Exceptional Learners and Special Education Under IDEA

Introduction to Special Education and Exceptional Learners

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) imposes upon educators and school administrators the duty to offer appropriate public education to children with disabilities, ensuring they realize their academic outcomes. This paper revolves around special education, IDEA and associated litigation, and the implications for both general and special educators. The first section covers baseline knowledge on special education and the various eligibility categories. The second section covers legislation and litigation around special education in the United States. The third and fourth sections cover the expectations for general educators and special educators, respectively.

The best point to begin any discussion on special education is defining an exceptional learner. An exceptional learner is one with some form of disability that makes them unable to do things that people of their age, maturation, and access to the same opportunities are able to do (Hallahan et al., 2022). Fortunately, exceptional learners can realize remarkable accomplishments if granted an opportunity to maximize their academic abilities (Hallahan et al., 2022). However, in most cases, people focus on such students' disabilities rather than on what they are able to do (Hallahan et al., 2022). Educators have a duty to offer exceptional students the support they need to recognize their abilities and achieve their full potential. This is where special education comes in.

Special education is instruction that is specially designed to meet exceptional students' academic needs through the use of special equipment, teaching techniques, materials, and facilities (Hallahan et al., 2022). For learners with hearing impairments, special education entails conducting lessons in sign language and/or provision of hearing aids. For visually impaired learners, special instruction may involve distribution of written materials in Braille or large print, while for those with special talents or gifts, it could entail providing opportunities for them to connect with working professionals to nurture their talents. The primary aim of special education is to identify and maximize the abilities of exceptional students (Hallahan et al., 2022). However, not all learners with a disability qualify for special education. To qualify, a child must be adversely affected by one or more of the 13 eligibility categories defined by IDEA.

The 13 IDEA Eligibility Categories

The following 13 eligibility categories are defined by IDEA (National Information Center for Children and Youth, NICHCY, 2012):

Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD): These are learning challenges that affect one's ability to do math, reason, speak, listen, write, or read (NICHCY, 2012). Conditions covered in this category include developmental aphasia, dyslexia, minimal brain dysfunction, brain injury, and perceptual disabilities (NICHCY, 2012).

Autism: These are developmental disabilities that adversely affect one's social interactions as well as non-verbal and verbal communications before a child's third birthday, and which affect their educational performance (NICHCY, 2012). Other symptoms of autism include unusual sensory responses, stereotyped movements, and repetitive activities (NICHCY, 2012).

Deaf-Blindness: Simultaneous visual and hearing impairments that adversely affect a child's educational performance, developmental needs, and communication ability, and which may not be addressed by typical education programs focused solely on either blindness or deafness (NICHCY, 2012).

Deafness: A severe hearing impairment that affects a child's ability to process information they hear even with assistive devices, thus adversely affecting educational performance (NICHCY, 2012).

Emotional Disturbance: A condition where a child exhibits fears or physical symptoms associated with school or personal problems, inappropriate feelings or behavior, an inability to maintain and establish effective social relationships with teachers and peers, and learning challenges that are not due to health or intellectual factors (NICHCY, 2012). Symptoms occur over such a prolonged period that they affect the child's educational performance (NICHCY, 2012).

Hearing Impairment: Impairments in hearing, whether fluctuating or permanent, that adversely affect a child's educational performance, but do not meet the criterion for deafness (NICHCY, 2012).

Intellectual Disability: Below-average intellectual functioning that co-occurs in the developmental phase with adaptive behavior deficits, adversely affecting academic performance (NICHCY, 2012).

Multiple Disabilities: Intellectual disabilities that co-occur with other impairments such as orthopedic impairment or blindness, causing severe impacts on a child's academic ability, and which cannot be managed by programs that focus solely on either of the impairments (NICHCY, 2012).

Orthopedic Impairment: This category covers serious orthopedic impairments that significantly affect a child's academic performance (NICHCY, 2012). Impairments resulting from diseases such as bone tuberculosis and poliomyelitis, or other conditions such as cerebral palsy, are also covered in this category (NICHCY, 2012).

Other Health Impairment: Limited alertness, vitality, or strength caused by Tourette Syndrome, sickle cell anemia, rheumatic fever, nephritis, leukemia, lead poisoning, hemophilia, heart conditions, epilepsy, diabetes, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or asthma, which severely affects a child's academic performance (NICHCY, 2012).

Traumatic Brain Injury: Acquired brain injury resulting from physical force to the head, causing partial or total psychosocial impairment and adversely affecting academic performance (NICHCY, 2012). This category does not cover degenerative or congenital brain injuries (NICHCY, 2012).

Speech or Language Impairment: Disorders affecting communication ability — such as voice impairment, language impairment, articulation impairment, or stuttering — that adversely affect academic performance (NICHCY, 2012).

Visual Impairment Including Blindness: Vision-related impairments that have an adverse effect on academic outcomes even with corrective measures (NICHCY, 2012).

Legislation and Litigation in Special Education

Laws have played a crucial role in the inclusion of children with special needs in the education system. The passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 (Public Law 94-142) marked the beginning of the journey to integrate exceptional learners into the public education system (Hallahan et al., 2022). The law sought to protect the rights of children with disabilities, most of whom had previously been excluded from education. Most states had laws excluding children with intellectual disabilities, emotional disturbance, visual impairments, and hearing impairments from accessing education (Keogh, 2007). The Act compelled states to develop and implement special education programs and related services to meet the needs of children with disabilities (Keogh, 2007).

The law underwent multiple amendments in the 1990s, and its name changed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990 and, finally, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act in 2004 (Hallahan et al., 2022). The passage of IDEA was revolutionary, as it was the first federal law that gave all children and youth with disabilities aged 3 to 21 access to free public education (Hallahan et al., 2022). Another federal public law (PL 99-457) supports IDEA by offering incentives to encourage states to develop and implement early intervention programs for at-risk children (Hallahan et al., 2022). Both IDEA and PL 99-457 impose on public schools the duty to identify exceptional children and offer the necessary special education services and programs to address their educational needs.

Other pieces of legislation also shape special education. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 grants persons with disability the same civil rights protections afforded to minorities on the basis of religion, nationality, sex, or race (Hallahan et al., 2022). The ADA protects persons with disability against discrimination in areas such as education, public accommodation, transportation, and employment (Hallahan et al., 2022). The 2002 No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) sought to raise the academic performance of all students in state school systems through increased federal regulation (Duignan & Nollen, 2024). It required teachers to develop innovative instruction strategies to raise the performance of each student — including special needs learners — toward proficient levels (Duignan & Nollen, 2024). In 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) to succeed NCLB following complaints by education stakeholders (Hallahan et al., 2022). Like NCLB, ESSA emphasizes developing individualized instruction strategies to meet the educational needs of each learner; however, it reduces the extent of federal influence and gives states and school districts more discretion in their decision-making (Hallahan et al., 2022).

Litigation provides a platform for courts to interpret the requirements of special education legislation in practice (Hallahan et al., 2022). In most cases, litigation around special education focuses on two elements: (i) parents who believe their child was wrongly assigned to special education, and (ii) parents who believe their child does not receive the special education services they deserve (Hallahan et al., 2022). In the first case, the state and local education stakeholders bear the burden of proving that they accurately and completely assessed the abilities and disabilities of the child before referring them for special education. In the second case, the burden of proof involves demonstrating that school authorities met their obligation of offering an appropriate education (Hallahan et al., 2022).

In the case of Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982), the parents of a deaf child, Amy Rowley, sued the Hudson Board of Education for refusing to provide a sign language interpreter for their child in school, as required under PL 94-142 (now IDEA). The court ruled that the school had met its obligation of offering Amy an appropriate education by developing an individualized education program that allowed her to benefit from special services. The child's achievement was also at par with that of her non-disabled counterparts. The court's ruling clarified that an appropriate education does not necessarily mean the school must offer the maximum possible achievement (Hallahan et al., 2022).

In the landmark case of Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017), Endrew's parents sued the school district for failing to provide their autistic child the level of educational benefit guaranteed for exceptional learners under IDEA. The Supreme Court held that the school district had failed to provide the required level of educational benefit needed to help the child make progress given his circumstances. As these cases demonstrate, litigation provides crucial insights into what special education laws demand in practice and what school administrators must do to ensure compliance.

Conclusion

The IDEA opened fundamental avenues around the governance of special education in the United States. The law imposes upon educators and school administrators the duty to offer an appropriate public education to help learners with special needs realize their full academic potential. To ensure compliance with IDEA, educators and special educators need to understand the expectations that govern their work, including the need to accommodate the individual needs of all learners, develop individual education plans, refer eligible learners for special education, and collaborate with other stakeholders to identify and nurture the talents and gifts of exceptional learners. For special educators, expectations include managing learners' behavioral problems, administering and interpreting assessments to gather relevant background information, utilizing assistive technologies, and remaining current with legislation governing special education.

Dingle, M., Falvey, M. A., Givner, G. C., & Haager, D. (2004). Essential special and general education teacher competencies for preparing teachers for inclusive settings. Issues in Teacher Education, 13(1), 35–50.

Duignan, B., & Nollen, J. L. (2024). No Child Left Behind – United States education 2001. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/No-Child-Left-Behind-Act

Farley, J., D'Angelo, J., Hurley, K., Angelique, A., & Trout, A. (2022). Teacher perspectives on information sharing and parent knowledge on special education. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 24(1), 1–12.

Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Pullen, P. C. (2022). Exceptional learners: An introduction to special education (15th ed.). Pearson.

Keogh, B. K. (2007). Celebrating PL 94-142: The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. Issues in Teacher Education, 16(2), 65–69.

Lenvik, A., Jones, L., & Hesjedal, E. (2022). Teachers' perspectives on gifted students with extraordinary learning potential in Norway: A descriptive study with primary and secondary teachers. Gifted and Talented International, 37(2), 163–172.

National Information Center for Children and Youth, NICHCY. (2012). Categories of disability under IDEA. NICHCY. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED572702