A. Student-Faculty Compact
By maintaining an environment conducive to quality study and instruction, the students and faculty of the University of South Carolina Joseph F. Rice School of Law agree to foster an appreciation of an abiding interest in the law.
To that end, students agree to conduct themselves as mature and responsible professionals, prepare thoroughly for and participate in class, yearn for knowledge, engage in critical legal analysis, and accept the ethical and professional responsibilities inherent in pursuing a law degree.
Faculty, administrators, and staff agree to act fairly and professionally, respect the best efforts of students, fervently enjoy the art of legal education, conduct classes in an organized and thoughtful manner, demonstrate concern for student comprehension of the law, and strive to provide students with the opportunity to acquire the skills necessary to render ethical, professional, and effective legal service to the community.
B. Faculty Teaching Responsibility (from the University of South Carolina's Faculty Manual)
Statement of Policy
At the beginning of each term, instructional staff members shall state clearly in a syllabus the instructional objectives of each course they teach. They shall seek to fulfill these objectives and give examinations consistent with them. Instructional staff members shall follow the course descriptions published in the university Undergraduate Studies Bulletin and Graduate Studies Bulletin.
Instructional staff members shall inform their students about how they determine final grades and any attendance requirements that differ from the university attendance policy. At the request of a student, a faculty member should provide, before the free drop date, an evaluation of the student's progress.
Instructional staff members shall retain final examinations for one semester and should review graded examinations and papers with their students, if the students desire. They should grade and return examinations promptly.
Instructional staff members should meet their classes regularly at scheduled times. If unable to meet their classes, they shall notify the dean or department chair.
Instructional staff members should post a reasonable number of convenient office hours, as determined administratively, with the option of appointments. 50
Instructional staff members responsible for academic advising should be in their offices at specified hours during registration.
C. Classroom Computer Usage
-
Policy
- Unless otherwise prohibited by a course instructor in accordance with this policy,
students may use laptop computers in class for the purpose of taking notes and for
such other purposes related to the course as are consistent with the educational function
of the classroom. A course instructor may allow any use of computers in class that
the professor deems appropriate.
- When computers or other electronic devices are used in the classroom, all sound should
be turned off unless specifically permitted by the course instructor.
- Students using computers or other electronic devices during class may not work on matters unrelated to the class. It is expected that students will not use the Internet during class except as permitted by the course instructor in a manner consistent with the purposes of the class. A course instructor may impose sanctions upon a student who does not comply with this policy, including barring the offending student from further use of the computer or other electronic device in class or imposing an appropriate grade reduction.
- Individual course instructors may impose additional limitations on or prohibit all use of computers or other electronic devices in the classroom.
- Unless otherwise prohibited by a course instructor in accordance with this policy,
students may use laptop computers in class for the purpose of taking notes and for
such other purposes related to the course as are consistent with the educational function
of the classroom. A course instructor may allow any use of computers in class that
the professor deems appropriate.
D. Grading
1. Anonymous Examination Grading Policy.
-
- Anonymous Examination Grading System (AEGS). Course instructors may elect to use the
Law School’s anonymous examination grading system. Under the AEGS system, students
identify their examinations by placing only their AEGS number on their examinations.
Each semester, the Office of the Law Registrar/Academic Services gives each student
a new AEGS number. Course instructors who use the AEGS system obtain the names of
students only after they have submitted examination grades. Course instructors retain
discretion to adjust grades to reflect class participation or other academic factors
- Student Responsibility: It is the student's responsibility to ask their course instructors for information about the basis of grading in the course, use of materials on the examination, and use of the AEGS in the course.
- Anonymous Examination Grading System (AEGS). Course instructors may elect to use the
Law School’s anonymous examination grading system. Under the AEGS system, students
identify their examinations by placing only their AEGS number on their examinations.
Each semester, the Office of the Law Registrar/Academic Services gives each student
a new AEGS number. Course instructors who use the AEGS system obtain the names of
students only after they have submitted examination grades. Course instructors retain
discretion to adjust grades to reflect class participation or other academic factors
-
First-Year Grade Distribution Policy
- With the exception of Legal Research, Analysis and Writing I and II and Introduction
to the Legal Profession, the average grade in all first-year courses shall fall within
the range of 2.900- 3.100. In extraordinary circumstances, the Associate Dean for
Academic Programs may grant a faculty member’s request for an exception to this policy
where the average grade for a 1L course falls below 2.900; if the exception to this
policy is sought by the Associate Dean for Academic Programs, the Dean shall make
the decision as to whether to grant the Associate Dean’s request for an exception.
- The average grade for Legal Research, Analysis and Writing I & II shall fall within the range of 2.950-3.150. In extraordinary circumstances, the Associate Dean for Academic Programs may grant a faculty member’s request for an exception to this policy where the average grade for a 1L course falls below 2.950; if the exception to this policy is sought by the Associate Dean for Academic Programs, the Dean shall make the decision as to whether to grant the Associate Dean’s request for an exception.
- With the exception of Legal Research, Analysis and Writing I and II and Introduction
to the Legal Profession, the average grade in all first-year courses shall fall within
the range of 2.900- 3.100. In extraordinary circumstances, the Associate Dean for
Academic Programs may grant a faculty member’s request for an exception to this policy
where the average grade for a 1L course falls below 2.900; if the exception to this
policy is sought by the Associate Dean for Academic Programs, the Dean shall make
the decision as to whether to grant the Associate Dean’s request for an exception.
-
Upper-Level Grade Distribution Policy.
-
Grade Normalization Structure
- Standard Normalization: Standard letter grades are assigned. The overall GPA for an individual class must
be normalized (curved) to within ±0.25 of that individual class’s entering GPA;
- Expanded Normalization: Standard letter grades are assigned. The overall GPA for an individual class must
be normalized (curved) to within ±0.40 of that individual class’s entering GPA;
- No Normalization: Standard letter grades are assigned. The overall GPA for an individual class need
not be normalized (curved).
- High Pass/Pass/Low Pass/Fail: Student performance shall be assessed as either
- High Pass (H_HPLP), which is equivalent to an A level of performance;
- Pass (P_HPLP), which is equivalent to a B level of performance;
- Low Pass (L_HPLP), which is equivalent to a C level of performance; or
- Fail (F_HPLP), which is equivalent to D or F levels of performance.
Note: Absent special circumstances that are determined by the Associate Dean for Academic Programs, no more than 50% of the students in a class should receive a High Pass.
- Pass/Fail Standard letter grades are not assigned. Student performance shall be assessed as
either Pass or Fail.
- Entering GPA defined. For a class offered at the Law School in a semester or term, the entering GPA of the
class is the [cumulative/average] GPA of the students taking that class in that semester
or term.
- Standard Normalization: Standard letter grades are assigned. The overall GPA for an individual class must
be normalized (curved) to within ±0.25 of that individual class’s entering GPA;
-
Applicability of Grading Structure
- Standard Normalization. Unless otherwise stated in this policy, all instructors teaching any course in the Department of Legal Studies at the School of Law shall
apply Standard Normalization. Instructors may petition the Curriculum Committee for
an exception to this policy, with the right to appeal a denial to the Associate Dean.
There is a strong presumption in favor of Standard Normalization, and exceptions permitting
either Expanded Normalization or No Normalization may be granted only for the reasons
described herein.
- Expanded Normalization. Expanded Normalization shall apply only as stated in this policy.
- Petitions for Expanded Normalization. An instructor may petition the Curriculum Committee, with the right to appeal a denial
to the Associate Dean, for an exception that permits them to apply Expanded Normalization
to a specific course.
- Expanded Normalization in the Current Semester. An instructor may petition for an exception that permits them to apply Expanded
Normalization to a specific course in the current semester. Such a petition shall
be approved only if the Curriculum Committee (or, upon appeal, the Associate Dean)
concludes that the instructor has established, by a preponderance of the evidence,
that the Expanded Normalization Standards, infra, are or will be met in the relevant semester.
- Expanded Normalization in the Current and Future Semesters. An instructor may petition for an exception that permits them to apply Expanded
Normalization to the specific course in the current semester and in all future semesters in which that instructor teaches that course without substantial
changes. Such a petition shall be approved only if the Curriculum Committee (or, upon
appeal, the Associate Dean) concludes that the instructor has established, by a preponderance
of the evidence, that the Standards for Expanded Normalization, infra, are or will be met in the current semester and will be met in future semesters.
If the petition is granted, the instructor must, within the first two weeks of every semester after the semester in which the petition was originally granted, submit to the Curriculum Committee a written memorandum verifying that the instructor intends to apply Expanded Normalization based on the previously granted exception. In this memorandum, the petitioning instructor must verify 1) that the Standards for Expanded Normalization remain satisfied for the same reasons as originally provided and approved, and 2) that no substantial changes have been made to the course (including but not limited to changes that require the approval of the Curriculum Committee or faculty).
If the instructor fails to timely submit a verification memorandum, the previously granted exception shall no longer be in effect. The instructor may, at their option, submit a new petition for Expanded Normalization. - Standards for Expanded Normalization. An instructor’s petition for an exception for Expanded Normalization shall only be
granted, whether by the Curriculum Committee or the Associate Dean, when the instructor’s
petition and supporting documentation establish by the preponderance of the evidence
that all of the following criteria are met:
- The instructor must provide substantial feedback on at least three instances of student
performance. “Student performance” refers to a substantive demonstration of a student’s
analytical, doctrinal, research, writing, or problem-solving abilities sufficient
to support individualized, formative feedback. Work that is too preliminary, undeveloped,
or superficial—such as unelaborated paper topic ideas, bullet-point lists of concepts,
or participation in general class discussion—does not constitute “student performance”
unless accompanied by the depth and articulation needed for individualized assessment.
Instructor feedback is “substantial” when it serves a formative function, identifies
with specificity the strengths or weaknesses of individual student performance, includes
clear guidance for improvement that individual students can reasonably implement,
and is delivered in a way that can be verified for purposes of compliance with this
policy. Routine check-ins, group feedback (e.g., generalized feedback during class
sessions), numerical scores without qualitative explanation, and commentary that merely
affirm performance (“good analysis,” “strong argument”) without identifying how to
improve future work do not constitute substantial feedback. The minimum instances
of substantial feedback must be provided on separate occasions over the course of
the semester, but can be provided in the context of either separate assignments (e.g.,
three separate pieces of legal writing) or on a single continuing assignment (e.g.,
multiple drafts of the same piece of legal writing);
- Each instance of substantial feedback must be provided prior to the next instance
of assessed student performance that receives substantial feedback. For example, for
substantial feedback on Assignment 1 to satisfy this rule, the instructor must provide
substantial feedback on Assignment 1 before the student submits Assignment 2;
- Students must be required to respond to the instances of substantial feedback given
on their previous performance. Instructors must formally identify and assess students’
response to substantial feedback. For example, instructors may require students to
incorporate the instructor’s feedback on Assignment 1 by revising and resubmitting
Assignment 1, or by demonstrating that the student incorporated the feedback on Assignment
1 into Assignment 2. Instructors who permit students to incorporate the feedback into
a subsequent assignment must establish with specificity that they look for and assess
the student’s incorporation of prior instructor feedback (e.g., by including that
requirement in a grading rubric); and
- The instructor must objectively assess the students’ performance in the course based on rigorous, methodical grading criteria involving a comprehensive written grading rubric for all substantial assignments.
- The instructor must provide substantial feedback on at least three instances of student
performance. “Student performance” refers to a substantive demonstration of a student’s
analytical, doctrinal, research, writing, or problem-solving abilities sufficient
to support individualized, formative feedback. Work that is too preliminary, undeveloped,
or superficial—such as unelaborated paper topic ideas, bullet-point lists of concepts,
or participation in general class discussion—does not constitute “student performance”
unless accompanied by the depth and articulation needed for individualized assessment.
Instructor feedback is “substantial” when it serves a formative function, identifies
with specificity the strengths or weaknesses of individual student performance, includes
clear guidance for improvement that individual students can reasonably implement,
and is delivered in a way that can be verified for purposes of compliance with this
policy. Routine check-ins, group feedback (e.g., generalized feedback during class
sessions), numerical scores without qualitative explanation, and commentary that merely
affirm performance (“good analysis,” “strong argument”) without identifying how to
improve future work do not constitute substantial feedback. The minimum instances
of substantial feedback must be provided on separate occasions over the course of
the semester, but can be provided in the context of either separate assignments (e.g.,
three separate pieces of legal writing) or on a single continuing assignment (e.g.,
multiple drafts of the same piece of legal writing);
- Expanded Normalization in the Current Semester. An instructor may petition for an exception that permits them to apply Expanded
Normalization to a specific course in the current semester. Such a petition shall
be approved only if the Curriculum Committee (or, upon appeal, the Associate Dean)
concludes that the instructor has established, by a preponderance of the evidence,
that the Expanded Normalization Standards, infra, are or will be met in the relevant semester.
- Petitions for Expanded Normalization. An instructor may petition the Curriculum Committee, with the right to appeal a denial
to the Associate Dean, for an exception that permits them to apply Expanded Normalization
to a specific course.
- No Normalization. No Normalization shall apply only as stated in this policy.
- Automatic Application of No Normalization. Certain classes automatically apply No Normalization. These courses are limited
to:
- Enrollment of Twelve (12) of Fewer Students. No Normalization shall automatically apply to courses in which twelve (12) or fewer
students are enrolled.
- Clinical Courses. Clinical courses involve multiple rounds of substantive feedback required to ensure
that students’ work reaches ethical levels of competence as required by SC Rules of
Professional Conduct, and they provide substantial lawyering experience that involves
advising or representing one or more actual clients. Due to the context of these courses
and the objective grading rubrics used to assess student performance, No Normalization
shall automatically apply to Clinical courses.
- Supervised Legal Research Projects. The course consists entirely of a Supervised Legal Research project for an individual
student with an assessment provided via letter grade or traditional Pass/Fail as set
forth in the Student Handbook Policy on Pass/Fail Grading. Due to the context of these
courses and the multiple rounds of feedback required by the rules governing Supervised
Legal Research projects, No Normalization shall automatically apply to individual
Supervised Legal Research projects.
- Enrollment of Twelve (12) of Fewer Students. No Normalization shall automatically apply to courses in which twelve (12) or fewer
students are enrolled.
- Petitions for No Normalization. An instructor may petition the Curriculum Committee for an exception that permits
them to apply No Normalization to a specific course in the current semester only.
The grant of any such petition is limited in effect to specific instructor, specific
course, and specific semester for which the petition was submitted.
No Normalization is intended to be granted only in rare and extraordinary cases. The Curriculum Committee and Associate Dean shall construe requests for No Normalization with the utmost caution, mindful of the school’s commitment to consistency, equity, and the prevention of grade inflation.
The Curriculum Committee (or, on appeal, the Associate Dean) shall only grant an exception for No Normalization when the faculty member’s petition establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that there is an extraordinary andragogical or administrative necessity that creates substantive anomalies or administrative burdens that fundamentally undermine fair and accurate grading under other grading methods (e.g., Standard Normalization, Expanded Normalization, Pass/Fail, etc.) in a way that is fundamentally inconsistent with the law school’s andragogical objectives. An instructor’s decision to assign the same grades to all students working in the same group does not establish an extraordinary andragogical or administrative necessity that can justify No Normalization if the instructor could structure the class, project(s), or grading in a manner that allows for individualized assessment.
The circumstances in which the Committee and No Normalization apply:
- The instructor establishes that all of the criteria for Expanded Normalization apply
AND that the students, when objectively assessed, have scored or are substantially
likely to score higher or lower than the Expanded Normalization range would permit;
- Courses in which students work on group projects in a way that the instructor, in
good faith, cannot separately assess individual student performance. The instructor
bears a heavy burden of establishing that individual assessment is impossible or prohibitively
impractical and is not merely a matter of preference;
- Interdisciplinary courses that include a substantial number of graduate students from
other disciplines who are graded under different norms; and
- Courses that are disrupted by emergency circumstances, such as a natural disaster or other event in which the application of Standard Normalization would unfairly penalize students due to circumstances beyond their or the instructor’s control.
- The instructor establishes that all of the criteria for Expanded Normalization apply
AND that the students, when objectively assessed, have scored or are substantially
likely to score higher or lower than the Expanded Normalization range would permit;
- Automatic Application of No Normalization. Certain classes automatically apply No Normalization. These courses are limited
to:
- Timing of Petitions & Committee Action. All petitions for exceptions to Standard Normalization must be provided to the Associate Dean for Academic Programs no later than fourteen (14) days before grades are due to be submitted to the Registrar. Whenever practicable, the Committee shall meet, in person or elsewise, to vote on petitions for exceptions to Standard Normalization no later than seven (7) days before grades are due to be submitted. The Chair of the Committee shall promptly communicate the approval or denial of such petitions to the petitioning faculty member, the Associate Dean, and the Registrar.
- Standard Normalization. Unless otherwise stated in this policy, all instructors teaching any course in the Department of Legal Studies at the School of Law shall
apply Standard Normalization. Instructors may petition the Curriculum Committee for
an exception to this policy, with the right to appeal a denial to the Associate Dean.
There is a strong presumption in favor of Standard Normalization, and exceptions permitting
either Expanded Normalization or No Normalization may be granted only for the reasons
described herein.
-
-
Submission and Posting of Grades.
It is the policy of the faculty of the University of South Carolina Joseph F. Rice School of Law that grades are due in the Office of the Law Registrar/Academic Services as follows:
Fall Grades: All grades are due on the first day of spring classes.
Spring Grades: First-year grades are due 21 days after the last regularly scheduled 1L examination. Upper-level grades are due on the last Friday in May. However, the Dean has discretion to set a date for the submission of grade information to determine the status of graduating seniors.
Summer Grades: For each summer school course grades must be reported 30 days after either the regularly scheduled examination date for the course or the last day of class if there is no examination in the course.
Grades for each course will normally be available on the student information system the day after they are received in the Office of the Registrar/Academic Services. -
Grade Changes.
A grade in a course may be changed only on approval of the instructor teaching the course and the faculty of the Law School for computational error or other good cause. The refusal of the instructor to change a grade is not review-able except on petition to the faculty under the faculty bylaws. Special make-up work, extra work, or examination to change a grade already recorded is not permitted. -
Class Ranks.
Class ranks are computed twice yearly, and available for distribution on March 1 and August 1. Class ranks are calculated based on grades submitted when semester grades are due (see § VIII.D.3). Class ranks are not calculated after summer grades have been submitted. Summer grades are included when calculating Fall semester class ranks. Students can obtain their individual class ranks by making a written request to the Office of the Registrar/Academic Services on a form provided by that office. -
Criteria for Academic Honors.
Dean's Medallion. This engraved medallion is presented to the graduate with the highest cumulative GPA.
President's Honor Roll. A student who earns a GPA of 4.000, having completed at least 12 graded law hours, will be named to the President’s Honor Roll.
Dean's List. A student who earns a GPA of 3.500, having completed at least 12 graded law hours, will be named to the Dean’s List.
Graduation Honors. Graduation honors are based on a student’s final GPA after all grades have been submitted. Summa Cum Laude (3.950-4.000); Magna Cum Laude (3.750-3.949); Cum Laude (3.500-3.749).
E. Student Evaluations of Faculty
Each semester, students are asked to fill out an evaluation form for each of their course instructors. The results of these evaluations are used by the Dean in setting salaries, by the Tenured Faculty in making promotion and tenure decisions, and by course instructors in improving their teaching. Considering the importance of these evaluations, the students are expected to provide honest and constructive feedback in a professional manner.
F. Student Grievance Procedures
The following procedures apply to all student complaints and grievances of an academic nature, excluding grade changes (See § VIII.D.4):
- Any student having a complaint of the above-described nature, shall in the first instance,
attempt to resolve this complaint by discussing it with the faculty member against
whom the complaint lies.
- If, by this means, the complaint is not resolved to the student's satisfaction, the
student shall, within thirty days of the occurrence being complained of, present the
complaint in writing to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. Such complaint shall
include a description of the attempted resolution with the faculty member or members
in question. The Associate Dean shall investigate the allegations made in the complaint,
take whatever actions the Associate Dean deems appropriate, and notify the parties
of that action
- If the actions taken by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs do not resolve the
complaint to the satisfaction of all parties, such dissatisfied party or parties shall,
within 15 days of receipt of notification by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs,
file a written grievance with the Student/Faculty Grievance Committee.
- The Student/Faculty Grievance Committee shall consist of two faculty members and one
student, each of whom shall be selected in the manner prescribed by the faculty by-laws.
The Chair shall be the faculty member on the committee with the greatest seniority
at the Law School.
- Grievances submitted to this Committee shall state in detail the nature of the complaint,
the underlying factual allegations, and the relief sought; attached shall be the student's
letter of complaint to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the latter's reply.
Copies shall be served on all parties.
- Upon receipt of a grievance, the Committee shall call a hearing in a timely manner.
The grievant shall be entitled to attend, make an oral statement, call witnesses,
introduce documentary evidence, be represented by counsel or a friend, or waive any
of these rights. The opposing party shall have the same rights. The Committee shall
also have the power, on its own motion, to call witnesses and receive evidence. The
hearing shall otherwise be closed.
- At the close of the hearing, the Committee shall go into executive session to discuss the merits of the grievance and to prepare a written decision thereon; such decision shall contain a finding of facts, the Committee's reason for granting or denying the grievance, and an indication of the appropriate remedy. Copies of the decision shall be given to all parties.
- The Student/Faculty Grievance Committee shall consist of two faculty members and one
student, each of whom shall be selected in the manner prescribed by the faculty by-laws.
The Chair shall be the faculty member on the committee with the greatest seniority
at the Law School.
- Decisions of the Committee shall be subject to approval, disapproval, or modification
by the Law School faculty. Such review shall be limited to the record as developed
below and the decision of the Committee shall not be disapproved or modified unless
it is found to be clearly erroneous. The decision by the faculty is not reviewable
- The time periods described herein shall be calculated based on "regular school days," which include days on which classes are scheduled and the final examination period. All times specified under the various provisions of this procedure shall not be extended, and the failure to exercise any right provided for herein within the time specified shall be deemed a waiver of such right.
G. Student Participation in the Governance of the Law School Under the Faculty By-Laws
The Law School is governed by the faculty under a set of by-laws. Certain portions of these by-laws authorize participation by students in faculty committee work. The faculty by-laws are available for inspection in the Office of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.
H. Notification of Student Rights Under FERPA
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) affords students certain rights with respect to their education records. They are:
- The right to inspect and review the student’s education records within 45 days of
the day the University receives a request for access.
Students should submit to registrar, dean head of academic department, or other appropriate official, written requests that identify the record(s) they wish to inspect. The University official will make arrangements for access and notify the student of the time and place when the records may be inspected. If the records are not maintained by the University official to whom the request was submitted, that official shall advise the student of the correct official to whom the request should be addressed.
- The right to request the amendment of the student’s education records if the student
believes them inaccurate or misleading.
Students may ask the University to amend a record that they believe is inaccurate or misleading. They should write to the University official responsible for the record, clearly identify the part of the record they want changed, and specify why it is inaccurate or misleading.
If the University decides not to amend the record as requested by the student, the University will notify the student of the decision and advise the student of his or her right to a hearing regarding the request for amendment. Additional information regarding the hearing procedures will be provided to the student when notified of the right to a hearing.
- The right to consent to disclosures of personally identifiable information contained
in the student’s education records, except to the extent that FERPA authorizes disclosure
without consent.
The University of South Carolina will disclose information from a student’s education records only with the written consent of the student, except:
- To school officials with legitimate educational interests;
A school official is a person employed by the University in an administrative, supervisory, academic or research, or support staff position; a person or company with whom the University has contracted (such as an attorney, auditor, or collection agency); a person serving on the Board of Trustees; or a student serving on an official committee, such as a disciplinary or grievance committee, or assisting another school official in performing his or her tasks.
A school official has a legitimate educational interest if the official needs to review an education record in order to fulfill his or her professional responsibility. - To officials of other institutions in which the student seeks or intends to enroll
provided that the student has previously requested a release of his/her record;
- To authorized representatives of the U.S. Department of Education, the Comptroller
General of the United States, state educational authorities, organizations conducting
studies for or on behalf of the University, and accrediting organizations;
- In connection with a student’s application for, and receipt of, financial aid;
- To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
- To parents of dependent students as defined by the Internal Revenue Code, Section
152;
- To appropriate parties in a health or safety emergency; or
- To the alleged victim of any crime of violence of the results of any disciplinary
proceedings conducted by the University.
- The University may disclose the result of a disciplinary proceeding to a parent or
guardian so long as the student is under the age of 21 at the time of the incident
and the proceeding has resulted in a violation of University drug or alcohol policies,
or any federal, state, or local law.
- To students currently registered in a particular class, the names and email addresses of others on the roster may be disclosed in order to participate in class discussion.
- To school officials with legitimate educational interests;
The University of South Carolina has designated the following items as Directory Information: a student’s name, electronic mail address, local and permanent mailing addresses and telephone numbers, semesters of attendance, enrollment status (full- or part-time), date of admission, date of graduation, school, major and minor fields of study, whether or not currently enrolled, classification (freshman, etc.), type of degree being pursued, degrees, honors, and awards received (including scholarships and fellowships), weight and height of members of athletic teams, and whether the student has participated in officially recognized activities and sports sponsored by the University.
The University may disclose any of these items without prior written consent, unless the student has submitted a written request to the office of the University Registrar not to release directory information pertaining to them. Requests will be processed within 24 hours after receipt. Telephone directories are published during the summer; students eligible to enroll for the upcoming fall term are included in the directory unless the Office of the University Registrar is notified by May 31. The electronic directory is updated each weekend; requests for non-disclosure will be honored with the next update after the request is processed by the staff of the Office of the University Registrar.
- The right to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education concerning alleged
failures by the University of South Carolina to comply with the requirements of FERPA.
The name and address of the Office that administers FERPA is:
Family Policy Compliance Office
U.S. Department of Education
600 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202-4605
Questions concerning this law and the University’s procedures concerning the release of academic information may be directed to the Office of the University Registrar at 777-5555.