New DOE Regulations: Can Your College Withhold Your Transcript?

On July 1, 2024, several new federal regulations went into effect in a bid by Department of Education officials to “oversee predatory and low-quality institutions of post-secondary education”.

            Perhaps the most prominent change is that federal regulations no longer permit colleges that receive federal financial aid to withhold transcripts for course credits paid for with federal money. As it would be extremely difficult for institutions to determine which credits in a student’s transcript were paid for with federal funds, and subsequently to solely release transcripts with those courses, it is likely that this change to the federal regulation will amount to a national ban on the practice of withholding student transcripts when there is a balance owed by the student.

            Students throughout the United States have struggled to get their higher education institution to release their transcript because they owe a balance to the institution. This phenomenon creates stranded credits, or academic credits that a student has earned but which cannot be verified due to the institution’s refusal to release the transcript. If a student cannot get their transcript, they cannot prove the credits they have earned to any other institution and have to start over if they wish to continue their education elsewhere. According to the 2024 Transcript Regulation Impact Survey (TRIS) by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, there are 6.5 million people in the United States with stranded credits with roughly $15 billion in debt owed to higher education institutions.

            This practice of withholding transcripts is utilized by higher education institutions to force students to pay the debts owed on their balance in order to have access to the formal record of their academic progress. This practice disproportionately impacts low-income students and students of color, and further bolsters inequities in the education system. Encouraging institutions to stop engaging in this predatory practice is one thing the Department of Education can do to help students that are struggling under the burden of student debt.

            Students aren’t out of the woods yet, though: several of the new regulations are already facing legal challenges, and whether this particular regulation remains in place will likely depend on how federal courts interpret the recent Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which curtailed Chevron[1] deference and substantially limited the regulatory power of federal agencies.

            If you are a student struggling to get your higher education institution to release your transcript due to a balance owed, we recommend you consult with an attorney to see if you can use these new regulations to your advantage and get your transcript released to you.

Written by education attorney, Megan Mitchell at Abdnour Weiker, LLP

www.Lawyers4Students.com

---

[1] In Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council,  the Supreme Court held that when a legislative delegation to an administrative/regulatory agency was not explicit but was implicit, the court could not substitute their own interpretation of the statute for a reasonable interpretation by the agency. This case created what is known as Chevron deference, wherein courts deferred to federal agencies on their reasonable interpretations of the regulatory statutes. In the recent decision in Loper, the Supreme Court has effectively put an end to the practice of Chevron deference.

Student Privacy Rights Under FERPA: What To Do If Your Student’s Privacy Is Violated

Most parents are aware that their students have some privacy rights that schools must take appropriate action to protect. However, many parents are not aware of what establishes those privacy rights and, perhaps more important to parents, what can be done to protect them.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) was adopted in 1974 as a Congressional response to the abuse of student records nationwide. FERPA serves two main functions: 1) guarantee access to students records for both students and parents; 2) limit third-party access to student records.

When processing a records request, a school must determine whether the materials requested qualify as education record materials. An “education record” includes records, files, documents and other materials, which: (1) contain information related to a student; and (2) are maintained by an educational institution. This includes things like a student’s academic work, test scores, psychological records, and family background. An education record does not include things like personal notes of a teacher or counselor, personnel records or law enforcement records.

So what happens when a student’s school releases part of their education record to a third party in violation of FERPA? One of the most common questions we receive is how parents can sue their child’s school for violating FERPA. Unfortunately, they cannot. FERPA creates no private right of action in the event of a school violation, meaning individuals cannot sue for a violation in court. Instead, in the event of a FERPA violation, a parent or student may file a Complaint with the Student Privacy Policy Office (SPPO) of the Department of Education alleging a violation.

A Complaint must be filed within six months of the violation, or within six months of when parents first knew or should have known of the violation. In this process, timeliness is key. Following a complaint, the SPPO will determine whether the school violated FERPA, and whether the school has a practice or policy of violating FERPA.

If the SPPO finds that a school has a practice or policy of violating FERPA, SPPO will then provide steps that the school must take to comply and provide a reasonable period to comply. If a school still does not comply, SPPO may withhold further payments made under any federal program and either issue a cease-and-desist letter or terminate federal funding.

Although there is no private cause of action guaranteed under FERPA it is still important that parents make their voices heard through the SPPO Complaint process. When facing the restriction or elimination of federal funding, schools will typically clean up their act with regard to maintaining FERPA-protected information. If you believe your child’s private, FERPA-protected information has been wrongfully distributed by their school, we encourage you to file a complaint with the SPPO and make your voice heard.

For more information about FERPA, check out the Special Education Legal Clinic’s FERPA video: SELC Understanding FERPA. Further SELC Workshops on other topics are also available.

Megan Mitchell is an education attorney in Michigan at Abdnour Weiker, LLP

www.Lawyers4Students.com

Board of Education Candidates in Ohio Can Be Surprised by State Law Disqualifying Some Candidates from Serving

School board elections are incredibly important to voters because of the direct impact that these elected officials could have on a family. Given the importance of these elections, it is surprising that one Ohio law disqualifying board of education candidates from serving on the board is not more known and understood.

According to Section 3313.33(B) of the Ohio Revised Code, no school board member shall have, “directly or indirectly, any pecuniary interest in any contract of the board.” What is a pecuniary interest?

In a 2014 Opinion, the Ohio Attorney General defined a “pecuniary interest” as simply an interest involving money. This law is certainly triggered when a school board member owns a company that does business in some capacity with the school district in which they serve. This makes sense.

However, this law also prohibits a school board member from being employed at a company that does business with the school district. In a 1999 Opinion, the Ohio Attorney General determined that a mere employment relationship is enough to trigger this rule. This is the case even if the employee’s specific duties and compensation are not directly linked to the contract with the district. The OAG reasoned that the existence, operation, and staffing level of the employer may be affected by the funds that are received from the school district. Even a pecuniary interest that is “small” and “indistinct” is enough to bar these relationships.

So, what happens when a school board member is simultaneously employed by a company that does business with the school district? In the same 2014 Opinion, the OAG explained that whenever a board member takes action in any matter in which he/she has a pecuniary interest, that action is void. Depending on the nature of the matter, this can have a substantial impact on the school district in which the member is serving.

For this reason, it is imperative that board of education candidates know the law and understand whether it disqualifies them from serving on the board of education.

What College Students Should Know About Off-Campus (Mis)Conduct

Most students know that their college or university can impose sanctions for their on-campus misconduct. What students may not know, however, is that their actions off-campus, including at home or on break, could also lead to sanctions.

Colleges and universities have expressed an interest in regulating students’ off-campus behaviors for a variety of reasons. First, universities want to protect their reputations as reputable institutions of higher learning and may discipline students for their off-campus misconduct to deter future behaviors that are contrary to their values and/or breach their codes of professional conduct. Second, certain kinds of off-campus behavior pose risks to other students’ safety and well-being—such as underage drinking, harassment, discrimination, violence, and drug abuse— and universities intervene to protect the campus community at large from these threats. Lastly, as social media use expands, it is increasingly difficult for universities to tell where on-campus behavior ends and off-campus behavior begins, so officials will sanction students more readily overall for uploading offensive content or engaging in cyberbullying.

Although no bright-line standard exists to predict precisely when a university will exercise jurisdiction, it is generally understood that the university disciplinary process can come into play where the student’s off-campus conduct “impacts the mission” of the institution or “causes substantial disruption” to the university community. As long as the school can demonstrate that there is a link between the off-campus behavior and the on-campus environment, it is permissible for the school to apply its code of conduct to these incidents.

However, it is important to know that, as of 2020, Title IX coverage does not extend to non-school-sanctioned activites occurring off-campus. Since its enactment in 1972, Title IX has prohibited sex-based discrimination, including sexual harassment, in educational activities. Under the 2020 regulations, the jurisdictional scope of Title IX has been narrowed, providing that if the alleged conduct occurs beyond the scope of an educational program, the school must dismiss the Title IX complaint. The school may still initiate its own disciplinary investigation, however, based on its own code of conduct.

Alternatively, crimes committed in a student’s hometown, while away on spring or summer break, or almost anywhere else, can follow students back to campus. This is because most schools consider their students to be representatives of their community no matter where they go. In other words, students are expected to always live in adherence to their institution’s values and morals. This is especially true for graduate or professional students. Universities can easily learn of students’ arrests or citations. So, students should err on the side of caution and be prepared for discipline that could arise from off-campus criminal acts.

Overall, university students are often held responsible for conducting themselves appropriately whether they are at home, school, or elsewhere. Whatever they may be facing, students are always encouraged to seek out legal counsel to guide them through the disciplinary process and to make sure their rights are protected at all stages of the proceedings.

Five Big Changes Coming to Ohio Education Laws in the 2023-24 School Year that Parents Should Know

On July 1, 2023, the Ohio House and Senate approved a new 2-year state budget, which was signed into law by Ohio Governor Mike DeWine on July 5, 2023. Here are the most important provisions impacting education for Ohio parents and students:

PRIVATE SCHOOL VOUCHERS (aka EdChoice Scholarship): All Ohio school children will be eligible for a school “voucher” to help cover the cost of tuition participating private schools. Children whose families earn up to 450% of the federal poverty level (~$135,000/year for a family of four) will be eligible to receive a full EdChoice Scholarship in the amount of $6,165 (k-8) and $8,407 (high school). Higher earning families are still eligibile, but may receive reduced scholarship amounts. This does not affect families receiving the Autism Scholarship or Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarship.

SIGNIFICANT FUNDING FOR PHONICS-BASED READING: The reconciled bill includes a significant investment in childhood literacy, particularly for phonics-based reading programs (a.k.a. the “Science of Reading”). The bill moves to eliminate “cueing” reading programs that have been used by school districts and educators for decades, but considered ineffective by many literacy experts. The funding in the new law includes allocations for training of teachers and district implementation over the next two years.

TOP 5% SCHOLARSHIPS FOR GRADUATES: Ohio high school students who graduate in the top 5% of their classes will be eligible for $5,000 scholarships to attend Ohio colleges and universities.

PARENTAL CONSENT FOR SOCIAL MEDIA: Children younger than 16 must get parental consent when they create new social media accounts starting Jan. 15, 2024. While not directly related to education funding, this budget item was initially requested by the Governor in an effort to protect the mental health of Ohio teenagers. It was included in the final bill.

NEW TEACHER PAY: The minimum annual salary for new public school teachers was increased modestly from $30,000 to $35,000. Many districts already have adopted salary schedules above this amount for first-year teachers. A proposal to increase the minimum salary to $40,000 was ultimately rejected.

Read more here: https://apnews.com/article/ohio-state-budget-taxes-education-vouchers-6f3c3abf4db444124d6c7b19090f5cc8

Abdnour Weiker, LLP (https://lawyers4students.com/)

Relief Has Been Denied in Most Anti-Masking Lawsuits Against Schools

Mark Weiker, Esq., Albeit Weiker, LLP

Over the last two years, Ohio school boards have become a lightning rod for citizens to unload their personal and political thoughts on almost everything pandemic related. From virtual learning to masking to quarantining, school boards have absorbed the diverse and sometimes raucous opinions of their constituents. Outcomes in recent lawsuits suggest that courts are largely unwilling to interfere with the discretion of school boards to make unpopular decisions.

Montgomery County Schools Cases

In September 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio in Dayton dismissed three separate lawsuits brought by pro se parents against three different Montgomery County Schools (Huber Heights City Schools, Mad River Local Schools and Northmont City Schools). The parents each alleged that the schools’ policies requiring masks were a violation of their children’s constitutional rights. The dismissals by the Court were not based on the merits of the claims, but rather on a rule prohibiting parents from filing pro se claims in federal court on behalf of their minor children.[i] The Court held that, “the rule against non-lawyer representation protects the rights of those before the court by preventing an ill-equipped layperson from squandering the rights of the party he purports to represent.”[ii]

Chillicothe City School District Case

On Nov. 1, 2021, four parents filed a lawsuit against the Chillicothe City School District and school administrators alleging that the school’s policy requiring masks was “arbitrary, capricious and based on ignorance due to failure to inquire into facts.”[iii] The parents’ pro se claims brought on behalf of their minor children were dismissed sua sponte by the Court for the same reason as those in the Montgomery County cases, while claims brought by the parents on their own behalf survived. Nonetheless, the parents’ request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) was denied because the parents “[had] not shown that they [were] likely to succeed on the merits of the remaining claims or that irreparable injury would accrue from denying the motion.”[iv]

In addition to the Chillicothe case, at least two other cases included requests for a TRO by parent-plaintiffs, and the courts denied the requests in both cases.

Mayfield City School District Case

In September 2021, a parent in the Mayfield City School District sought a TRO against the school district because the school board was attempting to institute a mask requirement.[v] The parent argued that the mask mandate caused “immediate and irreparable harm” to students, staff, and the general community.[vi] The parent also alleged that the mandate was a violation of her daughter’s constitutional rights and impeded on her daughter’s fundamental right to a public education.[vii]

The Court denied the motion for TRO because the parent failed to meet the necessary elements, finding that masking did not impede on the student’s ability to attend school. The Court also found that there was likely no chance of irreparable harm to the plaintiff’s daughter or other minors should the mask mandate be allowed to stand.[viii] Notably, the Court identified that, “the mask mandate was implemented to prevent serious injury, illness, and death in the District and broader community…[and] the risks associated with not wearing a mask in public schools are well-documented and supported by scientific evidence.”[ix]

Forest Hills Local School District Case

In another case filed in September, a plaintiff in the Forest Hills Local School District took issue with the meeting in which the school board adopted the mask policy. The plaintiff alleged a violation of the Open Meetings Act[x] and sought a TRO preventing the school board from enforcing the mask requirement.[xi] The Court denied the relator’s request for a TRO after holding a conference with the parties.[xii] After the TRO was denied, the plaintiff filed an affidavit to have the judge disqualified due to the judge’s comments at the conference, but the Ohio Supreme Court determined that the judge was not prejudicial.[xiii]

Hudson City School District Case

A more recent case was filed by three parents in the Summit County Common Pleas Court on Jan. 10 against the Hudson City School District. The parents sought injunctive relief prohibiting the school district from enforcing masking and quarantine rules absent a health department order, among other requests for relief. As of February 7, 2022, no hearing on injunctive relief has been scheduled or held, and no such relief has been ordered by the court, although the case is still pending.

While some case dismissals have been procedural, and others are only denials of immediate injunctive relief, the outcomes to date indicate a reluctance on the part of Ohio courts to disrupt the difficult decisions made by local boards of education—at least when it comes to masks.

---

[i] See P.G. v. Huber Hts. City Schl Dist., 3:21-cv-257 (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 23, 2021), citing Shepherd v. Wellman, 313 F.3d 963, 970 (6th Cir. 2002).

[ii] Id., citing Bass v. Leatherwood, 788 F.3d 228, 230 (6th Cir. 2015).

[iii] Wettersten v. Chillicothe City Schl. Dist., 2:21-cv-5187 (S.D. Ohio, Nov. 1, 2021).

[iv] Id.

[v] P.M. v. Mayfield City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., No. 1:21 CV 1711 (N.D. Ohio, Sept. 13, 2021).

[vi] Id. at 2.

[vii] Id.

[viii] Id.

[ix] Id. at 4.

[x] Doe v. Forest Hills Loc. Schl. Dist., A-2102899 (Hamilton Cty., Aug. 18, 2021) (documents sealed).

[xi] In Re Disqualification of Jenkins, No. 21-AP-114, ¶¶17-18 (Sep. 22, 2021).

[xii] Id.

[xiii] Id. at 2.

Educators should carefully consider school policies regarding masking.

                As you prepare your classrooms with supplies, fun stimuli, and all the accoutrements of a cozy room for fostering learning and creativity, let’s hope you also have time to prepare for the 2021-2022 school year mentally; not just for the continued repetitive phrases of “unprecedented times” and “socially distanced,” but also for the difficult decisions and choices you may face in and out of the classroom.

                Although, many schools had reached maximum capacity and limited or altogether abandoned masking by end-of-year this spring, many districts are now reconsidering these policies for a new school year amidst the new Delta variant of COVID-19 and its likely successors. For educators, this could mean continued or renewed policies requiring masking, vaccination, social distancing, and even remote teaching. While most public school educators are contract employees with due process rights, districts are nevertheless able to require their employees to wear masks and provide proof of vaccination with very limited exception. This means that unless you have deeply held religious beliefs which prevent you from masking or vaccination, or you have a disability recognized by the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), you will face discipline up to and including termination if you fail to comply with your district’s masking and vaccination policies.

                If you have a disability under the ADA, such a respiratory disability, that prevents you from wearing a mask, you should request a reasonable accommodation from your district as soon as possible. Although, your district is not required to accommodate you if it causes the district an undue hardship, they are required to engage with you in good faith to determine if a reasonable accommodation can be made. This process requires sufficient documentation from your doctor, and sometimes creative ideas for accommodations that suit you and simultaneously do not create a hardship for your district.

                An educator’s refusal to comply with district policies can not only lead to discipline from the district, but it could also lead to an investigation and discipline by the Ohio Department of Education (“ODE”). For instance, if a district threatens to terminate an educator for violating a masking policy, and the educator resigns under that threat of termination, the district must report that resignation to ODE. ODE will then initiate an investigation of the educator for a violation of the Licensure Code of Professional Conduct. During the pendency of that investigation, educators are unable to renew their credentials, and could face limitation, suspension, or even revocation of licensure. As such, we highly recommend that educators facing discipline in their districts reach out to counsel as soon as possible, not only to protect their due process rights in the district, but also to help them build the best defense possible against an ODE investigation.

Public schools with "mask optional" policies risk losing immunity.

A.         The Choice

Boards of education in Ohio have been placed in a tough position to start the school year. Boards have been forced to choose whether to require masks for their students and employees. Schools were placed in this position because the state legislature effectively removed the power of the Governor and the Ohio Department of Health to issue mask mandates (and most other related health orders). 2021 Sub.S.B.  No. 22.

With this authority removed, the Ohio Department of Health can now only “recommend” that schools require masks for the upcoming school year. See, COVID-19 Health and Prevention Guidance for Ohio K-12 Schools, Ohio Department of Health (Rev. July 26, 2021). Some local health departments have more recently heightened this to “strongly recommend” full masking of all students since infections associated with the Delta variant have increased, just in time for the start of the school year. Mask Advisory Issued for All Residents Indoors Regardless of Vaccination Status, Franklin County Public Health Advisory (August 5, 2021).

The response by boards of education at public schools has been mixed. Some boards of education have appreciated the risk to students and employees articulated by local health authorities and have adopted a full masking requirement for the start of the 2021-2022 school year. Other boards have recognized the potential for an increased risk for the unvaccinated, including those age 11 and under who do not have access to a vaccine, and opted to require masks for everyone at the elementary level.

A surprising number of boards have opted for a completely voluntary mask policy, perhaps because they believe masking is a purely personal decision, or that the risks articulated by health departments and federal agencies are overstated. There’s been some healthy (and unhealthy) debate surrounding the issue, which has included a variety of reasons for schools opting to go “mask-optional.”

B.         Sovereign Immunity; Exceptions Allowing Claims

One reason that boards may feel confident in adopting a mask-optional policy is because boards of education enjoy state sovereign immunity for decisions made in the exercise of their governmental functions. R.C. 2744.02(A)(1). School employees enjoy similar immunity for decisions made within the scope of their duties. R.C. 2744.03(A)(6).

Importantly, however, sovereign immunity is not absolute and the decision to go mask-optional could expose a school board--or a school employee recommending such a policy--to an increased risk of liability.

To begin, sovereign immunity does not apply to contract claims, claims that arise from an employment relationship with the school, or claims brought by an employee related to his or her “conditions…of employment.” R.C. 2744.09(A)-(C). Sovereign immunity also does not apply to “civil claims based upon alleged violations of the constitution or statutes of the United States.” R.C. 2744.09(E).

Therefore, one could easily imagine a teacher or other school employee asserting a claim that the employment agreement has been violated due to a voluntary masking policy in a pandemic, or that the conditions of employment have been improperly altered, making the employee more vulnerable to infection. Such a claim could be bolstered by high infection rates in any given school or by the fact that most school districts in the state required masks for all students and staff just last school year.

Sovereign immunity could also be side-stepped by any aggrieved party by asserting a claim under a federal statute or the U.S. Constitution. The federal statute possibilities are numerous, but the Americans With Disabilities Act would be one leading example, as this law requires reasonable accommodations to be made for students and employees with disabilities. 29 C.F.R. Part 1630, et seq. Other claims could come through the “state-created danger” theory under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, especially given that school-age children in Ohio are required by law to attend school. See, DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189, 199-200 (1989)("[W]hen the State takes a person into its custody and holds him there against his will, the Constitution imposes upon it a corresponding duty to assume some responsibility for his safety and general well-being”); see also, R.C. 3321.01(A)(1)(compelling students in Ohio to attend school).

Further, while school employees (such as superintendents and principals) enjoy immunity protections similar to those provided to boards of education, this immunity does not apply where “the employee's acts or omissions were with malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner.” R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b). So, depending on the specific circumstances surrounding a risk of infection, or an actual transmission of the virus, there could be individual liability for school employees for school-level decisions that ignore a known risk, assuming the decision could reasonably be considered reckless, in bad faith or malicious.

In sum, there are very plausible exceptions to sovereign immunity for mask-optional policies.

C.         Additional Immunity for Covid-Related Claims; Similar Exceptions

Notably, the Ohio legislature provided schools with another layer of immunity for Covid-related claims in 2020 with House Bill 606. This was signed by Governor DeWine on September 14, 2020, and provides in pertinent part:

No civil action for damages for injury, death, or loss to person or property shall be brought against any person [including schools and state institutions of higher education] if the cause of action on which the civil action is based, in whole or in part, is that the injury, death, or loss to person or property is caused by the exposure to, or the transmission or contraction of, MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, or SARS-CoV-2, or any mutation thereof. 2020 Am.Sub.H.B. No. 606, §2(A).

However, an exception to this law exists for reckless and intentional conduct, very similar to the exception for sovereign immunity above. Immunity under H.B. 606 does not apply if, “it is established that the exposure to, or the transmission or contraction of, any of those viruses or mutations was by reckless conduct or intentional misconduct or willful or wanton misconduct on the part of the person [or school] against whom the action is brought.” Id. "Reckless conduct” is defined in the law as:

Conduct by  which, with heedless indifference  to the consequences, the person disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the person's conduct is likely to cause an exposure to, or a transmission or contraction of, MERS-CoV, SARS-CoV, or SARS-CoV-2, or any mutation thereof, or is likely to be of a nature that results in an exposure to, or a transmission or contraction of, any of those viruses or mutations. Id., §2(D)(3).

To be sure, the same law prevents health orders and recommendations from being introduced as evidence in tort actions. Id., §2(B). Even so, the infection rates and/or exclusion of students from the classroom because of necessary quarantining could be enough to prove that any given school district violated a duty of care to its students or employees, and that the act of implementing a mask-optional policy was reckless. This is especially true where a school continues with a mask-optional policy despite an ongoing or increasing risk.

Finally, the immunity under house Bill 606 is temporary and is due to expire on September 30, 2021, unless it is extended by the legislature. Id., §2(E).

In sum, the immunity laws that boards of education, superintendents and principals may be relying upon may not be as strong as they think when they adopt a district-wide mask-optional policy. While the decision is within a board of education’s discretion, it should be made with caution and an understanding of this exposure.

Mark Weiker, Esq., Student and Educator Rights Attorney, Albeit Weiker, LLP

www.Lawyers4Students.com

Beating Summer Scaries (For You, Teacher)

Hey there. 

I see you in your yoga pants and top knot.

I know you don't know what day it is.

I'm right there with you.

A fellow teacher on summer break.

These last two months have been glorious for us:

Unlimited pee breaks,

Finishing our coffee while it's still warm,

Having more than 20 minutes to eat lunch,

Not having to tell anyone "people don't want you to lick them,"

(Unless you have a little one at home, God bless your soul).

The pace of summer is a delightful break from the frantic, absurd pace we are expected to keep during the other 10 months of the year. It’s a time to refocus, relax, and just BREATHE. Our summers are, simply put, crucial.

If you’re anything like me, gearing back up to school can be the scariest part of the year. What will my new class be like? How will the administrator and I get along this year? What if I still can’t get my test scores up? Wait, I have that kid on my roster? 

Beginning of the year anxiety is a real thing and it affects every teacher I’ve ever met. Between all the beginning of year PD, it often feels like there isn’t room to process through these feelings and prepare ourselves for the new batch of little ones entering our rooms. I wanted to take a minute to make some recommendations that work for me to slow myself down and get to the bottom of my anxiety about the new school year.

1. Meditate

Okay, I know what you’re thinking. Meditating is for crunchy hippies. Also sitting still for long periods of time is way too hard. And intimidating. And boring. 

Listen. 

I felt the same way when I started, but honestly nothing has helped me more. Meditating is basically just learning how to focus your attention which, for a teacher who has to think of literally seven million things all at once, can be a very powerful tool. 

There are all kinds of apps to help begin your journey with meditation. A couple I love are Headspace and Pacifica, which have both free and paid features. Another easy way to get started with meditation is through an easy visualization you can do independently at any time for any length of time. You can do this sitting, standing, or anywhere you feel relaxed. 

Take some deep breaths and start to focus on where you feel your breath in your body. Focus on filling up your belly, inhale and count to four, exhale and count to four. Repeat until you begin to feel relaxed. 

Think of yourself sitting on a nice, grassy hill, watching clouds float past you in the blue sky. The weather is a perfect 75 degree day with a nice breeze, not too hot and not too cold. The grass under you feels soft and inviting. One by one, watch each cloud pass from your left to your right, moving across the sky. Once you’ve watched a few clouds, begin to place your thoughts on the clouds one at a time. Place one thought on each cloud that comes into your view. Your thoughts can be long or as simple as a word or a feeling.  Watch each thought move from your left to your right and slowly exit your view. Keep watching your thoughts float by until you feel settled, grounded, and ready to move on with your day. 

You can repeat this exercise as many times as you need during your chaotic days at work. I tend to do mine as I walk to pick my students up from lunch as a sort of ‘midday check-in’ with myself.

Always remember your blue sky.

2. Cultivate time throughout the week for yourself 

As teachers, for our seven (or eight or nine) hours with students, we always have to be “on.” Our jobs, and often our personal lives as well, do not permit for any time just for us. When we go home, we are greeted with our own children or families who demand attention and care even though we already overexerted our sympathy muscles at work. It is absolutely exhausting to put so much into work and home; it leaves us feeling drained and powerless. 

One thing I’ve started incorporating is doing something little for myself each day. The term “self care” is so overused and has come to mean little more than sheet masks and bubble baths--but honestly, we all need to take better care of ourselves. You can start by making a list of things that make you feel like you. For me, that list includes writing, washing my hair, doing a sugar scrub, making a yummy dessert, and going on a walk without my phone. What feels good for you will be totally different from your friends, partner, and coworkers, and that is OKAY. 

Start with one minute a day. Find a time that works for you and start incorporating a little time just for YOU back into your hectic days. Yes, it will take work. Yes, it feels completely unnatural. Yes, it might feel selfish. But you are not able to pour out from a completely empty cup; the longer you spend focusing on everyone else, the more burned out you will become. Trust me, everyone in your life will be better off when you take time to recharge and relax. No one can be ‘on’ 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Spend time with yourself, it’s okay, I promise. 

3. Plan your weeks

Last winter, I invested $15 in a planner.  It has hourly spots for each day, from 6am to 11pm, along with space for writing about your dreams and your goals. As I started to use my planner, I noticed a shift in myself. When I set aside time for exercise at the beginning of the week, during the week it became a lot easier to go to a yoga class. When I set aside time to write in my journal, I knew what nights I needed to put my phone away early. This intentionality in my schedule started to shift my ability to use my evenings after school as ways to care for myself and further my goals, rather than just vegging out on Stranger Things for hours at a time. 

Planning your week will help you set aside those moments for yourself and help you realize just how much time you have outside of school. Even if your evenings are full of baseball practices, dance rehearsals, and piano lessons, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised at how much time you can redeem back. And even if there isn’t any extra time, you’ll know exactly what your week holds. Knowing what is coming and when it’s coming is a great trick to cut down on anxiety and rushing around that leads to extra stress.

4. Work on professional boundaries 

How many of us stay for hours after work doing tasks that could either have been done during planning or could be done at home? I know I for one, am guilty! 

I know planning is so much easier when you are close to your resources and materials. Lugging materials to prep, especially for primary grades, is super annoying. Planning at home can be difficult with your kids running around demanding attention, and honestly, it’s sometimes nice to just sit in the quiet building and get a bunch of work done. There is definitely a time and a place for long planning sessions; but staying late every day is a great recipe for burnout.

Start thinking now about what you want your boundaries to be for work. Do you want to leave within an hour of students leaving? Do you want one long planning day a week? Do you want to prep materials each morning before students get there? Think of what would work for you and your schedule. When the year starts, stick to your boundaries! If coworkers come in wanting to chat or co-plan, tell them times you’d be available. You are in control of your schedule and thinking it through ahead of time will help you communicate clearly with your co-workers and will help you manage your time well. 

SPACE.

5. Let it go

Once I was talking with a coworker and commiserating about keeping our classrooms and houses clean and she jokingly remarked, “Man. You know we wouldn’t be teachers if we didn’t have control issues about something.” At first I was slightly offended (I don’t have control issues, okay?), but the more I thought about it, the more her joke made sense. 

As teachers, we are paid to develop and create an environment that promotes learning in all types of students. But, since so much of teaching is out of our control, we are left with a whole lot of amazing, creative ideas that we either can’t afford or aren’t allowed to do because of testing, ‘rigor,’ and district expectations. This frustration continues to build and build in us until we feel like exploding. Why can’t we be allowed to just do what we know is best for kids? Isn’t that why we have college degrees? 

Last year, I had the opportunity to watch an absolutely amazing intervention specialist in my building teach a room of kindergarteners about control. She used a visual of concentric circles to show the kiddos things they could control and things they couldn’t. As I sat on that 5-year old sized chair, I realized that so much of what I worry about on a daily basis at work is simply out of my control. I cannot control where students are when they come to me, the curriculum mandated to me by my district, the conditions of my school, the people’s attitudes around me.

I can control how much I let these things affect me and where I choose to direct my stress. I can control how much work I choose to ‘take home.’ I can control my attitude and responses to stressful situations, even when everyone else around me is spinning out. 

Take some time to reflect on what you can and cannot control in your room and in your school. If you can’t control it, it’s time to let it go. Let go of the Pinterest boards and lower those expectations. I like to reflect on the phrase, “be gentle with yourself.” When you feel stressed about meeting those expectations, remind yourself that you are allowed to struggle and be imperfect and frustrated. You do not have to be a perfect teacher or perfect parent every day. There are going to be days that are amazing and fulfilling; but there will also be days where your lessons completely fall flat and you want to rip your hair out. 

Bring yourself back into balance by choosing which issues are going to be the ones that cause you to stand up and advocate for your students and which ones you are going to let go. By controlling your responses, you will be able to save your precious energy for the battles that really matter (and trust me, we both know there will be plenty). 

Alright, that’s enough from me. Go enjoy your last afternoon by the pool, or that last margarita before 4pm. 

Here’s to a great year full of possibilities! 

-A fellow teacher on summer break

A special thanks to our guest blogger, Ms. Dalton, an elementary teacher on the west side of Columbus, meditator, dog mom, and AW guest blogger.

Are you a teacher or administrator in need of representation? Call us. 614.745.2001.

Educators & Social Media Interactions

Many of you have heard about the teacher fired for her Twitter response to a student's  misspelling of the word tomorrow. See: http://abc6onyourside.com/news/nation-world/experts-defend-school-staffer-fired-after-correcting-students-spelling-on-twitter

While the teacher's response in the article certainly appeared to be more playful than harassing, it does highlight the inherent problem facing educators interacting with students on social media. The first rule and best rule to follow is that educators should not interact with students via social media, text message or alternative messenger apps such as SnapChat or Kik. When the school itself authorizes or instructs its employees to use these platforms to inform students and parents, extreme caution should be exercised.

The real challenge is that social media and messenger platforms are inherently informal. Educators can be lured into making seemingly humorous comments which others (namely parents) would consider rude or disrespectful. This means that posts originally intended to be playful (like the one in the article) are ultimately viewed as harassing. Teachers can easily forget that, notwithstanding the apparent equivalent "user" status they have with students online, they remain in a position of power over students in the real world. This means that comments from a teacher or educator carry more weight than comments made by peers, and can easily be considered an abuse of power. This is often how educators and schools using social media end up in awkward positions.

In addition to discipline or termination of employment, educators also risk license suspension or revocation for improper communications made on social media or by text. Based on recent license suspensions and revocations, it appears that the Ohio Department of Education is taking a tough stance on all questionable or informal electronic communications between students and teachers. For these reasons, it is sage advice for all educators to avoid social media or texting communications with students altogether if possible. If the employer-school authorizes or instructs teachers to use these platforms to communicate with students and/or parents, all communications should be about school business with no exceptions. And never get lured into making a joke at a student's expense.

Remember: in addition to representing students and parents, we counsel teachers and administrators through employment related matters in order to keep quality educators in schools. 

Questions? Call us! 614.745.2001