Old photo of classroom

History of Special Education in America

  • First Public Special Education Class

    First Public Special Education Class

    In 1896, a Rhode Island school opened its first public special education class. Although there were other schools around the country showing some progress in the inclusion of students with disabilities, many public schools refused to accept special education students. During this time, students with disabilities were labeled "backward" or "feebleminded," however teachers recognized their need for special classes and teachers. https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels/four/4d/10.html
  • Brown V. Board of Education

    Brown V. Board of Education

    Ruled that school segregation by race was not constitutional. Although the main topic was not disabilities, this case set the path for future legislation for individuals with disabilities in education, especially considering many special education students at this time were in separate institutions. Also sets a basis for Least Restrictive Environment, which means that students with disabilities should be placed as close as possible to general education classes if their condition permits.
  • Department of Public Welfare v. Haas

    Department of Public Welfare v. Haas

    Supreme Court of Illinois ruled that laws of the state did NOT require a "free public education for... children who were mentally deficient." They stated that because of their limited intelligence students with disabilities cannot reap the rewards of a good education. This is later contradicted by FAPE, which states all students are entitled to a free appropriate public education.
  • Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

    Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

    This act initiated the role of the federal government in protecting the rights and providing for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, such as those with disabilities. It encouraged states to develop and improve programs for students with disabilities. Although, it did not yet provide clear guidelines for what these programs must entail.
  • Education of the Handicapped Act (P.L. 91-230)

    Education of the Handicapped Act (P.L. 91-230)

    This act sourced from ESEA and further continued support of state-run programs for students with disabilities. However, just as its predecessor, this act did not provide clear guidelines and structures for these programs. This act was to be later revised to include clear sets and guidelines for schools to follow.
  • P.L. 94-142

    P.L. 94-142

    An amendment to the Education of the Handicapped Act. These public laws set forth clearer expectations for schools in order to be more inclusive of students with disabilities. It required states and schools to provide free and appropriate education (FAPE), required IEPs, and defined least restrictive environment (LRE). LRE is also known as mainstreaming allowed for further integration of students with disabilities in general education classes.
  • Hendrick Hudson Sch. Dist. v. Amy Rowley

    Hendrick Hudson Sch. Dist. v. Amy Rowley

    The case of Hendrick Hudson School district vs Amy Rowley required the courts to give an official definition to FAPE. This meant that the student has the right to a free and appropriate public education. This, not only includes school tuition but also covers expenses of materials required by the student in order to have a proper education. https://www.wrightslaw.com/info/fape.index.htm
  • Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA)

    Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA)

    Education of the Handicapped Act was amended and included more principles. These principles included things such as "Child Find" which declared that States must make it publicly available that they have resources for students with disabilities in place. In addition, it made further strides in including parent involvement in the act, such as parents being invited to a meeting that discusses their own child and having a say in them, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P--IJkVYItQ
  • No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

    No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

    Enacted in 2001, it provided "a framework on how to improve performance of America's" students and ensuring that none of them fall behind. NCLB had principles such as Increased accountability which stated that schools and school districts are responsible to oversee that all students including those with disabilities, meet adequate yearly progress. Other principles included "school choice" and flexibility within States, districts, and schools to allocate funds properly.
  • Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Act (IDEIA)

    Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Act (IDEIA)

    An Amendment to IDEA, IDEIA allowed for school districts to use response-to-intervention models to determine whether a child has a disability. In addition, this act increased Federal Funds to provide intervention services. It also raised standards for acquiring special education licensure.
  • Assistive Technology Act

    Assistive Technology Act

    The Assistive Technology Act was put in place to provide assistive tech to students with disabilities. Assistive Technology can be defined as anything that helps anyone achieve a goal. Assistive tech can be something from as small as a pencil grip, to as big and complex as a tablet. This act was put into place to make sure students are provided with the necessary equipment to succeed in their classrooms and not fall behind.
  • UDL in Every Student Succeeds Act

    UDL in Every Student Succeeds Act

    Universal Design for Learning although already an existing concept, was introduced to the public k-12 in the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2016. It states for schools and teachers to design curricula and lessons universally, to be able to teach those with and without disabilities. This means it must include or be adaptable to include things such as assistive tech, extra aid, or anything that a student facing a barrier may need. https://www.cast.org/impact/udl-public-policy