Special Education Law and Litigation

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas

1954

This U.S. Supreme Court case determined that discrimination against a group was unlawful and that segregated black and white schools were not "separate but equal." Though it was intended to combat discrimination inherent in the racial segregation of education, it also set the precedent for students with disabilities to be included in general education classes (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia

1972

This case determined that all children, regardless of ability level, have the right to a free public education including specialized instruction that is tailored to their needs (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

Rehabilitation Act

1973

Section 504 of this law states that no person with a disability can be excluded from a federally-funded activity or program on the basis of their disability. This law also broadened the methods for determining the existence of a disability, guaranteeing services for many more children that received disability services previously. Also promoted inclusion of students with disabilities in general education classrooms (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

1975

Possibly the most important piece of legislation passed regarding children with disabilities. All children, regardless of ability level, must be provided a free and appropriate public education. Children with disabilities must be incorporated in the general education classroom whenever possible. Each child with disabilities must be provided an individualized education plan, created between the school and parents, to address goals, services, evaluations and more (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

IDEA Reauthorization

1986

This reauthorization of IDEA added services for children from birth to school age. Services for children aged three to five were mandated. Added "developmentally delayed" label (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

IDEA Reauthorization

1990

This reauthorization of IDEA added autism and traumatic brain injury as categories of disability. It made the creation of an individualized transition plan mandatory by a child's sixteenth birthday. Of incredible importance, it also revoked immunity for states for violating IDEA (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District

1992

This court decision determined that any student with disabilities must first be placed in a general education classroom and provided with supplementary aids before any possible placement in an environment outside of the general education environment. This is another example of courts determining that placement with their general education peers is the preferred choice for individuals with disabilities (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

IDEA Reauthorization

1997

This reauthorization of IDEA required general education teachers to participate in the individual education plan (IEP) process. It expanded inclusion by stating that students with disabilities must have access to the general education curriculum. It emphasized measurable goals as part of the IEP. It added the assessment of students' needs for assistive technology. It strengthened due process for students with disabilities (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

No Child Left Behind Act

2001

A reworking of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the goal of this law is to increase the proficiency of all students, and ensure the efficacy of teachers and schools. The emphasis on proficiency has increased students with disabilities' interaction with the general education curriculum (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019). Critics of this law say that increased emphasis on test scores takes teachers' attention away from teaching to each individual student's needs (Darling-Hammond, 2007).

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

2004

This reauthorization of IDEA specifies that students with disabilities are expected to demonstrate the same improved performance that is demanded of general education students by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Standards for IEPs are relaxed by this law, with participation not always mandatory and multiyear IEPs being permissible. It added a statute of limitations for parents to file a due process complaint (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

Every Student Succeeds Act

2015

This reworking of the No Child Left Behind Act still focuses on annual testing of students. It allows states to enforce their own accountability system for schools, instead of the federal government. It keeps some of the best parts of No Child Left Behind for children with disabilities, like access to the general education curriculum, universal design for learning principles, and the use of evidence-based interventions where necessary (Gargiulo & Bouck, 2019).

References

2020

Gargiulo, R.M., Bouck, E.C. (2019). Special Education in Contemporary Society. (7th Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). "Evaluating 'No Child Left Behind'". The Nation. Retrieved from https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/library/blog/873.