# data[].attributes.headline
1852: Massachusetts passes first compulsory education law in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.subject
1852: Massachusetts passes first compulsory education law in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TBT: Mass. Becomes the First State to Make Kids Go to School

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Compulsory education laws are now on the books across the country.

# data[].attributes.body
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled a child who was considered "weak minded" and couldn't benefit from instruction, bothered other children, made "unusual noises," and was unable to take care of themselves could be expelled from school (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
1918: All states have compulsory education laws.

# data[].attributes.subject
1918: All states have compulsory education laws.

# data[].attributes.body
Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled a 5th grader could be expelled from public school because manifestations of his disability (e.g., drooling, facial contortions, speech problems) nauseated teachers and students, required too much time, and had a negative effect on school discipline (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
1934: Ohio court rules compulsory attendance laws give state authority to exclude some students. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1934: Ohio court rules compulsory attendance laws give state authority to exclude some students. 

# data[].attributes.body
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled segregation on the basis of unalterable traits (in this case, race) was unconstitutional; such segregation violated students' 14th amendment rights to equal protection under the law (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brown v. Board of Education | BRI's Homework Help Series

# data[].attributes.headline
1958: Department of Public Welfare v. Hass

# data[].attributes.subject
1958: Department of Public Welfare v. Hass

# data[].attributes.body
Supreme Court of Illinois ruled that the state's compulsory attendance laws did not require states provide free public education for students who were considered "feeble minded" or "mentally deficient" (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
Late 1950s to early 1960s: First congressional attempts to provide funds for educational programs for students with disabilities. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Late 1950s to early 1960s: First congressional attempts to provide funds for educational programs for students with disabilities. 

# data[].attributes.headline
1965: Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

# data[].attributes.subject
1965: Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

# data[].attributes.body
First federal law authorizing federal funds to assist states in educating [disadvantaged] students. Precursor of federal government providing federal money for the education of students with disabilities (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
1969: North Carolina criminalizes attempts to force attendance of students with disabilities in public school 

# data[].attributes.subject
1969: North Carolina criminalizes attempts to force attendance of students with disabilities in public school 

# data[].attributes.headline
1970: Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA)

# data[].attributes.subject
1970: Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA)

# data[].attributes.body
Provided funding to states to establish, continue, or improve programs for students with disabilities. First freestanding special education law; mandated students with disabilities be educated and receive special education and related services they needed to progress. "Toothless" in that there were no substantive rights (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
1972: PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

# data[].attributes.subject
1972: PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

# data[].attributes.body
Applied precedent from Brown. Class action lawsuit settled before the U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of PA. Consent decree (settlement) stated that all students with intellectual disabilities between he ages of 6 and 21 be provided a free appropriate public education in a program similar to those provided to students without disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Digital Storytelling: PARC vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

# data[].attributes.headline
1972: Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia

# data[].attributes.subject
1972: Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia

# data[].attributes.body
Class action lawsuit that applied the precedent from Brown. Filed in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia. Court ruled that school board must provide children with disabilities a public education and outlined procedures for labeling, placement, and exclusion of students with disabilities (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.body
First federal civil rights law to protect rights of people with disabilities. Prohibited discrimination against people with disabilities by any entity or agency receiving federal government money (Yell, 2019)

# data[].attributes.headline
1975: Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA)

# data[].attributes.subject
1975: Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA)

# data[].attributes.body
Often referred to as PL 94-142. Constitutes "the most significant increase in the role of the federal government in special education" (p. 44). Required states reciting federal money to provide a free appropriate public education to all eligible students with disabilities between the ages of 3 and 21. Students' rights outlined in PL 94-142: (a) nondiscriminatory testing, evaluation, and placement procedures; (b) least restrictive environment; (c) procedural safeguards/due process, including parent involvement; (d) free education; and (e) appropriate education provided in accordance with the IEP (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.body
First U.S. Supreme Court case to rule on meaning of FAPE. Court ruled FAPE had been provided if: (a) the school complied with procedures laid out in PL 94-142 and (b) the IEP was "reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefit" (Rowley, pp. 206-207, as cited by Yell, 2019, p. 165). IEP must confer some educational benefit (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.headline
1990: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

# data[].attributes.subject
1990: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)

# data[].attributes.body
Reauthorization of PL 94-142. Renamed the legislation "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act." Also required individualized transition plans to be included on IEPs for students 16 years or older (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.body
Reauthorization of ESEA. Held schools, districts, and states accountable for student achievement in math and reading, including students with disabilities. Mandated states include students with disabilities in accountability testing and close achievement gaps (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
No Child Left Behind: Explained & Summarized

# data[].attributes.headline
2004: Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

# data[].attributes.subject
2004: Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

# data[].attributes.body
Amends to align with NCLB by emphasizing accountability for student performance and highly-qualified special education teachers (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
IDEA Basics: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.headline
2015: Every Students Succeeds Act (ESSA)

# data[].attributes.subject
2015: Every Students Succeeds Act (ESSA)

# data[].attributes.body
Reauthorization of NCLB. Got rid of NCLB's less popular provisions (e.g., accountability, adequate yearly progress). Students with disabilities still required to participate in statewide assessments (Yell, 2019).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ESSA Explained: Inside the New Federal K-12 Law

# data[].attributes.headline
2017: Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District

# data[].attributes.subject
2017: Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District

# data[].attributes.body
U.S. Supreme Court clarified "educational benefit" standard from Rowley. The IEP must outline a program that is "reasonably calculated to enable a student to make progress in light of the child's circumstances" (Yell, 2019, p. 170).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Overview of Endrew F. v Douglas County School District