Since safe and equitable education for students with disabilities is a topic with a variety of sources of law from both the federal and state levels, I have constructed this legal guide as a practical overview for secondary science teachers. By helping teachers understand the implications of special education law, my desire is to provide this guide as a tool for science teachers to better serve learners with disabilities.  

An emerging area in the field of curriculum and instruction for students with disabilities is the role of high stakes testing and accountability (Alderson, 2018). While many laws focus on instruction for exceptional learners, few provide clarification on testing expectations, accountability, and flexibility with meeting the needs of each learner within a program. Although federal guidelines provide some alternatives to state testing for students with exceptional disabilities, state and local administrative law is lagging. Over time, this focus on testing may shift classroom teachers to focus on building collaborative classroom cultures and increased partnerships between exceptional and other learners. In doing so, teachers can help bridge the gap between where special education students are and where the state expects them to perform.


References: Alderson, P. (2018). How the rights of all school students and teachers are affected by special educational needs or disability (SEND) services: Teaching, psychology, policy. London Review of Education, 16(2), 175–190. https://www.ucl-ioe-press.com/journals/london-review-of-education/

Bost, J. I. (2018). CASE IN POINT: Making a difference: Leading with vision and mission while meeting day-to-day demands. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 31(2), 117–120. https://www.casecec.org/journal

Link: https://www-edweek-org.easydb.angelo.edu/ew/articles/2018/06/13/advocates-worried-about-special-ed-testing-waivers.html

Summary

· Students who are receiving special education services may be provided with alternative tests if they qualify due to significant cognitive disabilities.

· According to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) from 2015, only one percent of students in each state can be given the alternative test.

· Despite having time to plan, states are facing challenges in finding ways to balance which students are given the test and which students actually need the test.

· While some states have receive waivers and have flexibility in meeting the one percent limit, other states have not received the same treatment.

·  Rather than being handled at the state level, districts and secondary education offices are making decisions on which students receive which test. 
·  By adding pressure to individuals within programs, this testing power struggle is introducing added pressure on teachers supporting exceptional learners. 

Link: https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/08/07/students-in-special-education-english-learners-may-go.html

Summary

· While schools across the nation are struggling to balance the needs of all students who may require face-to-face support, some schools are fast-tracking special education students for in-person learning. 

· In addition to students who lack internet access and those with limited English-proficiency, students with individualized education programs (IEP) are being brought back to campus for specialized support in many states.

· Virtual instruction is difficult for many learners, but is especially challenging for students who require specialized support services. 

· Despite efforts at providing instruction during the early stages of the pandemic, many districts are facing potential legal recourse for failing to meet special education needs. 

· As teachers balance the needs of remote and face-to-face students, the challenges of providing safe and equitable opportunities are reaching new levels. 

Citation - U.S. Const. amend. XIV

Link - https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/#:~:text=No%20State%20shall%20make%20or,equal%20protection%20of%20the%20laws

Bulleted list – 

· In addition to extending citizenship and equal protection of law to diverse populations in the United States, the 14th amendment also provided protections for individuals with disabilities.

· By paving the way for later judicial decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education, the 14th amendment led to the identification of inequality in the education of disabled populations (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954). 

· The 14th amendment provided a pathway for future statutory law to guarantee equal access to public education for all citizens. 

·In maintaining a full understanding of this law, teachers should take steps to ensure that all students, including those with disabilities, are not deprived of life or liberty. 

Citation - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1414 et seq. (2010).

Link - https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title20/chapter33&edition=prelim 

Bulleted list – 

· In addition to establishing special education services and describing the rights of exceptional learners to a free appropriate public education, this law describes procedural guidelines for individuals working with disabled learners. 

· Sections 1414 and 1415 of this law are valuable to teachers since they describe the process of evaluating, reviewing, and placing a student in special education services, and provide guidance on how to handle placement disputes, mediation, and legal proceedings.
· These sections also describe individuals, including the content area teacher, who should be involved with the development of the individualized education plan (IEP) to support student safety and academic growth. 

· By working under the guidelines of this law alongside special education professionals in developing, maintaining, and monitoring implementation of a students’ IEP, teachers can help provide safe and equitable instruction for exceptional learners. 

Citation - Special Education Services and Settings, 19. Tex. Admin. Code § 89.61 et seq. 

Link - http://txrules.elaws.us/rule/title19_chapter89_sec.89.63 

Bulleted list – 

· This section of the Texas Education Code addressed rules and expectations for schools in providing services for special education of students. 

· While testing and rules for special education placements are a central focus, this section also addresses expectations for safe and appropriate instructional settings to support student success. 

· According to section 89.63 of this law, most students with exceptional learning needs can and should be supported in mainstream classes, but may require additional support to reach the goals of their IEP. 

Citation – Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 550 U.S. 516 (2007)

Link - https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep458/usrep458176/usrep458176.pdf 

Bulleted list – 

· This ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court should inform teachers about how parents play an important part in developing an IEP for student support and safety. 

· In the case, the parents of Jacob Winkelman, a student with autism spectrum disorder, pursued legal action after the school was unable to reach an agreement about how to proceed with an administrative review of his due process hearing. 

· By basing their argument and petition under the administrative guidelines of IDEA, Jacob’s parents sought to challenge the school’s decision in modifying his IEP (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2010). 

· The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that parents may pursue claims under IDEA on their own behalf, since the rights of the student are bestowed to parents under this act. 

· In working with parents to develop appropriate IEP for students, teachers and special education professionals should have an understanding of this judicial precedent in order to give appropriate attention to open conversation about student safety and success.  

References:

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (2010).

Link - https://pol.tasb.org/Policy/Download/1228?filename=EHBAF(LOCAL).pdf 

1 – 2 sentences: This local policy from the Wichita Falls ISD Board of Trustees describes how parents or guardians of students receiving special education services in self-contained classes can request for audio and/or video monitoring services to promote student safety. The policy also describes how this recording must be clearly communicated to staff in the room and how it is not to be used for evaluation purposes for special education teachers or paraprofessional aides. 

Citation: Council of Chief State School Officers. (2013). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium InTASC Model Core Teaching Standards and Learning Progressions for Teachers 1.0: A Resource for Ongoing Teacher Development. Washington, DC: Author.

Link: https://ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/2013_INTASC_Learning_Progressions_for_Teachers.pdf 

In working to ensure safe and equitable learning opportunities for students with disabilities, teachers should strive to fulfill the precepts of InTASC standard #2 by understanding learner differences and individuality. By utilizing diverse perspectives and facilitating an inclusive learning environment, teachers can hold all learners to high standards (InTASC, 2013).  

Link: https://www.nsta.org/science-scope/science-scope-january-2020/modifying-labs-students-special-needs

2 - 3 Sentences: This article from the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) describes the challenges and worth of modifying lab activities to better accommodate students with special education needs. According to the article, by strategically spacing, grouping, and engaging students in lab, teachers can to increase the likelihood of success for students with disabilities. By incorporating procedures that feature multiple methods of representation, teachers can support both exceptional and general education students. 

· Teachers should be committed to facilitating a positive classroom climate where learners with disabilities can receive an appropriate educational experiences (U.S. Const. amend. XIV; McGlynn & Kelly, 2020).

· Teachers must be aware of the developmental and physiological limitations that some students with disabilities may bring to the science laboratory and make modifications to ensure student welfare (19 T.A.C. § 89.63).

· Partnerships with parents and open communication are tools for success in supporting learning among students with disabilities (Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 2007). 

· Teachers should hold all learners to high standards, as dictated by the Texas Administrative code, but should be flexible with the ways students demonstrate learning according to an IEP (19 T.A.C. § 89.61). 

· All educational professionals should be familiar with the process of evaluating, placing, and modifying special education placements according to the guidelines from IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2010). 

· Modifying instructional delivery to support exceptional learners to incorporate multiple means of representation also supports general education populations (Alderson, 2018). 

· Utilizing diverse backgrounds and varying levels of experience among learners allows teachers to facilitate a positive classroom culture centered on collaborative learning (McGlynn & Kelly, 2020).

References on previous slides