Understanding Special Education Law: Impact of Endrew F
. Case
School
Liberty University**We aren't endorsed by this school
Course
EDSP 522
Subject
Law
Date
Dec 11, 2024
Pages
5
Uploaded by hughesss
Article Analysis: Special Education Law Liberty UniversityEDSP 522
Prior to 1975 there were no laws which governed the education of students with disabilities. Without formal guidelines, adaptations and accommodations for the education of students with special needs were either arbitrary, or non-existent. Following the passage of the EAHCA, which ultimately became the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, public schools began to face regulation in how they provided a free and appropriate public education to students with special needs. Since that act of law in 1990, there have been revisions to IDEA, and extensive case law which informs its implementation in the modern educational era (Department of Education, n.d.). One such piece of litigation is the lawsuit of Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District. The article "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017) and Special Education Law: What Teachers and Administrators Need to Know" by Couvillon, Yell, and Katsiyannis spotlights the pivotal concept of educational benefit being a foundational principle in special education law as is decided by the landmark case. This case set a precedent to establish higher standards for school districts, setting forth the requirement that Individualized Education Plans be held to a standard which ensures they are “likely to provide the child with meaningful educational benefit” (Couvillon et al., 2018, p.289). Previously the educational threshold for IEPs was that there was “some educational benefit” for students with disabilities (Couvillon et al., 2018, p.289). The significant impact of this legal decision continues today by raising the bar of educational quality provided to students with special needs. The Individuals with Disability Education Act stipulated the rights of students with disabilities to access a free and appropriate education (Department of Education, n.d.). IDEA set forth that students would be evaluated, and a team would determine whether students required special education services. This process would be encompassed in the development of an IEP, 1
which would outline the specific needs of a student, their goals, and any services or accommodations the team determined to be necessary. Prior to the educational challenge of Endrew F., IEPs did not have to demonstrate their support of moving a child past minimal progression. However, the Endrew F. case changed how the law, and ultimately school divisions, would apply special education concepts for children with special needs. Following the conclusion of this case, it became essential for special educators to understand the differences between minimal progress, and meaningful educational benefit as they worked to serve students under IDEA. The article discusses what teachers, administrators and local education agency representatives need to know in order for each party to uphold their responsibilities under FAPE. By ensuring that these individuals and representatives garner essential information about the laws governing their profession, the negative repercussions of ignorance can be avoided. Such negative consequences of ignorance discussed by the authors include the denial of appropriate services to students with special needs which may hinder their educational progress and personal potential. Another significant consequence of ignorance is the potential for legal challenges brought by parents against school districts as a result of their child not receiving FAPE. Additionally, there are serious, professional ethical concerns for failing to provide appropriate educational access to all students.The author’s purpose in discussing the Endrew F. case is to examine significant laws relevant to FAPE, and to highlight the impact of this case upon special education as a whole to provide meaningful educational experiences for students of all abilities. As a result, specialized education plans must demonstrate progress in both their academic and functional skill sets. This practical implication should guide educators to carefully design IEPs with specific, measurable goals while providing appropriate interventions which actively involve students with disabilities. 2
The Endrew F. case was a critical catalyst to prioritize an understanding of special education law by educators to ensure the proper supports and services are rendered to enable students to reach their fullest potential. By upholding the principles of FAPE, including a least restrictive environment, and an individual IEP, teachers and school districts can fulfil their ethical and legal responsibilities to provide equitable educational access for every child (Special Education, 2024).It should be the call of Christian educators everywhere to seek to serve the Lord’s most vulnerable children in a way which demonstrates Christlike charity, and compassion. Christ admonishes his disciples to care for the poor and needy in every way possible. He instructs disciples in Matthew 25:40 that “inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me”. Christian teachers in the world of special education must seek every day to serve the students in their charge the way the Lord would have them serve Him. This should guide their hearts and their minds as they seek to apply practices and principles in their craft. By doing so, they affirm their faith in Christ, and their desire to be like Him.ReferencesCouvillon, M. A., Yell, M., & Katsiyannis, A. (2018). Endrew F. v. Dougla County School District (2017) and special education law : What teachers and administrators need to know. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 62(4), 289-299.Department of Education. (n.d.). IDEA. Retrieved 12 10, 2024, from https://sites.ed.gov/idea/about-idea/3
Special Education. (2024). Retrieved 12 10, 2024, from https://www.parentcenterhub.org/iep-specialeducation/#:~:text=1)%20Special%20education%20means%20specially,ii)%20Instruction%20in%20physical%20education.4