Defining Educational Benefit: An Update on the U.S. Supreme Court's Ruling in "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District" (2017)

Autor/inn/en	Yell, Mitchell L.; Bateman, David
Titel	Defining Educational Benefit: An Update on the U.S. Supreme Court's Ruling in "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District" (2017)
Quelle	In: TEACHING Exceptional Children, 52 (2020) 5, S.283-290 (8 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Yell, Mitchell L.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0040-0599
DOI	10.1177/0040059920914259
Schlagwörter	Court Litigation; Individualized Education Programs; Equal Education; Access to Education; Students with Disabilities; Special Education; Educational Legislation; Federal Legislation; Program Implementation; Public Education; Standards; Definitions; Educational Benefits; Student Needs + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Rechtsstreit; Individualized education program; Individualisierendes Lernen; Education; Access; Bildung; Zugang; Bildungszugang; Student; Students; Disability; Disabilities; Schüler; Schülerin; Studentin; Behinderung; Special needs education; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen; Bildungsrecht; Schulgesetz; Bundesrecht; Öffentliche Erziehung; Standard; Begriffsbestimmung; Bildungsertrag
Abstract	This article begins with a scenario depicting the difficulties encountered by a young student in the Douglas County School District in Castle Rock, Colorado, named Endrew (called Drew by his parents). This situation, which began at Drew's individualized education program (IEP) meeting at Summit Ridge Elementary School when he was in fourth grade, led to a due-process hearing and two federal court cases and eventually resulted in the seminal ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in "Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District" (or "Endrew F."; 2017). The ruling, which was written by chief justice John Roberts, defined the educational-benefit standard that school districts must meet in developing a free appropriate public education (FAPE) for students with disabilities who receive special education services under the IDEA. Following the high court's ruling, the case went back through the two lower federal courts that first heard the case. A few months after the Supreme Court's ruling, the authors published an article in "TEACHING Exceptional Children" in which they reviewed the decision and provided implications for special educators for implementing programs that meet the FAPE standard of the the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2006) (see EJ1160170). The purpose of this article is to provide an update of that article and to examine the effects of the "Endrew F." ruling 3 years after it was announced. To accomplish this, the authors (1) review the definition of FAPE in the IDEA; (2) reexamine and update the Supreme Court's decision in "Endrew F."; and (3) extrapolate principles for educators from "Endrew F." with respect to development of students' IEPs. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01