History of Special Education Law Timeline

  • Brown v. Board of Education

     Brown v. Board of Education
    Court case where ruled that segregation based on a person's race or disability was unconstitutional in public schools.
  • Civil Rights Act

    Civil Rights Act
    Title IV of the Civil Rights Act allows equal protection violations based on sex, among other bases, in public schools and colleges.
  • The Elementary and Secondary Education Act

    President Johnson's actions to address the "War on Poverty" so that all children would have equal access to quality education.
  • PARC v. Commonwealth of PA

    PARC v. Commonwealth of PA
    The court ruled that the state could not deny an individual's right to equal access to education based on an intellectual or developmental disability status.
  • Mills v. Board of Education

    All students, regardless of their disabilities, have the right ta public education even if they can't afford it.
  • The Rehabilitation Act-504

    The Rehabilitation Act-504
    A person can not be discriminated against due to their disability in any program which receives federal funding. In regards to employing a person must meet essential job requirements.
  • The Education for All handicapped Children's Act (PL 94-142)

    This act required all public schools which use federal funds to provide equal access to education. This act also gave one free meal daily to students with physical and mental disabilities.
  • Armstrong v. Kline

    The 180 day rule violated the protection under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. In Pennsylvania, the public schools must provide an extended school year to students who are in special education services.
  • Larry P. v. Riles

    The court found that African American students were placed into special education classes based on IQ scores. Schools had to evaluate students using more than just an IQ test to place them.
  • Hendrick Hudson School v. Rowley

    States will receive Federal funds for students with disabilities to receive a free appropriate education.
  • Irving Independent School District v. Tatro,

    She defined the difference between a medical service and a related service. Children who have been identified with a disability will receive special education services. Schools must provide needed medical services to the special education students do not need to be performed by a doctor
  • Burlington School Committee v. DOE

    Under the EAHCA, parents can be reversed if they placed their child in private school due to a disagreement with their child's IEP, which their child's public school created.
  • EHA Amendment

    This amendment was added to create a program to help infants and toddlers program to provide educational services to children from birth through age 2 with developmental delays or disabilities.
  • Honig v. Doe

    The Supreme court ruled that a California school violated the EAHCA when it suspended a student for violent behavior related to their disability.
  • Danny R.R. v. State Board of Education

    When students cannot participate or master any skills taught in the general education classroom due to their disability (s), it is necessary to look into a more restrictive environment where learning can be centered around their individual needs, for example, an Early Education Class run at the IU.
  • Americans with Disabilities Act

    The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in several areas, including employment, transportation, public accommodations, communications, and access to state and local government programs and services.
  • EHA Amendment

    The EHA name was changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA during the 1990 reauthorization.
  • Board of Education in Sacramento CA v. Holland

    The case that caused the four-factor rule. First, educators must weigh the benefits of a general education classroom with an aid versus a special education classroom. Second, the benefits of interacting with students without disabilities (during lunch, recess, or specials). Third, how the student affects the teacher and other students in the class. Lastly, the cost of mainstreaming a student.
  • Oberti v. Board of Education

    This case is critical because the Court stated that schools were required to make efforts to mainstream disabled students or be able to explain why they did not do so.
  • Gaskin v. Commonwealth of PA

    In this case, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania violated the federal rights of children with disabilities. Students with physical, behavioral, and developmental disabilities. The action asserted violations of federal statutes protecting the rights of children with disabilities, principally the IDEA.
  • EHA/IDEA Amendment

    The goal of the All Handicapped Children Act (EHA)is to ensure that all children with disabilities have access to a “free appropriate public education (FAPE).
  • Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garrett F.

    If related services for a student are required to keep the child in school district l, then the school must provide the services.
  • No Child Left Behind

    No Child Left Behind
    Public schools receive federal funding for Title I programs to help bridge gaps among students. Students must take yearly assessments to track their educational growth. If schools miss their Annual Yearly Progress goal for two years, they must create a plan to improve their teaching.
  • IDEA Amendment

    IDEA amendment requires schools to use research based interventions when assisting students with learning difficulties. Most schools have used Response to Intervention (RTI) to meet the new requirements of the IDEA 2004 Amendment.
  • Endrew, F v. the Douglas County School District

    Due to her parents’ persistence, the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) cannot remove a student from a general education classroom due to severe disabilities. PDE had to follow the guidelines outlined in IDEA. Compliance monitoring for all schools for their special education students to ensure they receive meaningful education in the regular classroom with support and services.