student graders, emails may appear in the inboxes of many individuals at the educational institution. FERPA does not contemplate that education records are maintained in numerous places. As the Court set forth above, "Congress contemplated that education records would be kept in one place with a single record of access." Id. at 434 (emphasis added). Thus, California DOE's position that emails that are printed and placed in Student's file are "maintained" is accordant with the case law interpreting the meaning of FERPA and the IDEA. Id. ("The word `maintain' suggests FERPA records will be kept in a filing cabinet in a records room at the school or on a permanent secure database."). This analysis applies to Student's second claim against TCOE in the compliance complaint. Student argued that TCOE unlawfully "purged" emails without the notice and consent of Student's parents. Pursuant to 34 C.F.R. § 300.624, TCOE "must inform parents when personally identifiable information collected, maintained, or used under this part is no longer needed to provide services to the child." Student's argument that TCOE maintained emails electronically is unsubstantiated. In addition, Student's argument that TCOE "maintains" emails in inboxes and TCOE's server also fails. Accordingly, Student has failed to demonstrate that TCOE purged any emails that personally identify Student and that was maintained by TCOE. Pursuant to the applicable statute and regulation, TCOE was required to provide for inspection only those emails that personally identify Student and are maintained by TCOE. Student offers no evidence that TCOE failed to provide for inspection emails that were maintained in Student's file. Student admits that TCOE provided a "stack" of emails from 2006 and 2007 that were printed out and kept in Student's file. Moreover, the evidence that TCOE maintains Student's records in hard copy in Student's permanent file is not controverted. Student provides no evidence that TCOE maintains records electronically.3 Because TCOE was obligated to provide for inspection education records, see, 34 C.F.R. § 300.613, and the evidence supports California DOE's position that TCOE provided Student with the emails that TCOE maintained, this Court upholds California DOE's conclusion that TCOE was compliant with the applicable state and federal education laws. Accordingly, Student's first and second claims fail, and California DOE is entitled to summary judgment in its favor. FN3. This interpretation does not preclude or prohibit an educational institution from maintaining education records on an electronic database; however, questions related to electronic maintenance of records are inapplicable to the instant case. The non- controverted evidence demonstrates that TCOE only maintains records in hard-copy format. Thus, the Court does not reach the question of whether an educational institution should provide electronic records in their native file format if they are maintained electronically. Attorneys Fees Introduction *8 Next, Student moves for summary judgment on its claim against TCOE for attorneys fees. Student contends that he is entitled to recover attorneys fees for the successful prosecution of the compliance complaint filed with the California DOE. Pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1415(i)(3)(B)(1), this
Chapter 5 – Confidentiality and Student Records, Charter SELPA As of 11/18/2016 CAHELP Governance Council Approved
Page 23
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online