Oregon
Oregon School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Oregon's split consent rule under ORS 165.540 governs school recording. In-person conversations and video calls, including classroom and meeting recordings, require that all participants be informed, though students may record regularly scheduled classes with a visible device under the unconcealed device exception. Phone calls with school staff follow one-party consent, and FERPA separately protects student education records.
Recording in Oregon schools involves the intersection of state recording laws, federal education privacy laws, and school district policies. Oregon's split consent framework under ORS 165.540 applies to all school settings, while federal laws like FERPA and IDEA add layers of protection for student privacy and disability accommodations.
This guide covers how Oregon's recording laws apply in K-12 schools and higher education in 2026, including classroom recording, IEP meetings, school security cameras, and student and parent rights.
Oregon's Split Consent Framework in Schools
Phone Calls With School Staff
Under ORS 165.540(1)(a), Oregon follows one-party consent for phone calls. Parents and students can record phone calls with:

- Teachers and professors
- School administrators and principals
- Counselors and advisors
- Special education coordinators
- School board members (in their official capacity)
No notification is required. If you are a participant in the call, you can record it.
In-Person Conversations at School
For face-to-face conversations at school, ORS 165.540(1)(c) requires all-party notification. This means:
- You cannot secretly record an in-person meeting with a teacher
- Parent-teacher conferences require notification to all participants before recording
- Conversations with administrators in their offices require notification
- Hallway conversations between students and staff require notification for audio recording
The same notice rule covers video calls. Since 2021, ORS 165.535(1) defines a "conversation" to include a communication occurring through a video conferencing program, so a Zoom or Teams meeting with a teacher or administrator is treated like an in-person conversation, not like a phone call.
The Classroom Exception
ORS 165.540(6)(a) includes an exception for regularly scheduled classes and seminars when an unconcealed recording device is used. This means:
- Students can record lectures with a visible recording device without individually notifying the instructor and every classmate
- The device must be clearly visible, not hidden
- This exception applies to regularly scheduled educational sessions, not one-on-one meetings or informal conversations
- Individual instructors and school districts may have their own policies restricting recording even when the statutory exception applies, and in K-12 public schools a district policy required by Executive Order 25-09 bars student phone use during instructional hours
Recording in K-12 Schools

Student Recording Rights
Oregon K-12 students have limited recording rights that are shaped by both state law and school district policies:
In class (the unconcealed device exception):
- Students may record regularly scheduled classes with a visible device under ORS 165.540(6)(a)
- In practice, K-12 students generally cannot use a phone to record class: under Governor Kotek's Executive Order 25-09 (July 2025), every Oregon school district must prohibit student use of personal electronic devices during instructional hours, with policies in effect by January 1, 2026
- The order requires exceptions for a medical provider's order, a student's IEP or Section 504 plan, and written exemptions granted by the district, so recording as an approved accommodation remains possible
- Breaking a district device policy is a school discipline matter, not a crime; ORS 165.540 still governs whether a recording is legal
Outside class:
- Audio recording of in-person conversations with teachers, administrators, or other students requires all-party notification
- Silent video in public school hallways, cafeterias, and common areas is generally legal
- Phone calls with school staff follow one-party consent
Parent Recording Rights
Parents often want to record interactions with school personnel, especially during disputes about their child's education. Oregon law provides clear rules:
Phone calls: Record freely under one-party consent. This is the simplest way to document conversations with teachers, principals, and district officials.
In-person and video meetings: You must notify all participants before recording. At the start of a parent-teacher conference or administrative meeting, state clearly: "I am going to record this meeting."
School events: The unconcealed device exception may apply at school assemblies, performances, and public meetings. Use a visible recording device.
Teacher and Staff Recording Rights
Teachers and school staff are subject to the same split consent rules:
- They can record phone calls with parents under one-party consent
- They must notify all participants before recording in-person or video meetings
- School district policies may impose additional restrictions on staff recording
- Recordings containing student information are subject to FERPA
Recording IEP and Special Education Meetings

IEP Meeting Recording Rules
Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings are some of the most frequently recorded school meetings. In Oregon:
- The all-party notification requirement under ORS 165.540(1)(c) applies to IEP meetings, whether held in person or by video conference
- Parents must notify the IEP team before recording
- The school district can also record if they notify all participants
- Neither party can secretly record the meeting
Federal Law Interactions
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) does not specifically address recording IEP meetings. However:
- IDEA guarantees parents the right to participate meaningfully in the IEP process
- Some parents argue that recording supports meaningful participation, especially for parents who need to review meeting content later
- Federal law neither authorizes nor prohibits recording IEP meetings. The U.S. Department of Education's 1999 published guidance says a school district may require, prohibit, limit, or regulate recording, but a policy that prohibits or limits it must allow exceptions when recording is needed for the parent to understand the IEP or the IEP process, or to exercise other IDEA rights
- Giving notice under Oregon law makes your recording lawful under ORS 165.540, but it does not override a district policy; if the district limits recording, ask in writing for an exception and explain why you need it
- The Oregon Department of Education provides guidance on parent participation rights
Recording Accommodations for Students With Disabilities
Students with disabilities may need to record classes or meetings as an accommodation:
- Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA, schools must provide reasonable accommodations
- Recording lectures may be a documented accommodation in a student's 504 plan or IEP
- When recording is an approved accommodation, it takes precedence over general school recording policies
- The student should still comply with the unconcealed device requirement of ORS 165.540(6)(a) for classroom recordings
School Security Cameras

Where Cameras Are Permitted
Oregon schools can install security cameras in:
- Hallways and corridors
- Building entrances and exits
- Parking lots and bus loading areas
- Cafeterias and common areas
- Gymnasiums (in public-access areas)
- Playgrounds and outdoor areas
- Administrative offices (in common areas)
Where Cameras Are Prohibited
Schools should not place cameras in areas where students have a reasonable expectation of privacy:
- Bathrooms and restrooms
- Locker rooms and changing areas
- Shower facilities
- Private counseling rooms (may vary by district policy)
Knowingly recording a person's intimate area (nudity, or undergarments covered by clothing) without consent where the person expects privacy, such as a bathroom, locker room, or changing area, is invasion of personal privacy under ORS 163.700 and may also implicate federal law. ORS 163.700 targets nudity and intimate areas, so a camera in a counseling room is mainly a district policy and privacy question rather than a violation of that statute by its placement alone.
Audio on School Security Cameras
If school security cameras capture audio of in-person conversations, the all-party notification requirement applies. Schools should:
- Use video-only cameras to avoid the audio consent issue
- If audio is enabled, post prominent notification signage throughout the school, but recognize that no Oregon court has held a sign satisfies the "specifically informed" requirement of ORS 165.540(1)(c); in State v. Bichsel (1990) the Court of Appeals held that even a recorder in plain sight was not enough without an unequivocal warning, so video-only cameras remain the safer choice
- Include surveillance disclosure in student and parent handbooks
- Train staff on audio recording compliance
FERPA and Recording Privacy
What FERPA Protects
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects the privacy of student education records. Under the federal definition, a recording is an education record when it meets both parts of a two-part test:
- It contains information directly related to a student
- It is maintained by the school or a person acting on the school's behalf
The purpose of the recording does not matter. Security footage the school keeps can be an education record if it is directly related to a student.
FERPA Implications for School Recordings
- Security camera footage that captures student behavior may become an education record
- Recordings of IEP meetings that document a student's educational program are education records
- Schools must protect FERPA-covered recordings from unauthorized disclosure
- Parents have the right to inspect education records, including relevant recordings
- Non-parent third parties cannot access recordings containing student information without consent or a FERPA exception
Student-Made Recordings
Recordings made by students on their own devices are generally not subject to FERPA because they are not maintained by the school. However:
- Sharing recordings that identify other students on social media may raise privacy and disciplinary concerns
- School anti-bullying policies may restrict how student recordings are shared
- Recordings used as evidence in disciplinary proceedings may become part of the student's record
Higher Education Recording Rules
University and College Classrooms
Oregon's unconcealed device exception for regularly scheduled classes applies in higher education. Students can record lectures with a visible device. However:
- Many universities have their own recording policies that may be more restrictive
- Professors may prohibit recording in their syllabi
- Recordings that capture other students' comments in class discussion may raise privacy concerns
- Disability resource centers coordinate recording accommodations
Virtual Learning
Online courses through video conferencing platforms fall under the ORS 165.540(6)(a) exception for regularly scheduled classes, which exempts the class from the all-participants notification requirement of ORS 165.540(1)(c) when it occurs through a video conferencing program. Students can record virtual classes through the platform's built-in feature without individually notifying the instructor and every classmate. This applies to synchronous classes on Zoom, Teams, and similar platforms.
Penalties for Illegal School Recording
Criminal Penalties
Violating ORS 165.540 in a school setting carries the same penalties as any other context:
| Penalty | Maximum |
|---|---|
| Jail time | Up to 364 days |
| Fine | Up to $6,250 |
Privacy Violations
Recording students' intimate areas in private school areas such as restrooms and locker rooms:
| Offense | Classification | Maximum Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| ORS 163.700 (Second Degree) | Class A misdemeanor | 364 days jail, $6,250 fine |
| ORS 163.701 (First Degree) | Class C felony | 5 years prison, $125,000 fine |
School Disciplinary Consequences
Students who violate school recording policies may face:
- Confiscation of recording devices
- Detention, suspension, or expulsion for recording-related misconduct such as harassment; for a K-12 student whose only violation is using a phone in class, Executive Order 25-09 bars responses that cost instructional time, including suspension or expulsion
- Referral to law enforcement for statutory violations
- Notation in disciplinary records
Oregon Recording Laws by Topic
Phone Call Recording | Audio Recording | Video Recording | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras
More Oregon Recording Topics
More Oregon Laws
- Oregon AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Oregon Dashcam Laws
- Oregon Data Privacy Laws
- Oregon Deepfake Laws
- Oregon Employee Monitoring Laws
- Oregon GPS Tracking Laws
- Oregon Police Bodycam Laws
- Oregon Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can students record classes in Oregon?
Yes, under the unconcealed device exception in ORS 165.540(6)(a). Students can record regularly scheduled classes with a visible recording device without breaking ORS 165.540. However, since January 1, 2026 every Oregon public school district must have a policy barring K-12 student phone use during instructional hours under Executive Order 25-09, and colleges and individual instructors may set their own rules. Students with disabilities may have recording approved as an accommodation, which the order requires districts to allow for.
Can parents record IEP meetings in Oregon?
Yes, but parents must notify all participants before recording. IEP meetings, whether in person or by video conference, are conversations subject to the all-party notification requirement under ORS 165.540(1)(c). Announce at the start of the meeting that you are recording. Federal guidance lets a school district limit or prohibit recording at IEP meetings, but any such policy must allow an exception when recording is needed for the parent to understand the IEP or exercise IDEA rights.
Can parents record phone calls with teachers in Oregon?
Yes. Oregon follows one-party consent for phone calls under ORS 165.540(1)(a). Parents can record any phone call with a teacher, principal, or school administrator without telling the other person. This is often the most practical way to document school communications.
Can schools put security cameras in locker rooms in Oregon?
No. A camera that records students' intimate areas (nudity, or undergarments covered by clothing) without consent in locker rooms, bathrooms, showers, or changing areas violates ORS 163.700, which covers visual recordings of intimate areas where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. This is a Class A misdemeanor. It becomes a Class C felony under ORS 163.701 if the recording captures a person in a state of nudity in such a place, or if the person recording has a prior conviction for invasion of privacy, public indecency, private indecency, or a sex crime.
Are school recordings subject to FERPA?
Recordings maintained by a school that contain information directly related to a student may be education records under FERPA. Schools must protect these recordings from unauthorized disclosure. Parent-made recordings on personal devices are generally not subject to FERPA.
Updates
We added the Executive Order 25-09 K-12 phone rule to the key takeaways, dated the Department of Education IEP guidance to 1999, and relabeled the ORS 133.739 source to show it covers only court-ordered interception violations.
We corrected the IEP-recording guidance (federal guidance lets districts limit recording, with required exceptions), added Oregon's 2025 executive order requiring school districts to bar student phone use during class, noted that a posted sign may not satisfy Oregon's notice rule, fixed the FERPA definition, and removed a mislabeled Student Privacy Act link.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
We corrected how this page describes Oregon's invasion-of-privacy statute (ORS 163.700 covers recording nudity or intimate areas, not camera placement as such) and clarified that Oregon's notify-all-participants rule also covers video calls, not only in-person conversations.
Fixed a dead FERPA link (ed.gov/ferpa 404s) to point to the current Department of Education host, studentprivacy.ed.gov/ferpa, in the citations list and both inline body references.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the citation for Oregon's classroom unconcealed-device recording exception from the unrelated ORS 165.540(2) to the correct ORS 165.540(6)(a) throughout the page, fixed the virtual-classes section's mischaracterization of the narrow (6)(b) evidence-gathering exception, and corrected the fabricated dissemination-based felony trigger for camera placement in locker rooms.
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 165: Offenses Involving Fraud or Deception
§ 165.540Obtaining contents of communicationsIn forcecited in 49 of our articles
(1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 or 133.726 or subsections (2) to (8) of this section, a person may not: (a) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a telecommunication or a radio communication to which the person is not a participant, by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, unless consent is given by at least one participant. (b) Tamper with the wires, connections, boxes, fuses, circuits, lines or any other equipment or facilities of a telecommunication or radio communication company over which messages are transmitted, with the intent to obtain unlawfully the contents of a telecommunication or radio communication to which the person is not a participant. (c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-24 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 76 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Fleetwood (2000) applied ORS 165.540 to body wire evidence, holding that words spoken into a telephone are a telecommunication under subsection (1)(a) and that the (5)(a)(B) exception fails unless the officer or the officer's agent shares reciprocally in the conversation, so the recordings were inadmissible.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Klein (Oregon Supreme Court 2012, 352 Or. 302)“…eing 3 recorded. Conversations recorded in violation of ORS 165.540 are not admissible in 4 court excep…”
- North Pacific Lumber Co. v. Oliver (Oregon Supreme Court 1979, 286 Or. 639)✓A lumber wholesaler secretly monitored traders' calls; on de novo review the court said the practice may have violated ORS 165.540 but refused to rest unclean hands on it, since the ex-employee's calls were never monitored. The employer's noncompete suit failed on other grounds.
- State v. Fleetwood (Oregon Supreme Court 2000, 331 Or. 511)✓A detective wired an informant and recorded the suspect's side of a phone call and his talks with his mother and a juvenile seller; the court held those interceptions violated ORS 165.540(1)(a) and (1)(c) because the informant was not a participant, and upheld suppression.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can You Record ICE Agents? Know Your Rights by State (2026), Is Plaud HIPAA Compliant? Kind Of. Here's What to Know (2026)
Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 163: Offenses Against Persons
§ 163.700Invasion of personal privacy in the second degreeIn forcecited in 13 of our articles
(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702, a person commits the crime of invasion of personal privacy in the second degree if: (a)(A) For the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person, the person is in a location to observe another person in a state of nudity without the consent of the other person; and (B) The other person is in a place and circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of personal privacy; or (b)(A) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording of another person’s intimate area without the consent of the other person; and (B) The person being recorded has a reasonable expectation of privacy concerning the intimate area. (2) As used in this section and ORS 163.701: (a) “Intimate area” means nudity, or undergarments that are being worn by a person and are covered by clothing.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 16 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. McQueen (2020) held that a person who intentionally exposes an intimate area to another has no reasonable expectation of privacy as to that person under ORS 163.700(1)(b)(B), reversing a conviction for secretly recording consensual sex. State v. Mayes (2008) read the nudity definition as reaching only post-pubescent people.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Parra-Sanchez (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2023, 324 Or. App. 712)“…wrong, and likely a criminal invasion of her privacy under ORS 163.700. To the extent that our case law regard…”
- State v. Rodriguez-Ganegar (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2003, 186 Or. App. 530)“…hat people were making love in it, the person would violate ORS 163.700(1)(b) by looking into the room in the m…”
- State v. Mayes (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2008, 220 Or. App. 385)✓A man hid cameras in workplace and office restrooms and secretly recorded women and two girls, ages nine and seven. The court held the nudity definition in ORS 163.700 reaches only post-pubescent people, measured from the onset of puberty, and reversed the seven-year-old's count.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Oregon Recording Laws (2026): All-Party Notice in Person, One-Party for Calls, Oregon Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance, Privacy, and Consent, Oregon Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent
§ 163.701Invasion of personal privacy in the first degreeIn forcecited in 12 of our articles
(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702, a person commits the crime of invasion of personal privacy in the first degree if: (a)(A) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording of another person in a state of nudity without the consent of the other person; and (B) At the time the visual recording is made or recorded the person being recorded is in a place and circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of personal privacy; or (b) The person violates ORS 163.700 and, at the time of the offense, has a prior conviction for: (A) Invasion of personal privacy in any degree, public indecency, private indecency or a sex crime as defined in ORS 163A.005; or (B) The statutory counterpart of an offense described in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph in another jurisdiction. (2)(a) Invasion of personal privacy in the first degree is a Class C felony. (b) The Oregon Criminal Justice Commission shall classify invasion of personal privacy in the first degree as crime category 6 of the sentencing guidelines grid of the commission.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at oregonlegislature.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Parra-Sanchez (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2023, 324 Or. App. 712)“…y, a Class A misdemeanor (ORS 163.700) or Class C fel- ony (ORS 163.701), but intended overt voyeurs to be guil…”
- State v. McQueen (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2020, 307 Or. App. 540)“…acknowl- edges that his conduct was “likely criminal” under ORS 163.701, the statute setting forth the crime of…”
- State v. Murphy (Court of Appeals of Oregon 2022, 319 Or. App. 330)“…was convicted of first-degree invasion of personal privacy, ORS 163.701, based on an incident involving his 15-…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Oregon Security Camera Laws: Installation, Audio, and Privacy Rules, Oregon Video Recording Laws: Surveillance, Privacy, and Consent Rules, Oregon Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Offenses, Penalties, and Protections
Sources and References
- ORS 165.540 - Obtaining Contents of Communications(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- ORS 163.700 - Invasion of Personal Privacy(oregonlegislature.gov).gov
- FERPA - Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act(studentprivacy.ed.gov).gov
- IDEA - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act(sites.ed.gov).gov
- Oregon Department of Education(oregon.gov).gov
- ORS 133.739 - Civil Damages (limited to ORS 133.724 and 133.737 violations)(oregonlegislature.gov).gov