# data[].attributes.body
Upon graduating from Angelo State University with a Master of Education in Guidance and Counseling, I hope to gain employment as a middle school counselor in the district that I currently work in. I plan to spend the entirety of my counseling career working in schools that encompass a high rate of students with low socioeconomic statuses and backgrounds.

# data[].attributes.headline
Top 5 According to a Current Professional 

# data[].attributes.subject
Top 5 According to a Current Professional 

# data[].attributes.body
I spoke with Lauren Lansford, the current Lead Counselor for a title one urban middle school located in Houston, TX about legal and ethical issues currently impacting her profession.

1.     Various schools in Houston and surrounding areas have dealt with an influx of students enrolling into schools with the "homeless" status, after Harvey affected nearly the entire city. Through the McKinney-Vento Act, schools are required to enroll a student regardless of where they currently reside and must even provide transportation in certain situations. Some students are having to travel on a school bus for longer than an hour to attend our campus.

2.     Issues of mental health and teen suicide are an increasingly top priority for most Texas schools. Due to the current traumatic events that have affected our students (i.e., Hurricane Harvey and Santa Fe school shooting) in Houston and surrounding areas, an influx of mental health trainings and professional developments have nearly doubled.

3.     In regard to confidentiality, it is imperative that a counselor adheres to the Ethical Standards of a School Counselor. Although false, most teachers assume they are entitled to all information regarding students and thus, counselors must be proficient in dealing with confidentiality issues.

4.     Because school counselors work closely with students who receive 504 services, it is imperative that counselors are up to date on 504 legislation.

5.     School counselors also work closely with students with dyslexia. The laws are constantly changing and a student could easily lose out on the necessary accommodations to be successful in class if the counselor does not stay up to date with the requirements.

# data[].attributes.body
The first article that was observed discussed a popular website used by teachers all over the United States called "Teachers Pay Teachers." The article discusses whether or not the website promotes and/or encourages the infringement of intellectual property.  The article also brings forth a widespread discussion on whether or not teachers should expect monetary compensation when sharing materials with colleagues (Schwartz, 2018).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Site does little to protect copyrights

Julie Reulbach doesn't sell resources on Teachers Pay Teachers, an online marketplace where educators can make money on their lesson plans and classroom materials. Even so, she often sees her work for sale there.

"Everytime I check, I find something," said Reulbach, a high school math teacher at a private school in Concord, N.C., who has published an instructional blog since 2010. She scans TpT for work from her blog about once every six months. Her site is under a NonCommercial Creative Commons license, so anyone can use, edit, or share her materials-but they are not supposed to sell them.

It's happening anyway. And Reulbach's experience isn't unique.

Nearly a dozen educators who have used or are knowledgeable about the site told Education Week that TpT has a widespread problem with copyright infringement. Teachers said sellers had lifted passages verbatim from their lessons and copied entire pages without permission. While the company provides a reporting mechanism for infractions, it leaves the policing to the rights holders themselves.

The controversy over stolen work has also fueled a larger ideological rift in the teaching community: the division between those who think it's fine for teachers to make money off their hard work, and those who believe educators should share materials with their colleagues for free.

In a statement, TpT CEO Joe Holland said that the company takes the protection of intellectual property seriously.

"TpT strictly prohibits its sellers from listing material that infringes on the intellectual property rights of others, and we have no desire to have such material on TpT," he said.

But educators and authors say the company should be doing more to combat what they see as a systemic failure to protect teachers and others who create materials.

'They Shouldn't Be Selling It'

When Reulbach sees sellers attempting to make money off of lessons she's created, she reaches out to them and asks them to take her materials down. "Usually, people contact me and say, 'I'm really sorry,'" and remove the resource from their store, she said.

But earlier this year, she got into an argument with a teacher-seller that veered into the public sphere. Seeing one of her graphic organizers for sale in a TpT store, Reulbach filed a notice with the company's copyright team and commented on the listing. She also reached out to the seller, Theresa Ellington, on Twitter, asking her to remove the product.

The two went back and forth on the social media platform, with Ellington saying that she had reworked the lesson from a Pinterest post and Reulbach maintaining that the resource was a direct copy of hers.

Screenshots Reulbach took of the worksheet from the store are nearly identical to the version in her original blog post, including the same formatting and equations. One picture published with Ellington's product even shows a photo of the organizer filled out in Reulbach's handwriting.

Eventually, Ellington, a math teacher and educational consultant, removed the graphic organizer from her store. But in an interview with Education Week, Ellington said she didn't believe that the resource ever infringed on Reulbach's copyright. She said she made changes to the Pinterest post and sold it so that other teachers could have access to the updated version. (She also said no one ever actually bought a copy from her.)

Reulbach often finds pictures of her work posted on Pinterest, she told Education Week, where teachers might assume that the images don't belong to anyone. "But obviously, if they didn't create it, they shouldn't be selling it and trying to make money off of it," she said.

Other teachers say they've unexpectedly found their work being sold on TpT as well.

When Chicago teacher Tess Raser found out that her 6th graders would be seeing the movie "Black Panther" as a class, she saw an opportunity for a powerful lesson. Raser created an accompanying curriculum for the movie, covering a wide swath of history, social studies, and sociology: African kingdoms, the trans-Atlantic slave trade, Afrofeminism, and Afrofuturism.

She posted the resource online, and it went viral. Raser's work was featured on the technology and science fiction site Gizmodo and on the site for Blavity, a media company geared to black millenials. Teaching Tolerance, a social justice and anti-bias program that provides free resources for educators, also highlighted it as recommended reading. While access to the Google doc with the curriculum was free, Raser asked that those who could pay her do so via Venmo or the Cash App, two online payment services. She also posted the resource for sale on her own TpT store.

Months later, a friend emailed her-another TpT seller had listed a resource with content almost identical to her own, she said. A preview page from the seller's lesson shows the same objectives around understanding colonialism and a similar picture-matching activity. Raser emailed TpT to report the seller and posted about the incident on Twitter. And though the seller did remove the resource from her store, Raser didn't feel that the problem had been resolved.

"I was like, OK, well, you still need to compensate me because you've been paid for work that I created," she said. "I don't care that it's deleted-you shouldn't have put it up in the first place."

Raser said she left comments on the seller's other listings asking for payment and emailed the company inquiring about compensation. But TpT told her that beyond removing the resource, there wasn't anything the company could do. Raser could get a lawyer, the company told her, if she wanted to pursue a case against the seller.

TpT doesn't arbitrate copyright claims. The company complies with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which updated copyright law to address publication and distribution on the internet. The law gives websites that host third-party content, like TpT, what's called a "safe harbor." When sellers on the platform post material that infringes on someone else's copyright, the company is not held financially liable.

In order to claim this legal protection, TpT has to give copyright holders a way to flag infringing content and have it taken down. Anyone who thinks a TpT seller has listed his or her copyrighted material can submit a DMCA takedown notice with the site. Every product has a "report this resource" option, which leads to an electronic form, or users can also email the company directly.

On its website, TpT says that if it receives a DMCA notice with all of the required information included, it will remove infringing content. The company would not say how many DMCA notices it receives on a yearly basis.

And the burden is on teachers to file infringement complaints-not on TpT to police seller content. TpT doesn't independently review the content on the site, in part because it's difficult for the company to know what agreements or licenses individual sellers have. For example, a seller using large, verbatim passages of someone else's work could be infringing on copyright-or might have permission from the original author to use those sections for commercial purposes.

For Raser, the seller's silence was especially astonishing, given the subject matter of her materials. "Literally, it's curriculum on colonization and the legacy of slavery," she said. It was "ludicrous," Raser said, that someone would take resources created by a black woman on those topics, pass them off as his or her own, and profit off of them. The seller, who is only identifiable by screenname, did not return several requests for comment.

After Raser commented on the seller's page asking for compensation, TpT told Raser that it had received reports of her harassing a member of the site. If the company received more of these reports against her, the email read, TpT would suspend or deactivate her account. The seller's account is still live.

Public Pressure

Some who've had their content lifted say they see public pressure as their best recourse.

Reulbach, the North Carolina teacher, said the reporting process through TpT can be slow, and contacting the seller directly sometimes yields a faster result.

But Ellington, whom Reulbach confronted on Twitter, said she felt that Reulbach was wrong to handle the incident publicly. "I felt like it was more cyberbullying than legitimately two people, two teachers, two professionals speaking about, 'Hey, this is an issue,'" she said.

When TpT did respond to Reulbach, it was only to say the company would note Ellington's infraction in its records.

Reulbach's social media callout did have another effect: It led to an avalanche of Tweets from other bloggers who'd had similar experiences.

Lisa Bejarano, a former high school math teacher who now works for the online graphing calculator company Desmos, was one of these bloggers. Bejarano has seen resources from her blog sold by other users, but she said it's not worth the energy for her to fight stolen work. She's reached out to sellers when similarities to her work have been pointed out to her by friends or colleagues, but she doesn't go looking for infractions.

"Usually as a teacher, you're just so busy trying to grade and plan and teach that policing is the last priority," she said.

Investigating possible infringement can carry a financial cost for teachers, too. Browsers on TpT can only see a small selection of preview pages from resources that they haven't purchased, so it can be necessary to buy a product to confirm a suspicion that it's copied from another work, said Bejarano.

"My perspective is always that if that teacher is that desperate to make a couple extra bucks that they need to go to these lengths, then they have bigger issues that I'm not going to fix," she said.

The company says it will close the accounts of sellers who are reported multiple times for copyright infringement, but wouldn't say how many individual infractions it would need to receive against someone before taking this step.

Several teachers argued that TpT didn't have an incentive to police the site, because the company profits off of every lesson sold. It takes a 45 percent commission from every lesson purchased from a regular seller and a 20 percent commission from every sale from a "premium" seller-a paid membership tier that costs about $60 a year.

"Teachers Pay Teachers is making money off of copyrighted material, and they're putting it on the responsibility of the teachers who created the material to go hunt that down, and make sure it comes off. And that's what makes me angry," said Reulbach. "It's not about me. It's about a corporation that's making money off of copyrighted material."

In a statement, Holland said the company has "no desire" to have material that infringes copyright listed on TpT.

Ethics of Selling vs. Sharing

When TpT first started in 2006, a controversial debate launched along with it: Is it ethical for teachers to charge each other for lessons and resources, or should they share their creations with each other for free?

TpT has been heralded as a way for underpaid educators to make extra money-media coverage has frequently spotlighted teachers who have pulled in six-figure profits.

But the customers on TpT are also teachers, who are facing financial strains similar to the sellers. Should they really have to pay for the materials needed to do their jobs?

Bringing up issues of copyright infringement on the platform can set off a powder-keg in the teacher-seller community, Reulbach said. Criticism of the problem, she said, is often mistaken for criticism of all teachers who use the site.

"It's a very, very sore subject for a lot of teachers, because some teachers really do need Teachers Pay Teachers to survive," Reulbach said. And teachers in underresourced schools rely on the centralized store of lessons and materials.

As TpT has become popular, opportunities for online sharing have also developed-platforms like BetterLesson and Share My Lesson allow teachers to freely post and download material. There's also a growing sect of teachers who create and use HyperDocs: editable, shareable lessons hosted on Google docs. That movement's website is titled " Teachers Give Teachers."

If material is good enough to share, it doesn't make sense to limit teachers' and students' access to it by charging a fee, said Kevin Roughton, a middle school social studies teacher in southern California, who said he's also seen his work sold on TpT without his permission. "If my work can help the teacher next door, I'm certainly not going to charge my colleague next door. ... I don't know why, all of the sudden, if it's [a teacher in] another county or another state, that I'd want to limit students from having access to that material."

Roughton publishes a blog where he shares the history lessons that he creates. Last year, he found a lesson with several lines of text lifted verbatim from his materials in a TpT store. He contacted the seller, who acknowledged the similarities and said he may have subconsciously included lines from other resources he had seen online. The seller then made changes to the product.

"Ideas in the education community are shared and borrowed and stolen all the time," Roughton said. But there's a difference, he said, between "stealing" an idea to use with your own students and stealing work to sell for profit. The former is good instruction, while the latter is at best bad practice-and at worst, illegal.

For Reulbach, seeing her work behind a paywall feels like a barrier to equity. "Teachers don't make a lot of money, and it just really makes me sad that teachers are paying for something that they could get for free," she said.

Need for Clarity

Sellers aren't just lifting resources from individual teachers-they're taking from commercially published materials as well.

Jennifer Serravallo, who's written books on teaching reading and writing strategies, is one of the many education authors whose work is popular with TpT sellers. Users create activities inspired by these authors' work and resources to complement the lessons in their books. Sometimes, though, they also include chunks of these authors' books, which are protected by copyright.

Searching Serravallo's name on the site returns more than 100 products, created by other users, that reference her work. Some of them clearly violate copyright, she said-like word-for-word passages lifted from her books-but others she doesn't flag, like when sellers reference her list of reading goals or the title of one of her books within their product. "I don't think that's a problem," she said. Making these judgment calls can be difficult, and it requires an intimate understanding of her published work, said Serravallo.

Serravallo thinks that a lot of the problems stem from teachers not understanding the ins and outs of copyright law. "The teachers who are making this stuff have always been horrified as soon as they've been called out," said Serravallo, expressing remorse that they've violated the work of an author they respect.

"I don't think there's malicious intent. I don't think they're trying to be sneaky ... I think they, in many cases, just really don't know that what they're recreating is a violation. They think it's just going to be a helpful resource out there."

The issue is hardly limited to Serravallo's work. Her publisher, Heinemann, recently updated the copyright language in its books, directly in response to teachers using work from its imprint on TpT and other sites: "We respectfully ask that you do not adapt, re-use, or copy anything on third-party (whether for-profit or not-for-profit) lesson-sharing websites."

And many teachers don't realize that they're generally violating copyright by pulling a photo or image from the internet that they don't have rights to use.

TpT has a "deep respect for intellectual property rights," said TpT CEO Holland, in a statement. "To that end, we ask our sellers to certify to the ownership of their resources upon account creation." Sellers have to re-confirm they're posting original work each time they upload a new resource. (TpT would not offer public comment beyond the written statement for this story.)

But copyright laws are complex and nuanced, said Serravallo. "As an author, I have learned a lot about this because I try to put stuff in my books, and it'll get flagged" by the publisher's permissions department, she said. Even now, after publishing several books, she still is surprised by some of the material the department tells her she can't use. For a teacher self-publishing content on TpT, navigating those rules without legal counsel would be difficult, said Serravallo.

The company provides several informational resources on copyright and trademark, including a three-part explanation of copyright protections, a quiz, and FAQ sections for sellers and buyers. But teacher-sellers aren't required to review these resources or demonstrate understanding of copyright protections before they start listing products.

Unfair Burden?

Educators say that the company should be doing more-to simplify the reporting process, to better educate sellers about copyright law, to take swifter action against those who break the rules.

Roughton, the teacher from southern California, never filed a DMCA takedown notice with the site. He said he knew that he had created the material, but he wasn't sure if he needed to do anything to claim copyright. (He did not.)

He was worried that if his claim weren't seen as valid he could get in legal trouble himself. "As a teacher, I was like, it's just not worth it for a $5 lesson on a website," he said.

When users do file DMCA notices, they have to separately report each listing. Sometimes, said Serravallo, a user will create individual resources that infringe on her copyright, and then bundle all of those resources into another, distinct product. In those cases, she has to report the bundle as well as each individual resource.

"It's a lot of work for the author to make something right that [someone else has] done wrong," said Serravallo.

Published in Print: January 15, 2019, as On 'Teachers Pay Teachers,' Some Profit From Stolen Lessons

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
On 'Teachers Pay Teachers,' Some Sellers Are Profiting From Stolen Work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Julie Reulbach doesn't sell resources on Teachers Pay Teachers, an online marketplace where educators can make money on their lesson plans and classroom materials. Even so, she often sees her work for sale there. "Everytime I check, I find something," said Reulbach, a high school math teacher at a private school in Concord, N.C., who has published an instructional blog since 2010.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discussed a New Jersey court case that prohibits the state from mandating the passing of two state exams in order for students to graduate (The Associated Press, 2019)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New Jersey cannot mandate that students pass two state exams before they can graduate high school, a state appellate court has ruled.

The unanimous decision was made public Monday but won't take effect for 30 days. It invalidates the state Department of Education's requirement that students must pass standardized exams-commonly known as the PARCC tests-in Algebra I and English.

The three-judge panel found the requirement- which was approved in 2016 and was due to take effect with the class of 2020-doesn't match a state law that requires students to pass just a single test in 11th grade in order to graduate.

"We do not intend to micromanage the administration of the proficiency examination mandated by the (law)," the judges wrote in their 21-page opinion. The 30-day delay for the ruling to take effect gives the state time to appeal to the state Supreme Court if it wants and avoids disrupting any ongoing statewide administration of proficiency examinations.

State Education Commissioner Lamont Repollet said his agency and the state attorney general's office are assessing their next steps while aiming to minimize the impact on students.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers is a consortium of states that developed the tests, which came online as part of a common-core curriculum in 2015. It has stirred controversy among parents, teachers, and students in New Jersey over how much classroom time gets devoted to test-prep instead of to other parts of the curriculum.

Web Only

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
N.J. Court Strikes Down High School Graduation Test Requirements

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New Jersey cannot mandate that students pass two state exams before they can graduate high school, a state appellate court has ruled. The unanimous decision was made public Monday but won't take effect for 30 days. It invalidates the state Department of Education's requirement that students must pass standardized exams-commonly known as the PARCC tests-in Algebra I and English.

# data[].attributes.body
I was very intrigued by the conversation that I had with Lauren Lansford in regard to Section 504. Counselors are responsible for ensuring that students are receiving the accommodations and modifications deemed necessary and appropriate via the 504 plan. As a special education teacher, I deal with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) on a daily basis, but have yet to work with students who qualify for a 504 plan.

# data[].attributes.body
This academic source, also located online, discusses the procedures, placement, and process under Section 504 (Office for Civil Rights, 2010).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
disabilities; students; schools; federal aid; disability discrimination; civil rights;

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Student Placement in Elementary and Secondary Schools and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This pamphlet describes the legal requirements of placing students with disabilities in elementary and secondary schools.

# data[].attributes.body
During my quest for more information regarding Section 504, I came across a website by the Office for Civil Rights (2018), which gave a quick introduction as to what Section 504 entails and addressed frequently asked questions regarding Section 504.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction | Interrelationship of IDEA and Section 504 | Protected Students | Evaluation | Placement |
Procedural Safeguards | Terminology

This document is a revised version of a document originally developed by the Chicago Office of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) in the U.S. Department of Education (ED) to clarify the requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (Section 504) in the area of public elementary and secondary education. The primary purpose of these revisions is to incorporate information about the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (Amendments Act), effective January 1, 2009, which amended the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and included a conforming amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that affects the meaning of disability in Section 504. The Amendments Act broadens the interpretation of disability. The Amendments Act does not require ED to amend its Section 504 regulations. ED's Section 504 regulations as currently written are valid and OCR is enforcing them consistent with the Amendments Act. In addition, OCR is currently evaluating the impact of the Amendments Act on OCR's enforcement responsibilities under Section 504 and Title II of the ADA, including whether any changes in regulations, guidance, or other publications are appropriate. The revisions to this Frequently Asked Questions document do not address the effects, if any, on Section 504 and Title II of the amendments to the regulations implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that were published in the Federal Register at 73 Fed. Reg. 73006 (December 1, 2008).
INTRODUCTION
An important responsibility of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is to eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability against students with disabilities. OCR receives numerous complaints and inquiries in the area of elementary and secondary education involving Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (Section 504). Most of these concern identification of students who are protected by Section 504 and the means to obtain an appropriate education for such students.

Section 504 is a federal law designed to protect the rights of individuals with disabilities in programs and activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education (ED). Section 504 provides: "No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . ."

OCR enforces Section 504 in programs and activities that receive Federal financial assistance from ED. Recipients of this Federal financial assistance include public school districts, institutions of higher education, and other state and local education agencies. The regulations implementing Section 504 in the context of educational institutions appear at 34 C.F.R. Part 104.

The Section 504 regulations require a school district to provide a "free appropriate public education" (FAPE) to each qualified student with a disability who is in the school district's jurisdiction, regardless of the nature or severity of the disability. Under Section 504, FAPE consists of the provision of regular or special education and related aids and services designed to meet the student's individual educational needs as adequately as the needs of nondisabled students are met.

This resource document clarifies pertinent requirements of Section 504.

For additional information, please contact the Office for Civil Rights.
INTERRELATIONSHIP OF IDEA AND SECTION 504 1. What is the jurisdiction of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and state departments of education/instruction regarding educational services to students with disabilities?
OCR, a component of the U.S. Department of Education, enforces Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, (Section 504) a civil rights statute which prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities. OCR also enforces Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Title II), which extends this prohibition against discrimination to the full range of state and local government services, programs, and activities (including public schools) regardless of whether they receive any Federal financial assistance. The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (Amendments Act), effective January 1, 2009, amended the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and included a conforming amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act) that affects the meaning of disability in Section 504. The standards adopted by the ADA were designed not to restrict the rights or remedies available under Section 504. The Title II regulations applicable to free appropriate public education issues do not provide greater protection than applicable Section 504 regulations. This guidance focuses primarily on Section 504.

Section 504 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Education. Title II prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by state and local governments. The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), also a component of the U.S. Department of Education, administers the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a statute which funds special education programs. Each state educational agency is responsible for administering IDEA within the state and distributing the funds for special education programs. IDEA is a grant statute and attaches many specific conditions to the receipt of Federal IDEA funds. Section 504 and the ADA are antidiscrimination laws and do not provide any type of funding.

2. How does OCR get involved in disability issues within a school district?

OCR receives complaints from parents, students or advocates, conducts agency initiated compliance reviews, and provides technical assistance to school districts, parents or advocates.

3. Where can a school district, parent, or student get information on Section 504 or find out information about OCR's interpretation of Section 504 and Title II?

OCR provides technical assistance to school districts, parents, and students upon request. Additionally, regulations and publicly issued policy guidance is available on OCR's website, at http://www.ed.gov/policy/rights/guid/ocr/disability.html.
4. What services are available for students with disabilities under Section 504?
Section 504 requires recipients to provide to students with disabilities appropriate educational services designed to meet the individual needs of such students to the same extent as the needs of students without disabilities are met. An appropriate education for a student with a disability under the Section 504 regulations could consist of education in regular classrooms, education in regular classes with supplementary services, and/or special education and related services.

5. Does OCR examine individual placement or other educational decisions for students with disabilities?

Except in extraordinary circumstances, OCR does not review the result of individual placement or other educational decisions so long as the school district complies with the procedural requirements of Section 504 relating to identification and location of students with disabilities, evaluation of such students, and due process. Accordingly, OCR generally will not evaluate the content of a Section 504 plan or of an individualized education program (IEP); rather, any disagreement can be resolved through a due process hearing. The hearing would be conducted under Section 504 or the IDEA, whichever is applicable.

OCR will examine procedures by which school districts identify and evaluate students with disabilities and the procedural safeguards which those school districts provide students. OCR will also examine incidents in which students with disabilities are allegedly subjected to treatment which is different from the treatment to which similarly situated students without disabilities are subjected. Such incidents may involve the unwarranted exclusion of disabled students from educational programs and services.

6. What protections does OCR provide against retaliation?

Retaliatory acts are prohibited. A recipient is prohibited from intimidating, threatening, coercing, or discriminating against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by Section 504.

7. Does OCR mediate complaints?

OCR does not engage in formal mediation. However, OCR may offer to facilitate mediation, referred to as "Early Complaint Resolution," to resolve a complaint filed under Section 504. This approach brings the parties together so that they may discuss possible resolution of the complaint immediately. If both parties are willing to utilize this approach, OCR will work with the parties to facilitate resolution by providing each an understanding of pertinent legal standards and possible remedies. An agreement reached between the parties is not monitored by OCR.

8. What does noncompliance with Section 504 mean?

A school district is out of compliance when it is violating any provision of the Section 504 statute or regulations.

9. What sanctions can OCR impose on a school district that is out of compliance?

OCR initially attempts to bring the school district into voluntary compliance through negotiation of a corrective action agreement. If OCR is unable to achieve voluntary compliance, OCR will initiate enforcement action. OCR may: (1) initiate administrative proceedings to terminate Department of Education financial assistance to the recipient; or (2) refer the case to the Department of Justice for judicial proceedings.

10. Who has ultimate authority to enforce Section 504?

In the educational context, OCR has been given administrative authority to enforce Section 504. Section 504 is a Federal statute that may be enforced through the Department's administrative process or through the Federal court system. In addition, a person may at any time file a private lawsuit against a school district. The Section 504 regulations do not contain a requirement that a person file a complaint with OCR and exhaust his or her administrative remedies before filing a private lawsuit.
STUDENTS PROTECTED UNDER SECTION 504
Section 504 covers qualified students with disabilities who attend schools receiving Federal financial assistance. To be protected under Section 504, a student must be determined to: (1) have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; or (2) have a record of such an impairment; or (3) be regarded as having such an impairment. Section 504 requires that school districts provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to qualified students in their jurisdictions who have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

11. What is a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity?

The determination of whether a student has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity must be made on the basis of an individual inquiry. The Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.3(j)(2)(i) defines a physical or mental impairment as any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense organs; respiratory, including speech organs; cardiovascular; reproductive; digestive; genito-urinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine; or any mental or psychological disorder, such as intellectual disabilities, organic brain syndrome, emotional or mental illness, and specific learning disabilities. The regulatory provision does not set forth an exhaustive list of specific diseases and conditions that may constitute physical or mental impairments because of the difficulty of ensuring the comprehensiveness of such a list.

Major life activities, as defined in the Section 504 regulations at 34 C.F.R. 104.3(j)(2)(ii), include functions such as caring for one's self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, and working. This list is not exhaustive. Other functions can be major life activities for purposes of Section 504. In the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), Congress provided additional examples of general activities that are major life activities, including eating, sleeping, standing, lifting, bending, reading, concentrating, thinking, and communicating. Congress also provided a non-exhaustive list of examples of "major bodily functions" that are major life activities, such as the functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions. The Section 504 regulatory provision, though not as comprehensive as the Amendments Act, is still valid - the Section 504 regulatory provision's list of examples of major life activities is not exclusive, and an activity or function not specifically listed in the Section 504 regulatory provision can nonetheless be a major life activity.

12. Does the meaning of the phrase "qualified student with a disability" differ on the basis of a student's educational level, i.e., elementary and secondary versus postsecondary?

Yes. At the elementary and secondary educational level, a "qualified student with a disability" is a student with a disability who is: of an age at which students without disabilities are provided elementary and secondary educational services; of an age at which it is mandatory under state law to provide elementary and secondary educational services to students with disabilities; or a student to whom a state is required to provide a free appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

At the postsecondary educational level, a qualified student with a disability is a student with a disability who meets the academic and technical standards requisite for admission or participation in the institution's educational program or activity.

13. Does the nature of services to which a student is entitled under Section 504 differ by educational level?

Yes. Public elementary and secondary recipients are required to provide a free appropriate public education to qualified students with disabilities. Such an education consists of regular or special education and related aids and services designed to meet the individual educational needs of students with disabilities as adequately as the needs of students without disabilities are met.

At the postsecondary level, the recipient is required to provide students with appropriate academic adjustments and auxiliary aids and services that are necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in a school's program. Recipients are not required to make adjustments or provide aids or services that would result in a fundamental alteration of a recipient's program or impose an undue burden.

14. Once a student is identified as eligible for services under Section 504, is that student always entitled to such services?

Yes, as long as the student remains eligible. The protections of Section 504 extend only to individuals who meet the regulatory definition of a person with a disability. If a recipient school district re-evaluates a student in accordance with the Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.35 and determines that the student's mental or physical impairment no longer substantially limits his/her ability to learn or any other major life activity, the student is no longer eligible for services under Section 504.

15. Are current illegal users of drugs excluded from protection under Section 504?

Generally, yes. Section 504 excludes from the definition of a student with a disability, and from Section 504 protection, any student who is currently engaging in the illegal use of drugs when a covered entity acts on the basis of such use. (There are exceptions for persons in rehabilitation programs who are no longer engaging in the illegal use of drugs).

16. Are current users of alcohol excluded from protection under Section 504?

No. Section 504's definition of a student with a disability does not exclude users of alcohol. However, Section 504 allows schools to take disciplinary action against students with disabilities using drugs or alcohol to the same extent as students without disabilities.
EVALUATION
At the elementary and secondary school level, determining whether a child is a qualified disabled student under Section 504 begins with the evaluation process. Section 504 requires the use of evaluation procedures that ensure that children are not misclassified, unnecessarily labeled as having a disability, or incorrectly placed, based on inappropriate selection, administration, or interpretation of evaluation materials.

17. What is an appropriate evaluation under Section 504?

Recipient school districts must establish standards and procedures for initial evaluations and periodic re-evaluations of students who need or are believed to need special education and/or related services because of disability. The Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.35(b) requires school districts to individually evaluate a student before classifying the student as having a disability or providing the student with special education. Tests used for this purpose must be selected and administered so as best to ensure that the test results accurately reflect the student's aptitude or achievement or other factor being measured rather than reflect the student's disability, except where those are the factors being measured. Section 504 also requires that tests and other evaluation materials include those tailored to evaluate the specific areas of educational need and not merely those designed to provide a single intelligence quotient. The tests and other evaluation materials must be validated for the specific purpose for which they are used and appropriately administered by trained personnel.

18. How much is enough information to document that a student has a disability?

At the elementary and secondary education level, the amount of information required is determined by the multi-disciplinary committee gathered to evaluate the student. The committee should include persons knowledgeable about the student, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options. The committee members must determine if they have enough information to make a knowledgeable decision as to whether or not the student has a disability. The Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.35(c) requires that school districts draw from a variety of sources in the evaluation process so that the possibility of error is minimized. The information obtained from all such sources must be documented and all significant factors related to the student's learning process must be considered. These sources and factors may include aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, physical condition, social and cultural background, and adaptive behavior. In evaluating a student suspected of having a disability, it is unacceptable to rely on presumptions and stereotypes regarding persons with disabilities or classes of such persons. Compliance with the IDEA regarding the group of persons present when an evaluation or placement decision is made is satisfactory under Section 504.

19. What process should a school district use to identify students eligible for services under Section 504? Is it the same process as that employed in identifying students eligible for services under the IDEA?

School districts may use the same process to evaluate the needs of students under Section 504 as they use to evaluate the needs of students under the IDEA. If school districts choose to adopt a separate process for evaluating the needs of students under Section 504, they must follow the requirements for evaluation specified in the Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.35.

20. May school districts consider "mitigating measures" used by a student in determining whether the student has a disability under Section 504?

No. As of January 1, 2009, school districts, in determining whether a student has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits that student in a major life activity, must not consider the ameliorating effects of any mitigating measures that student is using. This is a change from prior law. Before January 1, 2009, school districts had to consider a student's use of mitigating measures in determining whether that student had a physical or mental impairment that substantially limited that student in a major life activity. In the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), however, Congress specified that the ameliorative effects of mitigating measures must not be considered in determining if a person is an individual with a disability.

Congress did not define the term "mitigating measures" but rather provided a non-exhaustive list of "mitigating measures." The mitigating measures are as follows: medication; medical supplies, equipment or appliances; low-vision devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses); prosthetics (including limbs and devices); hearing aids and cochlear implants or other implantable hearing devices; mobility devices; oxygen therapy equipment and supplies; use of assistive technology; reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; and learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications.

Congress created one exception to the mitigating measures analysis. The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining if an impairment substantially limits a major life activity. "Ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses" are lenses that are intended to fully correct visual acuity or eliminate refractive error, whereas "low-vision devices" (listed above) are devices that magnify, enhance, or otherwise augment a visual image.

21. Does OCR endorse a single formula or scale that measures substantial limitation?

No. The determination of substantial limitation must be made on a case-by-case basis with respect to each individual student. The Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R. 104.35 (c) requires that a group of knowledgeable persons draw upon information from a variety of sources in making this determination.

22. Are there any impairments which automatically mean that a student has a disability under Section 504?

No. An impairment in and of itself is not a disability. The impairment must substantially limit one or more major life activities in order to be considered a disability under Section 504.

23. Can a medical diagnosis suffice as an evaluation for the purpose of providing FAPE?

No. A physician's medical diagnosis may be considered among other sources in evaluating a student with an impairment or believed to have an impairment which substantially limits a major life activity. Other sources to be considered, along with the medical diagnosis, include aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, physical condition, social and cultural background, and adaptive behavior. As noted in FAQ 22, the Section 504 regulations require school districts to draw upon a variety of sources in interpreting evaluation data and making placement decisions.

24. Does a medical diagnosis of an illness automatically mean a student can receive services under Section 504?

No. A medical diagnosis of an illness does not automatically mean a student can receive servicesunder Section 504. The illness must cause a substantial limitation on the student's ability to learn or another major life activity. For example, a student who has a physical or mental impairment would not be considered a student in need of services under Section 504 if the impairment does not in any way limit the student's ability to learn or other major life activity, or only results in some minor limitation in that regard.

25. How should a recipient school district handle an outside independent evaluation? Do all data brought to a multi-disciplinary committee need to be considered and given equal weight?

The results of an outside independent evaluation may be one of many sources to consider. Multi-disciplinary committees must draw from a variety of sources in the evaluation process so that the possibility of error is minimized. All significant factors related to the subject student's learning process must be considered. These sources and factors include aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, physical condition, social and cultural background, and adaptive behavior, among others. Information from all sources must be documented and considered by knowledgeable committee members. The weight of the information is determined by the committee given the student's individual circumstances.

26. What should a recipient school district do if a parent refuses to consent to an initial evaluation under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but demands a Section 504 plan for a student without further evaluation?

A school district must evaluate a student prior to providing services under Section 504. Section 504 requires informed parental permission for initial evaluations. If a parent refuses consent for an initial evaluation and a recipient school district suspects a student has a disability, the IDEA and Section 504 provide that school districts may use due process hearing procedures to seek to override the parents' denial of consent.

27. Who in the evaluation process makes the ultimate decision regarding a student's eligibility for services under Section 504?

The Section 504 regulatory provision at 34 C.F.R.104.35 (c) (3) requires that school districts ensure that the determination that a student is eligible for special education and/or related aids and services be made by a group of persons, including persons knowledgeable about the meaning of the evaluation data and knowledgeable about the placement options. If a parent disagrees with the determination, he or she may request a due process hearing.

28. Once a student is identified as eligible for services under Section 504, is there an annual or triennial review requirement? If so, what is the appropriate process to be used? Or is it appropriate to keep the same Section 504 plan in place indefinitely after a student has been identified?

Periodic re-evaluation is required. This may be conducted in accordance with the IDEA regulations, which require re-evaluation at three-year intervals (unless the parent and public agency agree that re-evaluation is unnecessary) or more frequently if conditions warrant, or if the child's parent or teacher requests a re-evaluation, but not more than once a year (unless the parent and public agency agree otherwise).

29. Is a Section 504 re-evaluation similar to an IDEA re-evaluation? How often should it be done?

Yes. Section 504 specifies that re-evaluations in accordance with the IDEA is one means of compliance with Section 504. The Section 504 regulations require that re-evaluations be conducted periodically. Section 504 also requires a school district to conduct a re-evaluation prior to a significant change of placement. OCR considers an exclusion from the educational program of more than 10 school days a significant change of placement. OCR would also consider transferring a student from one type of program to another or terminating or significantly reducing a related service a significant change in placement.

30. What is reasonable justification for referring a student for evaluation for services under Section 504?

School districts may always use regular education intervention strategies to assist students with difficulties in school. Section 504 requires recipient school districts to refer a student for an evaluation for possible special education or related aids and services or modification to regular education if the student, because of disability, needs or is believed to need such services.

31. A student is receiving services that the school district maintains are necessary under Section 504 in order to provide the student with an appropriate education. The student's parent no longer wants the student to receive those services. If the parent wishes to withdraw the student from a Section 504 plan, what can the school district do to ensure continuation of services?

The school district may initiate a Section 504 due process hearing to resolve the dispute if the district believes the student needs the services in order to receive an appropriate education.

32. A student has a disability referenced in the IDEA, but does not require special education services. Is such a student eligible for services under Section 504?

The student may be eligible for services under Section 504. The school district must determine whether the student has an impairment which substantially limits his or her ability to learn or another major life activity and, if so, make an individualized determination of the child's educational needs for regular or special education or related aids or services. For example, such a student may receive adjustments in the regular classroom.

33. How should a recipient school district view a temporary impairment?

A temporary impairment does not constitute a disability for purposes of Section 504 unless its severity is such that it results in a substantial limitation of one or more major life activities for an extended period of time. The issue of whether a temporary impairment is substantial enough to be a disability must be resolved on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration both the duration (or expected duration) of the impairment and the extent to which it actually limits a major life activity of the affected individual.

In the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), Congress clarified that an individual is not "regarded as" an individual with a disability if the impairment is transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less.
34. Is an impairment that is episodic or in remission a disability under Section 504?
Yes, under certain circumstances. In the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), Congress clarified that an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active. A student with such an impairment is entitled to a free appropriate public education under Section 504.
PLACEMENT
Once a student is identified as being eligible for regular or special education and related aids or services, a decision must be made regarding the type of services the student needs.

35. If a student is eligible for services under both the IDEA and Section 504, must a school district develop both an individualized education program (IEP) under the IDEA and a Section 504 plan under Section 504?

No. If a student is eligible under IDEA, he or she must have an IEP. Under the Section 504 regulations, one way to meet Section 504 requirements for a free appropriate public education is to implement an IEP.

36. Must a school district develop a Section 504 plan for a student who either "has a record of disability" or is "regarded as disabled"?

No. In public elementary and secondary schools, unless a student actually has an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, the mere fact that a student has a "record of" or is "regarded as" disabled is insufficient, in itself, to trigger those Section 504 protections that require the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE). This is consistent with the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), in which Congress clarified that an individual who meets the definition of disability solely by virtue of being "regarded as" disabled is not entitled to reasonable accommodations or the reasonable modification of policies, practices or procedures. The phrases "has a record of disability" and "is regarded as disabled" are meant to reach the situation in which a student either does not currently have or never had a disability, but is treated by others as such.

As noted in FAQ 34, in the Amendments Act (see FAQ 1), Congress clarified that an individual is not "regarded as" an individual with a disability if the impairment is transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less.

37. What is the receiving school district's responsibility under Section 504 toward a student with a Section 504 plan who transfers from another district?

If a student with a disability transfers to a district from another school district with a Section 504 plan, the receiving district should review the plan and supporting documentation. If a group of persons at the receiving school district, including persons knowledgeable about the meaning of the evaluation data and knowledgeable about the placement options determines that the plan is appropriate, the district is required to implement the plan. If the district determines that the plan is inappropriate, the district is to evaluate the student consistent with the Section 504 procedures at 34 C.F.R. 104.35 and determine which educational program is appropriate for the student. There is no Section 504 bar to the receiving school district honoring the previous IEP during the interim period. Information about IDEA requirements when a student transfers is available from the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services at http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cdynamic%2CQaCorner%2C3%2C

40. What are the responsibilities of regular education teachers with respect to implementation of Section 504 plans? What are the consequences if the district fails to implement the plans?

Regular education teachers must implement the provisions of Section 504 plans when those plans govern the teachers' treatment of students for whom they are responsible. If the teachers fail to implement the plans, such failure can cause the school district to be in noncompliance with Section 504.

41. What is the difference between a regular education intervention plan and a Section 504 plan?

A regular education intervention plan is appropriate for a student who does not have a disability or is not suspected of having a disability but may be facing challenges in school. School districts vary in how they address performance problems of regular education students. Some districts employ teams at individual schools, commonly referred to as "building teams." These teams are designed to provide regular education classroom teachers with instructional support and strategies for helping students in need of assistance. These teams are typically composed of regular and special education teachers who provide ideas to classroom teachers on methods for helping students experiencing academic or behavioral problems. The team usually records its ideas in a written regular education intervention plan. The team meets with an affected student's classroom teacher(s) and recommends strategies to address the student's problems within the regular education environment. The team then follows the responsible teacher(s) to determine whether the student's performance or behavior has improved. In addition to building teams, districts may utilize other regular education intervention methods, including before-school and after-school programs, tutoring programs, and mentoring programs.
PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS
Public elementary and secondary schools must employ procedural safeguards regarding the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of persons who, because of disability, need or are believed to need special instruction or related services.

42. Must a recipient school district obtain parental consent prior to conducting an initial evaluation?

Yes. OCR has interpreted Section 504 to require districts to obtain parental permission for initial evaluations. If a district suspects a student needs or is believed to need special instruction or related services and parental consent is withheld, the IDEA and Section 504 provide that districts may use due process hearing procedures to seek to override the parents' denial of consent for an initial evaluation.

43. If so, in what form is consent required?

Section 504 is silent on the form of parental consent required. OCR has accepted written consent as compliance. IDEA as well as many state laws also require written consent prior to initiating an evaluation.

44. What can a recipient school district do if a parent withholds consent for a student to secure services under Section 504 after a student is determined eligible for services?

Section 504 neither prohibits nor requires a school district to initiate a due process hearing to override a parental refusal to consent with respect to the initial provision of special education and related services. Nonetheless, school districts should consider that IDEA no longer permits school districts to initiate a due process hearing to override a parental refusal to consent to the initial provision of services.

45. What procedural safeguards are required under Section 504?

Recipient school districts are required to establish and implement procedural safeguards that include notice, an opportunity for parents to review relevant records, an impartial hearing with opportunity for participation by the student's parents or guardian, representation by counsel and a review procedure.
46. What is a recipient school district's responsibility under Section 504 to provide information to parents and students about its evaluation and placement process?
Section 504 requires districts to provide notice to parents explaining any evaluation and placement decisions affecting their children and explaining the parents' right to review educational records and appeal any decision regarding evaluation and placement through an impartial hearing.

47. Is there a mediation requirement under Section 504?

No.
TERMINOLOGY
The following terms may be confusing and/or are frequently used incorrectly in the elementary and secondary school context.

Equal access: equal opportunity of a qualified person with a disability to participate in or benefit from educational aid, benefits, or services

Free appropriate public education (FAPE): a term used in the elementary and secondary school context; for purposes of Section 504, refers to the provision of regular or special education and related aids and services that are designed to meet individual educational needs of students with disabilities as adequately as the needs of students without disabilities are met and is based upon adherence to procedures that satisfy the Section 504 requirements pertaining to educational setting, evaluation and placement, and procedural safeguards

Placement: a term used in the elementary and secondary school context; refers to regular and/or special educational program in which a student receives educational and/or related services

Reasonable accommodation: a term used in the employment context to refer to modifications or adjustments employers make to a job application process, the work environment, the manner or circumstances under which the position held or desired is customarily performed, or that enable a covered entity's employee with a disability to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment; this term is sometimes used incorrectly to refer to related aids and services in the elementary and secondary school context or to refer to academic adjustments, reasonable modifications, and auxiliary aids and services in the postsecondary school context

Reasonable modifications: under a regulatory provision implementing Title II of the ADA, public entities are required to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures when the modifications are necessary to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability, unless the public entity can demonstrate that making the modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the service, program, or activity

Related services: a term used in the elementary and secondary school context to refer to developmental, corrective, and other supportive services, including psychological, counseling and medical diagnostic services and transportation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
special education; disabilities; disability discrimination; fape; free appropriate public education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Frequently Asked Questions about Section 504 requirements for the education by school districts of students with disabilities

# data[].attributes.body
Office for Civil Rights. (2010). Student placement in elementary and secondary school and

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Retrieved from http://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo16757

Office for Civil Rights. (2018). Protecting students with disabilities. U.S. Department of

Education. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html

Schwartz, S. (2018). On ‘Teachers Pay Teachers,’ some sellers are profiting from stolen work.

Education Week. 38(18). Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/12/19/on-teachers-pay-teachers-some-sellers-are.html

The Associated Press. (2019). N.J. court strikes down high school graduation test requirements.

Education Week. Retrieved from https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/12/31/court-

strikes-down-high-school-graduation_ap.html

# data[].attributes.body
Section 504 is a federal law that was designed to protect those with disabilities in programs that receive federal funding. Through Section 504, the exclusion or discrimination of people with disabilities from any program that receives federal funding is prohibited and unlawful. Schools are required to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities by providing services that meet a student’s individual needs to the same extent as the needs of nondisabled students are met. In order for a student to qualify for Section 504, a student muse have a physical or mental impairment that limits at least one major life activity, has a record  of such an impairment, or regarded as having such an impairment (Office for Civil Rights, 2010, 2018).

Because the school counselor manages students who are protected through Section 504, becoming familiar with the requirements, legislature, and details is key. According to the Office for Civil Rights, OCR (2018), numerous complaints are filed in regard to Section 504. Of the complaints filed in regard to Section 504, most pertain to the identification of students who are covered under Section 504 and to the means to obtain an appropriate education.  As a future counselor, it is imperative that I am familiar with Section 504 and understand the aforementioned issues in an effort to minimize complaints and ensure that students protected by Section 504 are appropriately served.