-
Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka
A landmark U.S. Supreme Court case which declared the segregation of public schools is unconstitutional.
Brown v. BOE -
Public Law 88-164 : Community Mental Health Act
This law authorized funds for training professionals to work with children with special needs and for research and demonstration for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities and deafness.
CMHA -
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
This law brought education into the forefront of the national assault on poverty and represented a landmark commitment to equal access to quality education. This law funds are authorized for professional development, instructional materials, resources and promotion of parental involvement.
ESEA -
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
A child with disabilities cannot be excluded from school without careful due process and it is the responsibility of the schools to provide appropriate programs for children who are different (Kirk, Gallagher & Coleman 2015).
PARC v. COP -
Mills v. Board of Education
the presumed absence of funds is not an excuse for failing to provide educational services to children with exceptionalities. If sufficient funds are not available, then all programs should be cut back (Kirk, Gallagher& Coleman, 2015)
Mills v. BOE of DC -
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
The key provision of the act says that it is illegal to deny participation in activities or programs solely because of a disability
Section504 -
Public Law 94-142 : The Education for All Handicapped Children Act.
Was designed to assure that all handicapped children have available to them a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs.
Education for all -
Larry P vs. Riles
Children should not be labeled "handicapped" or placed into special education without an adequate diagnosis that takes into account different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Larry P vs. Riles -
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson vs. Rowley)
A child with disabilities is entitled to an appropriate, not an optimum, education. The Rowley decision was the first court decision that suggested that there was a limit to the resources that children with exceptionalities could expect.
Rowley Decision -
Public Law 99-457: Education for All Handicapped Children Act
This was not meant for all children of all ages. This act provided the opportunity by allocating federal funds for the states to develop plans and programs for children and their families from birth on (Early Intervention)
Education for All -
The Javits Act: Jacob Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act.
This is the only federal program dedicated specifically to gifted and talented students. This act does not fund local gifted education programs.
JavitsAct -
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
This act extends civil rights to persons with disabilities. These rights are guaranteed without regard to race, color, national origin, gender or religion through the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
AWDA -
Public Law 107-110: No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Had an impact on all schoolchildren and a special impact on children with disabilities. The purpose of this act was to hold schools and educators responsible for bringing students to a minimum level of competency.
NCLB -
IDEA (2004)
Reauthorization of Education for All Handicapped Children (Public Law 94-142). Was designed to strengthen and improve earlier versions. Some of the major changes: Quality of Personnel, IEP Standards and Transition Planning. IDEA2004
Second Link text -
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
The goal was the stimulate economic activity in a number of areas including financial and social institutions and education to ensure the long-time economic health of our nation.
ARRA -
ESSA: Every Student Succeeds Act.
This act replaces the No Child Left Behind act. It includes provisions that will help to ensure success for students and schools.
ESSA2015
