GACE Special Education General Curriculum (P-12) (735) study materials
GACE Special Education General Curriculum (P-12) (735) study resources

GACE Special Education General Curriculum (P-12) (735): Professional Responsibilities and Foundations

GACE Special Education General Curriculum (P-12) (735) · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Professional Responsibilities and Foundations

Foundations and professionalism

Anchor yourself in the six IDEA principles: zero reject (child find), nondiscriminatory evaluation, free appropriate public education (FAPE), least restrictive environment, procedural safeguards, and parent participation. Know the landmark cases: Brown v. Board (1954) ended school segregation; PARC (1971) and Mills (1972) established access to public education; Larry P. v. Riles (1979) restricted IQ testing for placing African American students in classes for intellectual disability; Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) defined FAPE as personalized instruction reasonably calculated to enable progress, not the best possible program; Honig v. Doe (1988) limited exclusion for disability-related behavior; Oberti (1993) strengthened inclusion; Endrew F. v. Douglas County (2017) required appropriately ambitious goals and more than de minimis progress; Forest Grove (2009) allowed reimbursement for a unilateral private placement when the district's program was inadequate.

Discipline rules matter: a student may be removed for up to 10 school days; longer removals that constitute a change of placement require a manifestation determination, and a 45-school-day interim alternative setting applies to weapons, drugs, or serious bodily injury. Related-service providers, general educators, and families are collaborative partners; confidentiality follows FERPA and IDEA, so discuss students only with those who have a legitimate educational interest. Recognize disproportionality - overrepresentation of students of color in certain categories and in suspension data - and respond with culturally responsive practice and equitable referral.

Traps: confusing Rowley and Endrew F.; skipping the manifestation determination; treating the IEP as a contract guaranteeing outcomes; and disclosing student information casually.

Worked example: An IEP with grade-level goals, progress monitoring, and appropriately ambitious growth satisfies Endrew F.; a program yielding only trivial yearly gains does not.

Rule of thumb: procedural compliance plus meaningful progress equals FAPE.