-
Brown v. Board of Education
This court case proved that "separate but equal" schooling for white and black people were in fact not equal. This judicial decision gave equal education opportunities for all races. This outcome also helped pave the way for future court cases that would provide equal education opportunities for children with disabilities. -
Civil Rights Act of 1964
This legislative decision ended segregation in public places and banned discrimination of race, religion, and sex when hiring people for jobs. It also showed the national commitment to end discrimination in education! This was the first step in helping to ensure every individual has the right to be educated without discrimination -
Hobson v. Hansen
This judicial decision ended tracking systems and ability grouping. Schools would standardized test students based on their nationality which was referred to as "tracking". They also would group students based on their ability. Both practices would discriminate against poor and minority students, so this court case ended these practices. -
Diana vs. State Board of Education
This judicial decision was a step in the right direction of placing people in their least restrictive environment. The outcome of this case allowed students to be IQ tested in the language they primarily speak. Often students who spoke a different language were misplaced in the special education classroom, this moved those students back into the regular classroom. -
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
This judicial decision guaranteed students a free public education from ages 6-21 regardless of the severity of the disability. It gave parents the opportunity to play a larger role in their child's education. It encouraged states to locate students with disabilities and serve them. Lastly, it allowed those students to be placed in an integrated environment. -
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
This legislation is commonly compared to IDEA, but it covers a broader number of students. This law prohibits discrimination, and determines a disability using a functional model. Once a student is covered under Section 504, schools must make "reasonable accommodations" for this student to participate in educational programs provided to other students. It allows students who do not need a special education to still have services provided for them. Section 504 covers a person's whole lifespan! -
Lau v. Nichols
This judicial case provided an equal opportunity for education to learners who were culturally and linguistically different. It did not stipulate a specific method of instruction, but made schools offer special language programs when needed. It also said just giving the students the same teachers, textbooks, and curriculum was not enough. -
Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA): Public Law 94-142
This key legislative act was the "bill of rights" for children with disabilities. It provided a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for all children. It allowed children with disabilities to be educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE). It provided a documented educational plan for students that was tailored to their needs (IEP). Lastly, it allowed huge parental involvement and nondiscriminatory assessments for students. -
Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District
This judicial decision showed the governments preference for students to be integrated in the general classroom. This forces schools to give students a chance in the general education classroom with modifications to the lesson and special services. If a student is not in the general education classroom there must be documentation and strong reasoning behind it. Students cannot simply be placed in the special education classroom because the teacher doesn't want to provide alternatives for them. -
Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education
This judicial case created a two-prong test to determine class placement in the least restrictive environment for students with severe disabilities. First, the test decides if students can make educational progress in the general education classroom with assistance and modifications to lessons. Second, it analyzes whether they are in the general classroom the maximum amount of time they can handle. This case only affected 3 states at the time, but led to other movements. -
American with Disabilities Act (ADA)
This legislation covers anyone with an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity. This gives people an equal opportunity in the workplace, school, and other public places like transportation. This is considered in all these places to provide accessible or even alternative means for providing services to people with disabilities. -
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F.
This judicial ruling clarified the idea of what related services a school should offer. It affirmed that schools do have to financially provide the healthcare services necessary for students protected under IDEA to obtain an education. Even if that healthcare is frequent and one-on-one. It can be provided by a physician or a school nurse. -
No Child Left Behind Act
This act expects all students alike to demonstrate proficiency in common subject areas. This act made special education teachers incorporate curriculum from the general classroom in their classes. It expanded opportunities for parents to be involved in their kids education. Lastly, it expected teachers to use evidence-based practice. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004)
This legislation made six revisions to the original IDEA act. This act changes the ways meetings can be held when establishing IEP's. It changes the transition service age to 16 and states that the IEP must be reevaluated every 3 years. It forces schools to employee highly educated special education teachers. It also holds the schools more accountable by making all students with disabilities take state tests, among other revisions. -
Winkelman v. Parma City School District
This judicial case gave parents the right to represent their child in IDEA-related court cases. This outcome showed that the rights IDEA gives to a parent are real and enforceable. Altogether, the ruling expanded the normality of parent involvement in their child's free and public education