-
Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Children (PARC) versus Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Guaranteed special education for
children with intellectual disabilities. This was the first step in providing education to all members of the community that were disabled. While it went quickly, the case is a cornerstone in including everyone no matter their ability. -
Mills versus Board of Education of the District of Columbia
Extended the right to special
education to children of all disabilities.
This case made it possible for all students with any disability to access public education appropriate to their learning capacity. Not all families could afford private education for their disabled child so having public education provide this service, was a huge step towards helping those in need. -
Vocational Rehabilitation Act (VR A) (P.L. 93-112, Section 504)
Defined handicapped person and
appropriate education, prohibits
discrimination in federally funded
programs. Section 504 of this act, made it illegal to discriminate against anyone solely on the basis of disability. This act also made it illegal to discriminate against those with hidden disabilities as well. -
Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) (P.L. 94- 142, Part B)
Requires free and appropriate education
for students with disabilities (ages 5-18)
and IEPs, defines least restrictive
environment. The EHA guaranteed a free, appropriate public education, or FAPE, to each child with a disability in every state and locality across the country.[timetoast]https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/speeches/750707.htm#:~:text=President%20Gerald%20R.,Handicapped%20Children%20Act%20of%201975&text=I%20have%20approved%20S.,Handicapped%20Children%20Act%20of%201975. -
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School versus Rowley
Clarified the definition of FAPE. Every child who attends public school gets a Free Appropriate Public Education, also known as FAPE. It’s also the deceptively simple idea that special education is built on. The main issue in this case was the terminology. The text of the legislation and the legislative intent show that the purpose of the law was not to allow each child to achieve their full potential, but to simply provide sufficient resources for disabled children to access education. -
Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments (P.L. 99-457)
Extends free and appropriate education
to children with disabilities (ages 3-5),
establishes early intervention for infants/
toddlers with disabilities (ages birth to 2). Prior to this act, any child under the age of 3 was not entitled to assistance. Allowing ALL children to be included provided the opportunity for early intervention to take place. -
Honig versus Doe
Schools cannot expel students for
behaviors related to their disability. This case made it so children with emotional disabilities were able to stay in school. Not all emotional disabilities can be controlled and this case proved that. The child was teased (bullied) by another student and simply reacted. -
Americans with Disabilities Act (AD A) (P.L. 101-336)
Prohibits discrimination in the private
sector and protects equal employments
opportunities for people with disabilities,
includes AIDS as a disability. This act includes autism, ADHD, bipolar disorder, PTSD, multiple sclerosis, and schizophrenia just to name a few. It enables ALL disabled persons the right to apply and obtain employment no matter what their disability is. [timetoast]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gsGiszvyjQ -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (P.L. 101- 476)
Replaces EAHCA, establishes person-
first language, expands special education
services and provisions for due process
and confidentiality, adds autism and
traumatic brain injury categories,
provides bilingual education, requires
transition services and planning. As of 2021, this act also includes eligible infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (I DEA) (P.L. 105- 17)
Requires students with disabilities to receive services even if expelled, allows use of developmental delay category through age 9, requires access to general education curriculum and state/district-wide testing, I EP team includes a general education teacher and a behavior plan (if warranted), offers mediation options, limits attorneys fees. This act requires a child to be provided a complete education in the least restrictive environment. -
Cedar Rapids versus Garret F.
Students must receive the
supplemental services needed to
attend school. These services include medical treatments such as suctioning, ventilator checks, catheterization, and others which can be administered by non-physician personnel come within the parameters of the special education law's related services. Prior to this case, schools would not allow students that required such services to participate in most things. This case changed that. -
No Child Left Behind Act (NC LB)
Increases accountability and flexibility in use of federal funds, offers school choice options, implements early reading interventions. When a school fails to achieve the goals set, there can be serious implications. These can be anything from a complete overhaul of the staff to closing the the school. Unfortunately, some schools will push students along even when they don't achieve standards. This can create a problem for those children later in life when they don't understand certain things. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) (P.L. 108-446)
Allows RTI model to determine presence of a learning
disability and no longer requires use of the severe
discrepancy model, increases funding to early intervention services for students who do not require special education, eliminates IEP short-term objectives for some students, raises special education licensure standards, adopts polices. Research-based instruction by requiring that special education teachers be highly qualified. -
Winkelman versus Parma City School District
Parents may pursue IDEA claims on their behalf, independent of their child’s rights. Suits are filed under parental rights. The case concluded that IDEA created a set of independently enforceable rights in parents.