# data[].attributes.body
1. The Rehabilitation Act

2. 1973

3. Proceedings:

1. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 accomplished protecting people with disabilities against discrimination (the Act requires businesses and schools to give the same opportunities to people with disabilities, and prohibits discrimination)

2. This Act is unique because it applies to many people other than students, such as people looking for housing, jobs, promotions, programs, etc.

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits many people including students, employees, and the general public. This Act requires all schools to provide the right to an education, benefiting students with disabilities. The Act stops businesses from not hiring people with disabilities, benefiting anyone with a disability looking for a job. The Act also benefits many people with disabilities by providing them with anti-discriminatory opportunities for housing, programs, and activities.

5. This Act falls under the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

2. 1990

3. Proceedings

1. The ADA accomplished prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities in schools and other public settings, such as transportation, places of employment, and public accommodations

2. The ADA is unique because it prohibits discrimination against disabled people in depth other than just providing an education (such as ensuring disabled students have access to extracurricular activities, auxiliary aids, facilities, etc.)

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits all Americans with disabilities including students, employees, and general citizens due to anti-discriminatory rules set into public places and transportation as well as schools and places of employment

5. The ADA falls under Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA)

2. 2008

3. Proceedings

1. The ADAAA was passed to restore and ground the original ADA act which prohibited discrimination against people with disabilities in schools, places of employment, and public places

2. The ADAAA is unique because it helped people place their disability with the ADA, making it easier to receive the benefits from ADA, such as widening the definition of disability

4. Implications

1. The ADAAA benefits all people with disabilities, especially those who find it harder to "prove" their disability to employers or school districts

5. The ADAAA falls under Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act

2. 1975

3. Proceedings

1. This Act accomplished passing a federal law guaranteeing a free public education to all disabled students

2. This Act is unique because it also requires public schools to provide adequate services and support for disabled students

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits disabled students by providing them with what they need for an equal education. This Act also benefits teachers by requiring the school to have the proper services and support required for teaching special education

5. This Act falls under the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and Individualized Education Program (IEP) pillars of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments

2. 1986

3. Proceedings

1. This Act expanded on the original Education for All Handicapped Children Act by including children from ages birth-3 years old and 3-5 years old with disabilities

2. This Act was unique because it introduced new school programs and pre-school programs for students with disabilities from birth to age 5. This act provided grants for early intervention programs and research (including physical, occupational, and speech therapy)

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits students with disabilities by providing them with adequate services and support. It also benefits family or caretakers of infants and toddlers with disabilities by providing them with research, education, therapy, etc., for their children

5. This Act falls under the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) and Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillars of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. The 1990 Amendments

2. 1990

3. Proceedings

1. This Act accomplished renaming the EHA and amended EHA to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and now including autism and traumatic brain injury (TBI) as disabilities

2. This Act was unique because it ensured regular educators to become part of a student's IEP team, emphasized benchmarks and goals, included new assistive technology and assessment tools, etc.

4. Implications

1. This Act not only benefits students with disabilities, special education and general education teachers, but it also benefits people with autism and TBI who are now able to receive benefits of special education

5. This Act falls under the Individualized Education Program (IEP) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments

2. 1997

3. Proceedings

1. This Act accomplished expanding and amending the original IDEA, especially regarding discipline of students with disabilities

2. This Act is unique because it contained some of the most significant changes to IDEA to date, including guaranteeing due process procedures and procedural safeguards for children in public schools

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits all students with disabilities in public school settings as well as teachers in terms of discipline protocol

5. This Act falls under the Due Process Safeguards pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

2. 2004

3. Proceedings

1. This Act improved special education in public schools by requiring all professionals to be highly qualified, lead research-based instruction, and emphasizing early intervention

2. This Act is unique because it placed many important details/requirements on IEP planning teams, reduced benchmarks and short-term objectives, and added in depth evaluation processes for special education

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits students with disabilities by requiring schools to create in depth IEPs to fit their needs and behaviors. It also benefits special education teachers by providing them with adequate materials, sources, and support for their students

5. This Act falls under the Individualized Education Program (IEP) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)

2. 2002

3. Proceedings

1. This Act ultimately led to higher expectations for public schools by increasing funding for research, provided more funding/assistance for students with lower income, increased parental involvement, and held public schools accountable

2. This Act is unique because after it was passed, it was highly accepted by the general population of parents, students, teachers, etc.

4. Implications

1. This Act benefits all students, especially students with disabilities, ensuring that every single student receives a fair and high quality education. It also benefits parents of these students by allowing more parental involvement, control, and flexibility

5. This Act falls under the Parent Participation and Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillars of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. PARC V Pennsylvania

2. 1972

3. Proceedings

1. This court case accomplished providing the right to an education for all students with disabilities

2. This court case is unique because after fighting against a case that prevented students with disabilities from attending public schools, it became the first lawsuit in America to fight for the right to an education and won

4. Implications

1. This court case benefited all students with disabilities by guaranteeing all students with disabilities had access and the right to free public education

5. This court case falls under the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Board of Education v Rowley

2. 1982

3. Proceedings

1. This court case accomplished verifying the meaning of FAPE, including special education and all of it's services

2. This case is unique because after a deaf student sued her school district for not having an ASL interpreter in her classrooms, the court ruled in favor of the school, explaining that they did not violate any educational rights and did not have to provide an interpreter

4. Implications

1. This court case benefitted the school district by providing clear and accurate descriptions of FAPE which ended up deciding that the school did not violate any Acts of special education

5. This court case falls under the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Daniel R.R. v State Board of Education

2. 1989

3. Proceedings

1. This court case accomplished including students with disabilities in general education classes as well as extracurricular activities

2. This court case is unique because even after the court holding declared a school district (who denied a student with special needs the right to a full time general education classroom) not guilty of violating the EHA, the case still provided an incentive to include students with disabilities in general education classrooms, interactions with their peers, and extracurricular activities

4. Implications

1. This court case benefitted students with special needs by including them in school programs and extracurricular activities, as well as including them in general education classrooms and interactions with their peers all while maintaining specific structures and routines in their special education classrooms

5. This court case falls under the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Oberti v Board of Education

2. 1993

3. Proceedings

1. This court case accomplished including the use of supplementary aids and services for students with disabilities when involved in general education classrooms or school programs

2. This court case is unique because it builds off of the Daniel R.R. v State Board of Education court case by allowing students with disabilities to have the support they need while in school

4. Implications

1. This court case benefitted many students with disabilities who also attend general education classrooms by providing them with the supplies and services they need. It also benefited general education and special education teachers by providing them with necessary tools in order to create an equal, safe, and comfortable functioning classroom

5. This court case falls under the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) pillar of special education

# data[].attributes.body
1. Cedar Rapids v Garret F

2. 1999

3. Proceedings:

1. This court case accomplished providing nursing services to students with disabilities regardless of the cost

2. The court case was unique because after a school district refused to pay for nursing services for a student with a spinal cord injury, the court ruling declared that nursing services must be provided in all public schools for students with disabilities

4. Implications:

1. This court case benefited all students with disabilities who need nursing care at school. It also benefited parents by ensuring that their children are taken care of during school hours at no cost

5. This court case falls under the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) pillar of special education