Special Education Law and Policy Timeline

  • Special Education Law Timeline 1954-2008

    Special Education Law Timeline 1954-2008
    The introduction of Special education events dates back to the early 1800s and on today still has continuous changes. However, this timeline will focus on Special educational historical events from 1954-2008.
  • Brown v. Board of Education, 1954

    Brown v. Board of Education, 1954
    Supreme Court rules that segregation in public schools is unconstitutional, which began the movement of equality in education.
    Source: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/brown-v-board-of-education
  • The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965

    The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
    Provided state federal money to states in order to improve opportunities for students who were disadvantaged.
    Source: https://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn
  • Education of the Handicapped Act of 1970

    Education of the Handicapped Act of 1970
    The purpose of this law was to assure that all handicapped children had a free appropriate
    education emphasizing special education and
    related services to meet their needs available to them.
    Source: https://www.gao.gov/products/113316
  • PL 91-230 Extension of Programs of Assistance Act

    PL 91-230 Extension of Programs of Assistance Act
    Extended and added amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965. By establishing a legal definition of learning disabilities as well as recognizing the need for special education for gifted and talented students. Source: https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/comp2/F091-230.html
  • Mills v. Board of Education (1972)

    Mills v. Board of Education (1972)
    In Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia (1972), hereafter Mills, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that students with disabilities are entitled to an education, and that education cannot be denied based on the accommodations’ additional cost to the school.Source: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/brown-v-board-of-education
  • Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

    Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
    Only a few decades ago, children with intellectual disabilities did not have the right to a public education. In fact, Pennsylvania state law allowed public schools to deny services to children “who have not attained a mental age of five years” by the start of first grade.
    Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/343/279/1691591/
  • Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

    Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
    Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a civil rights law that prohibits recipients of federal funding from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. As it relates to public education, the law states that a school cannot place a student in segregated classes or facilities “solely by reason of her or his disability.”
    of first grade.
    Source: https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocr/civilrights/resources/factsheets/504.pdf
  • Education Amendments (1974)

    Education Amendments (1974)
    Included rights from PARC v. Commonwealth of PA and Mills v. Board of Education in law.
    Source: https://www.advocacyinstitute.org/resources/SpedLegHistory.shtml
  • PL 93-380 The Family Educational Right and Privact Act of 1974

    PL 93-380 The Family Educational Right and Privact Act of 1974
    FERPA gives parents certain rights with respect to their children's education records. These rights transfer to the student when he or she reaches the age of 18 or attends a school beyond the high school level. Students to whom the rights have transferred are "eligible students." Source https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html
  • Handicapped Children's Protection Act

    Handicapped Children's Protection Act
    An amendment to the EAHCA, this act ruled that legal fees would be awarded to the parents of any child with disabilities who pursue a civil suit in regard to appropriate education. This ruling mitigates financial barriers for parents to advocate for their children. Source: Congress, H.R 1523- Handicapped Children's Protection Act of 1985
  • Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley

    Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley
    Stated that students who qualify for special education programs must be provided with individualized instruction to meet their specific needs.of first grade.
    Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/458/176/
  • Irving Independent School District V. Tatro

    Irving Independent School District V. Tatro
    Based on the ruling of Board of Education V. Tatro, the school is required to provide all services that are able to be provided to the student without a physician. In this specific case, this meant that the school was required to have the school nurse catheterize being she was able to do so without a physician. Source: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/468/883/
  • 1988 Honig v Doe

    1988 Honig v Doe
    1988 Honig v Doe: This was a court case about schools were not allowed to expel students because of behaviors related to their disabilities. Source : https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/484/305/
  • Tech Act

    Tech Act
    The Technology-Related Assistance to Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988 was signed by the President with the intention of promoting awareness of and access to assistive technology devices and services. It provides grant funds so statewide systems can be created and allow for the delivery of assistive technology devices to persons with disabilities. Source: (www.parentcenterhub.org/ata/)
  • Timothy W v. Rochester School District (1989)

    Timothy W v. Rochester School District (1989)
    Student was denied special education services because the school felt his disability was "too severe" to benefit Led to Zero-rejection policy.
    Schools could not deny a child special education services, no matter how severe their disabilities are.
    Source : https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/875/954/179023/
  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
    Reauthorized and expanded discretionary programs, mandated transition services, defined assistive technology devices and services, and added autism and traumatic brain injury to the list of disability categories.of first grade.
    Source: https://tea.texas.gov/academics/special-student-populations/special-education/idea.pdf
  • Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

    Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
    This civil rights law protects individuals with disabilities against discrimination and ensures that they have the same rights and opportunities in all areas. Source: www.adata.org
  • The Idea Amendments of 1997

    The Idea Amendments of 1997
    Changed the IEP team and added new components
    Reorganized the structure of IDEA
    Began requiring states to offer intervention efforts to parents before due process hearings. Source https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/98-42.html
  • No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)

    No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
    The purpose is “to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice so no child is left
    behind” through financial federal assistance.
    of first grade.
    Source: https://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml
  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA

    Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA
    This reauthorization of the IDEA helps guide decisions related to school-age special education, early identification of disabilities, and improvement of
    the education of children with
    disabilities. of first grade.
    Source: https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1350