Parent Advocacy

Student Confidentiality

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) defines education records as all records, files, documents and other materials containing information directly related to a student; and maintained by the education agency or institution, or by a person acting for such agency or institution (34 CFR § 99.3). This includes all records regardless of medium, including, but not limited to, handwriting, videotape or audiotape, electronic or computer files, film, print, microfilm, and microfiche.

In addition, for students who attend a public school district, all records pertaining toservices provided under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) are considered “education records” under FERPA. As such, they are subject to the confidentiality provisions of both Acts.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

Forum Guide to the Privacy of Student Information

HAVE A COMPLAINT?

You won't find these forms on the official Eanes ISD website.

An Important Parent/Student Right ... The Grievance Process

Know and protect your rights and your child's right to a grievance process. These district forms are not available on the official Eanes ISD website.

Click here - Eanes ISD Complaint Forms - Required to submit FNG Local Policy and GF Local Policy Complaints

COMPLAINT PROCEDURES	The Board shall establish procedures to consider complaints that a parent's right has been denied. Education Code 26.001(d)
	The Board shall adopt a grievance procedure under which the Board shall address each complaint that the Board receives concerning a violation of Education Code Chapter 26 (Parental Rights). Education Code 26.011

EISD FNG Local Policy (Student and Parent Complaints)

LEGAL POLICY (Foundation for Local Policy)

EISD GF Local Policy (Public Complaint)

Tip: Pay careful attention to the timelines referenced in board policy.

Note: "Retaliation: A Primer" and the "Retaliation Triangle" were originally published in The Observer, a newsletter published by the Sacramento LDA (Spring 1998). This link is no longer active. However, this article and more information about retaliation for advocacy are available here (see "Enemies List" Targets Parents).

Retaliation: A Primer

Note to the Reader: "Retaliation: A Primer" and the "Retaliation Triangle" were originally published in The Observer, a newsletter published by the Sacramento LDA.

retaliation, n. -Syn. vengeance, reprisal, punishment; see revenge

Retaliation against parents is a taboo topic in special education. No one knows how wide spread it is, or how often it occurs. Yet, wherever parents gather and whenever parents talk among themselves, the topic of retaliation receives lively attention. The focus of this essay is on parents; however, retaliation is not limited to parents alone. Anyone who advocates for children can become the target of retaliation. (click here to read about Pamella Settlegoode, adaptive PE teacher, who sued her Portland, Oregon school district for retaliation and won a one million dollar verdict that was upheld on appeal).

Retaliation is the act of using official resources to "punish" parents. It can take many forms. It is not, technically, a crime and it can be difficult to detect. (Note: This is not correct. Retaliation is defined and prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Click here for the legal definition of Retaliation from the ADA)

However, the underlying "causes" of retaliation are no mystery. There are two key ingredients: power and accountability - too much of the former and not enough of the later. The mechanism that seems to trigger retaliation is effective advocacy.

Retaliation occurs in an environment where school officials view IDEA as an unwanted imposition or as a way to develop a power base. In this setting the job is not to fully implement IDEA. Instead, school officials translate their responsibilities and duties to children and families into unquestioned decision making power over them. The profile of such officials can take two forms: openly hostile or smoothly deceptive, the latter preferring passive aggressive resistance. Hostile officials on the other hand use their position as an instrument of power to openly intimidate and even punish parents.

Many parents never encounter retaliation. Those that do however, are usually strong advocates for their children. Regardless, retaliation does occur and the fear of retaliation inhibits many parents. This affords school officials wide latitude to implement IDEA and the ADA as they see fit.

The Retaliation Triangle

Patterns of Retaliation

Like the food triangle, patterns of retaliation can be classified into three levels. Level I, the most frequent, is low-level passive activity, with the goal of delaying the process. Level II is more overt; the goal is to scare parents. Level III is the form of open hostility and the goal is to punish parents. Level III retaliation is rare, but costly, dramatic, and damaging.

Level I - Delay. The goal at this level of retaliation is to reduce parent effectiveness by passive resistance, such as the introduction of delays and obstacles in the many processes involved in special education. There are numerous ways officials can achieve this result.

One is simply playing dumb. This allows officials to effectively ignore the law and parent rights under the law. Another is "forgetting" to do things. An official may repeatedly forget to follow-up on a commitment, such as getting back to parents with further information, or fail to schedule further meetings without several reminders. Being "away from the phone," so often that parents give up on some important issue is also effective.

Yet another technique is overly technical interpretations of laws and regulations. Level I does not appear hostile, but it can be extremely effective.

Level II - Fear. Level II retaliation is not hidden. At this stage officials may appear to be openly frustrated and hostile. They will state that they won't for example, allow parents to observe a class, or won't permit certain kinds of testing. The list of "can't do's" is quite long. Most of it however, is bluff.

Level II retaliation is based on putting up a tough front in an effort to scare parents and reduce their advocacy. It is predicated on parental ignorance of the law. While it can be very effective, parents can break through this barrier by learning more about special education laws and regulations and simply insisting on compliance. Once past the obstacles, parents usually find that resistance is eliminated.

Level III - Punishment. At this level, retaliation can get ugly, with school officials openly threatening and actively trying to punish parents.

In this war-like state, school officials have a variety of weapons to choose from. One is the fair hearing (due process hearing) process. Schools have vast financial resources to transform hearings into major trial-like proceedings. Since there is no accountability to taxpayers for the large sums spent in such legal adventures, officials have free rein to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars. (See the Hamilton County TN v. Zachary Deal case, where the school district spent at least 2.8 million dollars on attorneys' fees to fight parents of a child with autism.)

Aiding and abetting this practice is a network of attorneys who specialize in fighting parents. These attorneys are organized into a professional group which holds national conferences and training programs at the local level. School officials are invited to attend these conferences where they are tutored in the finer points of "aggressive action," in the form of strategies to be used before an IEP meeting or at the pre-hearing conference of a due process or fair hearing.

There have been recent reports of a menacing new form of retaliation involving the fabrication of child abuse charges against the target parent. Such allegations can trigger an investigation by Child Protective Services which has police-like powers. Pending the outcome of their investigation, they may choose to remove children from the home.

Level III is so serious that most parents need an attorney to protect themselves.

Note: "Retaliation: A Primer" and the "Retaliation Triangle" were originally published in The Observer, a newsletter published by the Sacramento LDA (Spring 1998). We wrote a short article, The Enemies List, based on "Retaliation: A Primer" that included links to the original article on the Sacramento LDA site. In 2006, we received several reports of broken links to the original article. We discovered that the link to the Sacramento LDA site was deactivated. Since we saved the original article, we are posting it on Wrightslaw. If the Sacramento LDA organization creates a new site and/or posts the article, we will be happy to remove this article and create a link to the original.

A 1983 federal report entitled "A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform" observed: "If any unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war."

But, many parents probably have as much chance of influencing a foreign dictator as they have of influencing a school board."

Silent No More: The Law is Behind Parents Who Assert Their Rights in Public Schools

Parents' Handbook for Successful Schools

Helpful documents compiled by The Justice Foundation

Please Note: Agency procedures require a written and signed complaint from the complainant before any action can be initiated. Complaints received via e-mail are logged in, but are not considered formal complaints. For information on submitting a formal written complaint, follow the procedures outlined in the Compact with Texans.

The Texas Education Agency is located in the William Travis Building
1701 N. Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas, 78701
(512) 463-9734

Parents' Bill of Rights for Texas Public Schools

These rules, which have been modified several times since their original passage, are part of the Texas Education Code and as such, they must be observed by every Texas public school, including charter schools.

Please note that parents have other rights that are not specifically in this list. Local school boards also have policies that may include additional rights and procedures, as long they do not conflict with those listed below.

If you believe that either the Parents' Bill of Rights or another education law is being violated, you can contact the Texas Education Agency for guidance. They are the Texas agency responsible to assuring that school districts and charter schools follow Texas education laws.

Here is the current version of the Texas Parents' Bill of Rights and Responsibilities, including changes made during the 2003 legislative sessions:

Texas Parent's Bill of Rights and Responsibilities
(Texas Education Code, Chapter 26)

Purpose

(a) Parents are partners with educators, administrators, and school district boards of trustees in their children's education. Parents shall be encouraged to actively participate in creating and implementing educational programs for their children.

(b) The rights listed in this chapter are not exclusive. This chapter does not limit a parent's rights under other law.

(c) Unless otherwise provided by law, a board of trustees, administrator, educator, or other person may not limit parental rights.

(d) Each board of trustees shall provide for procedures to consider complaints that a parent's right has been denied.

(e) Each board of trustees shall cooperate in the establishment of ongoing operations of at least one parent-teacher organization at each school in the district to promote parental involvement in school activities.

Definition

In this chapter, "parent" includes a person standing in parental relation. The term does not include a person as to whom the parent-child relationship has been terminated or a person not entitled to possession of or access to a child under a court order. Except as provided by federal law, all rights of a parent under Title 2 of this code [the part of the Texas Education Code that pertains to public schools] and all educational rights under Section 151.001(a)(10), Family Code, shall be exercised by a student who is 18 years of age or older or whose disabilities of minority have been removed for general purposes under Chapter 31, Family Code, unless the student has been determined to be incompetent or the student's rights have been otherwise restricted by a court order.

Rights Concerning Academic Programs

(a) A parent is entitled to:

(1) petition the board of trustees designating the school in the district that the parent's child will attend, as provided by Section 25.033;

(2) reasonable access to the school principal, or to a designated administrator with the authority to reassign a student, to request a change in the class or teacher to which the parent's child has been assigned, if the reassignment or change would not affect the assignment or reassignment of another student;

(3) request, with the expectation that the request will not be unreasonably denied:

(A) the addition of a specific academic class in the course of study of the parent's child in keeping with the required curriculum if sufficient interest is shown in the addition of the class to make it economically practical to offer the class;

(B) that the parent's child be permitted to attend a class for credit above the child's grade level, whether in the child's school or another school, unless the board or its designated representative expects that the child cannot perform satisfactorily in the class; or

(C) that the parent's child be permitted to graduate from high school earlier than the child would normally graduate, if the child completes each course required for graduation; and

(4) have a child who graduates early as provided by Subdivision (3)(C) participate in graduation ceremonies at the time the child graduates.

(b) The decision of the board of trustees concerning a request described by Subsection (a)(2) or (3) is final and may not be appealed.

Access to Student Records

A parent is entitled to access to all written records of a school district concerning the parent's child, including:

(1) attendance records;

(2) test scores;

(3) grades;

(4) disciplinary records;

(5) counseling records;

(6) psychological records;

(7) applications for admission;

(8) health and immunization information;

(9) teacher and counselor evaluations; and

(10) reports of behavioral patterns.

Access to State Assessments

Except as provided by Section 39.023(e), a parent is entitled to access to a copy of each state assessment instrument administered under Section 39.023 to the parent's child.

Access to Teaching Materials

(a) A parent is entitled to:

(1) review all teaching materials, textbooks, and other teaching aids used in the classroom of the parent's child; and

(2) review each test administered to the parent's child after the test is administered.

(b) A school district shall make teaching materials and tests readily available for review by parents. The district may specify reasonable hours for review.

(c) A student's parent is entitled to request that the school district or open-enrollment charter school the student attends allow the student to take home any textbook used by the student. Subject to the availability of a textbook, the district or school shall honor the request. A student who takes home a textbook must return the textbook to school at the beginning of the next school day if requested to do so by the student's teacher. In this subsection, "textbook" has the meaning assigned by Section 31.002.

Access to Board Meetings

(a) A parent is entitled to complete access to any meeting of the board of trustees of the school district, other than a closed meeting held in compliance with Subchapters D and E, Chapter 551, Government Code.

(b) A board of trustees of a school district must hold each public meeting of the board within the boundaries of the district except as required by law or except to hold a joint meeting with another district or with another governmental entity, as defined by Section 2051.041, Government Code, if the boundaries of the governmental entity are in whole or in part within the boundaries of the district. All public meetings must comply with Chapter 551, Government Code.

Right to Full Information Concerning Student

(a) A parent is entitled to full information regarding the school activities of a parent's child except as provided by Section 38.004.

(b) An attempt by any school district employee to encourage or coerce a child to withhold information from the child's parent is grounds for discipline under Section 21.104, 21.156, or 21.211, as applicable.

Right to Information Concerning Special Education and
Education of Students with Learning Disabilities

(a) The agency shall produce and provide to school districts sufficient copies of a comprehensive, easily understood document that explains the process by which an individualized education program is developed for a student in a special education program and the rights and responsibilities of a parent concerning the process. The document must include information a parent needs to effectively participate in an admission, review, and dismissal committee meeting for the parent's child.

(b) The agency will ensure that each school district provides the document required under this section to the parent as provided by 20 U.S.C. Section 1415(b):

(1) as soon as practicable after a child is referred to determine the child's eligibility for admission into the district's special education program, but at least five school days before the date of the initial meeting of the admission, review, and dismissal committee; and

(2) at any other time on reasonable request of the child's parent.

(c) The agency shall produce and provide to school districts a written explanation of the options and requirements for providing assistance to students who have learning difficulties or who need or may need special education. The explanation must state that a parent is entitled at any time to request an evaluation of the parent's child for special education services under Section 29.004. Each school year, each district shall provide the written explanation to a parent of each district student by including the explanation in the student handbook or by another means.

Requests for Public Information

(a) A school district or open-enrollment charter school that seeks to withhold information from a parent who has requested public information relating to the parent's child under Chapter 552, Government Code, and that files suit as described by Section 552.324, Government Code, to challenge a decision by the attorney general issued under Subchapter G, Chapter 552, Government Code, must bring the suit not later than the 30th calendar day after the date the school district or open-enrollment charter school receives the decision of the attorney general being challenged.

(b) A court shall grant a suit described by Subsection (a) precedence over other pending matters to ensure prompt resolution of the subject matter of the suit.

(c) Notwithstanding any other law, a school district or open-enrollment charter school may not appeal the decision of a court in a suit filed under Subsection (a). This subsection does not affect the right of a parent to appeal the decision.

(d) If the school district or open-enrollment charter school does not bring suit within the period established by Subsection (a), the school district or open-enrollment charter school shall comply with the decision of the attorney general.

(e) A school district or open-enrollment charter school that receives a request from a parent for public information relating to the parent's child shall comply with Chapter 552, Government Code. If an earlier deadline for bringing suit is established under Chapter 552, Government Code, Subsection (a) does not apply. This section does not affect the earlier deadline for purposes of Section 552.353(b)(3) for a suit brought by an officer for public information.

Consent Required for Certain Activities

(a) An employee of a school district must obtain the written consent of a child's parent before the employee may:

(1) conduct a psychological examination, test, or treatment, unless the examination, test, or treatment is required under Section 38.004 or state or federal law regarding requirements for special education; or

(2) make or authorize the making of a videotape of a child or record or authorize the recording of a child's voice.

(b) An employee of a school district is not required to obtain the consent of a child's parent before the employee may make a videotape of a child or authorize the recording of a child's voice if the videotape or voice recording is to be used only for:

(1) purposes of safety, including the maintenance of order and discipline in common areas of the school or on school buses;

(2) a purpose related to a cocurricular or extracurricular activity;

(3) a purpose related to regular classroom instruction; or

(4) media coverage of the school.

Refusal of Psychiatric or Psychological Treatment of Child
as Basis of Report of Neglect

(a) In this section, "psychotropic drug" has the meaning assigned by Section 261.111, Family Code.

(b) An employee of a school district may not use or threaten to use the refusal of a parent, guardian, or managing or possessory conservator of a child to administer or consent to the administration of a psychotropic drug to the child, or to consent to any other psychiatric or psychological testing or treatment of the child, as the sole basis for making a report of neglect of the child under Subchapter B, Chapter 261, Family Code, unless the employee has cause to believe that the refusal: (1) presents a substantial risk of death, disfigurement, or bodily injury to the child; or (2) has resulted in an observable and material impairment to the growth, development, or functioning of the child.

Exemption From Instruction

(a) A parent is entitled to remove the parent's child temporarily from a class or other school activity that conflicts with the parent's religious or moral beliefs if the parent presents or delivers to the teacher of the parent's child a written statement authorizing the removal of the child from the class or other school activity. A parent is not entitled to remove the parent's child from a class or other school activity to avoid a test or to prevent the child from taking a subject for an entire semester.

(b) This section does not exempt a child from satisfying grade level or graduation requirements in a manner acceptable to the school district and the agency.

Complaints

The board of trustees of each school district shall adopt a grievance procedure under which the board shall address each complaint that the board receives concerning violation of a right guaranteed by this chapter.

Fee for Copies

The agency or a school district may charge a reasonable fee in accordance with Subchapter F, Chapter 552, Government Code, for copies of materials provided to a parent under this chapter.

TITLE 2. PUBLIC EDUCATION

SUBTITLE A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 4. PUBLIC EDUCATION MISSION, OBJECTIVES, AND GOALS

§ 4.001. Public Education Mission and Objectives

(a) The mission of the public education system of this state is to ensure that all Texas children have access to a quality education that enables them to achieve their potential and fully participate now and in the future in the social, economic, and educational opportunities of our state and nation. That mission is grounded on the conviction that a general diffusion of knowledge is essential for the welfare of this state and for the preservation of the liberties and rights of citizens. It is further grounded on the conviction that a successful public education system is directly related to a strong, dedicated, and supportive family and that parental involvement in the school is essential for the maximum educational achievement of a child.

(b) The objectives of public education are:

OBJECTIVE 1: Parents will be full partners with educators in the education of their children.

OBJECTIVE 2: Students will be encouraged and challenged to meet their full educational potential.

OBJECTIVE 3: Through enhanced dropout prevention efforts, all students will remain in school until they obtain a high school diploma.

OBJECTIVE 4: A well-balanced and appropriate curriculum will be provided to all students.

OBJECTIVE 5: Qualified and highly effective personnel will be recruited, developed, and retained.

OBJECTIVE 6: The state's students will demonstrate exemplary performance in comparison to national and international standards.

OBJECTIVE 7: School campuses will maintain a safe and disciplined environment conducive to student learning.

OBJECTIVE 8: Educators will keep abreast of the development of creative and innovative techniques in instruction and administration using those techniques as appropriate to improve student learning.

OBJECTIVE 9: Technology will be implemented and used to increase the effectiveness of student learning, instructional management, staff development, and administration.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 260, § 1, eff. May 30, 1995.

"QUALITY COUNTS 2004" from Education Week

Note: Registration required to access.

Teachers, in particular, must be surveyed in a way that assures both credibility and anonymity. They are very often troubled by what they see in the schools yet unable to candidly express themselves without risking their jobs.

Building an Education Consumers Association in the Face of Public Apathy

Being a parent activist can be frustrating. There may be some support for your concerns but most people seem indifferent to educational issues unless they have reached crisis levels. In addition, educators and community leaders are often hostile and defensive. They don’t want to see an object of local pride tainted by criticism. The recent public response to educational standards illustrates the problem. Everyone was supportive until they discovered that it was their school and their child that did not measure up.

Public concern about local schooling typically originates as parent protest about a particular event or policy. Parents become concerned about an issue because of its expected impact on their children. Their protests may produce some degree of accommodation but the broader matter of whether the local schools should adhere to the aims of the local community is never addressed because public discussions are confined to the immediate conflict. As soon as the immediate problem is diffused, consumers go away. For an ECA to form and grow, it needs to look beyond the immediate crisis.

As is evident from years of polling data, most people believe their local school system is excellent. It’s the ones in other towns and other states that need reform. Instead of having concerns about academic standards and the like, average parents are more likely to share students’ complaints about boring classes and too much homework. They believe good teaching is, first and foremost, teaching that makes learning fun and exciting. They assume that if students appear to be engaged and enthused, they must be learning something important. As one activist commented, most people think of good teaching as something that looks like MTV.

In short, an activist’s life can be very frustrating because most people literally do not see the problem. Parents and taxpayers may have complaints about a particular issue but, in general, they see nothing that calls for far reaching change. Schools maintain a largely positive public image and so long as they do so, there isn’t going to be a groundswell of community support for consumer activism.

Are They Really Apathetic?

While it is true that many of those who should be concerned about local school quality seem uninterested in learning more about it, it isn’t true that they don’t care about the issue. Rather, the truth is that most citizens have little direct knowledge about whether their schools are doing a good job. Their view is simply a reflection of the prevailing climate of opinion. Even if they recognize the need for selective improvements, most citizens assume that local schools are doing at least an adequate job of imparting the knowledge and skills necessary to going to college or getting a job. Parents, for example, may not be willing to participate in an ECA but they do care about whether their kids are learning enough to go to college and/or have an attractive career. Businessmen and community leaders may prefer to believe the schools are doing a great job but they do care about whether students are learning enough to be gainfully employed.

In essence, education’s consumers believe their schools are doing at least an adequate job because they have no reason to believe otherwise. Virtually all the information they get about local schools comes from the schools themselves and most of it sounds good. Most people are favorably impressed with schools that excite students and tout the latest innovations because they are given to understand that excitement and innovation are the keys to student achievement. Most laymen would never think to question whether schools are continually striving to use the best and most effective teaching methods. It is only after the students graduate and enter college or the workplace that parents, students, and employers may come to have objective reasons for doubt. Of course, by then it is too late.

Information Needed by the Public

Broad public interest in and support for an examination of school quality issues is unlikely to emerge unless the public has reason to doubt the conventional wisdom. Such a change isn’t likely to take place over night. Responsible citizens and school board members are not going to abandon long-held beliefs without credible evidence—especially in the face of claims by local school officials that minor refinements may be needed but that otherwise, all is well.

Of course, doubt may never arise if the public hears only from the schools and that is why ECAs need to raise the issue. An ECA may be questioning the value of a proposed program (e.g, the adoption of “new, new math” or the implementation of block scheduling) but it needs to go into the broader question of whether existing and past practices have worked as advertised. How many past fads have been adopted and later swept under the rug? Broadly, the ECA needs to put the current issue in context: Should a school system that has been doing a mediocre job be trusted to implement more pedagogical mischief?

In order to overcome public indifference, an ECA has to pull together data that validates its assertions, share that information with the public in a credible and consumer-friendly way, and be patient. The experience of other schools and other communities around the country needs to be gathered, responsibly examined, and publicly reported. Data collection and dissemination may take days and weeks but it needs to be done in a way that fair and credible.

Objective data on school performance may be available from state and national databases but opinions are valuable too. Groups that might be surveyed include recent graduates, parents of recent graduates, employers who hire recent graduates, professors who teach recent graduates, and teachers who have worked with recent graduates. Professional assistance in survey construction is advisable.

Teachers, in particular, must be surveyed in a way that assures both credibility and anonymity. They are very often troubled by what they see in the schools yet unable to candidly express themselves without risking their jobs.

Parents and other members of the community need to understand that they may not have been getting the full story about the quality of local schooling. They also need to become accustomed to the notion that there is a responsible point of view about schooling that differs from the official viewpoint, i.e., there is a legitimate consumer viewpoint. With a public recognition that “let the buyer beware” applies to schools just like it does other market transactions, a local consumer voice can grow and be effective. Without such a public understanding, most people who hear complaints about local schools will reject both the message and the messenger.

J. E. Stone, Ed.D.
Education Consumers ClearingHouseTM
P.O. Box 4411
Johnson City, TN 37602
phone & fax (423) 282-6832
professor@education-consumers.com

During my twenty years of government service, I have met and come to know many whistleblowers. If I could make a generalization about them, I would describe them this way:

Whistleblowers are over-achievers. They are competent and efficient, the kind of people who are concerned that things be done right. They are also people who have the moral fiber to stand up to corruption.

In almost every case, they became whistleblowers because a moral dilemma, not of their own seeking, was thrust upon them. They were asked to do something immoral and they refused.

Ninety-nine out of a hundred people, when faced with such a dilemma, will hold their nose and remember where their bread is buttered. Or they will convince themselves there is no dilemma.

Most whistleblowers start out doing the right thing thinking that once "upper management" or some figure of authority learns of the situation they will straighten it out. Even after they come to understand that "upper management" is not going to save them, whistleblowers remain unrepentant and even defiant. From that inevitably follows harassment, persecution, and vilification. This is not the path for a malingerer.

Each year taxpayers pay billions of dollars for goods and services ranging from health care and defense to public safety. And each year taxpayers pay millions of dollars to police and prosecute fraud against the public purse.

Yet one whistleblower can frequently accomplish more than a roomful of inspectors or policemen, and costs far less. Whistleblowers know the system, and speak out in a spirit of public service.

Whistleblowers are precisely the kinds of people we should have in top management of government and industry. It is not the whistleblower who needs protection so much as it is the public that needs the protection of the whistleblower.

William Sanjour
US Environmental Protection Agency

watch·dog (wchdôg, -dg) noun

One who serves as a guardian or protector against waste, loss, or illegal practices.

Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced.

- Albert Einstein

Student Confidentiality

Forum Guide to the Privacy of Student Information

The Retaliation Triangle

Silent No More: The Law is Behind Parents Who Assert Their Rights in Public Schools

Parents' Bill of Rights for Texas Public Schools

Teachers, in particular, must be surveyed in a way that assures both credibility and anonymity. They are very often troubled by what they see in the schools yet unable to candidly express themselves without risking their jobs.

Building an Education Consumers Association in the Face of Public Apathy