-
Brown vs Board of Education
Racial segregation of schools negatively impacted the education of black students and was determined to be a violation if the 14th Amendment - As a result of this case the Equal Protection Doctrine was developed -
Civil Rights Act 1964
Outlawed discrimination on the basis on race, sex, religion, color, or national origin - Challenged the idea of "separate but equal" - A catalyst in the field of special education law as this act helped to ensure that students with special needs were no longer excluded or denied a free appropriate public education -
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Also known as ESEA - Provided federal money to states to improve educational opportunities for disadvantaged children - Title VI of ESEA added funding grants -
PARC vs Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Students with mental retardation were not receiving public education because of their disability - Violation of the 14th Amendment - All children with mental retardation must be provided free public education -
Mills vs Board of Education
Students were denied or excluded from public education because of a variety of disabilities because the board claimed it was impossible to fund the education of these students with special needs - Board must provide all children with publicly supported education -
The Rehabilitation Act 504
Replaced Title VI of ESEA (1965) - Consolidated and expanded federal grant programs and continued to fund pilot programs at state and local levels - This act was crucial to special education law as it was the first freestanding special education law, mandated special education, and required education and services for student progress -
Education of All Handicapped Children's Act (PL 94-142)
On November 29th signed into law by President Ford - Special education students were excluded or did not receive appropriate education - This Act ensure students with special needs receive free appropriate public education and individualized education plans -
Armstrong vs Kline
Pennsylvania Department of Education refused to provide or fund special education services exceeding 180 days per year - Violation of PL 94-142 (1975) - Extended School Year for students with special needs to continue receiving education and services needed -
Larry P vs Riles
Black children wrongly placed in special education - IQ tests would be used henceforth to determine EMR and prevent students from being wrongly placed in special education -
Hendrick Hudson School vs Rowley
A student with special needs was denied a sign language interpreter for all her classes on the basis that she was making progress without this services previously - This case helped define what is considered to be "appropriate" under Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) -
Irving Independent School District vs Tatro
Violation of 504 because the district would not provide student with medical services needed during school hours - Students can not be denied FAPE due to specific medical needs -
Burlington School Committee vs DOE
School was not equipped to handle the special needs of a student and agreed that his appropriate placement involved moving him to a new school - Parents can be reimbursed for private school tuition paid after disagreeing with IEP -
Danny R.R. vs State Board of Edcuation
School refused to place a student with special needs in a classroom with typical peers - Students with disabilities have the right to be included in general education setting (inclusion) -
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life including jobs, schools, transportation, and public places - Ensures equal rights of those with disabilities -
EHA Amendment
Traumatic Brain Injury and Autism were added as new disability categories and individual transition plans required to be added to IEP for transition to post-secondary life -
Oberti vs Board of Education
Student was not recommended for regular education placement based on behaviors the district felt prohibited him from participating in the regular education setting - The conclusion of this case advocated for mainstreaming with appropriate supplemental supports and services -
Board of Education in Sacramento CA vs Holland
Student with special needs denied full time regular education placement - Students who benefit from regular education should be mainstreamed in regular education placement with supplemental services -
Gaskin vs Commonwealth of PA
Student with special needs denied FAPE and supplemental services needed to be successful in regular education - Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) requires IEP team to take special consideration into integrating students in regular education - As a result of this case new IEP forms were developed -
EHA / IDEA Amendment
Added new IEP components and new disciplinary provisions, required states to offer mediation to parents prior to due process -
Cedar Rapids Community School District vs Garrett F.
School refused to provide nursing services for student with special needs during school - Under IDEA the school board is responsible for services - This case cited Irving Independent School District vs Tatro (1984) -
No Child Left Behind
Signed into law by President Bush on January 8th, 2002 - Reauthorization of ESEA making schools accountable for producing measurable progress in student reading and mathematics in public schools - Students with disabilities were included in NCLB -
IDEA Amendment
Reorganized IDEA - Defined what it means to be a "highly qualified" special education teacher, prohibited discrepancy when determining if a student is eligible to be considered learning disabled, encouraged response to intervention - Response To Intervention (RTI) used to positively motivate and redirect students both academically and behaviorally
