Parent and Student Rights

Parents do not have an unlimited right to observe a classroom whenever they wish. Districts may establish reasonable procedures to minimize disruption to instruction. Parents should follow the district's procedures and any directions from campus administration concerning classroom observations. The following are examples of visitation rules:

Many times, teachers also prefer no more than one or two visitors at a time. Parents who fail to adhere to schools’ visitation rules or who repeatedly cause disruptions can be restricted from the classroom by the administration.

The administration should address any questions regarding whether individuals such as noncustodial parents, stepparents, or other individuals acting as parents should be allowed to visit the classroom.

Texas Education Code §26.003 gives parents reasonable access to the principal or a designated administrator with authority to reassign students to request a change in their child's class or teacher, provided the change would not affect another student's assignment. The statute also provides that certain other parental requests concerning academic programs should not be unreasonably denied.

Both state and federal law give parents substantial rights to information concerning their own child. Texas law specifically provides parents access to teaching materials, instructional materials, teaching aids, and tests administered to their child, as well as other information identified by law. Parents also generally have rights of access to their child's education records under the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), subject to exceptions and limitations provided by law.

Parents should understand, however, that these rights do not necessarily provide access to every piece of information a school employee may possess about a child or to information concerning other students. Whether particular information must be disclosed depends on the type of information and the applicable state and federal law.

As parents have a right to full information regarding their child's school activities, communication from the school, particularly the child's classroom teacher, is essential. (Classroom newsletters are a good tool for this.) Teachers should also answer parents’ specific questions in a reasonable manner through the communication methods permitted or preferred by the district, such as personal conferences, phone calls, approved communication apps or notes sent home with the child.

State law provides parents with broad rights to information about their own child. Similar rights of access to educational records and information are provided under the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

FERPA generally protects the privacy of student education records and generally requires parental consent before personally identifiable information from those records is disclosed to third parties. However, FERPA contains a number of exceptions that permit disclosure without prior parental consent, including disclosures to school officials with legitimate educational interests and certain other circumstances specified by federal law.

The administration should address any questions regarding whether information can be shared with individuals such as noncustodial parents, stepparents, or other individuals acting as parents.

Section 26.010 of the Texas Education Code provides that parents have the right to temporarily remove their child from instruction or another school activity when it conflicts with the parents’ religious or moral beliefs. The parent must provide a written statement authorizing the removal to the district. The parent is not entitled to remove the child to avoid a test or for an entire semester.

Section 26.011 of the Texas Education Code requires school districts to maintain a grievance procedure for addressing grievances concerning violations of parental rights under Chapter 26, certain other statutory rights, and district policies. The specific procedures and deadlines for filing a grievance are governed by state law and the district's grievance policy. Complaints relating to special education services may also be subject to additional state and federal procedures.

A parent may choose to attempt to resolve a concern informally with the teacher or administration before filing a formal grievance, but the district's grievance policy and applicable law determine the procedures and deadlines for pursuing a formal grievance.

Are parent complaints “slander”?

A parent does not generally violate an educator's legal rights simply by making a complaint about the educator to the school district. Even when an educator believes a parent's allegations are false or unfair, the appropriate response will ordinarily be to address the allegations through the district's administrative process.

Defamation claims against parents can be complicated and depend on the specific statements made, where and to whom they were communicated, and the resulting harm. An educator considering legal action against a parent should consult with an attorney about the specific circumstances.

Generally, a school district employee or contractor must obtain a parent's written consent before conducting a psychological or psychiatric examination or test or providing psychological or psychiatric treatment, unless an exception applies, including when the examination, test, or treatment is required under state or federal special education law or another applicable law. A parent's refusal to consent to psychological or psychiatric testing or to the administration of psychotropic medication, by itself, generally does not provide a basis for a child-abuse report. There are, however, important exceptions, and educators should follow applicable reporting requirements when they have reasonable cause to believe abuse or neglect has occurred.

Generally, a school district employee or contractor must obtain written parental consent before making a videotape of a child or recording a child's voice. However, consent is not required when the recording is used only for certain purposes identified by law, including:

• The purpose of safety, including the maintenance of order and discipline in common areas of the school or on a school bus
• A purpose related to a co-curricular or extracurricular activity
• A purpose related to regular classroom instruction
• Media coverage of the school

Because these exceptions are vaguely worded and subject to interpretation, it can depend on the circumstances and applicable law. Educators should seek guidance before making recordings when they are uncertain whether an exception applies. A local policy may also impose additional restrictions, so educators should be familiar with applicable district policy.

The U.S. Supreme Court confirmed in 1969 that students have free speech rights under the First Amendment in the well-known Tinker v. Des Moines School District opinion. But in Tinker, the court also explained that those rights were not absolute. Just as a citizen does not have a First Amendment right to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater, a student’s free speech rights can be restricted. The court made it clear that school officials could restrict communication that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others.” Since 1969, educators, students, and courts have grappled with whether a particular student expression was sufficiently disruptive to allow its prohibition.

Student expression through school-organized channels such as the school newspaper, choices of theatrical productions to perform, or books to maintain in the school library are subject to tighter controls by school officials under the U.S. Supreme Court’s Hazelwood decision. Here, the court held that school-sponsored forums could be more tightly controlled because they were a part of the school curriculum. This distinction between a student’s individual expression and expression through a school-maintained forum has been controversial, and the courts have remained busy dealing with legal challenges to a multitude of issues, from district censorship of school newspapers to removal of particular books from school libraries.

The Pledge of Allegiance
 A common issue in student expression is when or if a student can refuse to participate in the daily pledges of allegiance to the U.S. and Texas flags. Section 25.082(a) of the Texas Education Code requires all school districts to adopt a policy requiring students to recite the pledges of allegiance to the flags. Section 25.082(c), however, provides that on written request from the student’s parent or guardian, a school will excuse the student from reciting the pledges.

Likely no area is as confusing and difficult for a public school teacher and administrator than the role of religion in public schools. What must be prohibited versus what must be allowed is ever-changing and likely to continue evolving.

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is the most important consideration of a student’s rights regarding religious expression. The First Amendment establishes two related and equally important requirement for public school teachers and administrators—commonly referred to as the “establishment clause” and the “infringement clause.”

The Establishment Clause—limits on discussing your beliefs
 The First Amendment “establishment clause” prohibits the government from promoting a particular religious belief. Public school teachers do not lose their own rights to their own religious beliefs, but while acting in their professional capacity as teachers, they are legally considered agents of the government, so they must be careful not to promote their own beliefs when they are teaching.

The important question is whether the teacher’s students are old enough and sophisticated enough to distinguish between two things:

In most cases, a student must accept a teacher’s statements as true. For example, a teacher can grade a test answer that 2 + 2 = 5 as wrong and does not have to accept a student’s claim that they believe it to be true. The question is, are the students sophisticated enough to understand the difference between this and a teacher’s statement of their personal religious belief?

The “Free Exercise Clause”—restrictions on limiting student expression of their own beliefs

The First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause protects individuals’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs. Public schools generally may not discriminate against students because of their religious beliefs or religious expression.

This area of law is fluid, so there is not a good set of rules for teachers to follow. That means the best practice is for teachers to immediately involve the administration if a student requests permission regarding a religious-themed activity, whether it is modifying an assignment or passing out religious-themed gifts to classmates.

What does the Texas Education Code say about religious expression?

In addition to the constitutional issues described above, the Texas Education Code also provides specific protections for students’ religious expression. Section 25.151 provides:

A school district shall treat a student’s voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint, if any, on an otherwise permissible subject in the same manner the district treats a student’s voluntary expression of a secular or other viewpoint on an otherwise permissible subject and may not discriminate against the student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.

The Education Code goes on to state specific rules districts and district staff must follow to ensure that the district or its staff do not discriminate.

Limited right to public religious expression – Texas Education Code §25.152

• Requires that a district establish a “limited public forum” when students can publicly speak as school events. The forum cannot discriminate against a student based on a religious viewpoint expressed by the student on an otherwise permissible subject.
• Provide a method, based on neutral criteria, for selection of student speakers at school events.
• Ensure a speaker does not engage in obscene, vulgar, offensively lewd, or indecent speech.
• State in writing or orally that the student’s speech does not reflect endorsement, sponsorship, position, or expression of the district.

Religious expression in class assignments – Texas Education Code §25.153

• Provides that students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written or oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content. The work must be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance to the assignment, and a student cannot be penalized or rewarded on account of the religious content.

Religious groups and activities – Texas Education Code §25.154

Allows students to organize into religious groups to the same extent that students are allowed to organize into secular groups. The groups must be given access to school facilities to the same extent that noncurricular groups are.

Religious groups and activities – Texas Education Code §25.154

Allows students to organize into religious groups to the same extent that students are allowed to organize into secular groups. The groups must be given access to school facilities to the same extent that noncurricular groups are.

Right to pray – Texas Education Code §25.901

Provides that a public school student has “an absolute right to individually, voluntarily and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the school.” Also provides that “a person may not require, encourage, or coerce a student to engage in or refrain from such prayer or meditation during any school activity.”

Although the Texas Education Code provisions are intended to provide protection to districts and educators in allowing student expression, they must be read in context of the U.S. Constitution’s prohibition on religious endorsement, so the complex question of what must be allowed versus what must be prohibited is likely to remain not completely answered for some time.