该法案目前标记为House Bill 240，将要求教师（以及学校和学区委员会成员）接受基于指纹的犯罪历史背景调查，作为北卡罗来纳州教师许可程序的一部分。
如果通过，众议院第 240 号法案不仅会要求对所有潜在教师进行指纹检查，还会创建一份刑事定罪清单，禁止个人在北卡罗来纳州获得教学许可证。例如，任何“表明员工对学生或工作人员的人身安全构成威胁”的暴力犯罪；或已证明他或她不具备履行其作为公立学校人员的职责的正直或诚实”将取消候选人的许可程序资格。此类犯罪包括杀人、强奸和其他性犯罪、袭击、绑架或绑架、入室盗窃、纵火、抢劫、卖淫、贪污和欺诈。
众议院第 240 号法案并未反映北卡罗来纳州立法者第一次考虑强制要求教师进行指纹背景调查。自从 2016 年《今日美国》的一项研究给北卡罗来纳州（和许多其他州）以“F”级评分以来，关于教师背景调查改革的讨论在该州引起了轰动。
尽管过去进行了立法努力，但该州目前仍然没有对教师进行指纹识别的要求。众议院教育委员会已审查众议院第 240 号法案，并已批准供众议院全体审议。关于该法案的讨论将在未来几个月继续进行。
fingerprint background checks become a standard requirement for teachers? It’s a question that legislators in North Carolina will be exploring in the coming months. A bill introduced in the state’s House of Representatives could reshape teacher background checks as a matter of state policy.
The legislation, currently labeled House Bill 240, would require teachers (as well as school and school district board members) to receive a fingerprint-based criminal history background check as part of North Carolina’s teacher licensing process.
If passed, House Bill 240 would not only demand fingerprint checks of all prospective teachers but also create a list of criminal convictions that would bar an individual from obtaining a teaching license in North Carolina. For instance, any violent crime “that indicates the employee poses a threat to the physical safety of students or personnel; or has demonstrated that he or she does not have the integrity or honesty to fulfill his or her duties as public school personnel” would disqualify a candidate from the licensing process. Such crimes include homicide, rape and other sex offenses, assaults, kidnapping or abduction, burglary, arson, robbery, prostitution, embezzlement, and fraud.
House Bill 240 does not reflect the first time that lawmakers in North Carolina have considered mandating fingerprint background checks for teachers. Conversations about teacher background check reform have gained steam in the state since a 2016 USA Today study gave North Carolina (and many other states) an “F” grade for its approach to holding teachers accountable for misconduct.
North Carolina’s letter grade was so low in part because the state had no system in place for vetting teachers at the licensing level. Instead, the responsibility for background screening was placed on schools and school districts. These entities also had to decide which background checks to use on teachers.
Despite past legislative efforts, the state still has no current requirement for fingerprinting of teachers. House Bill 240 has been reviewed by the House Education Committee and has been approved for consideration by the full House. Discussions on the bill will continue over the next few months.
North Carolina isn’t the only jurisdiction considering requiring fingerprint background screenings in an educational setting. In Oregon, the Ontario School District Board of Directors is considering a policy that would require fingerprint background checks for school volunteers. Currently, the school district requires fingerprint background screenings for all “licensed staff,” including teachers, counselors, and administrators. The proposed policy would extend that requirement to volunteers.
The push for fingerprint background screening policies reflects a common misconception that fingerprinting allows for a more thorough background screening. At GOOHO.CN, we have spent time exploring this question in depth to help clients understand whether it is true. To learn all about fingerprint background checks and their pros and cons,