Search

Time trends in U.S. autism prevalence from three ongoing datasets [Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, and California Department of Developmental Services (CDDS)] are calculated using two different methods: (1) constant-age tracking of 8 year-olds and (2) age-resolved snapshots. The data are consistent across methods in showing a strong upward trend over time. The prevalence of autism in the CDDS dataset, the longest of the three data records, increased from 0.001% in the cohort born in 1931 to 1.2% among 5 year-olds born in 2012. This increase began around ~ 1940 at a rate that has gradually accelerated over time, including notable change points around birth years 1980, 1990 and, most recently, 2007. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assistive technology (AT) for students with visual impairments (VI) is an essential part of their educational program. AT allows students to develop skills, engage in the academic environment, and function independently. Despite the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) mandate for AT as part of a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP), research has found that rural schools use fewer AT devices when compared with urban schools. The extent of AT use is significantly determined by the level of teachers’ training and their familiarity with AT. In this article, the authors present an AT resource they created to provide teachers and parents with current, helpful information on AT for students with VI. The resource details (a) application/devices about which teachers need to know more, (b) the type of VI with which an application/device is most helpful, (c) key features, (d) cost, (e) sources for additional information, (f) product guides and research evaluating the AT, and (g) organizations that provide additional information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge and understanding of assistive technology is important for all education majors as they prepare to serve increasingly diverse classrooms. This article provides a program description of how one rural university embedded assistive technology content and skills in both a special education plan of study, as well as in professional core courses for all education majors. The process and model are described for both on-campus and distance education populations. In addition, strengths and challenges of the model are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights the needs of advanced and gifted literacy learners for providing the support to the literacy development of students. Topics discussed include information on Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), U.S. which enables free public education to disabled students; introduction on Illinois Accelerated Placement Act, 2018 which heightened awareness for addressing advanced and gifted student needs in school districts; and information on several literacy program.

The article offers information on individualized education program (IEP) enacted by the U.S. government for public schools, and mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, that provide educational plans for students with all kinds of learning disabilities. It mentions about Supreme Court case Endrew F. v. Douglas Co. School on need to develop meaningful IEPs for students with disabilities; and improving academic achievement and functional performance of the students.

The article focuses on promoting college and career readiness (CCR) for all students in the U.S. It mentions about the enactment of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act which mandates education for students with disabilities; enactment of Every Student Succeeds Act which mandates all students are prepared for college and career; and enactment of individualized education program for supporting students in academic tasks.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires schools to provide all students who qualify for special education services with a free appropriate public education (FAPE). However, the IDEA does not specify how much substantive educational benefit students must be afforded in order to receive a FAPE, leaving this question for the courts. For over thirty years, courts split over the amount of educational benefit that school districts must provide to their special education students, leading to significant confusion and anxiety among parents and school officials regarding their legal rights. The Supreme Court sought to clarify this standard in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1 by ruling that special education students must receive an education that would allow them to make "appropriate progress" based on their individual circumstances. Unfortunately, the Court's new standard created additional ambiguity and left lingering questions among stakeholders within the education community regarding school districts' obligations to these students. This Note addresses these questions by identifying the implications of the Court's appropriate progress standard for students, teachers, and school operations, and proposes that courts adopt a two-part test for applying the new standard that evaluates both the procedures of particular institutions and the substantive value of students' individualized curricula. Defining the FAPE requirement this way would clarify the standard and provide stability in an area of law plagued by inconsistency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When it was first enacted, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) had the potential to function both as a progressive statement on the rights and needs of children with disabilities and as a concrete mechanism for promoting the educational progress of students with special needs--a population that had previously been all but denied access to the classroom. Yet despite the Act's potential, over forty years of court precedents interpreting the Act have resulted in a diluted, unimaginative reality. The result is a system of inadequate education for students who most need educational revitalization: (1) a "continuum of alternative placements" provision that allows schools to provide students with only a bare outline of one-size-fits-most, group-based programming; (2) a "least restrictive environment" provision that does little to require that schools place students in public, integrated settings; and (3) an "educational benefit" standard that is far too comfortable with the status quo. This Note begins by tracing the failures of the IDEA in the delivery of special education today, characterized by the low academic achievement of students with disabilities, high rates of incarceration and exclusionary discipline, and a lack of imagination on the parts of districts and teachers. The Note then proceeds to explain how educational inaction has been allowed to persist through a policy of judicial deference to districts, with courts failing to demand bold action or creative generation of new and innovative special education programs. Despite these failures, this Note argues that the Supreme Court's recent decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1 can be used to help advocates move courts and districts out of the largely stagnant provision of special education services, where schools continue to rely on the same ineffective and dated programs rather than developing new methods to reach children with disabilities who continue to struggle in school. This Note argues that the language of Endrew F. can be read to promote a more rigorous, guided process of program development, helping advocates evaluate a district's process and communicate failures to courts in a way that authorizes courts to act to correct these failures. In moving beyond the status quo and requiring that schools engage in constant growth, Endrew F. has the potential to solve the "puzzle" of the IDEA's three primary provisions which, through court interpretations and decades of neglect, has led to a stalemate that incentivizes inaction rather than solutions. This Note's novel interpretation of Endrew F. encourages a more robust reading of the Act, which will in turn support the growth and development of children with disabilities across the nation's public schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article explores race and class inequality in the distribution of special education benefits pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA"). Scholarship in this area has focused on the disproportionately high representation of black children in special education and in the most stigmatized disability categories. The consensus view is that racial differences in disability prevalence are due mainly to teachers' discrimination against black children. Little noticed is middle-class white children's disproportionately high representation in autism, a category associated with relatively greater resources and more advantageous educational outcomes than are associated with the categories in which black children are disproportionately represented. This article argues that to understand the disproportionate allocation of special education resources by race and class-and other distributional disparities like it-scholars and policy makers alike must shift focus from a preoccupation on bias toward investigating the precise mechanisms for how legal benefits are allocated. In special education, no child simply "receives" special education services because a teacher wants him to. Under the IDEA, children receive appropriate benefits only when their parents take on the role of ardent advocate, using special education knowledge and behavioral strategies. Only parents with these sets of knowledge and behavioral strategies-what sociologists call "cultural capital"-will be best able to navigate the process. In predominately white, relatively affluent school districts, schools where the racial disparities in special education are most pronounced, middle-class white parents are best able to convert their economic and social capital into the cultural capital needed to secure preferable diagnoses and resources. Using special education as an example, this Article argues that when a legal scheme requires beneficiary action as a prerequisite to receiving benefits, stratification in cultural capital will influence which individuals, and consequently which groups, receive the benefit to which they are entitled. Cultural capital helps scholars and policymakers understand how groups come to disproportionately capture scarce legal resources and benefits, moving us beyond a sole focus on discrimination against groups to a more complex and nuanced focus on how privilege is reproduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents interpretations of Julie Waterstone's analysis of U.S. Supreme Court case Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District addressing Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). It mentions about inclusion of FAPE under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; and roles of districts as providing expertise of school officials and parents as providing input in the individualized education programs development process.

The article discusses Julie Waterstone and Miriam Kurtzig Freedman contributions in tandem with each other to sharpen the communal understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court's Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1 decision limning the substance of free appropriate public education (FAPE). It mentions about inclusion of FAPE under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; and improving the individualized education programs (IEPs) of students with disabilities.

The increasing prevalence of diagnoses for autism spectrum disorder (ASD), now one in 68 children according to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), presents a number of policy implications. In particular, many of these children become eligible for special education services under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Given the specialized expertise and resources required of local education agencies (LEAs), how do they respond to this implementation challenge? In May 2015, an online survey was distributed to various governmental and nongovernmental actors in three Virginia localities to measure the extent of collaboration in local autism policy networks. The findings suggest that these networks are driven by autism-related information, and that nonprofit organizations act as intermediary organizations that bridge disparate stakeholders. The results contribute to our understanding of fragmentation across policy subsystems, with the focus here on education policy, and the implementation challenges related to a rapidly changing policy issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Programs serving infants and toddlers are expected to use child data to inform decisions about intervention services; however, few tools exist to support these efforts. The Making Online Decisions (MOD) system is an adaptive intervention that guides early educators’ data-based intervention decision making for infants and toddlers at risk for language delay. Using a cluster randomized design to test the effect of the MOD, home visitors (HVs) were assigned to either use the MOD or not across 13 Early Head Start programs. Both groups used the Early Communication Indicator (ECI) for progress monitoring and a parent-mediated language promotion intervention. Children from both groups demonstrated significant growth in expressive communication. However, children whose HVs fully implemented the MOD grew significantly more than the group that did not use the MOD, even after statistically controlling for parent and HV variables. Implications for designing effective and usable systems to promote the use of data-based decision-making practices by infant–toddler service providers are discussed, as well as limitations of the current study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers an overview of special education laws in the U.S. It discusses the federal law known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and demonstrates the application of the law as it relates to the author's personal experience. Also discussed are court decisions on cases involving children with learning disabilities.

• The professional literature is largely lacking with regard to current information about state systems for complaint procedures (CP) as compared with the much more common knowledge of the due process hearing mechanism of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. • Overall, almost two thirds (63%) of CP filings nationwide resulted in a decision letter, and a similar majority (62%) of these letters found violations, which suggests that districts should focus on not onlymore effective compliance but also early resolution. • More than half (56%) of CP investigators have an educational background in special education and about a quarter (26%) have an educational background in law, which may result in a gap in the needed skill sets for effective investigation and decision writing. • Trainingmost often is in the form of attendance at a national-level conference (75%) or various forms of in-house training (61%), but respondents acknowledged the need for improved professional development, especially training tailored to the needs of CP investigators. • The most common practices among CP systems are (a) the use of a template for CP decisions, (b) the authoring of CP decisions by the investigator, and (c) supervisory review of CP decisions by a supervisor, although additional responses suggested the need for broader systemic efficiencies, such asmore user-friendly information and alternative dispute resolution. • The relatively infrequent and thus wider disuniformity of other practices--namely, (a) the use of a two-part test for procedural issues, (b) the resolution of substantive issues, and (c) provision of amechanism for appealing CP decisions--poses problems for school districts that warrant policy consideration at the national, state, and local levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article comprehensively reviews national legislation that affects the delivery of adapted physical education services. Legislation includes the Education of the Handicapped Act as amended by PL 99-457, the Rehabilitation Act as amended by PL 99-507, and the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act as amended by PL 100-146. Direct and indirect references to physical education are presented for each act. An overview as to the legislative process is also described. Advocacy is discussed pertinent to the profession's and the professionals' responsibilities for ensuring that statutory language is implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines a case in which the plaintiff filed suit complaining of a lack of physical accessibility issues under Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and professional judgement issues under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents abstracts on physical activity topics which include school-based intervention and target social skills in autism, document analysis for individuals with disabilities, and inclusive recreation practices for transition-age youth.

Despite the increased advocacy for inclusive practices in the U.S. public school system, the exclusion of individuals with disabilities (IWD) from physical education and extracurricular sports remains a concern. This article discusses barriers to the inclusion of IWD in school-based physical education and other sport and physical activity programs, with an emphasis on the issues related to teacher and coach training. Further, the article presents considerations on how to address these barriers within physical education teacher education and coaching education undergraduate curricula. Physical education teachers and coaches are the individuals who have the greatest responsibility for promoting and ensuring inclusion in school-based sport and physical activity opportunities; therefore, comprehensive and appropriate training related to inclusion should be provided in undergraduate programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Courts often use a controversial tool called the "categorical approach" to determine whether a defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a "violent felony" or a "crime of violence." Many federal criminal statutes require the use of the categorical approach because they provide for increased penalties if a defendant has prior convictions for violent crimes. For example, under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), a defendant who commits a firearms offense and also has three prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses faces a minimum mandatory sentence and a higher maximum possible sentence than would have been the case had she simply committed the firearms offense without the prior convictions. Because of the significant effect that a conviction for a violent crime can have, the determination of whether an offense falls within the definition of "violent crime" is vital. The Supreme Court has made clear that it is the judge, using the so-called "categorical approach," who determines whether a prior conviction was for a violent felony under the ACCA, or a crime of violence under statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 16. The categorical approach requires a court to consider the statutory definition of the crime at issue, rather than the actual facts that gave rise to the conviction, to determine whether the prior conviction qualifies as a violent felony under the ACCA. In its recent decision in Johnson v. United States, however, the Court determined that the use of the categorical approach rendered part of the definition of violent felony-the "residual clause"-unconstitutionally vague. Similarly, in Sessions v. Dimaya, the Court decided that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally void for vagueness under Johnson. However, the Court has not considered whether the categorical approach must be used in determining if an offense is a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Section 924(c) provides for a mandatory consecutive sentence for a defendant who uses or carries a firearm during and in relation to a federal crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, or who possesses a firearm in furtherance of such a crime. Section 924(c) thus creates a separate crime that applies in the context of the facts at issue in the case before the court rather than to prior convictions. The § 924(c) definition of crime of violence is identical to the definition of crime of violence set forth in § 16. Lower courts are divided as to who should determine whether an offense is a crime of violence under the residual clause of the § 924(c) definition. Some district courts employ the categorical approach, while others suggest that a jury can decide whether the offense satisfies the residual clause of the crime of violence definition. Because the statute does not apply to a prior conviction but instead applies to a particular set of real-world facts that a jury can use to decide whether an offense meets the statute's definition of crime of violence, courts should not employ the categorical approach when determining whether an offense is a crime of violence under the § 924(c) residual clause. Additionally, because § 924(c) applies in the context of facts that a jury can consider during deliberation, the factors that require use of the categorical approach for prior convictions are inapplicable, thus escaping constitutional issues that are implicated under the ACCA and § 16. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, thirty-seven states have parental involvement laws that require a minor seeking to access abortion care to consult or obtain consent from a parent before undergoing the procedure. In these states, a minor's only hope for getting around this obstacle is judicial bypass-a proceeding in which a minor must convince a judge that she should be able to obtain an abortion without parental involvement, based on two Supreme Court-articulated factors. Many of these states impose heightened evidentiary standards-namely, the "clear and convincing evidence" standard-in these proceedings where the minor bears the burden of proof. This Comment argues that imposing heightened evidentiary standards in judicial bypass proceedings creates an undue burden on a minor's right to abortion under the strengthened standard set out in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt. Thus, the imposition of these heightened evidentiary standards in this context is unconstitutional. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article addresses the impact of school voucher programs on students with disabilities. We show that for children with disabilities, the price of admission into so-called "school choice" programs is so high that it is effectively no real choice at all. School voucher programs require students with disabilities to sign away their robust federal rights and protections in the public school system. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)-the preeminent legislative safeguard for students with disabilities-these rights include the right to a "free and appropriate public education" delivered through an "individualized education plan." By giving up these protections, children with disabilities are left at the mercy of private schools that have no legal obligation to provide them with an appropriate education, and, in the vast majority of cases, are not legally prohibited from discriminating against them on the basis of their disability. We argue that school voucher programs-including a proposed federal voucher program-put the education of students with disabilities back decades, and likely constitute a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Comment will focus on Uber and its obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). While it may seem logical that Uber should adhere to the same ADA regulations as taxis, the relevant ADA provision only applies to private entities that are primarily engaged in the business of transporting people. To avoid these regulations, Uber asserts that it is primarily a technology company, rather than primarily a transportation company. However, the more expansive approach, consistent with the ADA's purpose of eliminating discrimination against persons with disabilities, is to classify Uber's services as public accommodations. While the ADA's public accommodation provision governs physical spaces such as restaurants, shopping centers, and offices, some jurisdictions have recently decided that web-based entities and services are public accommodations. Thus, even if a court were to accept Uber's claim that it is primarily a technology company rather than a transportation company, Uber would still be required to adhere to the ADA's public accommodation provision. This Comment presents and analyzes three rationales for defining Uber as a public accommodation under the ADA: (1) web-based activities are distinct public accommodations, (2) the physical vehicles that Uber operates are places of public accommodation, and (3) Uber is a "travel service" or "other service establishment" as defined in the ADA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on emerging scientific consensus around how adolescent brain development facilitates certain behaviors in the U.S. It analysis case studies and national data how the legal framework in schools does not protect and in fact encourages biased decision making resulting in adverse outcome. It also informs on the enactment of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for providing students access to education.

In Puerto Rico there are no scales in Spanish for teachers to assess the neurocognitive processes underlying the academic and social functioning of students, as established in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This paper documents the process of translation and cultural adaptation of the Cognitive Assessment System 2: Rating Scale, which allows teachers to assess the neurocognitive processes of the PASS theory (Planning, Attention, Simultaneous and Successive Processing) in children and adolescents. A concurrent triangulation was used with a sample that included 2 translators, 8 experts in neurocognitive processes and 15 teachers. Chávez and Canino's (2005) methodology was used to obtain semantic and content equivalence. The procedure included: translation into Spanish, review by bilingual experts and teachers, back-translation and final review by experts. According to the results, the reviewers understood the translation of all items, but suggested semantic (e.g. grammatical) and content (e.g. examples of cultural concepts) changes to maintain equivalence with the original version. This work shows the importance of avoiding literal translations, while using comprehensive models of translation and adaptation. In addition, it provides a tool for the identification and early intervention of Specific Learning Disorders (SLD) in Spanish-speaking students, in compliance with IDEA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Professionals, families, and individuals with disabilities must work together to advocate for policy and legislation that will improve the lives of those with disabilities. Rural areas have unique issues that make targeted advocacy efforts necessary. While families and parents have a personal interest in advocacy, professionals have ethical principles related to advocacy they must uphold as a member of their field. This article outlines steps to use when working with state and national legislators including (a) knowing the issues, (b) identifying allies, (c) working with others, and (d) sustaining advocacy efforts. Specific tips are provided for individuals making face-to-face visits with legislators to increase chances of positive outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal statute that protects the rights of students with disabilities by conferring onto them a substantive right to a free, appropriate public education (FAPE). Under the IDEA, aggrieved parents may demand a "due process hearing," an administrative process presided over by an impartial hearing officer through which students and families may seek redress for violations of the IDEA. Due process hearings, however, allow only for certain types of relief-notably, money damages are not available under the IDEA. Students with disabilities are also protected under other statutes, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Parents may sue under these sister statutes but, in most cases, must first exhaust their administrative remedies by seeking a due process hearing pursuant to 20 USC § 1415(l). This Comment addresses an unanswered question about § 1415(l) that the Supreme Court explicitly left unaddressed in its recent decision in Fry v Napoleon Community Schools: if a family alleges a denial of a FAPE-which Fry held triggered exhaustion-but sought relief that the IDEA could not provide, including money damages, is exhaustion required? With respect to this question, the lower courts are split. By applying principles of statutory interpretation, examining the history of the IDEA, and considering the policy implications of exhaustion, this Comment argues that exhaustion should not be required in such a case. This conclusion is first rooted in the plain-language reading of the statute, a reading that is confirmed by comparing § 1415(l) to other federal statutes and to the ADA and § 504. Moreover, considering the kinds of cases in which this question would arise by applying the Fry standard reveals that waiving exhaustion in such a case creates appropriate deterrence for schools and school districts. Consistent with the core purpose of the IDEA, such a reading of the statute better vindicates the rights of students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Congress enacted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to prevent the widespread exclusion of children with disabilities from public schools. While today's schools no longer formally exclude students with disabilities, they routinely achieve this same end through school discipline policies. In fact, students with disabilities are at greater risk of suspension and expulsion than any other student population. The suspension rate for students with disabilities is more than twice that of their peers. Likewise, one out of every four students arrested at school is a student with disability. These high rates of discipline, in turn, help funnel students with disabilities into juvenile detention centers at alarmingly high rates. The IDEA contains statutory provisions that ostensibly guard against these problems. In particular, the Act prohibits schools from suspending and expelling students for behavior that is rooted in their disabilities. Based on original empirical research, this Article demonstrates that these provisions, while well-intended, are woefully inadequate to achieve their goal. First, the evidentiary standard for demonstrating that misbehavior is rooted in a disability is unfeasible. It requires students to prove their disability caused the misbehavior, even when evidence to make this showing is essentially unavailable. Second, the statutory provision presumes that decisionmakers can reliably judgewhether a particular misbehavior is rooted in disability. This assumption is flawed because disabilities and the behaviors that they produce vary across individuals, time, and circumstance. Thus, neither science nor the evidence typically presented at discipline hearings allows for concrete distinctions between disability-related and nondisability-related misbehavior. The confluence of these two points essentially requires students to affirmatively demonstrate the unknowable, tilting the standard strongly in favor of excluding students with disabilities--the exact opposite of the IDEA's overall goal. This Article argues that current flaws can be mitigated by altering the burden of proof and expanding the type of data that schools must gather and rely upon in making decisions regarding the exclusion of students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information on education policy in the field of visual impairment that was discussed at the 2018 American Foundation for the Blind Leadership Conference is presented. Topics covered include the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, assessments used for the determination of eligibility for vision services, and the role of cognitive testing and standardized testing in a guidance document relating to visual impairment.

The article offers suggestions for teaching children with childhood cancer. Topics discussed include identifying students requiring special education and related services under the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act; implementation of evidence-based practices for executive function (EF), emotional coping skills, and social skills; and using systematic instruction to aid students with deficits in working memory.

Copyright of Education Policy Analysis Archives / Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas / Arquivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas is the property of Educational Policy Analysis Archives & Education Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Violence in schools remains a complex and challenging issue. In this article, we examine schools’ responsibilities in placement and the provision of services for students who have chronically exhibited dangerous behaviors. Multiple court cases have provided schools guidance in evaluating when student removal through injunctive relief for dangerous behavior is warranted. A four-point criterion for informing removal decisions is discussed along with some practical implications for administrators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court in several cases. The case discussed include Alston v. Pa. State Univ. wherein student sued university for failing to provide him with increased financial aid for personal expenses, M.L. v. Smith on disabled Jewish child brought suit against school superintendent and school district alleging violation of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and McClendon v. Ohio Dept, of Edn. on teacher sued school board alleging due process.

As of the 2013–2014 school year, about 2.5 million school-age students attended charter schools nationwide. Because charter schools are publicly funded entities, they are required to adhere to all federal nondiscriminatory laws as well as the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. This legal brief provides an overview of charter schools, legal requirements associated with students with disabilities enrolled in charter schools, and recommendations for practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For much of the nation's history, states excluded entire groups of students from mainstream public-school classrooms based on classifications of race or disability. Although Brown vs. Board of Education and its progeny, as well as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, now prohibit the most blatant and egregious forms of this type of exclusion, a new version has emerged. Over the last thirty years, schools have suspended, and transferred into separate schools known as Alternative Education Programs ("AEPs"), a significant and growing number of students. Proponents of this new version of exclusion argue that these practices can help to curb misbehavior, promote school safety, and assist students in obtaining academic success. Yet research shows that suspending students does little to improve behavior; nor does it necessarily improve school safety. And while policymakers intend for AEPs to re-engage students at risk of educational failure, they are often demonstrably inferior to regular public schools and thus unable to accomplish these stated objectives. Perhaps most troubling, the individual students at greatest risk of suspension and transfer to AEPs are from those groups once subject to de jure segregation and outright bans from classrooms: African-American students and students with disabilities. This Article contextualizes suspension and AEP transfer within the longer history of exclusion of Black students and students with disabilities. It describes how pre-civil rights school districts justified group-based exclusion of African-American students and students with disabilities on the basis that they were undeserving of the full promise of public education. It then analyzes the rise in suspensions and growth of AEPs and outlines their problematic features, while drawing important parallels between the new exclusion and the historical trope of the underserving child. It shows the ways in which suspension resists legal challenge, as well as how traditional tools for promoting educational equity are likely to be inadequate in addressing the flaws of AEPs. Looking forward toward possible solutions, the Article commends the small but growing number of schools finding non-exclusionary ways to address misbehavior and suggests that rather than seek to reform AEPs, policymakers should consider abandoning this failed educational innovation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports the decision of the U.S. Supreme court in the case "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1" in which the court held that, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act schools must provide students an education that is "reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances. It mentions that vacated the judgment of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Assistive technology supplements and supports the learning of students with disabilities in school and at home. Thanks to federal mandates, students with disabilities receive consideration for assistive technology devices and services — the tools and supports needed to achieve determined learning outcomes. Assistive technology devices and services operate as a process, ensuring students with disabilities receive optimal access to learning across all educational settings and subject areas. This article provides physical educators with a working knowledge of the assistive technology process along with recommendations for supporting their students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social stories frequently have been used to improve the social interaction of students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This literature review examines the effectiveness of social story interventions on the social interactions of students with ASD including with whom, where, and what formats have been implemented, as well as the methodological rigor of the research. Findings indicate preliminary evidence to suggest that social stories are a promising intervention to increase social interactions. Future research with methodological rigor is needed to reveal the most effective strategy for developing and implementing social story interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights how immigration issues impact families in the U.S. in 2017. Topics discussed include changes in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy that protected from deportation about 800,000 undocumented immigrants; provisions of Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) that requires schools receiving federal funds to provide a "free and appropriate" public education for children.

Background: Current policy in Oregon limits eligibility of children diagnosed with developmental delay for school-based services. Due to eligibility definitions, children with developmental delay may face additional barriers transitioning from early intervention/early childhood special education into school-based special education services.Aims: Examine the relationship between enrollment in school-based special education programs given a change in primary disability diagnosis.Methods: Logistic regression models were fit for children who enrolled in early intervention/early childhood special education services with a primary disability diagnosis of developmental delay and changed primary disability diagnosis before third grade (n=5076).Results: Odds of enrollment in future special education were greater in children with a change in primary disability diagnosis after the age of five in comparison to children that had a change in primary disability diagnosis before the age of five, while adjusting for demographic characteristics (adjusted odds ratio: 2.37, 95% CI 1.92, 2.92).Conclusion: Results suggest that children who are diagnosed with a developmental delay and exit early childhood special education due to maximum age of eligibility are more likely to enroll in special education compared to children without a gap in service access.Implications: Gaps in service access during early development are associated with the need for supportive services later on in life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we analyze the Supreme Court's decision in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District RE-1 (2017), interpreting the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and its provisions creating a right of every student with a disability to have an appropriate education. We compare the Endrew decision with IDEA and the Court's previous appropriate education decision, Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley (1982), on four key concepts: educational program, reasonably calculated, progress, and child's circumstances. We discuss the case's implications for systems capacity development and interpret Endrew as a narrative about students' ethical claim to dignity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]