In the 2001 case Owasso Independent School District No. I-011 v. Falvo, Kristja J. Falvo, a parent of three students in the district, challenged a common classroom practice where teachers have students grade each other's work and call out the scores for record keeping - known as peer grading or score calling. She argued that this violated her children’s rights under The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which prohibits educational institutions from disclosing "education records" without written parental consent. However, the Supreme Court ruled against Falvo with a unanimous decision stating that peer-graded assignments do not constitute "education records" under FERPA because they are not kept by an educational agency or institution nor any person acting on its behalf; therefore such practices did not violate federal law protecting student privacy.

In the dissenting opinion for Owasso Independent School District No. I-011 v. Falvo, Justice John Paul Stevens argued that peer grading in classrooms should be considered a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). He contended that students' grades are educational records under FERPA and thus should not be disclosed without parental consent. He disagreed with the majority's interpretation of "maintained" as used in FERPA to mean only institutionalized or systematic recordkeeping by schools, arguing instead for a broader interpretation encompassing any student work evaluated by teachers or peers which contributes to an academic record. Furthermore, he expressed concern about potential harm caused by peer grading due to embarrassment or humiliation among students.