Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
court case
sped court case
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Student Education Act – 1988 PL 100-297 | Fed funds provided economically disadvantaged,demonstrate limited English proficiency or have disability andidentified as gt |
| 1954 – Brown vs. Bd of Ed | separate but = |
| 1967 – Hobson vs. Hansen | based only on IQ– tracking system for all was discriminatorily unconstitutional |
| 1972 – Mills v Bd of Ed | $ financial problems can’t be reason for lack of approp. programs |
| 1972–Pennsyl. Asso. For Retarded Citizens vs Commonwealth of PA | MR right FAPE |
| 1979 – Armstrong v Kline | extended school year services |
| 1979– Larry P vs Riles | IQ test not used as primary or sole basis of placing students in sped program |
| 1982 – Bd of Ed of Hudson School District vs Rowley | right to IEP |
| 1983 – Abrahamson v Hershman | $ district funds pay for training and education for student w/multiple disabilities in a private residential placement |
| 1984 – Dept. of Ed vs. Katherine D | LRE home instruction for student w/multiple health problems didn’t follow LRE |
| 1984 Irving Independent School District v. Tatro | MED service forced school to provide non-physician required med services to all a physically impaired student to attend school |
| 1988 Honig vs Doe | misbehavior students w/disabilities not excluded for misbehavior that is disability related but services could cease if behavior was not related to disability |
| 1989 Timothy vs. Rochester School District | FAPE All receive FAPE without exception |
| 1993- Zobrest vs. Catalina School District – | Parochial student is provided assistance of related service pertaining to disability-doesn’t violate separation of church and state |
| 1993 – Oberti vs. Bd of Ed | MR support family preference to educated child with MR in gen ed class |
| 1998- Foley v. Special School District of St. Louis County | not $ for private school -public schools not obligated to provide sped services if parents choose to place child in private school |
| 1999- Cedar Rapids v. Garrett F | med services needed to child w/disability to access and benefit from sped must be provided by school as long as service doesn’t require physician. |
Created by:
amjshock
Popular Standardized Tests sets