Type: Administrative, Federal Level

Link:  https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title34/34cfr99_main_02.tpl

Summary:  FERPA outlines the usage and protection of student records, and explains that content from a student’s education records cannot be released to the public without parental consent. Parents can also request to keep directory information private. While educators do have access to records, this code of regulations explicitly states when that information can be given to others. For educators, this law is important because an employee cannot post anything related to a child’s educational records in their social media, and should be cautious when posting anything related to students. Something as simple as a picture of a child, or a complimentary posting about a successful project could be considered confidential information according to what the parent has permitted. 

Type: Statutory Law, State Level

Summary: Texas Education Code’s Section 38.027, entitled “Electronic Communication Policy” defines what actions count as electronic communication. It also says that school districts must create local policy about electronic communications that include provisions to prevent inappropriate teacher-student communication, allow employees to deny their personal phone number from students, and create methods for reporting incidents of inappropriate electronic communication. 

Type: Judicial Law

Summary:  In Pickering vs. Board of Education (1968), the court found that educators have a right to speak on issues of public importance without being terminated. This case involved a teacher who was fired after writing an opinion piece to the newspaper about the school district’s funding allocations. This case was particularly important because it brought about a “balancing test” that would be used in future cases, described as “arriving at a balance between the interests of the teacher, as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interests of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees” (Pickering v. Board of Education, 1968, p. 2). 

Type: Judicial Law

Summary: In Munroe vs. Central Bucks School District (2015), the court found that an educator’s anonymous online activity can cause them to be terminated. A teacher’s anonymous blog, which contained offensive and disparaging remarks about students, was discovered and her identity was revealed. Her blog was shared among the school community. Munroe claimed that First Amendment rights prevented her from being terminated, but the court used the Pickering balancing test to determine that her postings damaged the trust and respect necessary for her position. This case is monumental because it shows educators that even anonymous activity online can be used against them.