Rights of Students with Disabilities A “history of neglect” 1928—Soldier’s Rehabilitation Act 1920—Smith-Bankhead Act Brown v. Board

Rights of Students with Disabilities 1971—Pennsylvania “free, public program of education and training appropriate to the child’s capacity, within the context of a presumption that, among the alternative programs of education and training required by statute to be available, placement in a regular public school classroom is preferable to placement in a special public school class.. and in any other program of education and training.”

Rights of Students with Disabilities 1972—Mills v. BOE Expanded the PA ruling to include all children Provisions for (a) FAPE; (b) IEP; and (c) due process Issue of funding

Rights of Students with Disabilities Education for All Handicapped Children (EAHCA) FAPE IEP Special ed services Related services Due process LRE

Rights of Students with Disabilities 1990 IDEA Expanded definition (less specific) Time to evaluate (5-9) Discipline Hearing within 10 days Interim educational setting (up to 45 days) Drugs & weapons Manifestation

Rights of Students with Disabilities 2004 IDEA Closely aligned with NCLB Funding allocations Highly qualified teacher Tested for AYP (provisions for alternative assessments) Flexibility in spending (15 / 85%) Guidelines for identification Attorney fees Resolution “session” Addition of “bodily harm”

Rights of Students with Disabilities FAPE Requires services that: (a) have been provided at public expense, under public supervision, and without charge) Meet state education standards Include appropriate schools Provided in accordance with IEP What is appropriate? No substantive measures “Floor of opportunity”  Hendrick Hudson case

Rights of Students with Disabilities IEP Educational needs Instructional goals and objectives Identifies services provided Evaluation procedures

Rights of Students with Disabilities IEP (cont) Present level of performance must be stated Goals must be measurable Child must be progressing Program modification should enable the attainment of these goals Provisions for participating in achievement assessments Evaluation must relate to the IEP Parent report cards

Rights of Students with Disabilities ADHD Not specifically listed under IDEA Covered under IDEA, ADA, and 504 Eligible for services in one of three areas Other health impaired Specific learning disability Seriously emotionally disturbed

Rights of Students with Disabilities LRE Hospital – classroom What do we consider? Can cost be an issue? Judicial deference Inclusion Related services (Tatro case)

Rights of Students with Disabilities Discipline & the “stay-put” provision Focus on FAPE & LRE Special considerations Manifestation “Stay-put” provision When a student is under review Bars unilateral exclusion and non-specific time Again—weapons, drugs, or bodily harm 10 days evaluation 45 days, interim setting

Rights of Students with Disabilities In CT (a) Was the misconduct caused by, or did it have a direct relationship to, the child’s disability? (b) Was the misconduct the result of a failure to implement the IEP?

Rights of Students with Disabilities If either condition is met, it is a manifestation and the student may not be disciplined IEP team must remediate With no manifestation, it is the same except that services are not discontinued Stay-put—the student remains in the interim setting pending the resolution of the dispute

Rights of Students with Disabilities What are three key legal issues in this area in your educational context? What are three challenges in this area? What are three questions about this area of law?