Paper

Special Education Timeline

  • Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142)

    Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94-142)
    Guaranteed a free appropriate public education to each child with a disability. Four Purposes:
    * a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs
    * rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected
    * to assist States and localities in providing education of all children with disabilities
    * to assess effectiveness of efforts to educate all children with disabilities
  • Hudson v. Rowley

    Hudson v. Rowley
    Who: Amy Rowley Complaint: A child who was deaf whose parents wanted the school to provide an interpreter. Decision: The school upheld the law by providing an equal and adequate education based on an individualized plan. Amy Rowley tested on level with her peers thus deeming an interpreter unnecessary.
  • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
    Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was reauthorized and renamed IDEA.
  • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

    Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
    Ensures the right of individuals with disabilities to nondiscriminatory treatment in aspects of their lives outside of education. Protections:
    * employment
    * transportation
    * public accommodations
    * state and local government
    * telecommunications
  • IDEA Amendment

    IDEA Amendment
    • Definition of disabled children changed to include developmentally delayed children between three and nine years of age.
    • It also required mediation between parents and schools.
    • Authorized additional grants for technology, disabled infants and toddlers, parent training, and professional development.
  • No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)

    No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)
    Targeted to aid:
    * Students in poverty
    * Minorities
    * Students receiving special education services
    * English Language Learner Effect on schools:
    * Required all students to meet "proficient" level on annual tests
    * All teachers "highly qualified"
    * Research-based instruction
    * Penalties to schools not meeting requirements including change of leadership, closing the school, school improvement plans *Led to inclusion
  • Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004

    Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004
    IDEA amended to align with NCLB or 2001 including:
    • All teachers will be "highly qualified"
    • Requirement of research based interventions (led to RTI implementation to meet requirements)
    • Addition of Procedural Safeguards
    • Modified IEP process and requirements
    • Additions to discipline policies including manifestation determination standards and a case by case analysis
  • Rosa's Law (PL 111-256)

    Rosa's Law (PL 111-256)
    Named for Rosa Marcellino, a 9-year-old with Down syndrome. Her parents fought for the federal government to replace the term "mental retardation" with "intellectual disability" as well as replace the term in their home state of Maryland's health and education code. The federal law was signed by president Barack Obama.
  • Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

    Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
    Replaced NCLB and has the following changes:
    • States are not limited to state tests, nationally recognized tests are acceptable (ex: SAT and ACT)
    • Only 1% of students can be given alternate tests
    • Flexible federal framework, states make their own goals.
    • Additional accountability measures for scoring schools.
    • No penalty for struggling schools
    • National center for reading and literacy disabilities
    • Encourages personalized learning for students
    • States may develop parent opt-out option
  • Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District

    Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District
    Who: Endrew F. Complaint: A child with Autism whose parents were concerned with stalled progress. Endrew was a student of the district from Preschool to 4th grade. His parents withdrew him from the district and enrolled him in a private school where he made significant progress costing $70,000 annually. Argument: The district states the IEP upheld the law. Decision: IEP must be reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child’s circumstances.