The Education of Children
with Disabilities
A Brief History of the Legislation and Litigation that
has Shaped Education and Special Education
in the United States
Thomas P. DiPaola, Ph.D.
How we got to where we are
PL 94-142 EACHA of 1975


The congressional bills which became
Public Law 94–142 in 1975 were originally
introduced in 1971
their consideration by Congress had an
impact on the nation, fueling the interest
in state legislation and in litigation
Core Components of the IDEA
Originally PL 94-142
The EAHCA of 1975
Core Component
Implementation
Zero Reject
All means All
Non-Discriminatory Evaluation
No single instrument of evaluator
Free Appropriate Public Education
(FAPE)
Individual Education Program
(IEP)
Appropriate as defined in the IEP
Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)
Educate students with disabilities with
nondisabled students to the maximum extent
appropriate AND
Do not remove unless absolutely necessary
Procedural Safeguards
Protect students, parents and school personnel
Parental Participation
parents active participants in the development
and delivery of special education program.
Selected Litigation
involving civil rights and the
education of children with disabilities







Brown v. BOE (1954) - equal access v.
segregation
Hobson v. Hansen (1967) – tracking v. equal access
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) – due process
Diana v. State BOE CA (1970) – IQ tests culturally biased
Larry P. v. Riles (1972) – IQ cannot used for be sole
placement
PARC v. PA (1972) – FAPE
Mills v. DC (1972) – zero reject


By 1974 over 36 “right to education” lawsuits filed in 25 states
RI Society Autistic Children v. State of RI (1972)
Selected Litigation
involving civil rights and the education
of children with disabilities







Stuart v. Nappi (1978) – Discipline and disability
condition Manifestation Determination
S-1 v. Turlington (1981) - Manifestation
Determination and cessation of services
Hudson Board v. Rowley (1982) –
comparable not “maximized”
Irving District v. Tatro (1984) – related
services
Smith v. Robinson (1984) – Attorney Fees
Honig v. Doe (1988) – behavior expulsion
Tim W (1989)
Selected Litigation involving civil
rights and the education of children
with disabilities

PARC v. PA (1972) – FAPE, basis for PL 94-142
 January 7, 1971
 14 specific children & all others of similar “class”
 PARC 3 main points
 Can learn with appropriate instruction
 “education” is broader than traditional academics
 Early educational experience is essential
 Settled on consent agreement
 time table, two “masters”
 FAPE = PROPERTY RIGHT – 14th Amendment
 DUE PROCESS – 5th Amendment
 Civil Rights Act & Brown v. BOE
Litigation

Mills v. DC (1972)




7 plaintiffs (mental, physical, LD, EBD) – expelled
DC claimed no money for programs
 Trim other programs
Advertise services = Child Find
Governed by Congress = national application
 10th Amendment – Education is a State’s Right
 Can do away with BUT not just for some
 “zero rejection” policies
 Ages 5-17, up to 21
History of Legislation
Concerning Special
Education
Legislation






Civil Rights Act of 1964 – Title IV
 Commerce Clause of 14th Amendment – unitary systems
PL
PL
PL
PL
89-10 – ESEA of 1965
89-313 – ESEA amendments of 1965
91-230 EHA of 1970
93-112 Rehabilitation Act of 1973 – Section 504
 Access to funded programs – anti-discrimination
Family Education Rights Privacy Act – PL 93-380
 November 19, 1974
 Mainstreaming Act”
 Right to inspect, review & control records
 Buckley amendment to PL 93-586
 Amendment to ESEA – PL 89-313
 Provides funding
 LRE
Legislation

Education of All Handicapped Children’s Act - PL 94-142
 November 29, 1975
 Assessment/evaluation prior to placement
 FAPE





Services ages 5-21
LRE
Due Process
IEP
Revolutionary in SCOPE
Legislation



EAHCA Amendments of 1986 – PL 99-457
 Extension of rights to school for children ages 35
 Funds for intervention for children & families birth
- 3 years
 IFSP – Individualized Family Service Plan
PL 100-407 “Tech Act” Technology Related Assistance for
Individuals with Disabilities
American Disabilities Act (ADA) – PL 101-336
 1990
 Prohibits discrimination at state and local
levels
 Based on Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Legislation

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) – PL 101-476




“handicapped” replaced by “disabled”
1990
Name change for PL 94-142
Added two exceptionalities




Program expansions of related services
 Counseling
 Rehabilitation
 Social work
Program creations
Transition services
 Assistive Technology
PL 102 - 569 Rehabilitation Act Amendments 1992
IDEA 97
 Accommodations
 Alternative assessments



Traumatic Brain Injury
Autism
P.L. 93-380, Education
Amendments of 1974

FAPE

Procedural Safeguards

Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

Federal Funds
P.L. 94-142, Education for All
Handicapped Children*





FAPE
Procedural Safeguards
LRE
Nondiscriminatory evaluation
Individualized Education Program
*Reauthorization
Public Law 99-372

The Handicapped Children’s Protection Act
of 1986

Reimbursement of legal fees for parents who
prevail

Requires that the case and legal fees be
discussed with lawyer prior to legal action
Public Law 99-457
Education of the Handicapped
Amendments of 1986
 Federal incentives to adopt
Infant/Toddler Programs
 Extended FAPE to all children ages 3-5
 Requires Individualized Family Service
Plan
(IFSP) for each child/family served

Public Law 101-476*






Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) 1990
Changed language of law
Added students with autism and traumatic
brain injury
Required transition plan on IEP
Designated assistive technology as a related
service
Strengthen inclusion laws
*Reauthorization
Public Law 101-336

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 1990

Expands civil rights for individuals with
disabilities

Requires the rights of equal access and
reasonable accommodation in employment
Public Law 105-17*





Individuals With Disabilities Education Act
Amendments of 1997
Restructured the law
Changes in the IEP team and content of IEP
Required states to establish a voluntary
mediation program
Added language concerning discipline
*Reauthorization
Public Law 107-110



Elementary and Secondary School
Education Act
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Four principles




Accountability
Parent involvement
Highly qualified
Research-based instruction
Public Law 108-445




Individuals with Disabilities Education
Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004)
Excludes division’s responsibility for medical
devices surgically implanted
Highly qualified special education teachers
Provides early intervening services for nonspecial education students
Public Law 108-445



Flexible allowances in the processes of
evaluation, eligibility, and IEP
School division in which private school of
parentally placed student is located
responsible for special education and related
services
Changes in disciplinary procedures for
special education students
Constitution
th
14

Amendment
Section. 1. All persons born or
naturalized in the United States
and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United
States and of the State wherein
they reside. No State shall make
or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any State
deprive any person of life, liberty,
or property, without due process
of law; nor deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.
Discipline of Special Needs
Students under IDEA
Step 1: Functional
Behavioral Assessment
A FBA determines the underlying cause or function
of a child’s behavior that impedes the learning of
the child with a disability or the learning of the
child’s peers.
Things to do:





Verify the seriousness of the problem
Define the problem in concrete terms
Collect data, identifying problem behavior and
possible causes
Analyze the data
Formulate and test a hypothesis
Step 2: Behavioral
Intervention Plan
A BIP is a written, specific, purposeful and organized plan
which describes positive behavioral interventions and
strategies that address a student’s social, emotional, and
behavioral development (OSEP, 2003).
An effective BIP should show a clear link between the
FBA and the selected intervention strategies.
Intervention Features:
•
•
•
•
Acceptable Replacement
Behaviors
Antecedent Manipulations
Consequence Manipulations
Setting-Event Manipulations
Step 3: The Manifestation
• Is there a relationship between the
child’s disability and the behavior?
• If the IEP Team determines that the
child's behavior was a manifestation
of the disability, the child cannot be
subjected to long-term removal for
the behavior.
• The IEP Team may recommend a
change of placement if it concludes
the current placement is
inappropriate in light of the behavior.
Supreme Court Cases
Goss v. Lopez 419
U.S. 565 (1975)
Do special education students
have due process rights?

All students have the right to
procedural due process?

Students have the right to explain
their conduct to an administrator
(short-term suspension).

Students must be given a hearing
before the school board for long-term
suspensions and expulsion.
Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S.
305 (1988)
Can a student with a disability
be suspended if a causal
connection exists between
the disability and the
misconduct?
 Right of student to remain in
educational placement pending a due
process hearing.
 If a serious offense is a manifestation
of the disability, IDEA prohibits
exclusion of student.
Circuit Court Cases
S-1 v. Turlington (1981)
5th Circuit Court Case
 Case requiring that "a trained and
knowledgeable group of persons"
meet to determine if a student's
misconduct "bears a relationship to
his handicapping condition."
 Required the manifestation
determination
 Declared that expulsion is a change
in placement for a child with a
disability
Commonwealth of Virginia v. Riley
(1996) 4th Circuit Court
 Virginia challenged the U.S.
Department of Education's
policy that school districts must
provide educational services to
students who have been
suspended for more than 10
days for reasons unrelated to
their disabilities.
 Court ruled: School must
provide a free appropriate
education to student even if
infraction is unrelated to
disability.
District Court Cases
Can students with disabilities be transferred to other
schools in the division and/or receive alternative
placements?
AW v. Fairfax County School
Board, No. 03-1181 (4th Cir.
2004)

School district transferred a
student with a disability to
another school in the division
for disciplinary reasons.

A transfer does not violate the
“stay put” provision of IDEA as
long as the student continues
to receive related services.
Parent v. Osceola County Sch.
Bd.,
59 F.Supp.2d 1243 (M.D. Fla.
1999)

Alternative school placements
for special education students
with discipline issues do not
have to be exactly the same as
the student’s regular school
placement.
Lamont v. Quisenberry (1984)
District Court of Ohio
 Long-term exclusion from a
classroom to a severely
restricted environment like a
one-hour-per-week, homebased tutoring program is
illegal.
Other Case Law
Questions, comments, discussion?