LEGAL ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT - University of Dayton法律问题的评价-戴顿大学.pptVIP

LEGAL ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT - University of Dayton法律问题的评价-戴顿大学.ppt

  1. 1、原创力文档(book118)网站文档一经付费(服务费),不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。。
  2. 2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传,本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺!文档内容仅供研究参考,付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费,意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务;查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档,您可以点击 这里二次下载
  3. 3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“版权申诉”(推荐),也可以打举报电话:400-050-0827(电话支持时间:9:00-18:30)。
  4. 4、该文档为VIP文档,如果想要下载,成为VIP会员后,下载免费。
  5. 5、成为VIP后,下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后,不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们
  6. 6、成为VIP后,您将拥有八大权益,权益包括:VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
  7. 7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传,每下载1次, 网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等,对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档
查看更多
LEGAL ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT - University of Dayton法律问题的评价-戴顿大学

LEGAL ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT CHAPTER TWO CHAPTER OBJECTIVES The basic problems with respect to discrimination in special education The landmark court cases in special education Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act P.L. 93-380: The Family Education Rights and Privacy Act P.L. 94-142: The Education of All Handicapped Children’s Act The procedural safeguards under P.L. 94-142 CHAPTER OBJECTIVES P.L. 98-524: The Vocational Education Act of 1984- the Perkins Act P.L. 99-457: Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 1986 P.L. 105-17: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA ’97) P.L. 101-336: The Americans with Disabilities Act No Child Left Behind The role of state and federal government in establishing and implementing laws pertaining to special education. Prior to 1975 The two types of discrimination most evident were: The exclusion of students with disabilities altogether from school. The classification of students with disabilities when, in actuality, no disability was present. LANDMARK COURT CASES IN SPECIAL EDUCATION BROWN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION of TOPEKA, KANSAS- 1954 The court ruled that it was illegal practice under the Fourteenth Amendment to arbitrarily discriminate against any group of people. It then applied this principle to the schooling of children. HOBSON v. HANSEN- 1967 Court declared D.C. school system’s tracking system invalid, but allowed for special classes providing testing procedures were rigorous and that testing was frequent. DIANA v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION- 1970 California was mandated to correct bias in assessment procedures. If a student’s primary language was not English… Culturally unfair items… Intelligence tests had to be developed… PARC v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA- 1972 Court ratified a consent agreement assuring that schools may not exclude students who have been classified with MR. The court mandated that all students must be provided with a free public education. WYATT v. S

您可能关注的文档

文档评论(0)

wuyoujun92 + 关注
实名认证
文档贡献者

该用户很懒,什么也没介绍

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档