3 ms·

Can someone please explain the relationship between the linked article and the headline. How has the supreme court set the educational bar higher for students w

by tlow 10y ago

Can someone please explain the relationship between the linked article and the headline. How has the supreme court set the educational bar higher for students with disabilities and how will this impact public education? Will there be immediate effects?

Pulcinella 10y ago
Federal law requires that a public school provide a free and appropriate education for students with disabilities. If the school does not, then the parents of the student can place their child into a private school and the public school is required to reimburse the parents for failing to meet their legal obligations. There was a lawsuit over this concerning what level of education the public school must provide in order to meet their legal obligation. The appeals court set the bar really low. It seems the student basically just had to be passed from grade level to grade level if I am understanding the situation correctly. The Supreme Court said, no the public school actually has to set appropriate challenges and goals for the disabled student and try to meet those goals. The school has to do this even if the disabled student cannot be placed in the mainstream education classes.
- tlow 10y ago
  Right, isn't the term "reasonable accommodations" from ADA language? I'm still at a bit of a loss as to the functional impact. I understand the monetary argument in the first paragraph, there are similar laws pertaining to educational material funding and accessibility such as CA EDU 60119[1] which requires access to all students all primary education materials BOTH at home and in the classroom. But I'm still struggling to understand how this will functionally change anything? I guess I'm wondering if there is a measurable mandate for anything other than what could hypothetically be "superficial change" to accommodate the language of the supreme court. []1http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/textedcod60119.asp http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/textedcod60119.asp

by tlow 10y ago

Pulcinella 10y ago

Federal law requires that a public school provide a free and appropriate education for students with disabilities. If the school does not, then the parents of the student can place their child into a private school and the public school is required to reimburse the parents for failing to meet their legal obligations. There was a lawsuit over this concerning what level of education the public school must provide in order to meet their legal obligation. The appeals court set the bar really low. It seems the student basically just had to be passed from grade level to grade level if I am understanding the situation correctly. The Supreme Court said, no the public school actually has to set appropriate challenges and goals for the disabled student and try to meet those goals. The school has to do this even if the disabled student cannot be placed in the mainstream education classes.

tlow 10y ago
Right, isn't the term "reasonable accommodations" from ADA language? I'm still at a bit of a loss as to the functional impact. I understand the monetary argument in the first paragraph, there are similar laws pertaining to educational material funding and accessibility such as CA EDU 60119[1] which requires access to all students all primary education materials BOTH at home and in the classroom. But I'm still struggling to understand how this will functionally change anything? I guess I'm wondering if there is a measurable mandate for anything other than what could hypothetically be "superficial change" to accommodate the language of the supreme court. []1http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/textedcod60119.asp http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/cr/cf/textedcod60119.asp