Free Appropriate Public Education for Handicapped Children

1986 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-53 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Yanok
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education

Legislative Intent and Progress

1978 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasper Harvey
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Individualized Education Plan ◽  
Education For All ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Made In ◽  
Education Plan

Central to the provision of a free appropriate public education for all handicapped children in this country is the successful implementation of an individualized education plan for each child. This article addresses some of the concerns and some of the progress being made in implementing the statutory requirements of Public Law 94–142.

The Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975 PL 94-142: Its History, Origins, and Concepts

1979 ◽  
Vol 161 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Zettel ◽  
Joseph Ballard
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Education ◽  
The United States ◽  
Education For All ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Local Education Agencies

In November of 1975 the Congress of the United States passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) and thereby mandated that all school-aged handicapped children in the United States were to have available to them a “free, appropriate public education” by September 1, 1978. To accomplish this the Congress also prescribed a set of minimum standards that were to be followed by state and local education agencies to insure that such an education was indeed being provided. The purpose of this particular article is twofold. First, it will provide an account of the basic tenets of the law, its origins, and its legislative history. Second, it will describe a number of the minimum standards established by this act that directly relate to and impact upon the education of handicapped children.

Legal Precedents for Students with Severe Handicaps

1986 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 358-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna Lehr ◽  
Paul Haubrich
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Education For All ◽  
Extended School Year ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
School Year ◽  
Severe Handicaps

Since the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 many legal precedents have been established that serve to define the parameters of programs for students. These parameters, as well as emerging and as yet unresolved issues as they relate to students with severe handicaps, are discussed. The authors focus their discussions around an example of a student with severe handicaps and present the effects of the precedents on this child's free appropriate public education, including extended school year, related services, appropriate curriculum, and appropriate placement.

Honig v. Doe: The Suspension and Expulsion of Handicapped Students

1989 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell L. Yell
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Education For All ◽  
School Policies ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
Suspension And Expulsion

Public Law 94–142 provides for a free appropriate public education for all handicapped children, but does not address the issue of disciplining handicapped students. The result has been confusion and uncertainty, particularly concerning expulsion and suspension. The courts have been forced into this vacuum, acting as arbiters. The Supreme Court's ruling in Honig v. Doe will help to delineate the proper role of educators in the suspension and expulsion of handicapped students. This article examines that role and offers recommendations for school policies regarding the discipline of handicapped students.

scholarly journals Free Appropriate Public Education, the U.S. Supreme Court, and Developing and Implementing Individualized Education Programs

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Michael Rozalski ◽  
Mitchell L. Yell ◽  
Jacob Warner
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Education Program ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
State Education ◽  
Education Agency ◽  
Education Act

In 1975, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1990) established the essential obligation of special education law, which is to develop a student’s individualized special education program that enables them to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE was defined in the federal law as special education and related services that: (a) are provided at public expense, (b) meet the standards of the state education agency, (c) include preschool, elementary, or secondary education, and (d) are provided in conformity with a student’s individualized education program (IEP). Thus, the IEP is the blueprint of an individual student’s FAPE. The importance of FAPE has been shown in the number of disputes that have arisen over the issue. In fact 85% to 90% of all special education litigation involves disagreements over the FAPE that students receive. FAPE issues boil down to the process and content of a student’s IEP. In this article, we differentiate procedural (process) and substantive (content) violations and provide specific guidance on how to avoid both process and content errors when drafting and implementing students’ IEPs.

Pediatricians and The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (public law 94-142)

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-137
Author(s):  
Francine H. Jacobs ◽  
Deborah Klein Walker
Keyword(s):  
Educational Opportunity ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Handicapped Child ◽  
Education For All ◽  
Special Education Services ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Procedural Rights

In November 1975, Congress passed The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (public law 94-142) which became effective on October 1, 1977. This law requires that any state receiving funds through PL 94-142 provide a "free appropriate public education" for each resident handicapped child, and protect the procedural rights of parents and children in the receipt of these special education services. State and local educational agencies (school systems) must develop and implement plans to identify, locate, and evaluate these children, and place them into suitable programs, all toward the goal of "full educational opportunity" for each (sections 612 and 613).1

Provision of Related Services for Children with Chronic Disabilities

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 796-797
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Program Planning ◽  
Individual Education Plan ◽  
Speech Pathology ◽  
Supportive Services ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Physician’S Role ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Physician's Role

The term "related services" is defined in Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, as follows: . . . related services means transportation, and such developmental, corrective and other supportive services (including speech pathology and audiology, psychological services, physical and occupational therapy, recreation, and medical and counseling services, except that such medical services shall be for diagnostic and evaluation purposes only) as may be required to assist a handicapped child to benefit from special education, and includes the early identification and assessment of handicapping conditions in children. Under PL 94-142, all handicapped children are to have available to them "a free, appropriate, public education which includes special education and related services to meet their unique needs." Such services are to be provided at no cost to the child or family in conformity with an Individual Education Plan. PROBLEMS In the implementation of PL 94-142, the physician's role in providing related services has been narrowly defined as meaning: . . . services provided by a licensed physician to determine a child's medically related handicapping condition which results in the child's needs for special education and related services. This definition fails to recognize the physician's potential role in the supervision, program planning, medical management, and monitoring process. According to the definition, the physician's role in the delivery of related services has become limited to diagnosis. Little physician input is sought on treatment-related issues. As a result, the delivery and coordination of related services have posed a serious problem.1,2

EAHCA (Education for All Handicapped Children Act); IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act)

2019 ◽  
pp. 109-112
Author(s):  
Shawn S. Sidhu
Keyword(s):  
Public Education ◽  
Spina Bifida ◽  
Board Of Education ◽  
Individual Education Plans ◽  
Individuals With Disabilities ◽  
Handicapped Children ◽  
Independent School District ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Individual Education

Chapter 14 includes two cases involving the EAHCA, now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), that have heavily influenced the way public education is provided to school children with disabilities. Hendrick Hudson Board of Education v. Rowley helped to establish the requirements and limits of Individual Education Plans (IEP), a free academic service for any school child with a learning disability. Irving Independent School District v. Tatro, although specific to a child with spina bifida, helped to establish the medical care accommodations that a school must provide for a child with a physical disability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document