Ethics, Laws, and Values in Education
Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo, 534 U.S. 426 (2002)
Law Reference: Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, 1974)
Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo, 534 U.S. 426 (2002)
Law Reference: Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, 1974)
Sources: Bradley, Meyers, & Winterman (2017), Chapters 1–3; Schimmel, Eckes, & Militello (2017), Chapter 9; Owasso v. Falvo, 534 U.S. 426 (2002).
Does the act of peer-grading student work violate the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) by disclosing protected educational records without consent?
Kristja Falvo, a parent in the Owasso Independent School District, challenged the classroom practice in which students graded each other’s assignments and announced their scores aloud. She argued this violated her children’s privacy rights under FERPA, which protects the confidentiality of “education records.” The district court sided with the school, the appellate court reversed, and the case reached the Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that peer grading does not violate FERPA. The Court determined that grades written on students’ papers before they are officially recorded by a teacher are not “education records” within FERPA’s scope.
Justice Kennedy’s opinion turned on interpretation and purpose. FERPA’s intent is to safeguard institutional record-keeping, not to micromanage classroom interactions. Papers handled temporarily by students are not “maintained” by an educational agency, which is FERPA’s legal threshold. In short, Congress meant to regulate files, not learning moments.
From an ethical standpoint, the Court’s reasoning values practicality and trust. Education depends on collaboration, feedback, and immediacy. Turning every exchange into a compliance event would suffocate learning. Yet Bradley et al. (2017) remind us that teachers must still uphold student dignity; legality isn’t an excuse for empathy. Schimmel et al. (2017) drive that point further: prevention lies in awareness. A lawful act can still be unethical if poorly executed.
For K–12 leaders, Owasso serves as both a boundary and a mirror. The ruling clarifies that not all information shared in learning environments counts as a “record,” but it also challenges educators to balance transparency with sensitivity. In a classroom, “what’s legal” and “what’s right” can drift apart. FERPA compliance is the floor, not the ceiling. The ethical ceiling is built on culture, teachers' modeling discretion, and students' learning respect.
Owasso doesn’t upend FERPA; it contextualizes it. The Court preserved flexibility for educators but placed a quiet responsibility on schools: to ensure privacy isn’t trivialized. This decision keeps education human by trusting teachers to act in good faith. It also warns leaders that the power to interpret the law must always be matched with a commitment to integrity. As educators, our duty extends beyond avoiding lawsuits, it’s about protecting the emotional and intellectual safety of every learner.
References:
Bradley, L. H., Meyers, M., & Winterman, K. (2017). School Law for Public, Private, and Parochial Educators (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
Schimmel, D., Eckes, S., & Militello, M. (2017). Principals Avoiding Lawsuits: How Teachers Can Be Partners in Practicing Preventive Law (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo, 534 U.S. 426 (2002).
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232g (1974).
