Privacy is a dominant theme in United States public policy. Yet, although privacy is important, it is not everything. As the lessons of the 9-11 have taught us, we cannot simply put our collective heads in the sand and be "either for or against" privacy, no matter what the circumstances. Seeking to protect privacy is both commendable and necessary, but we cannot do it blindly and without cost.

That, unfortunately, is exactly how some Tennessee parents are approaching student privacy protection for their children. Last month, all Nashville schools, in response to parental complaints and on the advice of school lawyers, stopped posting honor rolls. Some schools may go even further by banning the use of school walls and bulletin boards as exhibition sites for good student art work. Pep rallies, designed to applaud athletic prowess, and spelling bees are being cancelled.

Such extreme changes came after a few parents of underachievers complained that athletic, artistic and academic acknowledgments harm their children who might be ridiculed for not making a list, being publicly displayed or earning a varsity letter. What they don’t understand is that no law can protect a child from every one of life’s little, or not so little, indignities.

What they do understand, is that Tennessee law, at least as currently written, appears to do just that. According to a half-century old Tennessee statute, public school students’ records must be kept confidential unless parental permission is given for disclosure (Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-504). Tennessee law broadly prohibits disclosure of records relating to academic performance, but does permit disclosure of statistical information not identified with a particular student and information relating to an individual student’s name, address, dates of attendance, grade levels completed, class placement and academic degrees.

The application of this statute to the current situation can and should be challenged.

A valid argument can be made that honor roll postings may be disclosed under the exception for class placement lists, but to date no published court opinion on the issue exists in Tennessee. Indeed, it is unlikely that an honor roll posting case will be in the courts any time soon for several reasons. First, school districts throughout Tennessee have been scrambling to make sure they have blanket permission forms signed by parents to be sure that student achievements can be acknowledged publicly.

Second, unless the disgruntled parents are fortunate enough to find a parent of an honor roll student willing to sign on to a challenge, the disgruntled parents lack standing to maintain an action challenging an invasion to other students’ right to privacy.

Finally, because all of the remaining 49 states have done away with similar statutes in favor of following federally mandated student privacy statutes and guidelines, which allow the release of such distinguishing accomplishments like honor rolls, it is conceivable that Tennessee legislators will consider the same.

The federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, also known as the Buckley Amendment, comprehensively governs student records kept by most American schools, both public and private, at the elementary, secondary, or higher education (including law school) levels. Under Buckley, relatively little private information may be released without parental consent, including a student’s name, address, phone number, date and place of birth, educational focus (major), participation in school activities and sports, height and weight of those on athletic teams, dates of attendance, degrees and awards, and the most recent school attended.

Legal experts are divided on whether Buckley places additional burdens on the schools when it comes to honor rolls or Dean’s lists. Most concur, however, that it is prudent for the school to seek parental written consent before releasing such information, including "honors and awards." Buckley guidelines, issued by the Department of Education, note that listing students' names on a published honor roll would be consistent with the part of the law’s directory information definition that covers awards received because achieving such a status could be considered honorary recognition.

Two terms ago, the United States Supreme Court issued its first ruling interpreting Buckley. In Owasso Independent School District v. Falvo, 534 U.S. 426 (2002), the Court held that peer-grading of student papers does not violate Buckley. The Court, however, expressly declined to answer the broader question whether the grades on individual student assignments once they are turned in to the teachers are protected by the Act. Later that term, the Court ruled in its second Buckley case that there is no private right of action under the Act. (See Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002)). Thus, parents cannot bring suit themselves to enforce federally mandated student privacy restrictions.

Don’t get us wrong, we are strong proponents of many privacy laws. But we are equally strong proponents of excellence and self-sufficiency. Honor roll lists offer proper recognition and, like other awards, are effective motivators. The elimination of public acknowledgments sends the wrong message to our children; namely, that their successes should not be celebrated but, rather, silenced.

Proponents of honor roll systems argue that they motivate students to achieve new heights in education. The National Commission on Excellence in Education issued its 1983 report entitled A Nation at Risk, in which it warned that "the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people."

The last thing America’s schools need is more hoops to jump through as they seek to educate our children. Academic and athletic achievements deserve frequent public recognition, whether it’s a happy face on the top of an assignment or a box score in the local newspaper.

No doubt there is a very fine line between protecting privacy and encouraging excellence. It is doubtful that any legislative body ever intended to protect the confidentiality of every spelling test or shop project. But what a sad day it will be for us all if the underaccomplished win their war and we all end up living in our own private Idaho, unable or unwilling to share each other’s accomplishments and experiences.

We overindulge, overprotect and over-manage our children. As a result, they are not learning to deal with life’s normal disappointments and emotional turbulences. The harm that results in the classroom from taking privacy law to the Nth degree, for the wrong reasons, can only be cured by erasing overblown reactions to privacy concerns.

It’s about time we stop our laws from trumping our common sense.