Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Free and Appropriate Public Education laws
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Free and Appropriate Public Education laws
One of the legal implications in the case of Wartenberg v. Capistrano Unified School District (1995) was that the Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) federal law was being violated (west Law, 1995). Since the court found the district in violation of FAPE, it also meant that the services being provided in the IEP were not appropriate. Jeremy continued to struggle in school, and despite initial modifications being made, the last addendum to the IEP stated fewer services and no supplemental hours, in a structured educational setting. Furthermore, according to educational code §56341.1 (b) (1) a Behavioral Intervention plan (BIP) must be in place if the student’s behaviors are impeding his IEP goals, his learning or the learning of others (Kemerer and …show more content…
Capistrano Unified School District (1995) are similar to legal implications mentioned above. Kemerer and Sansom (2005) state, “A parent seeking to obtain reimbursement for educational expenses must satisfy two criteria. First, during the time period in which the educational expenses were incurred, the school district did not make available a FAPE” (p. 329). The second reasons is “…educational services obtained by the parent must be designed to meet the student’s unique needs and provide students with educational benefit” (Kemerer and Sansom, 2005, p. 239). Again, by not providing FAPE, Capistrano Unified was in violation of the federal law, and in return, the Wartanberg’s were entitled to financial compensation for tuition and service fees at Jeremy’s new placement. Moreover, according to the Ninth Circuit Court, parents have the right to obtain legal fees if they have triumphed in one or more issues in a due process (Kemerer and Sansom, 2005). Jeremy’s parents prevailed, and refused to accept a completely different school setting that was offered in the district’s written offer, causing for attorney/legal fees to be paid by Capistrano Unified (West Law,
2.Facts: This case was originally presented before the district court of Colorado in 1993 on behalf of the parents of Gregory Urban, a seventeen-year-old teen with severe mental disabilities. Gregory and his parents moved to Evergreen, Colorado in 1991. The parents wanted Gregory to go to Evergreen High School but the school district placed him at Golden High School where he participated in support services for children with severe disabilities. The support services at Golden High School were not available at Evergreen High. After the development of Gregory’s IEP his parents voiced objections to what they believed constituted violations of Gregory’s right to a free and appropriate public education. These violations included placement of Gregory outside his neighborhood school and failure to stipulate transition services in his IEP. After initially participating in the IDEA administrative process the parents filed a case with the district court claiming the school district violated Gregory’s rights under IDEA and ADA. The court ruled in favor of the school district by rejecting
A teacher’s most important duty is to protect the students they are in charge of. This duty includes both reasonably protecting students from harm and, when a student is harmed, reporting it to the proper authorities (Gooden, Eckes, Mead, McNeal, & Torres, 2013, pp. 103-109). There have been many court cases that reiterate this duty of school staff. One such case is Frugis v. Bracigliano (2003) where many staff at a school failed in their duty to protect students and allowed abuse to continue for years.
The Supreme Court case, Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, was argued on March 29, 2000, in Texas (Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe). The verdict was decided on June 19, 2000 by the Supreme Court. The case questioned the constitutionality of the school’s policy that permitted student-led, student initiated prayer at football games. The Supreme Court justices had to take the Establishment Clause of the first amendment into account when making their decision (Cornell University Law School). The case originated in the Santa Fe Independent School District, located in Texas. The District was against Doe, a Mormon and a Catholic family involved within the District. The purpose of the case was to determine if the school policy was in violation of the first amendment’s Establishment Clause which creates a divide between religion and government. The first amendment freedom of religion was the right at stake in regards to the Establishment Clause that defines a line between church
General education high school teacher, Michael Withers, failed to comply with his student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP). D.D. Doe’s IEP required tests to be read orally. Despite knowledge of this IEP and being instructed to follow the IEP by the superintendent, school principal, special education director, and special education teacher, Withers still refused to make the accommodations for D.D.’s handicapping condition. As a result, D.D. failed the history class. His parents filed charges against Withers, arguing that D.D was not afforded the right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) promised to all students by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). They also filed a claim for injuctive relief against the Taylor County Board of Education to enforce the laws that protect handicapped students.
Board of Education v. Pico is a Supreme Court case that was argued from March 2, 1892 to June 25, 1982 (Island Trees…). This case presents the issue of banning “vulgar and immoral” books from school libraries (Board of Education, Island).
We, all, have the opportunity to voice our opinion on subjects that matter to us. The First Amendment grants us freedom of speech and expression. However, this was not provided to all students in 1968. During this time, there were three students in Des Moines, Iowa, who wore black armbands to school. These armbands were a symbol of protest against the United States involvement in the Vietnam War. After the Des Moines School District heard about this plan, they instituted a policy banning the wearing of armbands, leading to the suspension of students. A lawsuit has been filed against the Des Moines School District, stating how this principal goes against the students’ First Amendment rights. Thus, in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District case, Justice Abe Fortes determined the policy to ban armbands is against the students’ First Amendment rights. Yet, Justice Hugo Black dissented with this decision, determining the principal is permissible under the First Amendment.
Jackson vs. Birmingham Board of Education (2005) is a more recent case that still fights against one of history?s most common topics; equal rights. This will always stand as one of the greatest problem factors the world will face until eternity. These issues date back for years and years. This case was brought to the Supreme Court in 2004 for a well-known topic of sexual discrimination. It helped to define the importance of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
Many Supreme Court cases in the United States have reassured its citizens’ rights. One of those cases was that of the 1965 Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District case. This case was about five students who were suspended from school for wearing black armbands. Should the students have been suspended? The Tinker v. Des Moines case was a very controversial Supreme Court case in which the right to freedom of speech and expression for students in public schools was violated.
Vernonia School District v. Acton was a US Supreme court decision that aims to uphold the constitutionality affecting random drug testing implemented by local public schools in Vernonia, Oregon States. This provision mandates student athletes to undergo drug testing before they are going to be allowed to participate in sporting activities. This particular measure established by the constitution stated that it propagates any illegal use of any prohibited substances for students in order to preserve the integrity of the society in particular with handling against drug use. An official investigation led to the discovery that high school athletes in the Vernonia School District participated in illicit drug use. School officials were concerned that drug use increases the risk of sports-related injury. Consequently, the Vernonia School District of Oregon adopted the Student Athlete Drug Policy which authorizes random urinalysis drug testing of its student athletes Substance abuse materials may include marijuana, which is cannabis that is commonly used by teens.
In cases having to do with constitutionality, the issue of the separation of church and state arises with marked frequency. This battle, which has raged since the nation?s founding, touches the very heart of the United States public, and pits two of the country's most important influences of public opinion against one another. Although some material containing religious content has found its way into many of the nation's public schools, its inclusion stems from its contextual and historical importance, which is heavily supported by material evidence and documentation. It often results from a teacher?s own decision, rather than from a decision handed down from above by a higher power. The proposal of the Dover Area School District to include instruction of intelligent design in biology classes violates the United States Constitution by promoting an excessive religious presence in public schools.
"Pickering v. Board of Education - 391 U.S. 563 (1968)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2014.
John, a 15 year old male, is an 8th grade student attending a local middle school. John is a transfer student from another state and he been placed into an inclusion classroom because he has been identified as a student with a disability and requires an IEP. Lately, John has been verbally and physically disruptive during math class. Some of the disruptive behaviors John often exhibit in the classroom include making loud noises and jokes during instruction, calling his peers names, physically touching his peers, and grabbing group materials. John’s teacher collected data and learned that his verbal disruptive behavior occurs 4-8 times during each sixty minute class meeting, and his physical group disruptions occur 75% of the time he works with a group. After meeting with John’s other teachers, his math teacher learned that his disruptive behavior is only present during math class. According to John’s math test scores on his IEP, his math instructor also learned that math is a challenging subject for John and he is significantly below grade level. Both John’s math teacher and his IEP team reached an agreement that they would like to decrease the number of times John disrupts instruction and eventually eliminate the disruptive behavior. The replacement behavior for John is to remain focused and on task during math instruction and assigned activities without triggering any disruptions (i.e., distracting loud noises or jokes causing the class to go into a laughing uproar, physical contact with peers, name calling, or grabbing his peers’ materials). Instead of John being punished for his disruptive behavior, the replacement behavior would allow him to remain in math class, and he will also be able to receive posit...
The Gaskin Settlement Agreement is an agreement between a group of families and advocacy organizations who filed a class action lawsuit against the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) on behalf of a group of children with disabilities in 1994. This agreement does not change a student’s placement, program, or IEP in any manner. Only the IEP team has the authority to make modifications that will impact a student’s IEP. The main goal of this settlement is to make sure that IEP teams will determine if the goals in a student’s IEP may be implemented in a general education setting with supplementary aids and services prior to considering an environment that is more restrictive in nature. The elements of this case were designed to help increase the capacity of school districts to provide related services, SDI that is appropriate, supplementary aids and services, and supports to students who have disabilities that are placed in general education classrooms. The PDE lists many important elements of the Settlement Agreement to be aware of...
A behavioral intervention plan (BIP) is designed for a specific child to try to help that child learn to change her or his behavior. Once the function of a student 's behavior has been determined, the Individual Education Program (IEP) Team should develop the behavior intervention plan A behavioral intervention plan can be thought of as a plan to support the student in order to help him or her change behavior. Effective support plans consist of multiple interventions or support strategies and are not punishment. Positive behavioral intervention plans increase the acquisition and use of new alternative skills, decrease the problem behavior and facilitate general improvements in the quality of life of the individual, his or her family, and
Public Law 94-142: The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, now called Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), requires states to provide free, appropriate public education (FAPE) for every child regardless of disability. This federal law was the first to clearly define the rights of disabled children to receive special education services if their disability affects their educational performance. A parent of a special education student also has basic rights under IDEA including the right to have their child evaluated by the school district and to be included when the school district meets about the child or makes decisions about his or her education. If a child is identified as in need of special education services, the school district must devise a written individual education program (IEP) for the child, which includes related services. An IEP is a statement of a student’s special education and related services including speech services, psychological services, physical and occupational therapy, counseling and assistive technology and transportation. In addition, this legally binding, individualized plan outlines reasonable educational goals for the student and is reviewed and updated yearly.