-
AN 1, 1866 Civil Rights Act of 1866
By declaring that all persons born here in the US are citizens this act profvides that it was illegal to discriminate against individuals on the basis of color, race or whether they were a slave. This in turn would help in future litigation and provide remedy for those effected in the education system (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JAN 1, 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson
The Supreme Court ordered that it was legal to segregate individuals and have seperate facilites as lon as they were equal. However, seperate is not equal as we learn through out the civil rights movement. This decision would not be corrected until Brown v. Board 58 years later (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
OCT 6, 1954 Brown v.Board of Education
This is a consolidated case that fought for desgregation of all public school systems in the US and seperate but equal was unconstitutional. This is the springboard for litigation and legislaton regarding students with disabilities (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JAN 1, 1972 Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
This case involved the court establishing due process procedures to ensure all students had equal rights. This was a procedural law that was later included in Public Law No. 94-142. The Board of the District of Columbia denied access to education for students who were special needs. The Court found that free public educational services, or a suitable private alternative paid for by the board of education, must be delivered based on the students' individual needs, regardless of cost (Smith, -
MAY 5, 1972 Pennsylvania Assocaiation for Retarded Citizens v. Pennsylvania. & Mills v. D.C. Board of Education
The federal court decided that children with mental disabilities would be provided with free and appropriate public education. These cases provided a legal standing to challenge officials denying equal opportunity. These cases brought to attention that students with disabilities should not be excluded and should have equal protection under the law. -
SEP 26, 1973 Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
This law signed in by President Nixon probits discrimination in the workplace and schools and any entity receiving federal funding. This plan mandates individulaized plans for eligible disabled students who need accommodations or modifications in or order to receive FAPE. Least Restrictive Education mandate is an essential element as far as placement to the learning envrionment (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JAN 1, 1975 Public Law No. 94-142
The Education for All Handicaped Children Act. This law secured the basic ideals, rights and responsibilities to ensure equal access to public education for all children who are disabled. The key element being that prior written notice be provided to the parent regarding proposes or refuses changes to idenification, eval or ed placement of a child or FAPE (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JAN 1, 1982 The Rowley Decision
The U.S. Supreme Court's first interpretation of what was then called the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (now the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, "IDEA"). "Basic floor of responsibilty" and "some educational benefit" A two part test can be implemented now when working through specific case issues. (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JUL 26, 1990 The Americans with Disabilities Act
This law prohibits discrimination by your employer, services received by state and local governments, in places of public accommodation, transportation and telecommunications. This is key because a public school is included under this law by providing civil rights protections to individuals with disabilities and not discrimination on the basis of race, sex, national origin, and religion. (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011). -
JAN 1, 2001 No Child Left Behind
The said goal of NCLB is to "level the playing field" in the education field. There are several standards such as adequate yearly progress, use of "scientifically based research", teachers who are "highly qualified", evaluations and minimum standards for paraprofessionals. Santions apply to some of the above if standards are not met. The goal is to level the playing field and shorten the gap. (Smith, Polloway, Patton & Dowdy, 2011).