Public law 94–142: Implications for the classroom teacher

More than at any other point in history, there is a humanistic concern exhibited toward the exceptional individual-for his education, welfare, and especially for his role as a contributing member in a changing society. The actions of parent groups have outpaced the professional community's ability to respond adequately to full service programs for all children, and these actions have resulted in passage of Public Law 94-142, the most profound legislative mandate offered the classroom teacher. Public Law 94-142, scheduled for implementation in the 1977-78 school year, contains significant innovation regarding the classroom teacher's role in serving the handicapped. Basically, the legislation expands and strengthens the delivery of services to all of the nation's handicapped youth. The teacher's role will be vital particularly in providing full educational programs and services for those requiring assistance. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act was first introduced into the 93rd Congress as Senate Bill 6 with the intention of expanding the provisions for handicapped children already enacted by that Congress. Again introduced into the 94th Congress, it passed the Senate in June 1975. From there the bill went to a joint House/Senate Conference Committee. The Conference Report passed the Senate by a vote of 87 to 7 and the House by 404 to 7 and went to President Ford who reluctantly signed it into law. Public Law 94-142 extends the existing funding formula to states set forth under P. L. 93-380 for the 1976 and 1977 fiscal years, but beginning in 1978 the new law will pay to the states and local education agencies 5 percent of the average per pupil expenditure for handicapped children being served. Furthermore, the percentage of cost that the federal government will assume under the new law increases every fiscal year until it reaches a maximum of 40 percent in 1980. Initially, in 1978, the appropriated funds will distribute equally between state and local education agencies, but in subsequent years 25 percent will go to state agencies while 75 percent will pass through the state agency and go to local education agencies. It will continue as the state's responsibility, however, to