Should state step up background checks?
High Point reporter John Vandiver wrote this piece on Sunday about criminal background checks for teachers. North Carolina is one of only four states that does not require the checks. It is left to individual school systems to decide the scope of any background checks.
Guilford County Schools uses a private firm to check criminal records in North Carolina. In certain situations, the district may also perform a limited out-of-state check. But national checks are never done.
It would cost $38 per teacher to conduct national background checks, which access the FBI's criminal database. A one-time check of the district's existing teachers would cost about $164,000. And with about 500 new teachers hired each year, the district would pay about $19,000 annually to check new employees.
Why is this important? There have been two incidents in as many years in Guilford County Schools where employees working with children were found to have served time in prison - one for armed robbery and the other for a drug conviction.
What's your take on criminal background checks? Should the state pay for them? Should the school system find the money to do broader checks itself? Fingerprinting teachers for FBI checks is standard in most states. (However, I don't know if those states pick up the tabs or if the local school systems do.)
What about infringing on a person's civil rights?
"We probably feel that would be invasive," Eddie Davis III, president of the N.C. Association of Educators, said of fingerprinting prospective teachers. "Unless we get to a point where there's a major problem, I would think local school districts should deal with this. It seems to be working now."
Davis also opposes retroactively conducting background checks for current teachers.
"Where does it stop?" Davis said. "Will it be drug testing teachers next?"
So, what do you think?
Comments (9)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
I think the safety of our children should be a number one priority in this county. All and any necessary precautions should be taken before it is one step too late when it comes to our kids. Background checks should include a broader data bank outside of North Carolina. This is a necessary cost and bids should be sought to see who can do the most cost efficient and thorough job.
Posted on June 20, 2005 12:25 AM
I agree that broader background checks should be applied for new hires and ,if not retroactively, then upon promotion or classification changes.
I'm on the fence about fingerprints/DNA samples. Again, perhaps only new hires?
Additionally, should all kids be fingerprinted at the first and sixth grades?
Posted on June 20, 2005 7:04 AM
Didn't see anything about DNA samples? No teacher should object to fingerprinting if they have nothing to hide. I have seen my bank fingerprint people who cash a check and it is not from their bank.
jwg, what is your reasoning on fingerprinting all kids in 5th and 6th grade? Any fingerprinting of children would have to be permitted by their parents.
Posted on June 20, 2005 7:21 AM
I'm a teacher and I have no problem with being fingerprinted or having a thorough background check completed. I agree with the above posts that the safety of our kids must come first. In fact, I didn't realize until this year that GCS didn't do a full background check. Also, I believe that this is something the state should help school districts pay for. Otherwise, teachers would probably end up paying for it (we already have to pay for our schooling, the Praxis tests, and our teaching license). One stipulation: All school employees or anyone that would have contact with students should have to have the background check--not just teachers.
Posted on June 20, 2005 9:25 AM
Interesting that the annual amount estimated to conduct background checks is LESS than the amount of Grier's raise this year...
Does that tell you where our School Board's priorities are?
My employer fingerprints. It's no big deal, the ink washes right off. What's the big fear?? Unless some administrators just don't want their past to haunt them?
I say fingerprint everyone and start with the Superintendent.
Posted on June 20, 2005 9:38 AM
Barbra Ann,
My thought on fingerprinting kids in the first & sixth grades is that it provides an additional piece of evidence for law enforcement in the event that something happens to a kid (abduction, etc) and should get most of the kids. I'm not law enforcement so I can't say whether or not it would be valuable to them. If it's of no value or not cost effective, then obviously don't do it.
We have done the Ident-A-Kid thing for our kids so we have a record. It seems to me that this might be a way to provide this for all kids as part of their 'Permanent Record'.
I felt that this question was in keeping with "the safety of our children should be a number one priority in this county. All and any necessary precautions should be taken" portion of your previous post.
Posted on June 20, 2005 12:47 PM
OOPS! Sorry, Barbara Ann, I can't typ.
Posted on June 20, 2005 4:23 PM
Currently, all applicants for a substitute teacher position with GCS are required to pay for their own background check. I thought this was interesting, considering that substitutes are not paid much, but I paid it anyway because I wanted to help out my children's school. Do teacher applicants pay for their own background checks now or do they only make substitutes pay? Will additional background checks be an expense to GCS or will they pass off the cost to applicants?
Posted on June 22, 2005 10:00 PM
Please visit my directory:
Webverzeichnis, - Kostenlos, Kostenlos - Erotik, Erotik - Begleitservice, Begleitservice - Shopping, Shopping - Mode, Mode - Fitness, Fitness - Partnersuche, Partnersuche.
Posted on June 21, 2006 2:50 AM