Fifty Years of IDEA

Fifty years ago, millions of children with disabilities were excluded from public education. Today, how far have we come—and where do we go next?

On November 29, 1975, President Gerald Ford signed the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) into law. As we observe fifty years of special education law in the United States, it is a time to reflect on the impact, the trends, and the future of special education. Now, more than twenty years after the IDEA’s last reauthorization, special education is again undergoing changes.

Coming soon after the enactment of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the EHA (or PL 94-142, as many called the law), set the stage for special education as we know it today. With the Supreme Court weighing in on the standard for a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the Rowley decision in 1982, schools throughout America began to make one more leap toward meeting the call of public education for all students. In more recent years, with decisions like Endrew F. clarifying the standard for a free appropriate public education, the opportunities and responsibilities for the education of students with disabilities is steadfast as a primary responsibility for schools, while also a frequent source of legal questions and disputes.

While Congress has never come close to meeting the funding promised and anticipated for special education, the IDEA has fundamentally reshaped the operations of school districts over the decades. Special education remains one of the most highly regulated aspects of school operations, with federal statutes, federal regulations, state law, state regulations, and myriad guidance documents all dictating the actions of school personnel who support students with disabilities. Moreover, the IDEA is one of the most-litigated federal statutes, resulting in hundreds of court decisions throughout the country each year.

Impact of the IDEA

As school districts were addressing desegregation in the mid 1970s, the addition of legal requirements to provide a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities allows schools to reach closer to the fundamental mission of public education. At the same time, school districts were not equipped for teaching students with disabilities, and compliance led to schools generating new systems and new expertise for teaching and learning. New positions, innovative programs, and accessible facilities created opportunities not only for structures and personnel to meet the requirements of the IDEA, but it also fostered an era of rethinking teaching to meet the needs of a more diverse set of learners. 

Ahead of, and important to the substance of, the last reauthorization of the IDEA in 2004, the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education identified both the progress and the continuing challenges associated with educating students with disabilities. The Commission noted: “Although it is true that special education has created a base of civil rights and legal protections, children with disabilities remain those most at risk of being left behind. The facts create an urgency for reform that few can deny.”

And from the school attorney’s perspective in particular, the IDEA created new legal hurdles and complex systems for compliance. Due process hearings have evolved into formal, technical legal proceedings, with experts on both sides, high-stakes decisions, and frequent appeals to court. By 2025, there are over fifty federal appellate court decisions under the IDEA annually – let alone the hundreds of lower court decisions as well. The many procedural requirements under the IDEA are a constant legal compliance concern, with ever-changing state-level rules, shifts in guidance, and impacts from court interpretations. This system of procedural safeguards, and the rights and responsibilities it undergirds, is unlike any other aspect of the legal system, and is a unique manner of decision-making and dispute resolution unlike any other aspect of school operations – or any other sector. These legal complexities have shaped not only compliance but also the evolution of educational practices.

Trends after 50 Years

As we look at the longstanding trends under the IDEA, many of those trends remain relevant and impactful today. For example, the IDEA’s mandate to education students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment has forged significant discourse on inclusive practices, finding effective and compliant ways to educate students with disabilities alongside their non-disabled peers. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, there remains steady growth in the percentage of students with disabilities placed in general education more than 80% of the day, increasing from under 50% of students with IEPs spending 80% or more in general education in the 1990s to nearing 70% of students with IEPs spending 80% or more in general education in recent years.

Also, the IDEA has required school districts to think about behavior and discipline differently than they did before, with specific requirements to ensure that students with disabilities are not removed from school for discipline purposes when the conduct in question is a manifestation of his or her disability.  Research has proven that traditional models of student discipline are often ineffective in changing behavior, but the IDEA’s expectation for positive behavioral interventions and limiting exclusionary discipline was prescient as to the evidence-based practices more common today. While behavior is a constant challenge, the IDEA pushes school districts toward more evidence-based practices, resulting in better outcomes for students, peers, school staff, and the school community.

By ensuring the role of parents –requiring a seat at the table – the IDEA has also promoted the collaborative approach to decision-making between parents and schools that forms the foundation of special education procedures. As Chief Justice Roberts noted in Endrew F., “the procedures are there for a reason, and their focus provides insight into what it means, for purposes of the FAPE definition, to ‘meet the unique needs’ of a child with a disability.” 580 U.S. 386 (2017).

Over time, the Supreme Court has also acknowledged that the “core of the statute is the cooperative process that it established between parents and schools.”  Schaffer v. Weast, 546 U.S. 49 (U.S. 2005). To better accomplish this goal, there continues to be a steady rise in dispute resolution approaches, including mediation and facilitated IEP meetings. With increases as well in virtual participation in IEP meetings, IEP meetings look very differently than they did in the 1970s, but the core purpose remains: working collaboratively to design a program appropriate for the student.

But where will the IDEA take us in the future?

With major changes in structure at the federal Department of Education, funding questions predominate. The uncertainty leaves open questions for many school districts, which has been creating concern about new investments and whether the funding will remain intact to meet emerging needs of students with disabilities. As schools recognize that the obligations under the IDEA remain even if the funding changes or lapses, preparing for potential outcomes should be on the radar of all schools.

Closely tied to the funding question is another major factor impacting special education in the 2020s with little relief in sight: staff shortages. According to Education Week, approximately 70% of schools report difficulty hiring special education teachers in 2024-2025, with about 55,000 special education positions vacant and another 270,000 filled by staff who were not fully qualified. These shortages are impacting service quality, burnout and caseloads, and operational strain – and therefore schools need a proactive plan to recruit and retain special education staff. 

As inclusive practices increase, and special education shortages persist, finding ways to integrate the experiences of general and special education continue to be imperative. Schools are prioritizing co-teaching, universal design for learning, MTSS, and other approaches that continue to break down the historic barriers between general and special education. These efforts are essential to the future of special education and will be part of the solution to other challenges, such as funding and shortages.

Ultimately, the future of special education will require reimagining efforts to continue to meet the call of public education for all students. Using the IEP processes to design and implement programs that enable students with disabilities to make appropriate progress, participate alongside peers, and be prepared for post-secondary opportunities is an essential part of every school district’s educational mission.

The shift in focus over the last twenty years from merely access to improvements in outcomes has been a key piece of the operational decisions of schools and the focus of litigation. As President Ford noted at the time of signing the EHA: “Everyone can agree with the objective stated in the title of this bill… The key question is whether the bill will really accomplish that objective.” Fifty years later, we are closer to that objective than we were when we started, and school districts will continue that mission, learning important lessons and improving the future of all students in the community along the way.