Abstract
In the present times, it is increasingly becoming important to have an understanding of the legal frameworks that govern the operation and provision of education for both regular and special needs students in private and public schools. The objective in both contexts is the same: to facilitate equal access to all students. This paper compares and contrasts the findings of an interview with a legal expert and the findings from research concerning the applicability of special needs education law, its transformations, the party in charge of monitoring and implementation of the IEPs and any refinements that are needed in the special education law. It was found out that the transitions in the special need education law are the core contributing factor towards the achievement of an appropriate education for students that have disabilities. It is also notable that the significant challenge towards the realization of the IDEA goals and objectives is adequate funding from the state, local and federal government to facilitate appropriate inclusion of the students having disabilities.
Introduction
Since its introduction, special education has been subjected to numerous changes concerning the passing of legislations that determine the manner in which it is undertaken in the United States. The demands of special education has experienced transformations from the intensity of students disability as the primary determining factor of physical placement to incorporate the increasing urge for modification of the environments of learning and teaching strategies that integrates diverse capabilities of the students in learning environments that are considered as ideal (Mitchell, 2011). In fact, according to the US presidential National Council on Disability, special education should not be perceived as a place, rather it should be considered as a service that should be offered in every school. The basic argument is that special education law has been shifted from issues concerning access towards issues regarding quality of education (US Department of Education, 2011). This paper analyses the relationship between the law and ones school basing on the applicability of the law in the context of special education. In aIDition, the paper summarizes the opinions of a legal expert concerning the elements of special education that require any form of refinement.
Legal developments concerning special education
The findings from research show that the present form of special needs education can be significantly attributed to the famous civil rights campaigns. Prior to these campaigns, special needs education was significantly characterized by increasing levels of inequity concerning the ways in which special needs education was handled, in some cases, special needs education was based on racial basis. Early developments on special education laws comprised of compulsory attendance laws, the separation of students having disabilities and parental advocacy (Rothstein & Scott, 2009). After a 1972 case, Mills v. Board of Education, the advocates of the case and other likeminded activists steered the passing on the first legislation regarding the provision of special education, which was The Education for all Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) during 1975 that later changed to Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) during 1990. Despite this enactments that aim at fostering equal treatment to all individuals with disabilities, inequity concerning the provision of special education has been a significant challenge especially on the minority groups (Osborne & Russo, 2006).
The findings from the interview reported that the application of law in the context of special education began during the 1960s, which was then characterized by increasing cases of discrimination and segregation of students having disabilities. The exclusion from the regular classrooms was mainly because they were considered handicapped. As a result of this, there was needed to aIDress the issue regarding the violation of the children’s rights regarding equal access to education. It is notable from the interview and research that special education law can be significantly attributed towards the increasing violation of the civil rights for the children who had disabilities. This resulted to an integration of students having disabilities with the mainstream students after the passage of P.L 194-142 law during 1975, which had the main objective of financing the states to offer education to handicapped students in mainstream schools. It is arguably evident that in the last two decades, there has been a significant transformation concerning the applicability of law in the context of special education from a situation that can be considered to be least restrictive towards what can be considered to be maximum degree. Examples of such transformations includes transitions from self-contained classrooms to integration in resource classrooms with regular students, inclusion of the special needs students in the regular classes while offering special education assistance to them, co-teaching and learning with the mainstream students and special needs education teachers offering a joint teaching in the integrated classrooms. It can be argued that the transitions in the special need education law are the core contributing factor towards the achievement of an appropriate education for students that have disabilities. In aIDition, the law provides a framework through which parents can use to ensure that their children are integrated in the mainstream education and offered with the required services that are tailored to meet the needs of students having disabilities. The similarity is that the education of students having disabilities is governed by the federal laws, contrary to the regular students who do not receive protection compared to the special needs students.
Differences between the legal framework for special needs students and regular students in private and public schools
The findings from the interview with the legal expert report that regular students do not receive protection from the law compared to students having disabilities. There are at least thirteen exceptional classifications concerning the extent to which public schools have the obligation for paying the education fees for its students in instances whereby the local system have not implemented a policy regarding the provision of free appropriate education in private and state learning institutions. In the context of a private school, the system deployed within the school must take into consideration the provision that its students are receiving appropriate education just like their counterparts in public schools. Generally, regular students do not have any provisions in the special education law, implying that they are not supposed to benefit from the special education services in accordance with the qualification section of the special needs education law.
The findings from the legal expert are similar to findings from research. The similarity is that the education of students having disabilities is governed by the federal laws, contrary to the regular students who do not receive protection compared to the special needs students. The Individuals with Disabilities Act that was amended during does not have any provisions for inclusion; rather, the law categorically states that students having disabilities have to be educated in an appropriate environment that is least restrictive in order to facilitate the realization of their distinctive needs (Rothstein & Scott, 2009). In aIDition, the IDEA takes into consideration that environment that is least restrictive commences with the placement of the special needs education students in the mainstream education classroom. A significant contrast is that the IDEA it is not appropriate to put all students in the mainstream student’s classroom. This implies that it is a requirement of the law for the school districts to ensure that there is availability of “continuum of placements, that extends beyond the regular classrooms to incorporate residential settings with the principal objective of meeting the needs of the students having disabilities. The applicability of the continuum aspect implies that each student will receive a placement in an environment that has been tailored to meet his/her education requirements. As a result, the IDEA argues that the level of inclusion be subjective to the needs of the students as established by the IEP team and not in accordance with the convenience of the district or the perceptions of the parents/guardians (Osborne & Russo, 2006).
Monitoring the implementation and evaluation of IEPs in private and public schools
According to the findings from the interview with the legal expert, monitoring the implementation and evaluation of the IEPs may be undertaken by the education administrator at the local institutions, which may be done by the principal or his assistant, or a special education teacher who has been selected and acts the roles of the school administrator. All the respective forms and IEPs are usually signed off by the designated personnel in the local school context in either public or private schools. In the context of private schools, the Director of Special Education is required to attend all the annual meeting of IEP regarding the placement of students having disabilities in the school (Osborne & Russo, 2006). This is done with the main objective of ensuring there is appropriate education and progress for handicapped students in the private schools. The federal law requires on the other hand that monitoring the implementation and evaluation of IEPs be done by the IEP team. During the development of IEP for a handicapped student, it is a requirement of the IDEA that the IEP team should take into consideration the first alternative as placing the handicapped students in a mainstream classroom, when determining the environment that is least restrictive for the student. In case he IEP assesses and concludes that placing the student in a mainstream classroom is not the least restrictive environment, then IEP team has to provide justifiable reasons concerning the inappropriateness of regular classroom for the student. The main objective of outlining these requirements is to ensure that the goals of the IDEA are met, which mainly centers around offering education to many handicapped students as possible in the mainstream classrooms while at the same time meeting their distinctive and individual education requirements. It can be argued that the implementation of this legislation is vital in allowing handicapped children to live regular lives. In aIDition, the federal law requires that the beneficiary of the federal funds must ensure that he/she offers education for every qualified special needs student in accordance with the jurisdiction of people who do not have disabilities to the maximum level that is deemed appropriate concerning the unique requirements of the handicapped student. The recipient of the federal funds is also required to place the student with disabilities in a regular environment with the exception of cases whereby the recipient has proved that inclusion of the student with regular students and using other supplementary aides cannot be realized in a manner that is satisfactory (Mitchell, 2011).
Any elements of special education law that require refinement
The significant challenge towards the realization of the IDEA goals and objectives is adequate funding from the state, local and federal government to facilitate appropriate inclusion of the students having disabilities. This implies that there are little supplies to effectively facilitate the process of inclusion in the mainstream classrooms and inadequate instructional resources. The funding channels as provided in the law require refinement in order to ensure maximum allocation of special needs education programs and their effective usage regarding their provision of equal education to special needs students.

References
Mitchell, Y. (2011). The Law and Special Education. New York: Person Education.
Osborne, A., & Russo, C. (2006). Special education and the law: a guide for practitioners. New York: Corwin Press.
Rothstein, L., & Scott, J. (2009). Special Education Law. New York: SAGE.
US Department of Education. (2011). A Guide to the Individualized Education Program. Retrieved September 20, 2011, from http://ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.html#process