Free appropriate public education
Introduction
Every member in the society has the potential of helping the society in one way or another regardless of the disabilities that may be having. This serves as the origin of the Free Appropriate Public Education, which has the main aim of protecting the children with disabilities in the society (Office for Civil Rights, 2007). Any child, who is handicap, is a subject to the law that restricts the public schools system into providing the individual with the Free Approprate Public Education (FAPE). The law advocating for the FAPE is part of the individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). It may also fall under the Rehabilitation act. Children with disabilities have always suffered the effect of withdrawal from their peers because of the different abilities people consider them to be having. The segregation has made many of the disable children act as the unfortunate in the society even though they are at a tender age. This is the main reason why many lawsuits have involved themselves in ensuring that the disable children receive FAPE. The FAPE act in compensating for those activities that the disable cannot carry out in relation to non-disabled such as providing special accommodation, services for academic needs and transportation (Office for Civil Rights, 2007). This article explores the components of FAPE and the reason why many lawsuits such as IDEA and Rehabilitation Act have taken so much interest.
A thorough description of the special education law issue
The Individual with disabilities education and the rehabilitation act proposes that children with a disability should be a subject to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). This would allow the children with disabilities to have the same privileges just like their peer, especially in the learning environment. The achievement of FAPE involves the school management ensuring the students of special services as provide by the Individualized Education Plan. The IEP acts as a plan which specializes in meeting the needs of children with disabilities so that they be at the same level with the other peers. The services enhancing FAPE includes services for academic needs, speech and language services and modification that would make a learning environment more comfortable for the disabled children (Special Education News, 2012).
The FAPE program also constitutes the provision of the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), which ensures that the disable children have equal opportunities compared to the nondisabled. The LRE ensure that the disabled students learn in the same classroom with the nondisabled students so while also participating in the extracurricular activities together. Consequently, the LRE forms a critical part of the FAPE since it complements on protecting students with a disability in the learning institutions. Through the introduction of the LRE, the children will enough time of interacting with their peers in the classrooms thereby helping them form an idea that they are acceptable in the society. This always boosts the individual’s morale thereby improving on their yield in terms of academic performance.
For a child to benefit from the FAPE, provided by Individuals with Disabilities Act, the state accessor must access the candidate for the intended system (Office for Civil Rights, 2007). Provided the state identifies a form of disability the child will then be a benefactor of the Free Appropriate Public Education; consequently, the state would have to offer the relevant services to the personality. Further the child with special needs and suffering the effects of disabilities will be subject of the Individualized Education Plan (IEP). A team of educators from the child’s school such as a school psychologist, teachers, speech and language pathologists as well as the parents acts as the mastermind of the plan (Conroy et al, 2010). The IEP always gives the outline for the number of services that the disabled children will have to receive according to the FAPE. Most of these services have restriction of being within the school since it is the appropriate place to unite the children with disabilities and those without disabilities (Special Education News, 2012). A school will have violated the rights of the disabled children besides breaking the law if they do not offer the latter the services as they are stated by an IEP (Special Education News, 2012).
The Individualized Education plan is the property of the child hence the parent has the right to modify the IEP so that it suits the need by the child. The parent would have to request for intended changes in the IEP from the school management. The IEP is also a subject to modification by the teachers whenever they realize that the child does not need the help of such services again. This ensures that the child received quality and relevant services as provided by IDEA. The parents must always receive any notification relating to any services added or removed from the IEP. The modification of the IEP will also be in line with the procedural requirements of IDEA and FAPE (Conroy et al, 2010).
A thorough description of the legislative history of the issue
The FAPE stipulates that the disabled children receives free of charge support as provided to students who are nondisabled. It also ensures the provision of accessibility to the general education services for the disabled children through the encouragement of support with relating services to be available to the children. This is in their specified general education settings with possibility. In the long run, courts have assisted in the definition of the aspects under FAPE. It is significant for the involved parents to understand of FAPE not being an entitlement program capable of providing the children with a disability with standard education than made available to the nondisabled (Giuliani, 2012).
FAPE’s common first schools developed in the year 1840s with surfacing of the organised system in the education sector. The provided education in the early 1840 was provided privately hence was not accessible publicly to the majority. Henry Barnard and Horace Mann took the lead in the crusade to the development of common school statewide. The significant goal was to enable the provision of opportunities for the unprivileged and privileged children and the creation of common bonds amongst the diversified populations. As time progressed, only few of the people had the belief of disabled children not capable of accessing education. With a convincing progress of the movement, legislators enabled the development of compulsory laws of attendance. By the year 1918, all the states had accessibility to a simple form of education publicly for all the elementary aged students (Giuliani, 2012).
The introduction of compulsory high school education followed with the progress over the years. With the progress in the education system, the federal government could not enable the provision of public education funding until the year 1958. This followed with the introduction of the National Defence of the Education Act. During the period, the provision of educational services to the children having hearing and vision disabilities was possible in any state run facility. There was rare provision of services to the local communities, which was to enable the disabled children, remain at their respective homes. The services in the education system for the children having different disability types were not possible (Kirk et al, 2012).
A national movement meant to correct education inequalities followed in 1965 for the economically challenged persons or disabled. This resulted to passing of the Public Law (P.L 89-10) also referred to as ESEA Act. The addition of the Education of the Handicapped Act followed in 1970s rottenly referred to as Part B. The move led to the establishment of grant programs meant for expanding program developments for the local districts. This is with services offered to the disabled children. During the time, the open discussion as to the appropriateness in the delivery of services to the disabled children was not considerable. The congress addressed the appropriateness in the education system for the disabled children through passing an amendment with P.L. 94-142 subsequent passage (Kirk et al, 2012).
The amended act mandated FAPE with responsibilities with ensured due process, Least Restrictive Placements and Individual Education Plans (Kirk et al, 2012). It restrictively stipulated that the local education authorities to enable the provision of educational services to the community restraints. This enabled children having disabilities to continue staying with their respective families. Although there was a provision of accessibility to schools within the specified districts, it still encouraged the creation of two tracks of education with one for the nondisabled and the second one for disabled children. The reauthorization of the law followed late in the 1990 with renaming to IDEA. This has extensive with the continuing amendments enabled the accessibility to education services for the disabled children. This is through the encouragement of providing support and relating services to children in specified settings of general education (Rotatori, 2011).
Issues In Free Appropriate Public Education Law Suits Addresses
Free Appropriate Public Education issues relating to IDEA are on the basis of two arguments, which are: segregating disable children in classes or programs denies them the opportunity to access the normal experience like any other normal children, and segregation services do not result in adequate education for disabled students (Burns, 2001).
The law suits address issues relating to IDEA requirements like providing a child with a disability individual services such as transport, accommodation for these children who use adaptive equipments, and least restrictive environments by analyzing a suit by the plaintiff who experiences denial of these services (Burns, 2001). Law requires that before a child with a disability receives these services including Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individual with Disabilities Act, assessment of the child is mandatory by a state assessor. After identification of disability, the child gets the right for Free Appropriate Public Education, and services from the state. The child receives an IEP (Individualized Education Plan), which after combination by a team of educators, as well as the parent in the school where the child studies. This IEP indicates the services which the child as a right to receive while in school. Failure to provide these services to the child is a violation of the law a case where the parent can decide to file a suit in court.
When the IEP is in place, the parent of the child with a disability has the right to demand a change or modification of the child’s IEP service structure if they find appropriate. In other instances, teachers can decide to include another service they think the student with a disability will require, or even take away others as the child grows and the previous services becomes irrelevant. Many of the issues law suits address include these where the teachers or parents of students with disabilities decide to add or take away from the IEP, with or without notification of the relevant parties or after notification but the other party disagrees. These changes in the service for the child with disability law suits address can be within the procedural IDEA and FAPE requirements or not.
IDEA contains contains provisions for these procedural protections. When a parent of a child with disability files suit for IEP violation in a federal court, IDEA directs the court to assess the evidence and grant relief it finds appropriate. This statutory section enables the court to establish suitable remedies for the IEP services violation. A common remedy law suits grant under IDEA is the compensatory education. It requires the school board to provide the child with disability appropriate educational services, to substitute for the past failure in providing FAPE. The compensatory educational services can include summer educational services, physical therapy, occupational therapy, tutoring, or small group instruction.
Another issue lawsuits address in FAPE is the inclusion of children with disabilities in regular school programs. This is in accordance to the IDEA regulation 300.114(a)(2) general LRE requirement states that public agencies should ensure to the maximum extent appropriate that students with disabilities, including those in public, private institutions or care facilities, receive education together with children without disability. Parents can file a complaint to request the school administration for reimbursement of tuition fees if the school board has not developed an appropriate IEP for the child with a disability. In some occasion, the court can decide to deny reimbursement. A parent can decide to appeal before a federal court under IDEA. Here, the reviewing court addresses the case and makes an independent assessment of the IEP basing on the evidence and make a decision on the case on the preponderance of the evidence.
Newport News School Board vs Jaynes (2001)
The parents of Stefan who is suffering from autism since the age of two request a referral from LEA. The mother signs a “consent to testing” form but does not get advice of her parental rights. In 1994, Stefan is eligible for the individual services and the creation of IEP follows. The mother does not attend the IEP team meeting even after notification. They receive the IEP copy and sign it. The parents did not receive “Advisement of Parental Rights” including their rights to a process hearing. This LEA delays the implementation of IEP even with continuous requests by Stefan’s parents, which forces them to place Stefan in a private program. In 1996, they learn that they can contest the IEPs in a court hearing. The Fourth Circuit finds that the LEA did not notify Stefan’s parents their right, and the procedural violation explains the failure to provide Stefan with FAPE (Carie and Ingrid, 2007).
In order to benefit from IDEA’s law suits protections, children with disabilities’ parents should follow the procedures in IDEA. While IDEA provides a right to place a law suit, parents have a responsibility to exhaust all proper administrative remedies to challenge IDEA or its requirements decisions. IDEA outlines a clear appeal process, which parents must conclude each process before moving to the next (Carie and Ingrid, 2007).
Free Appropriate Public Education exists in every facet of life (Oklahoma, 2006). The All-inclusive institutions enhance positive out of school impacts by setting an example for the disabled students’ other areas in life. A parent of a 12 year old boy suffering from down syndrome found inclusiveness for all children because of FAPE the son receives equal treatment as a team member, like any other child in the community recreation program. According to the parent, this enhances self esteem for the child, which develops the habit of physical activity, and a sense of membership with other children. Many disable children including those suffering from physical impairments, Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), hearing impairments, desire to do everything that everyone else is doing (Oklahoma, 2006). Least Restrictive Environment requirement in IDEA, mobilize students, both disable and able students, teachers, parents, members of the community, come together and create a new educational culture which supports Free and Appropriate Public Education in IDEA. The beneficial outcomes of law suits address to FAPE will depend if all parties would participate to the full of one’s capacity as partners or members (Vazquez, 2010). The Least Restrictive Environment legal requirement will not only benefit the students with disabilities alone, but the schools and teachers too. If the current move, to Least Restrictive Environment models for educating students with disabilities integrates collaborative planning in the education frameworks, modification of education needs, and the involvement of the teachers as crucial components of the Least Restrictive Environment educational process. Benefits will increase if programming decisions focus on individual students’ needs, school attributes, and the expertise of the building professionals of these Least Restrictive Environment schools. Many students including students with disabilities and those without will benefit a lot from this legal requirement relating to IDEA (deBettencourt, 2002). These programs enhance collaboration and peer support, which are two crucial aspects for successful inclusion (Council for Exceptional Children, 2003).
Conclusion
The students with special needs form a vital segment in the society since if well educated they will have the same yield as their nondisabled colleagues. This formed the basis for the formation of FAPE by IDEA and Rehabilitation Act since there was little regard of the students in most of the schools. The parents and the teacher involve should always ensure that the disabled children always receive the relevant services; through ensuring that there are constant modifications on the IEP services. To rescue the students with disabilities, the parents and the teacher should always ensure that they have exposed the students to LRE that act as a boost in their morale. The FAPE program protects the disable student to the extent of forcing the parents to complete law suits proceedings even when they plan to remove their children from these public or private schools.
References
Office for Civil Rights (ED), W. C. (2007). Free Appropriate Public Education for Students with Disabilities: Requirements under Section 504 of the “Rehabilitation Act of 1973.” Revised. US Department Of Education,
Conroy, T., Yell, M. L., Katsiyannis, A., & Collins, T. S. (2010). The U.S. Supreme Court and Parental Rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Focus On Exceptional Children, 43(2), 1-16.
Special Education News, (2012). FAPE – Free Appropriate Public Education. Retrieved from: http://www.specialednews.com/special-education-dictionary/fape—free-appropriate- public-education.htm
Giuliani, G. A. (2012). The comprehensive guide to special education law: Over 400 frequently asked questions and answers every educator needs to know about the legal rights of exceptional children and their parents. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Kirk, S. A., Kirk, S. A., Gallagher, J. J., Coleman, M. R., & Anastasiow, N. (2012). Educating exceptional children. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Rotatori, A. F., Obiakor, F. E., & Bakken, J. P. (2011). History of special education. Bingley: Emerald.
Carie, L. H., and Ingrid, M. J. (2007). Free Appropriate Public Education in the Fourth
Circuit. Chapel Hill: School of Government, the University of North Carolina.
Council for Exceptional Children, Arlington, VA. (2003). Discover IDEA: Supporting
Achievement for Children with Disabilities. An IDEA Practices Resource Guide.
Council for Exceptional Children, 1110 North Glebe Rd., Arlington.
deBettencourt, L. U. (January 01, 2002). Understanding the Differences between IDEA
and Section 504. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34, 3, 16-23.
Oklahoma. (2006). Special education parent handbook: For children with disabilities,
their families, schools, and community. Oklahoma City: Oklahoma State Dept. of
Education.
Vazquez, M. F. (2010). Inclusionary practices: Impact of administrators’ beliefs on
placement decisions. Orlando, Fla: University of Central Florida.
