1967

The case Hobson v. Hansen was one of the first litigations that
included special education within the broader context of segregation and
labelling Of children.
Judge Skelly Wright ruled that the doctrine of equal educational
opportunity is a part of the law of due process, and denying an equal
educational opportunity is a violation of the Constitution (Hardman et
al.,] 990, p. 42).
The judge further declared that the track system, which used
standardized tests as a basis for special education placement, was
unconstitutional because it discriminated against black and poor children
(Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35). According to Kokasca and Brolin
(1985),
the case established additional precedent for future right-
to-education-suits in the following ways;

 School districts had to provide evidence that programs were yielding

adequate results. It was not enough for school districts to intend to
design adequate programs for students.
 Placement of students into appropriate programs had to be
substantiated by adequate procedures and supporting evidence. Tie
courts would not accept procedures that violated the constitutional
rights of the child, or tests that were inappropriate for the intended
educational objectives.
 Special education has to examine its unwilling partnership in de facto
segregation and the practice of placing students into categories of
disability (p. 17).
 The National Advisory Committee on
Handicapped Children drafted and
presented to Congress a definition of
learning disabilities, one that still stands as
a basic definition used to govern dispersal
of federal funds for support of services for
children with learning disabilities (Heward
& Qrlansky, 1989, p. 128).
 The CEC established the Division for
Children with Learning Disabilities (DCLD)
(Heward & Orlansky, J 989, p. 128).
Dunn published his article, "Special Education for
the Mildly Retarded—Is Much of It Justifiable?" in
Exceptional Children (Dunn, 1968). The article
served as the "conscience" for many educators
who began to question their placement practices
(Dunn, 1968). In addition to questioning
placement, Dunn also questioned the use of
disability labeling by saying that they "are [not]
badges of distinction."
Continuation…

Instead he recommended using labels that describe the nature of

the education the students would receive:

…we would thus be talking of students who need special

instruction in language or cognitive development, in sensory
training, in personality development, in vocational training, and
other areas (Dunn, 1968, p. 17, in Turnbull et al., 1999, p. 14).

 Dunn is considered a pioneer in modern special education and is

credited, together with Deno and Gallagher, to have ushered in the
concept of integration or mainstreaming.
 1969
The White House Conference was held. The concept of
normalization was promoted. P.L. 91-230. Elementary, Secondary, and
Other Educational Amendments defined learning disabilities; provided
funds for state-level programs for children with learning disabilities
(Heward & Orlansky, 1988, P. 36).

The Children with Learning Disabilities Act (Part of P.L. 91-239) was
passed by Congress. legislation authorized a 5-year program of federal
funds for training and establishment of model demonstration programs
for students with learning disabilities (Heward & Orlansky, 1989, p.
129).
...the period between the 1860s and the
1960s has been referred to as the
"Hundred Years War" because of the
enduring struggle between oral English
proponents and manual signed language
proponents (Lou, 1988, cited in
Drasgow, 1998, p. 329).
 1970
In the Philippines, particularly in the University of the Philippines,
a new area of specialization in the Master's program was instituted—
Master of Arts in Teaching in Special Education, major in Behavioral
Problems (Adorio, 1979, p. 31). Area of Hearing Impairment was
transferred to the Philippine Normal College, now the Philippine
Normal University.

Diana v. State Board of Education (California) declared that

children cannot be placed in special education on the basis of
culturally biased tests or tests given in other than the child's language
(Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 42).
Continuation…

Specifically, the case requires that:

 linguistically different students must be tested in their
primary language as well as English.
 students cannot be placed in special education classes
on the basis of IQ tests that are culturally biased.
 verbal test items must be revised so as to reflect
student's cultural heritage.
 group administered IQ tests cannot be used to place
children in programs for individuals with mental
retardation (Gargiulo, p. 44).
Evelyn Deno proposed the concept of a cascade of
services, describing it as:
The cascade system is designed to make available whatever
different-from. the mainstream kind of setting is required to
control the learning Variables deemed critical for the individual
case.

Deno is considered one of the three leaders in special

education who dared find new and better ways of serving
children with disabilities. The other two were Lloyd Dunn and
James Gallagher.
 Joint Commission on the mental health of Children published its first
report, entitled Crisis in Child Mental Health to advise the government
[U.S.] of the health needs of children and to make recommendations for
the programs to meet those needs.

The report included a statement regarding the rights of the child (Suran &
Rizzo, 1979, p. 18). Berlin (1975) revised the statement as "Bill of Rights."
The 8th provision in Berlin's version of the Bill of Rights for Children that
particularly refers to children with special needs is the following:

Eight: The right to Diagnostic, Treatment, and Rehabilitative Care

through Facilities which are Appropriate to Children 's Needs and
which Keep Them as Closely as Possible within Their Normal Social
Setting (cited in Suran & Rizzo, 1979, p. 18).
 1971
AnAmerican television show
—an episode of Julia Child's
The French Chef—was
captioned for deaf viewers
(Shapiro, 1993, p. 84).
 1972
 Wolf Wolfensberger introduced the concept of normalization to the United States, word
coined by Bengt Nirje of Sweden (Gargiulo, 2003, p. 21).
 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
was a class action suit that established the right to free public education for all children
with mental retardation. The court decided against exclusion and noted that:
Without exception, expert opinion indicates that all mentally retarded persons are
capable of benefiting from a program of education... The vast majority are capable of
achieving self-sufficiency and the remaining few, with such education and training are
capable of achieving some degree of self-care; that the earlier such education and training
begins, the more thoroughly and more efficiently a mentally retarded person can benefit at
any point in his life and development from a program of education. (PARC v. Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, 1972 quoted in Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 377).
In the same decision, the court recognized that:
It is the commonwealth 's obligation to place each mentally
retarded child in a free, public program of education and training
appropriate to the child's capacity.. ..
Placement in a regular public school class is preferable to
placement in a special public school class [i.e., a class for children with
disabilities] and placement in a special public school is preferable to
placement in any other type of program of education and training.
An assignment to homebound instruction shall be reevaluated not
less than every 3 months, and notice of the evaluation and an
opportunity for a hearing thereon shall be accorded to the parent or
guardian (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 38).
 The court ordered the Pennsylvania schools to provide a
free public education to all retarded children ages 6 to 21,
commensurate with their individual learning needs. In
addition, pre-school education district was providing it for
other children (Hardman et al., 1990, p. 41).
On the other hand, Mills v. Board of Education of the District
of Columbia established the right of every child to an equal
opportunity for education and declared that lack of funds was
not an acceptable excuse for lack of educational opportunity
(Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35; italics provided).
The case expanded the Pennsylvania decision to include all
handicapped children. The District of Columbia schools were
ordered to provide a free and appropriate education to every
school-age child with disabilities (Hardman et al., 1990, P. 41).
 An important result in the Mills v. Board of Education of District of
Columbia case was the court's decision that a child with a handicapping
condition could not be excluded from school on the basis of a claim of
insufficient resources by the school district (Yell & Espin, 1990, p. 398;
underlining provided).

Wyatt v. Stickney (Alabama) declared that individuals in state

institutions have the right to appropriate treatment within those
institutions. This was the first major court action in behalf of
mentally retarded persons residing in public institutions (Cavalier &
McCarver, 1981).

The court described the institutional facilities as human

warehouses steeped in an atmosphere of psychological and physical
deprivation. It specified that the state must make changes to
ensure a therapeutic environment.
'The court stipulated that patients have
the right to:
1. privacy and dignity;
2. manage their own affairs, including marriage, divorce, and
voting privileges;
3. have visitors, make phone calls, and receive confidential
mail;
4. be free from physical restraint and isolation;
5. wear their own clothes and keep personal possessions',
6. an adequate medical program; and
7. be free from experimental research without informed consent
(Hardman et al., 1990, p. 28).
Meanwhile, the Ruiz v. State Board of California case
brought into focus group testing and its attendant
placement in special education programs as a result of bias
in assessment and classification. The state school system
was charged with using procedures that resulted in
disproportionate number of minority group children being
classified as having handicaps and placed in programs that
have stigma. This case led to constraints in group
intelligence testing (Sage & Burrello, 1986, p. 42).
The eight-year research on the public school and agency
classification of minority children in California by Jane
Mercer pointed to the public school system as the primary
labeler of individuals as mentally retarded. The research
was widely disseminated.
 During the same year, a Canadian advocacy group held the
country's first conference on how to set up self-advocacy for and of
persons with retardation. The meeting took place in Vancouver
Island in British Columbia. That meeting was attended by Dennis
Heath and three men with retardation from Oregon, U.S.A. (Shapiro,
1993, p. 196). The four U.S. participants initiated the People First of
Oregon Conference a year later.

International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), meanwhile,

initiated computer programmer training for severely physically
disabled persons. Working with vocational rehabilitation agencies,
training facilities, and the business sector, it had trained 895 persons
in 22 active projects. Between 1974 and 1981, placement of
computer programmers from these projects ranged from 86% to
1000/0 per year (Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 33).
 The Federal Special Education Agency (then the Bureau of Education for the
Handicapped) endorsed career education. The Director of the Bureau, Edwin Martin,
declared career education a top priority and made funds available for a large number of
curriculum and materials development projects, in- service training, and research studies
(Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 36).
James Gallagher proposed for an individualized contract that would safeguard against
direct and permanent placements. In his article, Special Education Contract for Mildly
Handicapped Children," published in Exceptional Children in 1972, Gallagher wrote
…require a contract signed between parents and educators, with specific goals and a
clear time limit. This contract should before a maximum of 2 years and would be
nonrenewable, or renewable only under quasi-judicial type of hearing, with parents
represented by legal or child advocate counsel. The contract, composed after a careful
educational diagnosis, would commit the special educational personnel to measurable
objectives that would be upgraded on a sixth-month interval (Gallagher, 1972, pp. 151-152
cited in Turnbull et al., 1999, p. 16.)
Gallagher's recommendations found their way into the Individualized Educational
Program (IEP). Dunn, Deno and Gallagher are considered three leaders who changed
special education (Turnbull et al., 1999, p. 13—16).
 1973
 P.L.93-112, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, actually
adopted in 1977, declared that:
No otherwise qualified handicapped individual in the
United States, as defined in section 7(6), shall, solely by
reason of his/her handicap, be excluded from the
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal
financial assistance (Sage & Burrello, 1986, p, 51).
Serving as a "Bill of Rights" for exceptional individuals, Section 504 of
P.L 93-112 ensured that:

… the handicapped of America should have access to education and

jobs, and should not be denied anything that any other citizen is
entitled to or already receives (Patton et al., 1986, p. 25 citing La
Vor, 1977, p. 249).

Some 560 self-advocates attended the People First of Oregon

conference. Among the topics discussed in workshops by persons with
retardation were "how to get placed in the community" and "what to
say when someone called them retarded" (Shapiro, 1993, p. 197).

A U.S. District Court enjoined the federal government to disallow

funding for sterilization of women with retardation (Shapiro, 1993, p.
197).
Continuation…

A National Topical Conference on Career Education for

Exceptional Children and Youth was held.
This was co-sponsored by the Council for Exceptional
Children and the American Vocational Association.
The conference launched the concept of
multidisciplinary career education which received
endorsement from professional teacher associations
(Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 36).
1974
P.L. 93-380: Education Amendments extended
previous legislation; provided money to state
and local districts for programs for the gifted
and talented students for the first time.
The law also protected the rights of
handicapped children and parents in
placement decisions (Heward & Orlansky, 1988,
P. 36).
 1975
The Landmark law protecting children with special
needs—Education for All Handicapped Children Act
(EHA) or P.L. 94-142 was signed by President Gerald
Ford.
The law mandated the following:
1.provide free, appropriate public education for all
handicapped children, regardless of severity of
handicap;
2. protect the rights of handicapped children and
parents in educational decision-making;
3. require an individualized educational program (IEP)
to be developed for each handicapped child; and
4. ensure that handicapped students receive
educational services in the least restrictive
environment (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 37).
Implementation of P.L. 94-142 began in 1978 (Meyen, 1990, p.
19).
P.L. 94-142 makes free and appropriate public education
available for all handicapped children in the U.S. The four
major components of this law are:
1. nondiscriminatory and multidisciplinary assessment of
educational needs;
2. parental involvement in developing child's educational
program;
3. education in an environment suited to individual needs; and
4. an individualized education program (Hardman et al., 1990,
p. 41).
  The nature of education was likewise affected by the law, Words
such as "individualized education program," "short-term objectives,"
and objective criteria" became pedagogical jargon of special education
teachers. "became concept of individualized instruction is now generally
in place throughout the field of education.
The roles of both special and regular teachers have been changed as
a result of the passage of the law. Regular teachers must serve a more
diverse group of children and assume functions such as instruction of
special students in her class, diagnosis and assessment, and interaction
with parents (Bauer & Shea, 1989, p.8).
• Considering such, P.L. 94-142 has been called a "pragmatic theory
of special education" (Noonan & Reese, 1984, p. 9)
• P.L. 94-103 Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights
Act affirmed the rights of individuals with mental retardation and cited
areas where services must be provided for those with retardation and
other developmental disabilities.
• The Bureau of Education for the Handicapped (BEH) sponsored a
conference for nationally recognized leaders titled "Research Needs
Related to Career Education for the Handicapped" (Kokasca & Brolin,
1985, p. 38).
• The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps (TASH) was
founded (Heward, 2009, p. 91).
 1976
 The Division on Career Development (DCD) was provisionally approved as the 12th
Division of the Council for Exceptional Children by an overwhelming vote of its Board of
Governors (Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 38).
 The Vocational Education Amendments was passed. The law required that 10% of
federal funds be allocated for handicapped students, as outlined in P.L. 94-142 (Kokasca
& Broiin, 1985, p. 38).
 A year after P.L. 94-142 and on the bicentennial year of special education, Dunn (cited
in Aiello, 1976) argued:
We need to take the whole concept of least restrictive alternative and put meat to it.
Some important questions need to be asked such as: What exactly does the terminology
mean? What does it mean in terms of special services? How is the process accomplished in
terms of the regular class? (p. 251)
Continuation…
 In the same vein, John Tenney (cited in Aiello, 1976)
stated:
Mainstreaming has been in existence in some form
since 1930. There were early efforts to integrate children
into regular programs at the Kellogg School in Michigan.
Fifty years later, we are still trying to make the concept
work (p. 251). Tie General Assembly of the United Nations
declared 1971 the International Year of the Child (IYC).
Key objectives for this year were the promotion of child
advocacy and the call to action on the parts of nations,
organizations, and individuals to meet the physical,
intellectual, psychological, and social needs of all children
(Suran & Rizzo, 1979, pp. 17-18).
 1977
 The Career Education Implementation Incentive Act (P.L. 95-207)
helped the states infuse career education into school curriculum
so that it became part of ongoing local instruction, and was not
just considered a vocation education. Congress declared:
 A major purpose of education is to prepare every individual for a
career suitable to that individual's preference.. : career
education should be an integral part of the Nation's education
process which serves as preparation for work (including students
with handicaps) (Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 38).
 1978
 P.L. 95-561 : Gifted and Talented Children 's Education Act provided financial incentives for
states and local education agencies to identify and educate gifted and talented students, and
to be used for in-service training and research (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 37).
 The Council for Exceptional Children issued a position paper supporting career education. The
Council described career education as:

the totality of experiences through which one learns to live a meaningful, satisfying work
life... provides the opportunity for children to learn, In the least restrictive environment
possible, the academic, daily living, personal-social and occupational knowledge and specific
vocational skills necessary for attaining their highest levels of economic, personal and social
fulfillment. The individual can obtain this fulfillment through work (both paid or unpaid) and in
a variety of other social roles and personal lifestyles. . . student, citizen, volunteer, family
member, and participant in meaningful leisure time activities. (Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 39)
Continuation….

 Inthe case of Stuart v. Nappi, the expulsion of a

pupil with disabilities for disciplinary reasons
without due process was disallowed.
 Expulsion was considered a change in placement
and a denial of the opportunity for an appropriate
education. However, school authorities can
temporarily suspend students with disabilities who
are disruptive (Gargiulo, 2003, p, 45).
 1979
 Central York District v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Education ruled that
school districts must provide services for gifted and talented children (Heward and
Orlansky, 1988). Larry P, v. Riles (San Francisco Unified District, California) ruled that IQ
tests cannot be used as the sole basis for placing children in special classes; the case was
first brought to court in 1972 (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35).
 The Larry v. Riles is the most publicized case on the issue of disproportionate placement
between Blacks and Whites in programs for students with mild retardation. More minority
students are said to be in the special classes than whites. Prasse (1988) suggests that the
ultimate outcome of the Larry P. v. Riles case is the "pervasive, if not insidious, link
between psychoeducational assessment and special education" (p. 304).
 Armstrong v. Kline (Pennsylvania) established the right of some severely handicapped
children to an extension of the 180-day public school year (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35).
 
Origin of Cooperative Learning

...had its origins in the early 1970s when social scientists at the
Center for Social Organization of Schools at the Johns Hopkins
University were called on to help Baltimore public school teachers
manage newly integrated classrooms. The teachers found that
children from diverse ethnic groups tended to re-segregate
themselves in the classroom, lunchroom, and social settings. They
sought ways to encourage students to get to know and accept
each other. Shared learning activities were developed in which
teams of learners could study together, tutor each other, and
earn team rewards. When researchers evaluated team learning,
they found that student interaction increased, acceptance of
minority students improved, as did the self-esteem of all students
(Gunter, Estes, & Schwab, 1990, p. 168).
 1980
The judge in the case of Armstrong v. Klein ruled that the refusal of the state to pay for schooling in excess of 180
days for pupils with severe disabilities is a violation of their rights to an appropriate education as required by P.L.
94-142. According to the court, some children with disabilities will regress significantly during summer recess and
will have longer recoupment Periods. Thus, they are denied an appropriate education if not provided with a year_
round education (Gargiulo, 2003, p, 45).
In a series of workshops (Programs for the Handicapped) held at the U.S. Library of Congress, the participants
discussed the developments in information resources, such as print media and telecommunications; educational
machinery that can be used to teach handicapped students; mechanical and electronic aids that can be used to help
rehabilitate individuals; devices that help to restore, facilitate, and augment communication of handicapped
individuals; and accessibility and usability of environment facilities (Kokasca & Brolin, 1985, p. 29).
The U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Tatro v. State of Texas, held that catheterization qualified as a related
service under P.L. 94-42. Catheterization was not considered as exempted medical procedure as it could be
performed by a healthcare aide or school nurse. The Court further stipulated that only those services that allow a
student to benefit from special education qualify as related services (Gargiulo, 2003, p. 45).
 1982
 Rowley v. Hendrick Hudson School District (New York) was the first case based on P.L. 94-42 to
reach the Supreme Court. While denying plaintiffs specific request, the Supreme Court upheld
each handicapped child's right to a personalized program of instruction and necessary supportive
services (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35).
 The Education Consolidation Act phased out the Federal Office of Gifted and Talented and merged
gifted education with 29 other programs. Federal dollars to support 30 different and wide-ranging
education programs (K- 12) are sent to the states in the form of block grants. There is no federal
legislation that requires states to provide SpEd programs for the gifted and talented (Heward &
Orlansky, 1998, p. 53).
 In the Philippines, the Education Act of 1982 or Batas Pambansa 232 was passed providing for the
education of children who are physically, mentally, emotionally or culturally different from the
norm (Yap, 2008, p. 13).
 1983
Abrahamson v. Hetshman (Massachusetts) declared that residential school was necessary for a
child with multiple handicaps who needed round-the- clock training. The court required the
school district to pay for private placement (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p. 35).
P.L. 98-199 Amendments to the Education of the Handicapped Act was signed. Among the
major features are:
1. restoration of the National Advisory Committee on the Education of Handicapped
Children and Youth; permission to use federal funds under the preschool incentive grant
program to serve handicapped children below age
2. establishments of grants to states for developing and implementing comprehensive plans
to provide early childhood education to all handicapped children from birth;
3. expansion of model demonstration postsecondary education programs, including
vocational, technical, continuing, and adult education;
6. establishment of a new program to stimulate and improve secondary
special education and transition to postsecondary education, vocational
rehabilitation, continuing education employment, independent living, and
other adult services;
7. refocusing of personnel preparation resources on the preparation of
special education personnel and requiring colleges and universities
receiving grants to meet state and professionally recognized standards;
8. establishment of grants for parent training and information;
9. establishment of a new clearinghouse for dissemination of information
on federal laws, career, and job opportunities in special education and
available services and programs in postsecondary education for the
handicapped; and
10. emphasis offederal research on the improvement of teaching
methodology and the application of new technologies toward improved
instruction (Sage & Burello, 1986, p. 57).
Continuation…

 The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC) was

published by Alan S. Kaufman and Nadeen L. Kaufman.
This standardized test of intelligence has a special non-
verbal scale composed of selected K-ABC subtests which
can be administered in pantomime and responded to
motorically. According to the authors, the K-ABC permits
fair evaluation of the intellectual functioning of hearing-
impaired, speech- and language-disordered, and non-
English speaking children (Kaufman, A. & Kaufman, N.,
1983, pp. 1-2).
 1984
 The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, a revision of the Vineland Social
Maturity Scales of Edgar A. Doll, was published by S. Sparrow, D. Balla, and D.
Cicchetti. In its introduction, the authors described VABS:

... Assess personal and social sufficiency of individuals from birth to

adulthood. The scales are applicable to handicapped and non-handicapped
individuals, Like the original, the revised Vineland does not require the direct
administration of tasks to an individual, but instead requires a respondent who is
familiar with the individual's behavior (p. l).
 Department of Education v. Katherine D. (Hawaii) declared
that a homebound instructional program for a child with
multiple health impairments did not meet the least-
restrictive-environment standard; called for the child to be
placed in a class with non-handicapped children and
provided with related medical services (Heward & Orlansky,
1988, p. 35).
 Irving Independent School District v. Tatro (Texas) ruled
that catheterization was necessary for a physically
handicapped child to remain in school and that it could be
performed by a non-physician, thus obligating the school
district to provide that service (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, p.
35).
 Smith v. Robinson (Rhode Island) ordered the state to pay a
severely handicapped child's placement in a residential
program and ordered the school district to reimburse the
parents' attorney fees (Heward & Orlansky, 1988, pp. 35-36).
The court also stipulated that claims cannot be filed
simultaneously under P.L. 94-42 and Section 504 of P.L. 93-
11, when available. IDEA is to be the exclusive avenue
(Gargiulo, 2003, p. 45).
 7he Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act
was passed but took full effect only in 1986. This law required
election officials at all levels of government to make
registration and voting places accessible to people (Heward &
Orlansky, 1988, p. 344).
 The Heritage Foundation Report of May 11, 1984 was a criticism ofP.L. 94-142. The
report is critical of the role that the government has taken in providing services for
handicapped students. The report states:

The Education for All Handicapped Act rests on the questionable assumption that the
responsibility for disabled individuals is primarily society's as a civil right—rather than the
family's with the help of society... such legislation, although enacted by well meaning
politicians, has directed funding, attention, and policy to the '"special') student. The
evidence shows, regrettably, that such programs yield minimal positive results for the
student and generally damaging results for the normal child (The Heritage Foundation
Report, pp. 1-2 cited in Sapon-Shevin, 1987, p. 300).

 The Heritage Foundation Report proposes that special schools be established to meet
the special needs of students "who cannot easily be incorporated into a normal school
program" Heritage Foundation Report, p. 2 cited in Sapon-Shevin, 1987, p. 301).