Why We Name Some People and Not Others

This blog documents one family’s experience navigating gifted education acceleration, partial enrollment, and statutory compliance in Oak Park Elementary School District 97. Throughout these posts, you’ll notice that we name some individuals and not others. This page explains why.

The Legal Framework

Under U.S. defamation law, there’s an important distinction between public officials and private individuals:

Public officials (government employees exercising public authority) must prove “actual malice” to win a defamation claim—meaning the speaker knew the statement was false or had serious doubts about its truth.1

Private individuals need only show negligence (depending on the state).

This distinction exists to protect First Amendment rights to discuss the conduct of public officials. Citizens have a fundamental right to hold government officials accountable for their official actions.2

Who We Name

✅ Public Officials Performing Official Duties

We name district administrators and officials who make policy decisions, interpret statutes, and exercise discretionary authority:

  • Patrick Robinson (Acting Superintendent / Assistant Superintendent of Elementary Schools)
  • Hussain Ali (Principal, Mann Elementary School)
  • Emilie Creehan (Director of Teaching & Learning)
  • Current and former superintendents
  • School board members (when discussing public board actions)

Why: These are public officials exercising government authority. Taxpayers have a right to know how they perform their duties and make decisions affecting students. Their names appear in public records, board minutes, official communications, and district organizational charts.

What we say about them:

  • Factual descriptions of their actions (emails sent, decisions made, meetings declined)
  • Direct quotes from official communications
  • Timelines of interactions
  • Our interpretation of how their actions relate to law and policy (clearly marked as our view)
  • Criticism of their official decisions and patterns of behavior

What we avoid:

  • Speculation about personal motivations beyond what’s supported by documented facts
  • Information about their personal lives unrelated to their jobs
  • Accusations of intentional wrongdoing without strong evidence

Who We Don’t Name

❌ Teachers and Building-Level Staff

We do not name:

  • Classroom teachers (referred to as “Sonia’s teacher,” “the 2nd grade teacher,” etc.)
  • Enrichment specialists (referred to as “enrichment staff” or by program name)
  • Instructional coaches
  • Other building-level staff

Why:

  1. They don’t set policy. Teachers implement decisions made by administrators. They work within systems they don’t control.

  2. They face potential retaliation. Unlike administrators who have employment contracts and institutional power, building-level staff are more vulnerable to workplace consequences for perceived “problems” with parents.

  3. Privacy protection. While teachers are public employees, courts have recognized greater privacy interests for frontline workers compared to policymakers.3

  4. They often help. Many teachers have been supportive and advocating within the system. Naming them could create problems for people who are trying to help.

❌ Students and Other Families

We do not name:

  • Other students
  • Other parents
  • Any identifying information about families beyond our own

Why: Student privacy is paramount. Other families’ experiences are their own to share or not share.

Our daughter: We refer to her as “Sonia” or “my daughter.” We share only information relevant to educational access and advocacy, not personal details unrelated to the educational issues documented here.

What We Document

Everything we state as fact is supported by:

  • Emails (saved with full metadata, Gmail links, and timestamps)
  • FOIA responses (official district communications obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests)
  • Policy documents (board policies, acceleration rubrics, ISBE guidance, Illinois statutes)
  • Meeting notes and summaries
  • Timeline documentation (cross-referenced and dated)

When we offer interpretation or opinion, we clearly mark it as such and show our reasoning based on disclosed facts.

The Standard We Use

We apply the same standard that journalists, advocates, and community members use when covering local government:

If we can’t document it, we don’t state it as fact.

If it’s our interpretation or opinion, we say so explicitly and show our reasoning.

If someone is a public official performing official duties, we name them when discussing those duties.

If someone is not a policymaker or doesn’t have institutional power, we protect their privacy.

This approach:

  • Respects First Amendment protections for discussing public officials
  • Holds decision-makers accountable for their official actions
  • Protects individuals who don’t have institutional power
  • Maintains focus on systemic issues rather than personal attacks

Why This Matters

Public accountability requires naming the officials making decisions.

If we couldn’t identify who denied acceleration applications, who escalated requests, who interpreted statutes, or who exercised discretion—accountability becomes impossible.

Parents reading this blog need to know:

  • Who makes these decisions
  • What standards those officials applied
  • How they interpreted law and policy
  • What patterns exist across multiple incidents

That requires naming public officials and quoting official communications.

But it doesn’t require—and shouldn’t include—naming teachers who work within systems they don’t control, or exposing students and families who have privacy interests.

Questions?

If you have questions about our naming policy or documentation standards, you can review:

  • The documentation system described in the About page
  • Individual blog posts, which cite specific emails, FOIA responses, and policy documents
  • Illinois statutes governing partial enrollment (105 ILCS 5/10-20.24) and accelerated placement (325 ILCS 2)

All factual claims can be traced to source documents. All opinions are clearly marked as such.

This is how public accountability works: name the officials, document the facts, show your reasoning, protect the vulnerable.

Note: This page describes our editorial policy. It is not legal advice. For questions about defamation law, public records, or education advocacy, consult an attorney.

Last updated: November 20, 2025

  1. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). ↩︎

  2. Courts have repeatedly held that public school administrators—including principals, superintendents, and district officials—are “public officials” when speech concerns their official conduct. See Rosenblatt v. Baer, 383 U.S. 75 (1966); Kapiloff v. Dunn, 27 Md. App. 514 (1975). ↩︎

  3. See generally Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (1980) (documenting how frontline workers navigate competing pressures from management and clients). ↩︎