-
Establishment of "Normal Schools"
State-sponsored schools established in Massachusetts following the principles of education spearheaded by Horace Mann: Citizens cannot maintain both ignorance and freedom, this education should be paid for, controlled and maintained by the public, children of all backgrounds should be afforded the same education, this education must be nonsectarian, this education must be taught using tenets of a free society, and this education must be provided by well-trained, professional teachers. -
First Compulsory Education Law Enacted in Massachusetts
This law required that every city and town in the state offer a primary school. Parents who did not abide by the requirement to send their child to school could be fined and, in some cases, their parental rights would be relinquished. -
Gallaudet University
An educational institute for the deaf, Gallaudet University was authorized by Congress to grant college degrees to its students. -
Plessy v. Ferguson
This Supreme Court case ruled that it was constitutional to racially segregate schools as long as they were “separate but equal.” -
Council for Exceptional Children
The council was formed by a group of students interested in how to education children with special needs as well as establishing professional standards for special education teachers. -
Cuyahoga Councils for Retarded Children
Established in Ohio, this was one of the first parental advocacy groups to emerge as the result of subpar conditions for children with special needs in school. -
The National Association of Parents and Friends of Retarded Children
This was the first organization to fund research on intellectual and developmental disabilities. -
Brown v. Board of Education
This Supreme Court case ruled that students could not be denied an education based on race. In other words, segregated and separate schools were NOT equal, essentially overturning Plessy v. Ferguson. This paved the way for parents of children with special needs to begin advocating against educations exclusions based on disabilities. -
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
This law provided funding for primary and secondary education to promote equal access to education regardless of economic status. It also established the first Federal grant programs specifically for the education of students with disabilities and the Bureau of Education of the Handicapped and the National Advisory Council. -
Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA)
This was an amendment of the ESEA that expanded grant programs and mandated education for students with disabilities, including the requirement that they receive the appropriate services in order to progress. -
Pennsylvania Assn. for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
This case established that schools must offer accessible and appropriate educational opportunities to all students regardless of disability. -
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
This case was similar to PARC and ruled that all children with disabilities are entitled to a publicly funded education. -
Congressional Investigation
This investigation was launched by Congress following the PARC and Mills cases to look into the number of students with disabilities that were not receiving an appropriate education. It was discovered that this population was vastly underserved in the educational setting. -
The Rehabilitation Act
This was the first major piece of federal legislation provided protection of rights to individuals with disabilities. Section 504 established protection from discrimination based on disability. This was amended in 1974 to provide funding for programs, instructions for due process procedures, and to establish the concept of least restrictive environment for students with disabilities. -
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHC)
This law provided funding to states to develop and implement educational programs for children with disabilities. This set the foundation for all future special education laws. -
Public Law 99-457
This was an amendment to the All Handicapped Children Act which required that services be provided to families of children with disabilities from the time that they are born, where previously services had only been provided once the child reached the age of three. -
Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley
This case marked the first time that the EAHC was interpreted; specifically, the definition of “free and appropriate public education.” The courts ruled that the law only provided for access to an appropriate education based on the child’s disability and needs, but it did not define a standard for the level of education that the child may reach. In other words, it afforded schools the ability to determine what was required in order to meet the handicapped students' individual needs. -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro
This case marked the first time that a court attempted to define the difference between a “medical service” and “related services.” In this case, the Irving School District had denied the related service of catheterization to a student with spina bifida. It was argued that this was in violation of the AHA since the catheterization was a related service as it did not have to be performed by a licensed physician. -
Burlington School Committee of the Town of Burlington, MA v. Department of Education of Massachusetts
Supported the provisions of the EHA in that children with disabilities should have access to free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. This case also determined that if the public school cannot meet the needs of the child, it can be indicated in the IEP that an alternative placement, such as a private school, would be most appropriate for the child. This placement, as it is indicated in the IEP, would be at the cost of the school district. -
Handicapped Children's Protection Act
This was an amendment of the EAHC expanding public education to children from birth to age 5, encouraging early intervention supports and service plans for those children. It also sets guidelines of who should participate in the creation of those plans. Additionally, this act authorized financial award to reimburse cost incurred during civil suits involving violations of the EHA in the event that judgement is in the family’s favor. -
Honig v. Doe
This court case held that the “stay-put” provision in the EHA (a student’s placement cannot be changed during review or dispute of the IEP without parental consent) did not allow for schools to exclude children even if they exhibited danger or disruptive behaviors if those behaviors were the result of their disability. -
Timothy W. v. Rochester, NH School District
This case determined that a child with disabilities cannot be denied special education services regardless of the severity of the disabilities. -
Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education
This case established a two-part test for determining if a school has met the requirement for least restrictive environment: 1) Can an appropriate education in the mainstream classroom be achieved satisfactorily with the use of supplementary aids and services? And 2). If a student is placed in a more restrictive setting, can they be integrated with mainstream students to the maximum extent that is appropriate? -
Americans with Disabilities Act
This civil rights law ensured that people with disabilities have the same rights and opportunities as others. It prohibited discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all areas of public life, including school, and all places that are open to the general public. -
Hartmann v. Loudoun County Board of Education
This case established that mainstreaming is not a requirement if it does not provide the student with educational benefit, any small benefit that the student may receive from is outweighed by the greater benefits obtained in an alternative educational setting, the impact of a child’s disruptiveness in a general education setting is of legitimate concern, and the goal of providing a child with educational benefits is paramount to the social benefits they may receive in a mainstream setting. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
This law established processes of development of Individual Education Plans to create goals for the child with disabilities and the steps or actions that will be taken to support the child in reaching those goals. It maintained the previous requirements of least restrictive environment and placed a preference on placement in a general education classroom with non-disabled peers whenever possible. -
No Child Left Behind
This law was a reauthorization of the ESEA. It required regular annual testing of students in grades 3-8 and once in high school in order to evaluate whether the school is meeting academic standards for the students. This included students receiving special education services. The goal of the law was to ensure that all children had equal opportunities to high-quality education with a focus on schools that had high rates of students living in poverty, called Title I schools. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004)
This reauthorization provided federal funds to states to make special education services available to students with disabilities. It outlined changes to the IEP process in terms of who should participate and what should be included. -
Every Student Succeeds Act
This law replaced No Child Left Behind. It provides states with more leeway in holding schools accountable for academic achievement of students. It also requires that all students receive testing, providing accommodations or alternative tests where appropriate, such as in the case of a child with certain cognitive disabilities. This law also encourages involvement from parents in accountability of the schools.