Frequency Trends of Court Decisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

Autor/inn/en	Bailey, Tessie Rose; Zirkel, Perry A.
Titel	Frequency Trends of Court Decisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
Quelle	In: Journal of Special Education Leadership, 28 (2015) 1, S.3-13 (11 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1525-1810
Schlagwörter	Equal Education; Students with Disabilities; Educational Legislation; Federal Legislation; Incidence; Court Litigation; Geographic Location; Special Education; Enrollment; Educational Policy; Geographic Regions; State Courts; Civil Rights; New York; Pennsylvania; District of Columbia; United States; California; Illinois; New Jersey; Hawaii; Texas; Connecticut; Virginia + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Student; Students; Disability; Disabilities; Schüler; Schülerin; Studentin; Behinderung; Bildungsrecht; Schulgesetz; Bundesrecht; Vorkommen; Rechtsstreit; Special needs education; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen; Einschulung; Politics of education; Bildungspolitik; Staatsgerichtshof; Bürgerrechte; Grundrechte; Zivilrecht; USA; Kalifornien
Abstract	The purpose of this analysis is to provide systematic and up-to-date data on the frequency of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2012) court decisions on a state-by-state basis, not only overall, but in relation to special education enrollments. This empirical analysis revealed notable differences among state rankings in the frequencies of court decisions under the IDEA on overall and per capita bases for the period of 1979-2013. The findings reveal that on an overall basis, 10 jurisdictions, led by New York, Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia, accounted for almost two thirds of the IDEA court decisions, while the 10 jurisdictions with the fewest number of decisions, led by North Dakota, Wyoming, and Utah, accounted for less than 3% of decisions. The findings fill an existing gap in the research and provide special education administrators and policy makers the most comprehensive available data on the frequency of the judicial decisions, which is the most costly level of dispute resolution under the IDEA. The primary policy recommendation is to put a concerted priority on the limited number of jurisdictions in the high frequency per capita group rather than investing efforts on revising the adjudicative procedures in the next IDEA reauthorization. The primary research recommendation is for follow-up studies to identify the factors that contribute to the wide variation in frequency of judicial litigation rates among and within the states. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Council of Administrators of Special Education. 1675 East Seminole Street Suite L1, Springfield, MO 65804. Tel: 417-427-7720; Fax: 417-427-6520; e-mail: office@casecec.org; Web site: https://www.casecec.org/journal
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01