-
Students Excluded
Before the 1950s, students with disabilities were not allowed to attend public schools. The children were discriminated against and were given the opportunity to a free and quality education. This meant that students were not able to participate the least restrictive environment suited for them to flourish. -
Brown vs. Board of Education
In 1954, the ruling in the court case Brown vs. Board of Education, laid a foundation for the civil rights cases in the future, especially for children with disabilities. The phrase "separate but not equal, is inherently unequal" was later used to argue that children with disabilities should have the same opportunities to a public education as other students. This case opened the door for many others to get a proper education. link text -
ESEA
In 1965, President Johnson signed the Elementary and Secondary education act. This act provided specialized grants for low income schools and students with specialized need to pay for books, supplies and services necessary for their education. This act provided a base for more cases that focus on the betterment of special education. Link text -
PARC v. Pennsylvania
In the is case PARC sued the commonwealth of Pennsylvania because at the time students who had reached the age of 8 but had not reached the mental age of 5 could be denied free education. This law was used several times to deny disabled students the right to a free education. This case was overseen by three judges, a circuit judge and two district judges. -
Mills v. Board of Education of DC
This ruling is one of two federal trials that led to the EAHCA and later the IDEA. Before this, many schools did not offer special education programs and many students were not privileged to public services or excluded from public education. The schools argued that there weren't enough funds in the system to provide these students the services they needed. -
Individual Education Plan
The Individual Education Plan, IEP, was introduced in 1975 to create a way for each student, regardless of their physical or learning disability, can receive the same opportunity in education. This plan is designed to fit each child's needs in the least restrictive environment for them. This could mean incorporating the child in a general education classroom with some accommodations or the child belonging to an ESE class. -
FAPE
Free Appropriate Public Education, FAPE, is a part of the IDEA that requires all school provide students the opportunity to a free and public education that fits them based on their IEP. The Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School v. Rowley is the first Supreme Court case that classified the specifics of this law. Students are not required to attend an ESE classroom if they can thrive in a general education class with some or no accommodations. -
Behavior Analysis
In Honig v. Doe, the supreme court ruled to protect children with disabilities from being expelled or punished for behaviors related to their disabilities. In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that a California school board violated the EAHCA for suspending a student with an emotional disability. The student had trouble controlling his emotions and was indefinitely suspended for being aggressive in response to other students taunting him. -
No Child Left Behind
In 2001, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act which set in place new standards and previsions for all public schools. This act provided underprivileged schools funds and extra support to help raise them to the same level as schools in high SES neighborhoods. This act created title 1 funding and set in place more programs for ESE students to have the materials and resources they need to flourish in a general education classroom. -
Winkleman v. Parma City School District
In 2007, the Winkleman's went to court on behalf of their child because they did not agree with the placement of their child. At first the case was dismissed and granted to the school because the parents did not have proper representation and were attempting to sue the court without a lawyer. The Circuit court ruled that parents have the right to dispute cases on behalf of their child and have rights under IDEA too.