Board of Education v Rowley
How much education is free and appropriate? Here, the court addressed this issue. In this case, the parents of a deaf student, who was doing very well in school, in fact better than the typical children in her classroom, wanted an interpreter in the child’s class. The interpreter was to follow the child to all classes, and sign all of the verbal directions and conversations. The school did not want to provide this service, due in part to the fact that the child had access to an interpreter in kindergarten, and never utilized the service, because she was an excellent lip-reader. The school also noted that because the child was doing so well, she did not need an interpreter. The court found in favor of the district, deciding that IDEA decreed an adequate education must be provided, but that districts were not required to “maximize” a student’s educational experience. In other words, if she did not NEED the interpreter, because her progress was adequate, the district was not required to provide one (Looney 106-112).
'
click here to return to FAPE