The Least Restrictive Environment Mandate: How Has It Been Defined by the Courts ERIC Digest.Report as inadecuate




The Least Restrictive Environment Mandate: How Has It Been Defined by the Courts ERIC Digest. - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.





This digest examines how the concepts of least restrictive environment, mainstreaming, and inclusion have been developed by Congress and the courts. An introductory discussion of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) notes that Congress did not define the concept of least restrictive environment, but left it to the courts to shape a definition. A court definition of mainstreaming is provided. The paper then presents brief abstracts of Circuit Court cases that have helped to shape these concepts. The court cases are: Roncker v. Walter, (1983); Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education (1989); Greer v. Rome (1991); Oberti v. Clementon (1993); Sacramento v. Rachel H. (1994); Light v. Parkway (1994); Clyde K. v. Puyallup (1997); Hartmann v. Loudoun (1997); Hudson v. Bloomfield Hills (1997); and Doe v. Arlington County (1999). Each case is referenced to the Federal Reporter or the Federal Supplement. (DB)

Descriptors: Compliance (Legal), Court Litigation, Definitions, Disabilities, Educational Legislation, Elementary Secondary Education, Federal Legislation, Inclusive Schools, Mainstreaming

ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education, Council for Exceptional Children, 1110 North Glebe Rd., Arlington, VA 22201-5709. Tel: 800-328-0272 (Toll Free); Fax: 703-620-2521; e-mail: ericec[at]cec.sped.org; Web site: http://www.ericec.org. For full text: http://ericec.org/digests/prodfly.html.









Author: Douvanis, Gus; Hulsey, David

Source: https://eric.ed.gov/?q=a&ft=on&ff1=dtySince_1992&pg=6696&id=ED469442







Related documents