-
Period: to
Special Education Law
-
Brown v. Board of Education
In a landmark case that had sweeping reform and legal precedents for educational reform, the Supreme Court ruled that minority students should not be segregated from their white peers in the classroom. As a result of this major victory for the civil rights movement, it opened the door for further constitutional rights for persons with disabilities. Yell, M. (2012). "The Law and Special Education." Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ. Image: Accessed from http://blog.genealogybank.com/w -
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was a civil right's law that provided federal funds to improve the education of students who were disadvantaged, specifically those living in poverty. This act also covered handicapped students. The law provided grants for special education centers, for textbooks and library books. Department of Education. (2016). "History of ESEA." Accessed from http://www.ed.gov/ESSA. Image: Accessed from -
Education of Handicapped Act (EHA)
This act expanded state programs for children with disabilities, it also gave federal money to higher ed. institutions to teach special education teachers to help better educate students with disabilities. Yell, M. (2012). "The Law and Special Education." Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ. -
Pennslyvannia Association for Retarded Citizens v. Pennslyvannia
This decree laid out the right for students with disabilities to have an education. The decree also ruled that these students should be taught in a program that most resembles the curriculum and program for students without disabilities. US Supreme Court. (1972). "PARC v. Pennslyvannia Consent Decree." The Public Interest Law Center. Accessed from http://www.pilcop.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/PARC-Consent-Decree.pdf Image: Accessed from http://www.temple.edu/instituteondisabilities/voices/ -
Mills V. Board of Education
Mills V. Board of Education was a class action suit brought against Washington, DC from 7 students identified as having behavior issues or a disability. The 7 students represented 18,000 similar students denied education. The law laid groundwork for procedural safeguards and making exclusion unconstitutional. Education Law. (2016). "Mills v. Board of Education." US Ed Law. Accessed from http://usedulaw.com/438-mills-v-board-of-education-of-the-district-of-columbia.html -
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
As the first federal law to protect the rights of those with disabilities, Section 504 is a civil rights act ruling discrimination against people with disability as unconstitional. Specifically, agencies receiving federal funds must provide equal access to education and provide individualized modifications. Department of Education. (2016). "Protecting Students with Disabilities." Office of Civil Rights. Accessed from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html -
Education for all Handicapped Children Act
Also known as EAHCA, was eventually codified as IDEA. This act protects the rights of students with disabilities and their right to FAPE. Financial incentives provided for agencies meeting federal requirements. Department of Education. (2007). "Twenty-Five Years of Progress of Educating Children with Disabilities Through IDEA." Civil Rights Office. Accessed from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/idea/history.pdf Image: https://my.gallaudet.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/Deaf%20Eye -
Stuart v. Nappi
A Connecticut school wanted to expel a student, Kathy Stuart for behavioral problems and academic deficiency, despite having disabilities. The court ruled that Stuart and students with disabiltiies should not be expelled for behavioral issues. Brooks, Stephen. (2016). "Stuart v. Nappi." Accessed from http://mged3030courtcases.wikispaces.com/Stuart+v.+Nappi -
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley
This act, brought against a New York state school district, concerned a deaf student, Amy Rowley. The act ruled students with disabilities have a right to an individualized educational plan, but Rowley's parents wanted Amy to have an interpreter. This was denied. Wright, Peter. (2016). "Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley." Wright's Law. Accessed from http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/ussupct.rowley.htm -
Department of Education v. Katherine D.
A student named Katherine, diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, sues the DOE under the EAHCA. While the DOE offered a homebound program for Katherine, it was determined a homebound education is not FAPE under the least restrictive environment. Justia Legal Resources. (2015). "Department of Education v. Katherine D." Justia. Accessed from http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/727/809/390176/ -
Burlington School Committee v. Board of Education
This case ruled parents could participate in IEP development. Based on an evaluation of their child, the parents of Michael Panico determined they wanted him placed in a private educational setting. The case ruled the district must pay for the alternate placement if the district's IEP doesn't meet the child's needs. Wright, Peter. (2016). "Burlington School Committee v. Board of Education." Wright's Law. Accessed from http://image.slidesharecdn.com/idea1986-1228362505321614-9/95/slide-1-728.jp -
The Education of the Handicapped Amendments of 1986
This act passed by Congress in 1986 recognized the importance of early intervention for young children with disabilities (infants and toddlers). Some of these services can include occupational therapy, counseling, training, psychical therapy, psychological therapy, vision/hearing services, assistive technology. Yell, M. (2012). "The Law and Special Education." Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ. Image: http://images.slideplayer.us/7/1730037/slides/slide_9.jpg -
The Handicapped Children's Protection Act of 1986
This act provides attorneys fees for parents who prevail in cases under EAHCA. This act is an amendment of the EHA because it clarifies further rights of those with disabilities. Civil Rights Monitor. (2016). "Handicapped Children's Protection Act Becomes Law." The Leadership Council. Accessed from http://www.civilrights.org/monitor/august1986/art5p1.html?referrer=https://search.yahoo.com/ Image: http://image.slidesharecdn.com/idea1986-1228362505321614-9/95/slide-1-728.jpg?cb=1228355166 -
Honig v. Doe
The ruling of Honig v. Doe stipulated that students with behavioral issues related to their disabilities could not be expelled from school. While San Francisco school administrator stated keeping some students in school was dangerous, the law ordered students could not be expelled from behavior as a result of their disability. Brennan, William. (1988). Honig, California Superintendent of Public Instruction v. Doe. Wright's Law. Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/ussupct.honig -
Daniel R. v. State Board of Education
The court ruling decided that Daniel, a student with Down's syndrome, has a right to FAPE and the least restrictive environment. Daniel was removed from class for behavioral issues. However, the ruling determined children with disabilities should be taught in the LRE to the maximum extent possible under the law. Kids Together, Inc. (2009). Daniel R. v. State Board of Education. Accessed from http://www.kidstogether.org/right-ed_files/daniel.htm Image: http://images.slideplayer.com/7/1729968 -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990
The EAHCA was renamed IDEA in 1990. The new law added stipulations and clarifications of available and related students to those with disabilities, including assistive technology and rehab services. The law also changed "handicap" terminology to "students with disabilities. Department of Education. (2016). "IDEA Regulations." Accessed from http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cstatute%2CI%2CB%2C615%2Ck%2C -
Board of Education in Sacramento, CA v. Rachel H.
The outcome of this case, ruled on by District Court Judge Sneed ruled there are 4 factors to LRE, based on the case of Rachel, a student with a severe disability. Rachel's parents wanted her in reg. ed. The district wanted to put her in special ed. 4 factors: cost, academic benefits, non-academic benefits, effect on teacher. Kids Together, Inc. (2009). "Board of Ed. in Sacramento, CA v. Rachel H." http://www.kidstogether.org/right-ed_files/rachel.htm -
IDEA Amendments of 1997
Made to add improvements to IDEA 1990, these amendments saught to emphasize improvement in student performance. Making sure the FAPE students with disabilities were receiving is quality was the main point of these amendments. Department of Education. (2016). "IDEA '97." Accessed from http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/Policy/IDEA/index.html Image: Accessed from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/idea/graphics/ideasign.jpg -
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
Signed into law by President George W. Bush, the law dramatically expands the federal government's role in education in regards to under-performance. It holds school districts accountable for achievements, mandating LEA's provide evidence of student outcomes. Students with disabilities included in accountability measures. Department of Education. (2016). "No Child Left Behind." Accessed from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/No_Ch -
IDEA 2004
George W. Bush signed new amendments to IDEA into law. The new requirements include stipulations on discipline, identification of children with disabilities, procedures in changes in students' IEP, procedural safeguards for parents of those disabled, as well as defining highly certified special ed. teachers. Wright, Peter. (2016). "IDEA 2004 Regulations." Wright's Law. Accessed from http://www.wrightslaw.com/idea/law.htm -
Forest Grove v. T.D.
The Supreme Court ruled that given a public school district has failed to give a child FAPE in a public school setting, the student is entitled to reimbursements for private special education services fees, given the private placement is appropriate. Philpot, D. (2002). "Supreme Court Cases." Accessed from http://www.dphilpotlaw.com/html/supreme_court_cases.html -
ESEA NCLB Waivers
President Obama offers several relief waivers under NCLB that gives states more flexibility in the requirements. States can elect their own measures of student achievement (AYP). The waivers ease the punitive consequences of failing to meet AYP. Department of Education. (2016). "States Granted Waivers from NCLB." Accessed from http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/states-granted-waivers-no-child-left-behind-allowed-reapply-renewal-2014-and-2015-school-years Image: http://www.dispatch.com/cont -
NH Rules for the Education of Children with Disabilities
Updated to include new state and federal laws, these laws signed by Gov. John Lynch describe the process of identification of students with disabiltiies, procedures, placement, parental rights, procedural safegoards, complaint procedures, among other topics in regards to student education. NH DOE. (2014). "NH Rules for the Education of Children with Disabilities." Accessed from http://education.nh.gov/instruction/special_ed/documents/nh_rules_amendment_may_2014.pdf
