« Bullying and Students With Disabilities: A Resource Guide | Main | Betsy DeVos Faces Sharp Questioning on Special Education Policy »

U.S. Supreme Court Considers Level of Special Education Benefits


What level of educational benefit should school districts confer on children with disabilities to provide them with a free, appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act?

That's the question the U.S. Supreme Court grappled with Wednesday when it heard the case Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Board. (I also wrote a preview of the Endrew F. case, in which I interviewed the family at the center of the dispute and several legal experts.)

Reporters who heard the argument believe the court seemed receptive to the idea that "some educational benefit"—a phrase used in an earlier Supreme Court decision—should be defined to mean "more than de minimis, or trivial." That's the standard used by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver, as well as many other circuits. The parents of Endrew F., a 17-year-old Colorado student with autism, disagreed with that standard, as did the Obama administration, which urged the high court to take up the case. 

Here's a roundup of coverage: 

Education Week: "By the end of the argument, it seemed apparent that a majority of the eight-member court was disinclined to accept the standard adopted in this case by the 10th Circuit court, though it was unclear how far the justices might go in backing the student."

The Denver Post: "At times, even the justices seemed perplexed as to how they could better outline the appropriate level of benefit for students with special needs. ... 'What are we supposed to do to make that happen?' asked Chief Justice John Roberts. 

The Wall Street Journal: "The law should be read to require 'significant progress toward grade-level standards, not as close as possible to grade-level standards,' Justice Department lawyer Irv Gornstein told the court. 'And we think that this is just what most school boards are already doing.'"

Los Angeles Times: "[M]ost of the justices appeared to favor setting a slightly higher standard, one that should lead the child to make measured progress on academics or behavior. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said it would not be sufficient for schools to provide an expert for five minutes a day and claim they were providing the child 'some benefit.'"

Finally, if you want to immerse yourself in the case, here's a transcript of the oral arguments in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Board.

Don't miss another On Special Education post. Sign up here to get news alerts in your email inbox.


Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Follow This Blog


Most Viewed on Education Week



Recent Comments

  • sdc teach: I agree with the previous post regarding the high cost read more
  • Jason: That alert is from 2001. Is there anything more recent read more
  • Vikki Mahaffy: I worked as a special education teacher for 18 years read more
  • paulina rickards: As it relates to this research I am in total read more
  • Anonymous: Fully fund the RTI process. We are providing special education read more