v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decided that schools are not allowed to segregate their students by race. In view of that, the advocates argued, schools may also not segregate students by their ability. After all, students are students, regardless of their race or ability. The advocates for equal right in education, proved to be successful in pleading their case. On October 7th, 1971, a federal court ordered Pennsylvania to provide a free public education to all retarded children (PARV v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania). The next year (August, 1972), a federal judge ordered Washington, D.C. to offer educational facilities to all handicapped and emotionally disturbed children (Mills v. Washington, D.C.). These legislations served three main purposes. The first was to provide a free and appropriate education to all students with disabilities, a right that was long overdue. The second purpose was to educate students with special needs in the same school and, to the maximum extent, the same programs as their non-disabled peers. The third purpose was to put into effect a ‘checks-and-balances’ system so that students with disabilities have legal recourse in the case of a school not living up to the requirements made by the law (Turnbull et al p17). Three pioneers of special education envisioned a different profession. They had new ideas on how to serve children with disabilities. In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, they began to vocalize their criticism for the old system and ideas to rectify the problems. By showing these new ways, they paved the way for modern special education. As early as 1968, Lloyd Dunn began to question the efficiency of placing students with mild disabilities into special classes. It was his belief that children must stop being labeled as ‘mentally retarded’. “Furthermore,” Dunn states, “we must stop segregating them by pl...
