-
The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that a student with an intellectual disability could be refused an education because of their disability. This set a precedent that schools valued convenience over educating all students.
-
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin also ruled in favor of the school board to exclude a student. This student had an orthopedic impairment who could learn with accommodations.
-
The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” While this case dealt mostly with race, it would be used to open opportunities for special education laws in the future.
-
PARC v. Pennsylvania resulted in an agreement between the two sides, where the schools would provide free and appropriate education for students aged 6-21 with an intellectual disability.
-
The District Court for the District of Columbia in Mills v. Board allowed students with physical, emotional, and behavioral disabilities to also receive a free education.
-
The Rehabilitation Act used similar language as previous antidiscrimination laws to extend protections to people with disabilities. Per section 504, institutions that received federal funds— such as public schools— were explicitly forbidden to discriminate against people with a mental or physical impairment.
-
EAHCA codified the policies that were the results of PARC v. Pennsylvania and Mills v. Board of Education. It had become law that if a school received federal funding, they must provide a free and appropriate education to students with a mental or physical disability.
-
Like the Rehabilitation Act, the ADA forbade discrimination against people with disabilities. It expanded the protections to institutions that did not receive federal funding, including private schools.
-
Amendments were made to the Education for all Handicapped Children Act, including adding autism spectrum disorder and traumatic brain injury. It was also renamed to IDEA, which is how it is known today.
-
NCLB widely adopted the use of standardized testing and required all students, including those with disabilities outlined in IEPs and 504s to participate in them.
-
ESSA replaced No Child Left Behind and adjusted how testing was to be done. States could now use tests other than the ones that they devised. The percentage of students across a state that could be alternatively assessed was now capped at 1%.