The PARC case and early special education legislation

¶ … Student Education

What were the two main findings in the PARC Case (1971)?

One of the key findings in the PARC v. PA (1971) case was that failure to provide students having mental retardation with access to public schools went against the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause. The second key finding in this case was that failure to provide parents with notification regarding evaluation essentially offended the due process clause. Amongst other things, the court directed all school districts to not only identify but to also teach children with mental retardation.

Identify by exceptionality the students who were eligible for Exceptional Student Education under the provisions of the Education for all Handicapped Children Act (94-142) passed in 1975

As far as eligibility of "handicapped children" into schools that were state supported or operated (after the amendment of ESEA's Title 1) was concerned, P.L. 91-230 had as at 1970 embraced eligibility categories that were largely medically-based. Five years later, the same eligibility categories were according to Zettel (as cited in Triano, 2000) "incorporated into P.L. 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975." Only a few minor changes were made. In this case, the said medical classification as the Education Policy Research Institute (as cited in Triano, 2000) points out observed that:

the term "handicapped children" means mentally retarded, hard of hearing, deaf, speech impaired, visually handicapped, seriously emotionally disturbed, crippled or other health impaired… the term also includes children with specific learning disabilities to the extent that such children are health impaired.

3. Do the parents have to pay for the education if their disabled child attends a public school?

Thanks to the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, children who happen to be disabled have a right to appropriate and free public education. For this reason, parents of disabled children do not have to pay for their children's education if the said children attend public school.

4. Why is a regular education teacher included in the IEP (Individual Education Plan) team?

A regular teacher gives valuable suggestions on how the progress of a child in the education curriculum can be aided by the plan. As the U.S. Department of Education (1999) points out, the regular teacher is in this case expected to amongst other things participate in discussions and offer suggestions on how best the child can be taught. In the words of the U.S. Department of Education (1999), "the teacher must, to the extent appropriate, participate in the development, review, and revision of the child's IEP…"

5. Define the term, "appropriate education"

Appropriate education is instruction tailored to address the various unique and specific needs of children who happen to be handicapped. Instruction must in this case be supported by services that make it more likely for a handicapped child to profit from such instruction.

6. Define the term "Individual Education Plan" or IEP

Once a given child's eligibility for special education is ascertained, the process of identifying the individual needs of the said child begins. These needs and services are outlined in an Individual Education Plan -- IEP, a document developed through sustained team effort.

13. What is the definition of a "least restrictive environment" or LRE?

LRE as a concept essentially seeks to describe the mandate that whenever possible, students having disabilities be educated alongside their peers who are not disabled. More substantively, LRE on principle "states that children and youth with disabilities have a right to be educated in a regular education classroom with their peers without disabilities to the maximum extent possible" (Odom, Horner, and Snell, 2009, p. 577).

14. What is the definition of "related services?"

Related services are essentially all those services (extra help) that are ordinarily provided to students with disabilities in an attempt to ensure that they benefit/profit from special education. Examples in this case include psychological and interpreting services.

15. What did the U.S. Supreme Court decide in Schaffer v. Weast (2005)?

The Supreme Court in this particular case held that the burden of proof was borne by the party that brought the suit (Oyez, 2013). The said party could therefore be the school system or even the parents of a disabled child.

16. What does the term "Response to Intervention" (RTI) mean for public school principals and teachers?

RTI is essentially a prevention system that seeks to enhance the achievement of a student while at the same time reducing behavior problems. It is important to note that how successful a RTI is largely depends on a unified approach to learning as well as teaching. For this reason, teachers and principals are required to be collaborative in their quest to find solutions to any problems that may arise.

17. What did the U.S. Supreme Court decide in Winkleman v. Panama City School District (2007)?

To be determined in this case was whether a parent who was not a lawyer could argue on behalf of his child or on his own behalf in a federal court, under IDEA. The Supreme Court made a determination to the effect that "parents enjoy rights under IDEA; and they are, as a result, entitled to prosecute IDEA claims on their own behalf" (Oyez, 2013).