# data[].attributes.headline
Summary of Sources and Special Education Implications 

# data[].attributes.subject
Summary of Sources and Special Education Implications 

# data[].attributes.body
In the article, Thompson (n.d)  states policies and current trends of special education services. The article also provides competencies needed  and training experiences for effective leadership in special education schools. This information is resourceful to administrators so that legal issues are avoided.

On the TEA website, there are several resources to alleviate administrators from a special education dispute. I found information on the dispute resolution process, IEP facilitation, special education complaints, mediation, due process hearing, and the Special Education Resolution Book ("Special Education Dispute Resolution Processes", 2018).

This topic is important to my future career, because schools hold the Non-Discriminatory Act. Therefore, a school administrator must be able to have ample knowledge of the laws and procedures required by students obtaining special services at a campus. As stated before, special education laws are complex. Administrators should learn about special education laws, terminology, competencies, and training experiences to avoid special education disputes. However, sometimes disputes may be unavoidable for an administrator. Therefore, it is wise for administrators to know how to alleviate disputes. Disputes may happen when there is disagreement or violation  to a a child's IEP, and other services.

References

Special Education Dispute Resolution Processes. (2018). Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/Academics/Special_Student_Populations/Special_Education/Dispute_Resolution/Special_Education_Dispute_Resolution_Processes/

Thompson, P. Effective Leadership Competencies of School-Based Special Education Administrators. Effective Leadership Competencies.

# data[].attributes.headline
Researching Special Education Legal Issues and Federal Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Researching Special Education Legal Issues and Federal Law

# data[].attributes.body
My opinion is that Special Education information should be acquired straight from the Texas Education Agency (TEA).

# data[].attributes.headline
Researching Special Education Legal Issues and Federal Law 

# data[].attributes.subject
Researching Special Education Legal Issues and Federal Law 

# data[].attributes.body
In my search of the Angelo Stare University Library, I found this peer reviewed article of the required competencies for Special Education Administrators.

# data[].attributes.headline
Legal and Ethical Issue of Interest to Me: Special Education Guide for Administrators

# data[].attributes.subject
Legal and Ethical Issue of Interest to Me: Special Education Guide for Administrators

# data[].attributes.body
After my exploration of professional association websites and periodicals related to education, I am most interested in exploring special education legal issues and federal law.

Special education cases interest me, as I find a trend of cases aspiring in the last years in my area. Furthermore, I have witnessed some discrepancies at educational facilities and will like to gain knowledge of how to approach those kind of situations professionally.

# data[].attributes.body
Transgender Bathroom Case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dive Brief:

Federal Judge Wright Allen ruled in favor of now-graduated Virginia transgender student Gavin Grimm, who sued the Gloucester County School Board over a 2014 decision that he couldn't use the bathroom corresponding to his gender identity, USA Today reports.

The case was among the highest-profile to involve transgender bathroom rights in schools, at one point being sent to the Supreme Court before being dismissed back to the lower courts.

Allen's decision found that the school board discriminated against Grimm under the Constitution's equal protection clause and Title IX, and no further appeal by the school board has yet been filed.

Dive Insight:

Barring any further appeals, or any similar cases that the U.S. Supreme Court might decide to take on in the future, Grimm's case could now set a precedent on transgender bathroom rights in schools. Prior to this case, the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights under the Obama administration reached a resolution agreement in December 2015 with Illinois' Palatine High School District 211 regarding a transgender high school student's ability to use the girls' locker room. Further guidance on the issue released in May 2016 was later rescinded by the Trump administration.

Grimm's case, of course, isn't the only one to be appealed as far as the Supreme Court, as Wisconsin's Kenosha Unified School District in August filed an appeal requesting a decision on transgender students' bathroom rights under Title IX or the U.S. Constitution. So sooner or later, it seems likely a further decision is likely to come from a higher level.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Judge rules in favor of Virginia transgender student in bathroom case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Federal Judge Wright Allen ruled in favor of now-graduated Virginia transgender student Gavin Grimm, who sued the Gloucester County School Board over a 2014 decision that he couldn't use the bathroom corresponding to his gender identity, USA Today reports.

# data[].attributes.body
Endrew F. vs. Douglas- Special Education case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A year out, Endrew F. ruling leaves imprint

A year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that schools must offer students with disabilities an education reasonably calculated to enable them to "make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances," what has changed?

On the one hand, not much, if evaluating the dozens of special education cases that have cited Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District, which was decided March 22, 2017.

Around 90 percent of those kinds of disputes between school districts and parents were decided in favor of districts; the notable exception was that of Endrew F. himself, the teenager with autism who was at the center of the Supreme Court case.

The high court's unanimous decision sent Endrew's case back to a lower court, and the judge that had decided in favor of the Colorado district reversed himself in February, saying that the school system did not meet the new educational standard.

His parents and the Douglas County district have reached a settlement on the district court's order of reimbursement and attorney fees, and the parties are in the process of finalizing the agreement, said Jack D. Robinson, the lawyer representing Endrew and his parents.

Mulling the Impact

But while the case may not have had an immediate legal impact, advocates say the fact that the Supreme Court grappled with the purpose of a special education has had benefits that are less tangible.

"For me, the whole experience is something that I'll never forget," said Kristin Kane, who helped found the Decoding Dyslexia Virginia movement and was present at the oral arguments a year ago. "Even just the excitement of the Supreme Court taking this case and listening to it, validates that there is merit in these really hard discussions that happen every day."

The case before the Supreme Court focused on a narrow point of law: How much benefit should special education provide to students with disabilities?

In 2010, Endrew's parents pulled him out of his Colorado district because, they contended, his individualized education program, or IEP, was not designed to help him progress. The parents argued that the district should be required to pay private school tuition for the young man, who goes by Drew.

An administrative-law judge, a federal district judge, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals all decided against the parents. The appeals-court ruling in August 2015 said that Drew was gaining "some" educational benefit from his IEP. Referring to an earlier case in the same circuit, the court also said the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires that special education only offer a more than "de minimis," or trivial, benefit.

The Supreme Court case turned that around.

"When all is said and done, a student offered an educational program providing 'merely more than de minimis' progress from year to year can hardly be said to have been offered an education at all," wrote Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

Special education advocates, and U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, said the case would prompt higher standards for students with disabilities.

"Tolerating low expectations for children with disabilities must end. Challenging children with disabilities empowers them, and doing so gives them the hope of living successful, independent lives," DeVos wrote in a Commentary for Education Week.

Few Changes

But school districts are not losing cases because of the new Endrew F. standard, said Perry Zirkel, a professor emeritus of education and law at Lehigh University, who has been tracking the impact of the case. Forty-nine cases were decided by a judge who cited Endrew F. and applied its standard that a special education program must be "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress in light of the child's circumstances." Of those, 44 saw no change in the decision, and in 37 of those cases, the decision was for the school district. In two cases, the case was sent back for further evaluation.

In three cases, the decision was reversed. But on one occasion, a decision that had been in favor of the parents was reversed, with the district prevailing under the Endrew F. standard.

In several situations, judges said that local practices already met the standard outlined by the Endrew F. case, Zirkel noted.

"Anyway you slice it, it hasn't changed the trends," he said. "The same folks are still winning-the districts."

Those findings match what Catherine Merino Reisman, a lawyer who represents parents in special needs cases and works out of Haddonfield, N.J., has seen.

"It's only been a year, and it's going to take some time for the lower courts to apply Endrew," she said. Reisman said that judges in the federal judicial circuit where she works say that its "meaningful benefit" standard is equivalent to that laid out by the high court. Reisman thinks that the Supreme Court case offers more specific guidance than just "meaningful benefit."

There does seem to be a difference before cases ever make it to court, Reisman said. Parents are able to cite the case's standards when they are talking with school staff members and drafting IEPs.

"It definitely has focused the discussion much more clearly on what it is we're supposed to be doing for these kids with disabilities," she said.

Phyllis Wolfram, the director of special education for the Springfield, Mo., school district, said that her interpretation of the decision was that it matches up well with what districts already are trying to do for students with disabilities.

"It wasn't a major shift in the way we're doing business," said Wolfram, the incoming president of the Council of Administrators of Special Education.

But the case offered a chance to make sure that school personnel are collaborating with parents and that they are, indeed, creating ambitious academic standards. Wolfram is particularly mindful of the need to solicit meaningful parent input in crafting a child's education plan.

"We forget, especially those of us who have been in the field for a long period of time, that it takes time for teachers and parents to understand every aspect of that. It's a pretty complex law," Wolfram said.

For Kane, the Virginia advocate who witnessed the Supreme Court argument, the fact that districts are winning most court cases is not a surprise. In her experience, districts will generally choose to settle cases unless they are almost positive they can win, she said.

But it's important to continue to have a conversation about what high expectations are for students with disabilities, she said.

"Just the fact that it's being heard," Kane said, "is progress."

Published in Print: May 2, 2018, as Spec. Ed. Community Assesses Legal Impact After Landmark Case

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Year Ago the Supreme Court Raised the Bar for Special Ed. What's Happened Since?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that schools must offer students with disabilities an education reasonably calculated to enable them to "make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances," what has changed? On the one hand, not much, if evaluating the dozens of special education cases that have cited Endrew F.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 2: National School Boards Association (NSBA)

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 2: National School Boards Association (NSBA)

# data[].attributes.body
In my review of National School Boards Association (NSBA) advocacy page, I noticed two potential legal and ethical issues associated with my current or future career.

As an administrator I most certainly encounter issues revolving around the Student Non- Discrimination Act. On the NSBA page I encountered a video about unaccompanied undocumented students. Educators portrayed unsatisfied gestures when talking about this student population. However, schools have a legal obligation to educate all children. A strong administrator must enforce the act  and balance resources so that all children get the education they deserve.

Secondly, as stated on the site, special education can come with complex legal issues. An administrator must understand and make sure their educational institution is complying with federal law. Administrators would benefit from acquiring more in depth knowledge on special education terminology such as but not limited to Individualized Education Plan (IEP) , Behavior Improvement Plan (BIP), accommodations and modifications, Disability Act, 504 section of the Disability Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Advocacy | National School Boards Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
School Law Issues The resources, news, and court decisions you need on a range of legal issues for public schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 2:  National Education Association (NEA)

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 2:  National Education Association (NEA)

# data[].attributes.body
In my review of National Education Association (NEA) issues and action page, I noticed two potential legal and ethical issues associated with my current role and future career.

Every Student Succeeds Act  (ESSA) caught my attention due to the constant pressure educators and students face when encountering the state wide standardized assessment, STAAR. The assessment's scores are widely perceived as a reflection of a teachers's and educational facility's job performance. According to NEA, educators will not be evaluated on test scores alone, but the art and athletic programs, full time personnel, parent and family involvement, rigorous general education, advanced placement, and elective courses available in an educational facility.

Second that caught my attention was educational funding. FY 2018 budget bill increased educational funding and stopped or limited funds earmarked for the use of un-prioritized issues. FY2018 strengthens criminal background checks, professional development, and decreased class size. The section of FY2018 on this website talks about austerity, Betsy DeVos's request for the elimination of programs, Dreamers Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA),and Trump administration's request on immigration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our Current Focus

More Issues

In support of common issues and public education.

Research reports reviewing data on educational issues and policy papers concerning NEA members, educators, and the public school community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In support of common issues and public education. Research reports reviewing data on educational issues and policy papers concerning NEA members, educators, and the public school community.

# data[].attributes.body
Upon completion of a Master of Education in Educational Administration, I plan to continue my educational career as a teaching professional. I have many aspirations and want to gain more experience and credibility. I love to teach! After years of experience, I would like to become an assistant principal. When the time is right I would like to become a principal for a primary or secondary campus. Ultimately, I aspire to be a Head of Department at a district's central administration or God willingly work for Region One or the Texas Education Agency (TEA).