-
Brown v. Board of education of Topeka, Kansas
"Segregation of student by race rules unconstitutional; children deprived of equal educational opportunity. Ended "separate but equal" schools for white and black pupils. Used as a precedent for arguing that children with disabilities cannot be excluded from a public education." (Gurgiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.43) -
Diana v. State Board of Education
"Linguistically different students must be tested in their primary language as well as English. Students cannot be placed in special education classes on the basis of IQ tests that are culturally biased. Verbal test items to be revised so as to reflect students' cultural heritage. Group-administered IQ tests cannot be used to place children in programs for individuals with intellectual disability." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.43) -
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia
"Extended the Pennsylvania decision to include all the children with intellectual disabilities. Established the constitutional right of children with exceptionalities to a public education, matched to their needs, including specialized instruction, regardless of their functional level. (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.43) -
Armstrong v. Kline
"State's refusal to pay for schooling in excess of 180 days for pupils with severe disabilities is a violation of their rights to an appropriate education. The court found that some children with disabilities will regress significantly during summer recess and have longer recoupment periods; thus, they are denied an appropriate education if not provided with a year-round education." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.43) -
Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education
"Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a segregated class was an appropriate placement for a student with Down syndrome. Established a two-prong test for determining compliance with the least restrictive environment mandate for students with severe disabilities." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44) -
Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementon School District
"Place in a general education classroom with supplementary aid and services must be offered to a student with disabilities prior to considering more segregated placements. Pupil cannot be excluded from a general education classroom solely because curriculum, services, or other practices would require modification." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44) -
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F.
"U.S. Supreme Court expanded and clarified the concept of related services. Affirmed that intensive and continuous school health care services necessary for a student to attend school, if not performed by a physician, qualify as related services." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44) -
Schaffer v. Weast
"A U.S. Supreme Court ruling addressing the issue of whether the parent(s) or school district bears the burden of proof in a due process hearing... Court ruled that the burden of proof is placed upon the party seeking relief." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44) -
Winkelman v. Parma City School District
"The Supreme Court, by unanimous vote, affirmed the rights of parents to represent their children in IDEA-related court cases. Seen as an expansion of parental involvement and the definition of a free appropriate public education. Interpreted to mean that IDEA conveys enforceable rights to parents as well as their children." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44) -
Forest Grove School District v. T.A.
"Parents sought tuition reimbursement from the school district after removing their child who had learning disabilities, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and depression. The child was never declared eligible for a special education and never received services. Parents unilaterally enrolled the child in private school. The Supreme Court found that IDEA authorized reimbursement for private special education services." (Gargiulo and Bouck, 2018, p.44)
