-
Period: to
Special Education Timelines 1954-2021
Through the last several decades the court and legislation have been extremely influential on special education, services, and the rights of parents, students, and school districts. This timeline serves to give a brief glimpse at twelve legal aspects of special education. It should be noted that these are just a few of the major cases and pieces of legislation that inform how special education functions but these twelve just scratch the surface of the lengthy history of special education. -
Brown v Board of Education
Brown v Board of Education struck down segregation in public schools and the practice of "separate but equal". Justice Warren wrote in the decision that segregated schools were "inherently unequal." Originally intended to focus on civil rights of African American students and the difference in education of African American children compared to their white peers; the case went on to also show the difference in the education of children with special needs versus their general education peers. -
Training of Professional Personnel Act of 1959
This was the first law that expressly gave access to training for administrators, educators, and professional staff working with children with disabilities. This was one of the first few laws that aimed to improve special education services in conjunction with the Captioned Films Acts of 1958, Teachers of The Deaf Act of 1961, The Elementary and Secondary Education Act , and The State Schools Act. -
3. Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Previous to this law the state of Pennsylvania allowed for schools to exclude children from school or receiving services. The result of this law lead to the state agreeing to provide educational services to all students and many aspects of this law became the foundation of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) in 1975. -
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
This is the first civil rights law protecting people with disabilities. Section 504 protects people with disabilities from discrimination by any programs that receives federal funding. Under section 504 schools must identify student's with disabilities, their needs, and implement interventions that serve the student's individual needs. Section 504 sets out requirements for schools that receive federal funding to provide students with disabilities a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). -
Education for All Handicapped Children Act
This law, similar to Section 504, was directed at schools receiving federal funding to give students with disabilities access to equal education. Under EAHCA schools must identify and evaluate students with disabilities then create and implement intervention programs that meet the students unique needs. This law created requirements resolving disputes between schools and parents. EAHCA also required students to be educated in the the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) w/ non disabled peers. -
Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson County School District v. Rowley
Rowley marked the first time that a court made a decision based on EAHCA. Rowley was a deaf student and in a proposed IEP the school district did not provide a deaf interpreter as requested by the parents. Two courts agreed with the parents that the lack of an interpreter did not allow her to reach her full academic potential. The Supreme Court found the school only needed to provide instruction that she benefited from and that EAHCA was only meant to allow students into public schools. -
Handicapped Children’s Protection Act (HCPA)
The HCPA clarified requirements for parents to be allowed to participate in the creation of their child's Individualized Education Program (IEP) and that parents, if they deem the IEP to be inappropriate, are able to appeal to state education agencies (SEA) or possibly to state or federal courts. The HCPA also requires that school districts pay legal fees of families should the family prevail in court. -
Honing v. Doe
John Doe was a student receiving special education services in a developmental center that attacked a peer following a bullying incident. Doe was receiving services for a variety of needs including impulse control. A peer , Jack Smith, was also suspended indefinitely due to behavior issues caused by his disability. The case eventually made it to the supreme court that found the the "stay-put" provision of EHA protected students from being excluded due their disability despite behavior. -
Timothy W. v. Rochester, New Hampshire, School District
The school district of Rochester refused to provide services to Timothy, a student with multiple disabilities and considered to have a profound intellectual disability. The school board found that Timothy's disabilities were severe enough that he would not benefit from special education and therefore no services would be provided to Timothy. The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the school board could not deny services to a student due to the complexity of their disability or severity. -
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
The IDEA consists of six pillars; Individualized Education Program (IEP), Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), Appropriate Evaluation, Parent and teacher participation, and Procedural Safeguards. These pillars are designed to ensure that schools provide students with FAPE through an IEP designed for the students and their needs. IDEA protects children ages 3-21 and the rights of the child's parents. It also covers transition services for post school. -
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
ESSA pushes for protecting high needs and disadvantaged students. ESSA addresses special education students and requires that special needs students be given the assessments that non-disabled peers are given and along with the same academic standards. Only a small percentage of a school districts special education students can be excluded from these assessments. ESSA also pushes for schools to intervene with bullying which effects more special needs students than other populations. -
Endrew F. v Douglas County School District
IDEA allows for parents to seek financial compensation if a school cannot meet the needs of their child. The parents of Endrew sought compensation because they did not believe the school was meeting the needs of their student and moved him to a private school for Autistic children. The case went before the Supreme Court that found that schools could not only offer "de minimus" progress and that an IEP must be created to allow for the student to make progress appropriate for the individual.