1 / 16

MNU Landmark Special Education Court Cases

MNU Landmark Special Education Court Cases. Dr. Judy Martin Session 2 – January 14, 2014. U.S. Supreme Court Cases. Supreme Court Cases Driving Special Education BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the HENDRICK HUDSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, et al., Petitioners

cady
Download Presentation

MNU Landmark Special Education Court Cases

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MNULandmark Special Education Court Cases Dr. Judy Martin Session 2 – January 14, 2014

  2. U.S. Supreme Court Cases Supreme Court Cases Driving Special Education • BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the HENDRICK HUDSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, et al., Petitioners v. Amy ROWLEY, by her parents and natural guardians, Clifford and Nancy Rowley etc. • SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF the TOWN OF BURLINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, et al., Petitioners v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF the Commonwealth of MASSACHUSETTS et al. • FLORENCE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR et al. v. CARTER, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, CARTER • IRVING INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. TATRO ET UX., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIENDS OF TATRO, A MINOR • CEDAR RAPIDS COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT v. GARRET F., a minor, by his mother and next friend, CHARLENE F.

  3. Court Case: Rowley The foundation for any special education question.  It sets the standard for determining whether an IEP meets legal requirements 1. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the HENDRICK HUDSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, et al., Petitioners v. Amy ROWLEY, by her parents and natural guardians, Clifford and Nancy Rowley etc. No. 80-1002. Argued March 23, 1982. Decided June 28, 1982. Review Rowley:

  4. Court Case: Burlington Authorizes parents to seek private school expenses if IEP does not comply with IDEA SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF the TOWN OF BURLINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS, et al., Petitioners v. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF the Commonwealth of MASSACHUSETTS et al. No. 84-433. Argued March 26, 1985. Decided April 29, 1985. Review Burlington:

  5. Court Case: Carter Expands on Burlington to authorize parents to seek private school expenses even if the private school does not itself meet IDEA requirements for LRE FLORENCE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUR et al.v.CARTER, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, CARTER No. 91-1523.Supreme Court of United States. Argued October 6, 1993. Decided November 9, 1993. Review Carter:

  6. Court Case: Tatro Defines the scope of “related services” IRVING INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICTv.TATRO ET UX., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT FRIENDS OF TATRO, A MINOR No. 83-558.Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 16, 1984 Decided July 5, 1984 Review Tatro:

  7. Court Case: Cedar Rapids(Tatro) Continues with the Tatro case of “Related Services” CEDAR RAPIDS COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICTv.GARRET F., a minor, by his mother and next friend, CHARLENE F. No. 96-1793.United States Supreme Court. Argued November 4, 1998. Decided March 3, 1999. Review Cedar Rapids:

  8. MNUFour Ethical Systems Dr. Judy Martin Session 2 – January 14, 2014

  9. Ethics & Systems • Bumper Stickers: • Be careful to not stake the importance of an ethical decisions in a small area • Ideas expressed in a “bite-sized” portion can have broader implications. • Bumper stickers do not give specific solutions, only provide the initial process for making decisions • The PROCESS of how we work through moral issues is called an ETHICAL SYSTEM.

  10. Ethics & Systems • Ethical Options: • Ideas we are faced with are religious, political, economic & social • We have to make choices in these areas • The existence of conflicting views • No ethical approach is perfect – the law of ethics

  11. Ethics & Systems • Ethics as a Discipline • The idea that ethics can be studied can be confusing. We make decisions about things every day. • Examining ethical problems in our world (abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, capitol punishment) • Examining ethical systems

  12. Ethics & Systems • Ethics with Theory & Life • Bumper sticker: “Whatever you do, don’t get caught” or “Thou shalt not steal” or “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” • We all have different motives for these statements • We cannot opt our of making ethical decision

  13. Ethics & Systems • Ethics and worldviews • Every ethical system is part of something bigger, a worldview. • Worldviews= our beliefs and assumptions about how the world fits together Ultimate Reality – in every ethical system there is a connection between a concept of ultimate reality and the origin of wright and wrong Human Nature – Why do we do what we do? Is it our freedom to make decisions? Ethics deals with Human Beings.

  14. 4 Ethical Systems • Cultural Relativism • Ethical Egoism • Behaviorism • Utilitarianism

  15. Examples of Matrix

  16. Matrix Template

More Related