Proceedings: Section 504 protects qualified individuals from discrimination due to disability. It is unique because it specifically prohibits employers and organizations that receive financial assistance from any Federal department or agency from denying equal opportunity (can include hospitals, schools, human services, etc.)

Implications: It defines the right of individuals with disabilities to participate in, have access to, and receive services, including education, and training. This benefits anyone with a major impairment.

Pillars: I believe Section 504 specifically addresses the 'zero reject' pillar of special education because it is designed to give all people access to services and employment regardless of disability.

July 26, 1990

Proceedings: The ADA prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in everyday activities. It is unique because previously only those who received federal funding were prohibited from discriminating against disabilities.

Implications: This benefits individuals with disabilities in many facets of life such as public transportation, purchasing goods, employment, and even housing. The ADA stipulates that reasonable accommodations must be in place so anyone with a disability may also benefit from public, local and state services.

Pillars: I believe that similarly to Section 504, the pillar of special education addressed by this civil rights law is zero-reject. All means all.

Proceedings: It made significant changes to the definition of "disability" in order to broaden the scope of individuals protected under the ADA. It is unique because it overturned a number of Supreme Court rulings that interpreted the ADA unfairly.

Implications: The goal of the ADAAA was to focus more on access and accommodations, not whether or not a person had a disability. One example is the Supreme Court case Sutton v United Airlines in which they ruled a person with a disability that could be helped with medication does not qualify for ADA. The ADAAA reversed this decision because the original intent of the ADA was to provide equal civil rights to all, regardless of the degree of their disability.

Pillars: I believe that the ADAAA fits under the pillar of nondiscriminatory identification and evaluation. The point of the amendment is to prohibit discrimination of the degree to which someone is disabled.

1975

(Originally the Education for All Handicapped Children Act)

Proceedings: IDEA, in a nutshell, gives individuals with disabilities access to a free appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. It is unique because it gives dignity to these students by defining disability as a natural part of the human experience.

Implications: In the 1970s, nearly 2 million children with disabilities couldn’t attend public schools. IDEA made it possible for children ages 3-21 to have equal opportunity education.

Pillars: IDEA specifically addresses and is the basis for all six pillars of special education.

1986

Proceedings: This law authorized a early intervention program for infants and toddlers, which must be provided in accordance with an Individualized Family Services Plan. It is unique because it is focused on supporting the family rather than just the individual.

Implications: People who have benefited from this law are the infants, toddlers (and families of) who are experiencing or at risk for developmental delays.

Pillars: I believe this law to fall under the parent-student partnership. It is setting the family up for participation in special education down the road.

The 1990 Amendments

Proceedings: The amendments renamed IDEA (formerly EHA), added traumatic brain injury and autism to the disability categories, and created the Individualized Education Plan. It is unique because set up measurable goals and criteria to see if objectives were being met.

Implications: This benefitted all special education students because IEP's created a benchmark for progress.

Pillars: I believe this Amendment falls under the pillar of free and appropriate education, because it is setting up a measurable goal for what exactly is appropriate for that individual student.

The 1997 Amendments

Proceedings: The 1997 Amendments made progressive changes to IDEA including how discipline of special education students should be handled, when transition planning should start (14), and added general education teachers to IEP teams, just to name a few. What makes the amendment unique is that, for the first time, assistive technology is included in IDEA.

Implications: The main benefactors of the amendment are special education students receiving discipline due to behaviors that are a manifestation of their disability.

Pillars: I believe the amendment most aligns with the least-restrictive environment pillar. Most of the changes to the IDEA amendment were centered around providing students the environment they needed to learn and attain independence.

Improvement Act of 2004

Proceedings: The Improvement Act emphasized areas of IDEA that needed more guidance, including the definition of "highly qualified" teachers, and the disabled students' participation in state assessments. What makes it unique is it identifies certifications special education teachers should have in order to meet state requirements.

Implications: Any improvement to IDEA is beneficial to special education students, but this improvement also directly benefits schools. Highly qualified teachers mean higher state assessment scores which in turn increases funding.

Pillars: I believe this aligns with the pillar of free and appropriate education. The goal is to make sure that special education teachers are highly knowledgeable and can provide quality instruction across all core subjects.

Proceedings: This act was put in place to close the achievement gap with accountability, flexibility, and choice, so that no child is left behind. It provided more aid to federal elementary and secondary programs, and aimed for at least proficient scores on state assessments. It is unique because the legislation revised and extended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).

Implications: There is obviously a major debate on whether or not this act caused more harm than good. The veteran teachers that were not uniquely credentialed for the classes they were teaching were no longer able to teach in those areas without being certified. Schools that did not reach the benchmark of proficiency were penalized and lost funding, when many argue those are in fact the schools that need more funding. I will point out that it was beneficial for special education in the fact that it forced inclusion on the standardized testing, giving us useful data that led to a lot of research in the 2000's.

Pillars: The basis of No Child Left Behind is directly tied to the zero-reject pillar of special education. The entire point is to make sure that measurable progress is being made to close the gap, and that even special education students can aspire to proficiency on standardized assessments.

Pillars:

Proceedings: Families of disabled children sued the Commonwealth of PA because they were denied access to education. The Supreme Court ruled that this violated the 14th amendment to due process and was unconstitutional. The first right-to-education suit in the country, it gave equal access to education for all children regardless of disability. It is unique because it paved the way for IDEA a few years later.

Implications: As a result of this, nearly 7 million children were given the opportunity for a public education.

Pillars: This case was the foundation of several pillars of special education; zero-reject, free and appropriate education, least restrictive environment, and due process.

Proceedings: The court ruled that the school must provide accommodations for the disabled student to not only receive an appropriate education, but to be provided at the school's expense. This is unique because it set the bar extremely high for the lengths schools are required to go to provide a challenging and appropriate education.

Implications: Although this ruling can benefit any special education student seeking costly services in order to attain a higher level of education, the most specific group of students benefiting from this are those that require the services of a sign language interpreter.

Pillars: The pillar of appropriate education is the most considered in this court case. This is because they are saying it is not good enough to be good, we have to aim higher and provide special education students with whatever they need at whatever the cost.

Proceedings: The court ruled that not only does special education need to place importance on mainstreaming a disabled student in a regular classroom, that they need to individually tailor the education to suit their needs. It is unique because it created a statutory preference for mainstreaming.

Implications: The students that benefit from this case the most are those that are assumed to not have any benefit from being in a general education classroom.

Pillars: This case law specifically states that the foundational pillar for the court's decision is "free and appropriate education."

Proceedings: "Inclusion is a right, not a privilege for a select few." The court found that if the individual student benefits in a special education classroom, those same techniques can be implemented in the general education classroom.

Implications: The main students that benefit from this ruling are those that are thought to be better served in a secluded classroom. Just because they don't have the mental capacity of a general education student, does not exclude them from the right to participate in a general education classroom.

Pillars: Least restrictive environment is the pillar of IDEA that this court case used to rule in favor of Oberti.

Proceedings: The court determined in this case that the schools must provide continuous nursing services throughout the day for special needs children. It is unique because the precedent was set that intensive medical services must be provided for by the schools if they do not require a doctor.

Implications: This case benefits students like Garret that may have intensive needs like a ventilator, catheter, etc.

Pillars: I believe this case falls purely under the zero-reject pillar of special education. We cannot fail to provide related services due to any disability, whether or not it requires a great expense or intense medical support.