PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 1
Passing of the Education For All Handicapped Children Act: Impact on Students with
Disabilities
Jaime Messinger-Willman
School of Education, Liberty University
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 2
Abstract
Throughout the history in the United States, the education of students with disabilities (SWDs)
has evolved, moving from segregated schools and institutions to public schools. This paper will
discuss the impact of passing the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) on the
education of SWDs in public schools. The passing of the EHA was a landmark bill that provided
SWDs, no matter the severity of their disability, access to learning opportunities equal to that of
typically developing peers. Since the passing of this bill, the United States has been and
continues to make changes and progress in developing and implementing effective special
education programs and services for SWDs. As a nation, we must continue to devote funds, time,
and resources in holding school districts accountable for educating SWDs.
Keywords: special education, disabilities, free and appropriate education, least
restrictive environment, inclusion, Public Law 94-142, individualized education plans
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 3
Passing of the Education For All Handicapped Children Act: Impact on Students with
Disabilities
Up until 1975, students with disabilities (SWDs) were denied access to education and
learning opportunities in public schools (Dulien, n.d.). With the passing of the Education For All
Handicapped Children Act (EHA) (Public Law 94-142), SWDs were given the right to attend
public schools and have access to learning and academic opportunities, just like their typically
developing peers (Dulien, n.d.). SWDs were not always welcomed in the public school systems;
instead, they were locked up, seen as uneducable, or sent to hospitals or asylums. In the early
1800s and 1900s, individuals who were deaf were educated in asylums. William Boiling and
John Braidwood established the Cobbs School of Virginia, and Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet
established the Connect Asylum Deaf and Dumb school (Samantha, 2022
The EHA was passed by President Ford, which focused on improving the educational
opportunities for students with disabilities. With the inclusion of SWDs in public schools, there
have been consistent, ongoing, and intentional steps and goals to help develop and implement
effective programs and services for SWDs. Since 1975, the EHA has led the charge for
governmental policy changes and improvement in special education and paved the way for
special education as we know it today (Dulien, n.d.).
Summary and Context
The EHA bill was fundamentally established to provide SWDs with free and appropriate
public education (FAPE) in their least restrictive environment (LRE). Special education has been
set-up to operate on a continuum of services, ranging from the least restrictive placement (i.e.,
general education classroom) to the most restrictive placement (i.e., hospitals) (Blackman, 1989).
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 4
Public Law 94-142 was foundational in setting the initial stage, through the federal government,
to create more equitable educational experiences for SWDs (Thompson, 1985). The terms “more
equitable and appropriate” have been debated from all sides, as there are no set definitions in
Public Law 94-142 about what these words mean. However, what has been understood about the
word “appropriate” as it is written into the EHA is that it does not mean the most ideal placement
or program (Seltzer & Abidin, 1981); it instead, presumes that there is this imaginary line that
exists between what is appropriate for a child and what is not appropriate for the child.
What are the parameters of “appropriate” educational placement? The legal requirements
of EHA, identifies “appropriate” as a placement where students make reasonable academic
growth (Seltzer & Abidin, 1981). This means that when a student’s IEP team makes proposals
for placements and programs, they need to be able to have data to support that this program will
result in the student making reasonable academic growth or help the student in closing the
academic gap between the child’s expected and achieved grade level.
Under the EHA bill, students enrolled in special education have individualized education
plans (IEPs) developed that are individualized and created in response to each student’s unique
needs (Seltzer & Abidin, 1981; Thompson, 1985). These IEPs help provide SWDs with
specialized support and services so that each student can receive an education that will enable
them to graduate, attend college, and get a job.
There is an identified gap between what the federal law requires in relation to
“appropriate” education placement decision-making process and the data that identifies the
effectiveness of the different special education placements and programs (Seltzer & Abidin,
1981).
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 5
Blackman (1989) reports on a finding by a study completed by Danielson and Bellany
that has identified that there are far too many SWDs being segregated in separate schools and
classrooms. Some states are placing SWDs in segregated settings at five to six times the rate of
other states (Blackman, 1989). SWDs’ placements in these segregated schools are a result of the
function of their disability and, instead, should be a function of where they live. The high rate of
placements in segregated settings and schools goes against the premise and rules of EHA that
stipulate that SWDs be provided a free and appropriate education in their least restrictive
environment. Schools must look at, first and foremost, how students can be educated in the
general education setting before jumping to the far end of the continuum of services to the most
restrictive placements. Blackman (1989) is alarmed by the findings from Danielson’s and
Bellany’s study that identified that more than a quarter of all SWDs are being educated in
segregated placements.
While some states are failing to uphold the EHA for SWDs, some districts are having
success educating students in general education settings. What is possible at one school is
definitely possible at other schools. The variability in data of SWDs across states, should show
that some states are demonstrating success and improvements in educating SWDs in general
education settings (Blackman, 1989). Rust et al. (1978) studied the effectiveness of the resource
setting versus the general education setting, and their findings found that there were not
significant academic gains for students in the resource/self-contained setting versus those
students in the general education setting. Separate and segregated does not necessarily mean
better, for some SWDs. As a nation, we need to redirect our efforts and encourage states to look,
think, and restructure how they make decisions regarding a SWDs educational programming and
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 6
placement. States need to have a shift in their mindset, and instead looking at segregated
practices, they need to focus on school integration processes.
Special education funding should be provided to school districts to provide the best
special education supports and services for SWDs (Wang & Reynolds, 1985). Resource or self-
contained settings are not always the best special education supports and services for SWDs;
instead, it is the general education setting. Current policies that govern how special education
funds are spent has become the driving force and deterrent in providing special education
services in the general education setting (Wang & Reynolds, 1985). When designing a special
education plan for a student, the IEP committee is responsible for identifying how the student
can be served in their least restrictive environment before moving to more restrictive settings.
Unfortunately, due to how funding is set up, schools get more special education funding for
SWDs who are placed in self-contained special education programs (Wang & Reynolds, 1985).
Special education should not be looked at in isolation, instead, special education includes
looking at the entire educational system.
According to Wang and Reynolds (1985), general education teachers have been identified
as not having the best training or ability to adapt instruction for SWDs. What needs to happen at
the district level, in solving these problems in special education is looking at revamping the
general education program. Our nation needs to refocus our energy on how to restructure teacher
preparation programs to include coursework and practicum experiences on working with SWDs.
Critical Analysis
Providing special education to SWDs in public schools has operated in different phases.
The first phase occurred before 1975 when SWDs were educated in separate schools, asylums,
and institutions. The second phase occurred when President Ford signed into law the EHA,
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 7
which guaranteed the rights of free and appropriate public education for SWDs (Dulien, n.d.).
This law began what many hoped was a positive change in academic instruction for SWDs. The
third phase of special education occurred after President Ford signed the Public Law 94-142 bill.
While the vision of this bill was noble, and we, as a nation, held high expectations for the
educational outcomes for SWDs, the reality that our nation faced was there were too few SWDs
who were reading on grade level, mastering math grade-level content, and graduating from high
school and college. The instructional practices and specially designed instruction that students
were receiving were not producing the outcomes that the bill once promised. This phase led to
frustration and disappointment from parents, educators, lobbyists, organizational leaders, and
government officials. The final phase is very different from the previous phases. This phase
which has brought about change in the way we approach educating SWDs. Past common
practices have failed SWDs and have not leveled the playing field and educational opportunities
for these students. The current focus is on utilizing best practices (Dulien, n.d.) to teach SWDs.
There has been a shift in our thinking and practices in working with SWDs. We are now focused
on maximizing instructional time, building skills of educators, and SWDs spending more time
being included in the general education classroom. Schools need to get away from the
“cookbook” and “cookie cutter” approach to determining appropriate special education services
for students. Special education is fundamentally based on individualized plans based on
individual needs.
The Bible tells us, “Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve
others…. “(King James Bible, 1769/n.d., Proverbs 27:17). Teachers commit themselves to be
God’s saints; they devote their time and effort in showing their love for God by serving others.
Teachers must believe in themselves and have the adequate skills to go forth and teach, mold,
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 8
and develop students into strong and educated human beings. Our classrooms today are a blend
of different ethnicities, abilities, disabilities, and cultural beliefs.
“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise
you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that
full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I
was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body…”
(King James Bible, 1769/n.d., Psalm 139:13-16).
In these powerful words spoken by God, he is saying not only does he know us, but he
created us and made us the way we are – he intentionally designed each of us to be our own
unique beings. Our classrooms today are comprised of God created, unique children who look
different, act different, have different abilities, and/or disabilities. Each child has a right to be
inWhat the same room, learning alongside one another.
Conclusion
What is not negotiable, is special education is a must for SWDs. As a nation, we need to
celebrate where we have come, as special education today is not what it used to be, which is a
positive thing. As the population in the United States continues to expand, more rapidly in some
areas, than others, today’s classrooms and schools are reaching a point of overpopulation, which
leads to the issue of ensuring that all student’s needs are being met. Despite all of the advances
and successes that we have had over the years in special education, the biggest threat we face
today is continual budget cuts, which lead to considerable strain on an educational system that it
is running into not being able to sustain or handle much more. As a nation we need to continue
review and remind ourselves the premise for why EHA was established, and that was to provide
SWDs with free and appropriate education in their least restrictive environment. We need to
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 9
continue to fight for our SWDs and fight for what is educationally appropriate for them, to help
them continue to make academic, personal, and physiological growth.
PASSING OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT 10
References
Abidin, R. R., & Seltzer, J. (1981). Special education outcomes; implications for implementation
of Public Law 94-142.LJournal of Learning Disabilities,L14(1), 28–31.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948101400112
Blackman, H. P. (1989). Special education placement: Is it what you know or where you
live?LExceptional Children,L55(5), 459–462.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298905500510
Dulien, L. (n.d.) The History of Special Education. SPECIAL ED RESOUCE.COM.
https://specialedresource.com/history-special-education
The King James Study Bible. (2017). Thomas Nelson. (Original work published 1988).
Rust, J. O., Miller, L. S., & Wilson, W. H. (1978). Using a control group to evaluate a resource
room program.LPsychology in the Schools,L15(4), 503–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-
6807(197810)15:4<503::AID-PITS2310150409>3.0.CO;2-C
Samantha (2022, November 1). The history of deaf education. ICHS2019.
https://www.icphs2019.org/the-history-of-deaf-education.
Thompson, R. A. (1985). Public Law 94-142: A Critical review of its impact on the secondary
level.LThe High School Journal,L69(1), 50–54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40365186
Wang, M. C., & Reynolds, M. C. (1985). Avoiding the “catch 22” in special education
reform.LExceptional Children,L51(6), 497–502.
