-
Brown Vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 1954
National and global social/societal acceptability's began shifting and progressing around the turn of the middle of the 20th century. Equality for all, including the right to a quality and free public education, was heavily emphasized and still is to this day. This particular event insisted that segregating individuals from multicultural/ethnical/racial backgrounds was not beneficial to the growth and development of individuals and for our society and was ultimately deemed "unconstitutional". -
Diana Vs. State Board if Education
Diana at the time of this event was a young, primarily Spanish speaking individual that was inappropriately placed into a school program for individuals with intellectual disabilities. It is essential that IQ testing is available in a given persons native language in order to accurately gauge and asses ones actual abilities. Diana scored low on an English IQ test, she was not believed to have a genuine disability, she was inaccurately tested and placed in an "incorrect" educational program. -
Mills Vs. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
An expansion to the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania - 1972, this case includes rights to all children with intellectual disabilities to attend free public education regardless on the degree of an individuals impairment. Additionally, these students receive accommodations to suit their learning and social needs such as engaging with specialized instruction that is available to "all" children with disabilities. -
Lau Vs. Nichols
With an increase of children in schools coming from different linguistic/ethnical/cultural/racial backgrounds, this case fought to incorporate all the same educational materials provided for English speaking students including facilities, textbooks, bilingual teachers, and a curriculum in the native languages of other English learning students attending public schools across the nation. -
Daniel R.R. Vs. State Board of Education
This event in special education history implements a two step testing process to determine if a pupil can learn and grow in a general education environment. This is the first step, can they learn being surrounded by other classmates? If so, what is the furthest extent that individual has been integrated in general education that is appropriate? This case helped determine where handicap children need to be placed to receive an adequate education that accommodates their specific needs. -
Oberti Vs. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District
At the beginning of the last decade of the 1900's, classrooms in America had to be equipped with supplementary aids and provide necessary services to appropriately accommodate students with disabilities. Instructional modifications will need to occur as well. An instructor would need to have strong justifications and documentation to present to parents and other educational professionals to determine if a child with disabilities can or can not cope and function in a general education setting. -
Burden of Proof: Schaffer Vs. Weast
There have been cases of children that have been inaccurately assessed for their educational and cognitive performance and as a result have been potentially recommended for the wrong individual educational service. The United States Supreme Court ruled that the burden of proof belongs to the party seeking redemption as they believe the child has received an inaccurate and or inappropriate individualized education plans. That part could be the child and family or it could be the school district. -
Parental Rights: Winkelman Vs. Parma City School District
The Supreme Court argued and concluded that parents of disabled children have the right to represent their child in "Individuals With Disabilities Education Act" IDEA-related court cases. It was asserted that IDEA insisted on active parental involvement in these cases to ensure that not only the child in the court is properly placed, but all children in public schools will be properly placed and recommended for the right educational services. -
IDEA Exhaustion Doctrine: Fry Vs. Napoleon Community Schools
Ehlena Fry, a young girl with sever cerebral palsy was denied approval to have her service animal, a dog named Wonder, to assist her in kindergarten. The child's parents argued that this refusal violates her rights under Title II and 504. The school suggested that they could provide all the services that her service animal could and would not allow Wonder because they are unaware of how the animal would impact the classroom environment or how the animal would be controlled. -
Educational Benefit: Endrew F. Vs. Douglas County School District
Amongst the most recent activity in special education development involves a boy named Drew from Douglas County Colorado. From the time Drew was in preschool up to 4th grade, he exhibited increased behavioral issues. Dissatisfied with their child's IEP services, they sought relief and tuition reimbursement. However the school district disagreed and would not pay because they were in compliance with IEP requirements and the child was making some progress which is all that is required.
