Zero Reject Principle

The provision of resources to handicapped children is subject to a wide variety of federal and state laws and statutes. However, due the varied and spectacular range of disabilities and combination of disabilities it is often difficult to easily decide who should receive benefits and who should not. Often debated both within the court system, and without, is the subject of whether the child with a severe disability can actually benefit from the services and resources being allocated to that student. Timothy W. V. Rochester School District addresses just that issue referred to as “Zero Reject.”

Today’s society is different in its thinking when dealing with people with disabilities. There had to be many changes made in its labeling, and approach when dealing with people who may have physical/mental differences. The ostracize behavior that people were known to disturb in society has changed a great deal, due to the many federal laws that have been put in place to insure the well-being of people that have disabilities. In 1972, one very well-known case is Mill vs Board of Education of the District of Columbia this case address how the constituted rights of students were not being meet by not providing them with a public education.” Many disabled children had been excluded from public education prior to 1975,24 Congress, through the Act, sought initially to set up a process by which states would find children in need of educational services and bring them into the system”(Kotler, p.491,2014).

Prior to 1975, no federal requirements existed for students with disabilities to attend school, or requirements for schools to attempt to teach students with disabilities (Salvia, Yesseldyke, & Bolt, 2013, p. 25). However, upon the enactment of several federal laws, such as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB), student with disabilities received access to free, appropriate public education which in turned required students with disabilities to participate in statewide assessments. According to Public Law 94-142 (now included in IDEA), it requires an individual education program (IEP) for students with disabilities. As part of the IEP, it contains items such as present levels of academic achievement and functional performance, measurable annual goals, criteria of progress, special education and related services as well as documenting any necessary accommodations needed for statewide assessments. The author provides a comparison of statewide assessments including items such as participation, accommodations and types of assessments between the states of Texas and Massachusetts.

Following the early 1980s, litigation and court decisions had set the stage for additional special education laws to the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) which was subsequently reauthorized as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This assisted the primary confirmation of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) to every student by covering educational costs before to after children reach school age such as the needs of children with disabilities birth from early intervention services to lessen the potential for delays. It continued to extend for most students with disabilities that had formerly been, “provided services within small classroom setting, and taught by specially trained teachers who focused on adapting instruction to each student’s needs…Students receiving special education services [and a multidisciplinary] were increasingly being mainstreamed (taught, to the fullest extent possible, in a regular classroom setting)” (Dunlap, 2009, p. 9). Two rulings (Roncker v Walter and Daniel R. R. v. State Board of Education) were comparable by addressing the issue of carrying educational services to the kid set against the opposite manner by the principle of portability,

The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) of 2004 has several different procedure and document that are to be followed when assessing individuals for a special education program. In Guiberson's (2009) research he suggests that some educators may be unprepared to work with diverse student populations. In a 200 participant survey of speech pathologist a study found that a third of the participants did not have sufficient training in multicultural issues (Guiberson, 2009). Studies have shown that students that learn in educational environment that reflect their cultural background tend to achieve more academically, which make multicultural instruction important in school with diverse populations (Ornstein & Levine, 2007). Guiberson's

“Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society. Improving education results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities.” (Department of Education, nd.).

Rules, regulations, and federal laws for special education have improved as the years have gone by. This essay will indicate how educators teaching special education must comprehend the mandates of the Individual with Disability Act (IDEA), student and parental rights. This essay will also explain how court cases (past and present) and IDEA has given special education students the ability to receive a Free Appropriate Education (FAPE). My interview with Ms. Patricia Pritchett, Coordinator of Special Education in DeKalb County School District, was able to give me information and guidelines in reference to their county procedures and policies for the special education department. The interview with Ms. Pritchett gave me insight as to special education legal framework and how the constant changes that affects students with disabilities and regular education students.

In response to various court cases relating to services for students with special needs, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was enacted to mandate to the states that data regarding overrepresentation of race and ethnicity must be collected and monitored. If it is determined that a disproportionate number of students from a minority background are receiving special education services, a review of policies and procedures is required to

Disproportionate identification of minority students in special education is a major concern in schools today. This paper describes the issues in the assessment process with minority students and how we have arrived at a situation where minorities are being misdiagnosed into special education programs. Additionally, several legal cases are mentioned which show numerous actions and rulings that have tried to correct the disproportionate identification in special education. Some of the legal cases discussed include Larry P. v Riles, Diana v. State Board of Education, and Guadalupe v. Tempe Elementary School, which all significantly impacted special education today. Additionally, the Individual with Disabilities Education Act has enforced

The right of entry to education resources is more than uncomplicated admission to a college. The right to use means to provide students with the devices they will need to be victorious in higher learning. Students with a recognized disability ought to be no omission. In reality, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, “ensure that all qualified persons have equal access to education regardless of the presence of any disability.” Objective replacement, class waivers, and revision of classroom management, testing and course necessities are all illustrations of behavior to supply access for the learner with a disability. A break down to the creation of such practical adjustments can place schools in breach of federal and state statutes, ensuing expensive fines.

Artifact number four will review a scenario in which a seasoned high school principal refuses a disabled student education due to extraordinary expense and a view that the school might not be the best placement for Jonathan. The topics discussed all pertain to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), Cedar Rapids v Garret, Board of Education v Holland, and Timothy v Rochester. The facts that will be reviewed in this information will be discussed which could be used to defend Young’s decision, but make sure that Jonathan’s rights are not being stepped on.

This week the readings focused on IDEA 1997 funding formulas and the changes and how they impact special education. For me, the key point is that funding for education and special education services, has continued to be underfunded over the past decades. In addition, demands from legislation, both state and federal, are increasing in terms of increasing classroom rigor, implementation of high stakes tests, and evaluating teachers on their student performance in those high stakes tests. Perhaps one way some districts in the past tried to get around the funding gaps was to classify more students than actually qualified; by classified the low performing students they were able to receive more funds. Under IDEA 1997 funding changes, there is now

While all children can be referred for evaluation for special education, not all are found to be eligible. The student will be tested in all areas related to the child’s assumed disability by the multidisciplinary educational team. In order to be eligible for special education services, the child’s assume disability has to impact the child’s ability to learn. Parents represent the child’s interests. They need to stay informed and involved in their child’s education. IDEA of 2004 strengthened the role, as well as the responsibility, of parents and ensures that they and their families have opportunities to participate in their child’s education. IDEA also protects the rights of parents by ensuring that they can be members of the IEP teams. Parents can be involved in the evaluations and placements of their children and have a say in what happens.

For most of our nation's history, children with special needs or disabilities were shunted aside. In spite of mandated education laws that had been in place since 1918, many students were denied education and

The idea of children with disabilities, whether they be mild or severe has been a very controversial and misunderstood topic. In the past inclusion has brought about huge changes for not only the students, but also the parents and families of these children, and staff at schools. Teachers and education professionals were the first to really feel the wrath and intimidation of this dramatic shift in education. There were several different factors that were coming about that made it very difficult for schools and teachers, the unorganized mandates were strict and didn’t allow much time for change. “President Gerald Ford signed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) into law in 1975. Since the original passage of the EAHCA, the law has been amended four times and renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)” (Conroy, Yell, Katsiyannis, & Collins, 2010, para.1).