scholarly journals Provision of a Free and Appropriate Public Education in an Adult Jail during COVID-19: The Case of Charles H. et al. v. District of Columbia et al.

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (12) ◽  
pp. 767
Author(s):  
Joseph Calvin Gagnon ◽  
Amanda Ross Benedick
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Behavioral Interventions ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Compensatory Education ◽  
Washington Dc ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Youth And Young Adults ◽  
Education Act

COVID-19 has engendered serious challenges with the provision of special education services for youth and young adults incarcerated in U.S. adult correctional facilities. This article describes the recent lawsuit, Charles H. et al. v. District of Columbia et al., which focused on the lack of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) at the Inspiring Youth Program (IYP) school in the Washington DC jail during the pandemic. Following a brief review of relevant components of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2006) regulations, we describe the three areas in which there were violations to the provision of IDEA and FAPE, as well as the harm incurred. Specifically, we discuss the lack of: (a) instruction and monitoring of youth academic progress; (b) related services (i.e., behavioral interventions and supports, counseling); and (c) DC public schools Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) supervision and oversight. Finally, we provide a discussion of the need for compensatory education to remediate harm.

Instilling Collaboration for Inclusive Schooling as a Way of Doing Business in Public Schools

1996 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
RICHARD A. VILLA ◽  
JACQUELINE S. THOUSAND ◽  
ANN I. NEVIN ◽  
CATHY MALGERI
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Rapid Change ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Doing Business ◽  
Collaborative Behavior ◽  
Effective Collaboration ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Inclusive Schooling ◽  
Broad Overview

This article provides a broad overview of the concepts of collaboration and inclusive schooling within the context of rapid change in public education. the authors examine the current definitions of collaboration and inclusive schooling. they review various rationale for collaboration, current legislation related to collaboration in schools, and the recent research (1989 to 1995) on the effectiveness of collaboration in achieving the outcomes mandated by the individuals with disabilities education act (idea). in addition, they discuss major barriers to and facilitators of effective collaboration and make several recommendations for the supports needed to establish a collaborative ethic and collaborative behavior in public schools. the authors argue that collaboration can no longer be considered a voluntary act.

Mental Health Services, Free Appropriate Public Education, and Students With Disabilities: Legal Considerations in Identifying, Evaluating, and Providing Services

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Yell ◽  
Carl Smith ◽  
Antonis Katsiyannis ◽  
Mickey Losinski
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
Public Education ◽  
School District ◽  
Mental Health Services ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Education Act

In the past few years, the provision of mental health services in public schools has received considerable attention. When students with disabilities are eligible for special education and related services under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), mental health services are required if such services are needed to provide students with a free appropriate public education (FAPE). That is, when a student’s individualized education program (IEP) team determines that he or she needs mental health services to receive a FAPE, a school district is required to provide these services. Our purpose is to discuss when school district personnel should identify, evaluate, and serve students with disabilities who may have mental health needs.

Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017): The U.S. Supreme Court and Special Education

2017 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 321-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela M. T. Prince ◽  
Mitchell L. Yell ◽  
Antonis Katsiyannis
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Public Schools ◽  
Public Education ◽  
School District ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
The U.S

On March 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District. This case addressed the question how much educational benefit are public schools required to provide to students with disabilities under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to confer a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The purpose of this legal update is to provide a brief overview of court developments regarding FAPE, summarize Endrew, and provide implications for practice.

Ensuring Appropriate Education: Emerging Remedies, Litigation, Compensation, and other Legal Considerations

1997 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonis Katsiyannis ◽  
John W. Maag
Keyword(s):  
Compensatory Education ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Free Appropriate Public Education ◽  
Educational Rights ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Traditional Remedies ◽  
Bona Fide ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Legal Fees ◽  
Appropriate Education

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides procedural and substantive educational rights to ensure a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to qualified people with disabilities. As a result of this Act, parents have been successful in receiving various remedies for violations that inhibit a student's right to FAPE. This article examines traditional remedies, such as reimbursement for residential placements, related services, and legal fees, with an added emphasis on the increasingly used remedy of compensatory education and the potential for the award of monetary damages. Compensatory education has been established as a bona fide remedy, and the award of monetary damages is appropriate given legislative mandates and judiciary holdings.

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.

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.

Perspectives on the Future of IDEA

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Hardman ◽  
John McDonnell ◽  
Marshall Welch
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Individualized Education Program ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Individualized Education ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Restrictive Environment

Since its original passage in 1975 as Public Law 94-142, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has been the cornerstone of practice in special education. This federal law has enabled all eligible students with disabilities to access a free and appropriate public education. During the past 2 years, the 104th Congress has debated vigorously some of the law's basic tenets (e.g., definition of disability, content of the individualized education plan [IEP], parental rights to attorneys, fees, discipline, and placement). The basic requirements of the law remain intact and continue to shape the scope and content of special education. This article addresses whether or not the assumptions upon which IDEA is based remain valid as we approach the 21st century. We critique these assumptions within the context of four requirements of IDEA: (a) eligibility and labeling, (b) free and appropriate public education, (c) the individualized education program (IEP), and (d) the least restrictive environment. Recommendations for changes in existing law relative to each of the above requirements are presented.

scholarly journals School Psychologists’ Knowledge and Self-Efficacy in Working with Students with TBI

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann E Glang ◽  
Melissa McCart ◽  
Christabelle L. Moore ◽  
Susan Davies
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
School Psychologists ◽  
School Setting ◽  
School Psychologist ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Need Support ◽  
Effective Training ◽  
Perceived Preparedness ◽  
Low Levels ◽  
Education Act

Approximately 145,000 U.S. children experience lasting effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI) that manifest in social, behavioural, physical, and cognitive challenges in the school setting. School psychologists have an essential role in identifying students who need support and in determining eligibility under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The purpose of this study was to assess the knowledge and perception of abilities related to TBI in a sample of school psychologists currently working in public schools. We surveyed school psychologists and found persistently low levels of knowledge and of perceived preparedness to work with these students. School psychologists with more experience working with students with TBI rated themselves significantly higher on their perceived ability to perform nearly all key duties of a school psychologist. To meet the academic and behavioural needs of students with TBI, all school psychologists need effective training in working with and evaluating students with TBI.

Getting Ruby a Quality Public Education: Forty-Two Years of Building the Demand for Quality Public Schools through Parental and Public Involvement

2006 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 570-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
ARNOLD FEGE
Keyword(s):  
Public Schools ◽  
No Child Left Behind ◽  
Public Education ◽  
School Improvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Elementary And Secondary Education ◽  
Left Behind ◽  
History Of ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Access To Data

In this article, Arnold Fege identifies parental and public engagement as critical to sustaining equity in public education. He traces the history of this engagement from the integration of schools after Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 and the implementation in 1965 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act through the provisions of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). He finds that while NCLB gives parents access to data, it does not foster use of that information to mobilize the public to get involved in school improvement. Fege concludes with historical lessons applicable to the reauthorization of NCLB, emphasizing enforcement of provisions for both parental and community-based involvement in decisionmaking, resource allocation, and assurance of quality and equity.

Conceptualizing and Utilizing Board Certified Behavior Analysts as Related Services Providers in Inclusion-Oriented Schools

2021 ◽  
pp. 074193252110636
Author(s):  
Michael F. Giangreco ◽  
Robert C. Pennington ◽  
Virginia L. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Behavior Analyst ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Related Services ◽  
Disabilities Education Act ◽  
Behavior Analysts ◽  
Related Service ◽  
Education Act ◽  
Support Students

Although behavior analytic practices have been widely applied in schools to support students with disabilities, there remains limited guidance concerning utilization of these practices in inclusion-oriented schools and, more specifically, the role of the Board Certified Behavior Analyst in the provision of related services. The goal of this article is to encourage discussions among stakeholders hopefully leading to a clearer conceptualization and more effective utilization of behavior analytic practices in inclusion-oriented schools. In addition to discussing the conceptualization of behavior analytic services as a related service and the role of both Board Certified Assistant Behavior Analysts and Registered Behavior Technicians as paraprofessionals under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, we provide a set of guidelines for related services decision-making practices useful within a collaborative teamwork framework, including behavior analysts, and offer areas for future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document