Nevada Regents Limit Access to Private Records

According to the presidents of Nevada's two public universities, four members of the Board of Regents requested and received confidential student and employee records in 2001 and 2002. One regent requested the resumes of finalists for a head coach position, another looked at the employment files of two former professors, and a third requested employment records for two employees because he sought to intervene in their dismissals. The largest and most controversial request was made by regent Linda Howard, who received information about thousands of students, including their names, grades, details about their ethnicity, and any disciplinary actions taken against them. University officials testified to the Board of Regents that they had unsuccessfully tried to persuade Howard to accept data without student names attached.

At the time, state law and university policy allowed the eleven regents unlimited access to such records, although the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act requires the disclosure of such files to have a legitimate educational purpose. Howard said that she did have legitimate reasons to review the records, but did not specify what they were. Her request was made during a contentious debate about raising admissions standards at Nevada's public institutions, which she opposes. Howard has repeatedly criticized other regents for doing too little to recruit minority students, and for voting against her proposal for a minority outreach center in Las Vegas. Other regents said that outreach programs already exist and that the budget would not permit the establishment of a new center.

Howard also specifically requested information on a student journalist who had called her an idiot, on another student who had disagreed with her about admissions standards at a public hearing, and on a university employee with whom she had had disputes in the past. These revelations exacerbated existing tensions on the board of regents. Howard, who is the only black member of the board, characterized criticism of her actions, especially another regent's description of her as an "orangutan," as part of an ongoing pattern of racism.

The new policies will require regents to make written requests to see student and employee records. Students and employees will be notified of the requests.

In a separate incident in April, Howard requested that the tenure application of a faculty member who had opposed her on admissions standards be reviewed by the regents. The regents normally grant formal tenure approval for groups of professors whose names are forwarded to them by the state's college and university presidents, but do not typically review individual cases. The request was rejected, and an ensuing discussion focused on the importance of academic freedom and the need for new procedures that will preclude such singling out in the future, according to James Richardson, a faculty member at the University of Nevada, Reno, and former president of the AAUP, who was present at the board meeting.

"There certainly have been problems, but the regents are quite responsive to faculty concerns," Richardson says. "It was refreshing to hear them arguing on behalf of academic freedom.

 Printer-Friendly Page