Cost Of Public Education

Throughout the ages, people with disabilities have been hidden away at homes or institutions and were often not educated. This was common practice and as such, when the education system was designed, children with disabilities were not even considered. Then, starting soon after the civil rights movement in the 50’s, a series of lawsuits was brought against school boards and the federal government took notice. Then the Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was passed and these children were finally allowed the education they deserved. As time went

The first key principle of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act is that any student regardless of their disability is entitled to a free and appropriate public education. The term zero reject is commonly used to summarize this principle. An important component of zero reject is for school administrators to understand that the state is responsible for locating, identifying, and providing for students with disabilities from birth through age twenty-one. School officials play an important role in carrying out the state responsibility under the zero reject principle. This principle both implies and specifies the concept that no matter how severe the disability may seem, all children can learn, benefit from, and are entitled to a free and appropriate public education.

Prior to 1975, students with disabilities had limited educational options, as most children either attended a private school at the expense of their parents or did not attend a school at all, resulting in the child remaining in the home setting (Lloyd & Llody, 2015). The desire for equal treatment and acceptance are components sought by students with MSD, their families, and advocates within the field of special education. Although severe cognitive deficits can impact typical awareness, some individuals with a severe disability recognize the notion they may be viewed differently from the general public. FAPE ensures access to learning spaces for children with MSD, thus a free public education is provided at no cost to the family. In addition, a continuum of service options is considered by an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) team when determining a public school districts offer of FAPE, which is to be provided in the least restrictive environment (Yell, Katsiyannis, Ryan, McDuffe & Mattocks, 2008).

Educators must understand and respect the legal rights of students and their parents, which are protected by the U.S. Constitution/Fourteenth Amendment. The Individuals with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protect students who have been identified with disabilities. According to both IDEA and Section 504, all special education students must be educated in the least restrictive environment. The two provisions also mandate that that all children with disabilities receive a free and appropriate public education, which is referred to as FAPE. This essay will answer the question, "what is FAPE and why is it so important in the education of all children, especially students with disabilities?"

The provision of resources to handicapped children is subject to a wide variety of federal and state laws and statutes. However, due the varied and spectacular range of disabilities and combination of disabilities it is often difficult to easily decide who should receive benefits and who should not. Often debated both within the court system, and without, is the subject of whether the child with a severe disability can actually benefit from the services and resources being allocated to that student. Timothy W. V. Rochester School District addresses just that issue referred to as “Zero Reject.”

In the early 1970’s parents of students with disabilities went to federal court when their local school districts did not provide services to meet their children’s educational needs. In Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971), a Pennsylvania court ruled that all children, regardless of disability, have a basic right to an education under the Fourteenth Amendment. In Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972), a federal court ruled that the District of Columbia schools could not exclude children with disabilities from the public schools. Cases like this focused public attention on the issue of educating children with disabilities. The social and political pressure then resulted in landmark federal legislation to address the educational rights of these children.

Today’s society is different in its thinking when dealing with people with disabilities. There had to be many changes made in its labeling, and approach when dealing with people who may have physical/mental differences. The ostracize behavior that people were known to disturb in society has changed a great deal, due to the many federal laws that have been put in place to insure the well-being of people that have disabilities. In 1972, one very well-known case is Mill vs Board of Education of the District of Columbia this case address how the constituted rights of students were not being meet by not providing them with a public education.” Many disabled children had been excluded from public education prior to 1975,24 Congress, through the Act, sought initially to set up a process by which states would find children in need of educational services and bring them into the system”(Kotler, p.491,2014).

In 1975, Congress enacted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) to ensure that children with disabilities will receive a free appropriate public education through their local school

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEIA) mandates that “to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not disabled”, and stipulates that “special classes, separate schools, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily” (IDEIA, P.L. 108-446 [Sec. 612 (a)(5)(A)], 2004). Likewise, the No Child Left

“I would just like to call to the Court’s attention what the realities of that situation are, and I think I can speak with some authority because for the last nine years, my fifteen-year-old- daughter has been denied access to public education…” were the words of Leonard Kalish, a father from the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972), speaking about his daughter not being able to attain a public education (Kemerer and Sansom, 2005). He continues by stating, “…and as a result of which we have had her in private schools…we have spent approximately forty thousand dollars…” (p. 293). Like Mr. Kalish, many parents have gone in front of the courts to fight for their child’s right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and receive financial compensation, like the parents of Jeremy Wartenberg, from Wartenberg v. Capistrano Unified School District (1995) (West Law, 1995). However, before discussing the Wartenberg’s case, it is key to look back on special education and how it has evolved over time.

The article I read discussed providing more substantial benefits to servicing students across the country with disabilities. The article writes, “the Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously raised the bar for the educational benefits owed to millions of children with disabilities in one of the most significant special-education cases¬ to reach the high court in dec¬ades (Brown & Marimow, 2017).” However, “the court did not raise the bar as far as some advocates had hoped, to call for ‘substantially equal’ opportunities for students with disabilities… (Brown & Marimow, 2017).” The article also mentioned a major case in fighting for the rights of a student with disabilities to “a ‘free appropriate public education’ (Brown & Marimow, 2017).” The case involves a young boy

Districts are continually looking for ways to overcome these barriers. “These alternative approaches seek to turn the budgetary challenge into an education-improvement opportunity by unlocking resources so they can be used differently and by re-orienting the system around effectiveness and efficiency” (Petrilli & Roza, 2011) One such alternative approach is the belief that intervening with a student before identification of being in need of services can decrease expenditures for special education services. IDEA 2004 part B regulations permit an LEA to use not more than 15% of these funds on Early Intervening Services. This allocation comes with strict guidelines on how and for whom the funds can be spent and these expenditures must be accurately reported. (Munson, 2014) Districts have begun to implement ways to decrease referrals through early identification of those students who may have challenges, addressing the challenges early on and avoiding the costly path of special

To determine the cost of making all public higher education free in America, we first need to look at how much we are currently spending. In 2008–9, there were 6.4 million full-time-equivalent undergraduate students enrolled in public universities and 4.3 million enrolled in community colleges.1 The following year, the average cost of tuition, room, and board for undergraduates at public four-year institutions was $14,870; at two-year public colleges, it was $7,629.2 If we multiply the number of students in each segment of public higher education by the average total cost, we discover that the cost of making all public universities free would have been $95 billion in 2009–10, with an annual cost of $33

In a 2014 report from McCann, special education services were federally mandated for the first time in 1965 by the Education of Handicapped Children Act, and a two-year $3.5 million program was created to provide formula grants to states for funding education of special needs students. According to the website, www.understandingspecialeducation.com (2009), in 1975 Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act which guaranteed a “free and appropriate public education” (FAPE). This act was later modified and became the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. IDEA requires individual states to provide children with special education services as a condition of receiving federal funding for education. The largest portion of IDEA is called IDEA

The educational system in the United States has not always provided comparable education to students with disabilities. Not until 1975, when congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975, were public school systems were required to provide “free and appropriate” education to children with disabilities. This law is currently referred to as Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA). These laws provide a legal precedence to ensure students with disabilities receive special education services (Hallahan, Kauffman & Pullen, 2012, p. 16).