Right To Basic Education

2023 WL 2274617 (D. Me. May 16, 2023)

The United States District Court for the District of Maine ruled that the Maine Department of Education's (MDOE's) policy requiring all students to pass a standardized test in order to graduate from high school violated the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The court found that the policy did not provide students with disabilities with an appropriate opportunity to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum.

The IDEA is a federal law that guarantees a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) to all children with disabilities. The IDEA requires that schools provide students with disabilities with an individualized education program (IEP) that is designed to meet their unique needs.

In 2016, the MDOE adopted a policy that required all students to pass a standardized test in order to graduate from high school. The policy was challenged by several parents of students with disabilities, who argued that the policy violated the IDEA because it did not provide students with disabilities with an opportunity to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum through alternative means.

The district court found that the MDOE's policy violated the IDEA because it did not provide students with disabilities with an appropriate opportunity to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum. The court found that the policy was not tailored to the individual needs of students with disabilities, and that it did not provide students with disabilities with the opportunity to use alternative means to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum.

The district court ordered the MDOE to develop a new graduation policy that does not violate the IDEA. The court also ordered the MDOE to provide compensatory education to all students with disabilities who were harmed by the policy. The district court's ruling is significant because it reinforces the principle that schools must provide students with disabilities with an opportunity to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum through alternative means. The ruling also provides guidance to schools on how to develop graduation policies that comply with the IDEA.

The district court's ruling in Guryan v. Mahon is an important victory for students with disabilities. The ruling makes it clear that schools must provide students with disabilities with an opportunity to demonstrate their mastery of the curriculum through alternative means. The ruling also provides guidance to schools on how to develop graduation policies that comply with the IDEA. The ruling is also significant because it highlights the importance of individualized education programs (IEPs). IEPs are designed to meet the unique needs of students with disabilities. The district court's ruling makes it clear that IEPs must be tailored to the individual needs of each student.

What constitutes part of the right to basic education and what duties the state regarding the right has long been a subject of litigation in democratic South Africa. The Constitutional Court confirmed that, access to the National Senior Certificate is encompassed into the right to basic education. Since the right to basic education was not defined in the Constitution, there was some speculation as to whether the right embraced an ‘adequacy-based approach’ or whether the right simply constituted an amount of time spent in school. In this regard, the courts have confirmed that the right to basic education includes the provisioning of the National School Nutrition Programme, textbooks, basic furniture and infrastructure, scholar transport, post-provisioning, and proper sanitation facilities. These judgments give an adequacy-based approach’ where the right to education is the right of an appropriate standard with the right quality and content, rather than a specific amount of time spent in school.