Why children have a right to high quality provision that meet their individual needs?

Question

Why children have a right to high quality provision that meet their individual needs?

Answer 1

look up IDEA to see why all children have a right to an education.  just because a child has a disability, it should not prevent them from learning at their level, that is why they have instruction that meets their individual needs.  all children have a right to a fair and free public education, Brown v The Board of Education.  federal 164 also states why all children are in titled to a public and free education

Answer 2

Because it is a basic human right.

Although the school system is not the best place to provide/meet the "individual" needs of students, because they are dealing with large groups of young people, and have a prescribed curriculum that requires everyone to learn the same thing at the same time; so much for the individual needs of a students, and his/her learning style, or interests being a priority!!

Answer 3

Well, no.  IDEA bestows the right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to eligible students with disabilities, and the accommodations and modifications are to be individualized.  However, the US Supreme Court in Rowley v. Bd. of Ed. of the Hendrick Hudson School District, 458 U.S. 176 (1982) held that FAPE only requires services that provide students with "some educational benefit."  That is a low standard.    

There is some debate as to whether NCLB has created a new measure for FAPE:  high-stakes standardized testing. At this point that is merely academic because there is no decision to replace Rowley.  Whether this is even a measure we would want to use for any child, much less a child with a disability, is also hotly debated.

NCLB does require that teachers be "highly qualified," but if you read the language the required qualifications are very minimal and really do not exceed what states already required for basic teacher licensure.

Brown v. Board of Education did not speak to students with disabilities.  It is often cited as being the first special education case, but legislative history does not support this.  It was a truly great civil rights case that inspired the nation towards equality, but it did not create rights for student with disabilities.  I would look to PARC and Mills for the case law that provides the foundation for special education.  I'm not sure what my friend above is talking about with "federal 164."  There must be something missing from there.  For example a federal law would be cited as "volume number" then either "CFR" (code of federal regulations) or "USC" (united states code) then "section number."  The IDEA is 20 USC 1400 et seq., for example.  I'm curious, though...