FTCE Exceptional Student Education (ESE) K-12 Practice Test

In which court case was the absence of a regular education teacher on an IEP team deemed a serious procedural error?

1. Board of Education v. Rowley

2. M.L. V. Federal Way School District

3. Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education

4. Tatro v. Texas

The correct answer is: M.L. V. Federal Way School District

The correct answer is based on the case M.L. v. Federal Way School District, where it was established that the absence of a regular education teacher on an Individualized Education Program (IEP) team is considered a serious procedural error. This case emphasizes the importance of including general education teachers in the IEP process, as their expertise is crucial for ensuring that a student with disabilities can access the general curriculum in an appropriate manner. The involvement of regular education teachers supports collaboration and helps to create a more comprehensive educational plan tailored to the needs of the student. Other cases mentioned, while significant in their own right, focus on different aspects of special education law. For instance, Board of Education v. Rowley primarily addressed the standard of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Daniel R.R. v. State Board of Education involved discussions regarding mainstreaming and appropriate educational placements for students with disabilities. Tatro v. Texas concerned the provision of related services, specifically about the scope of services under IDEA. Each of these cases contributes to the body of law surrounding special education but does not specifically highlight the procedural requirements of IEP team composition as M.L. v. Federal Way School District does.