Can schools block students who use accommodations from receiving academic and other honors?

Answer:

No, not just because a student uses disability-related accommodations. Schools can set compliant rules for who qualifies for an honor. An individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan doesn’t guarantee an award. It also isn’t a reason to deny one. Schools can’t discount a qualified student’s achievement simply because the student received needed support.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations

Section 504 and Title II

Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act bars disability discrimination in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. Title II of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) bars disability discrimination by public entities, including public school districts. These protections cover school-sponsored field trips, sports teams, clubs, and other activities beyond the classroom.

Under 34 C.F.R. § 104.4 and 28 C.F.R. § 35.130, schools can’t deny qualified students equal access to benefits because they have a disability.

Title II also requires reasonable modifications to rules, practices, or procedures when needed to avoid disability discrimination. A public school may refuse a change if it can show that the change would fundamentally alter the program or activity. Two examples follow below.

• In its Jan. 25, 2013, “Dear Colleague” letter, U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) gave an example of a runner who needed a visual start signal because of a hearing disability. The signal would occur at the same time as the starting pistol. OCR said this wouldn’t change the race’s basic nature or give the runner an unfair advantage.

• In the same letter, OCR gave an example of a fundamental alteration a school could refuse. Adding an extra base in baseball would change the game.

Schools also can’t use eligibility rules that screen out students with disabilities unless those rules are necessary for the program or activity.

Reydon Public Schools’ Valedictorian Policy

May 15, 2026, U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued its letter for OCR Case No. 07-26-1328, involving Reydon Public Schools (RPS) in Oklahoma. The student’s father said RPS ruled his child out for valedictorian because the student’s IEP allowed extra time on tests. He said the student had earned all A grades for two years and otherwise qualified.

The district’s policy required students to complete coursework “without modifications.” After OCR began its investigation, RPS named the student valedictorian. The principal apologized to the student and father and gave OCR a draft handbook with the disputed words removed.

RPS signed a resolution agreement before OCR finished its investigation. It agreed to revise its valedictorian and salutatorian policies and review those honors for the 2021–22 through 2025–26 school years. For students who qualified but were unlawfully excluded under the old policy because of disability, RPS agreed to provide notice and correct their records.

OCR’s Honor-Roll Finding

OCR’s Annual Report to Congress for fiscal years 2007–08 describes a complaint alleging that a district did the following:

“[D]iscriminated against special education students at a middle school on the basis of disability by excluding special education students from recognition on its A and B honor roll or comparable honor roll.”

OCR didn’t name the district.

According to the report:

“OCR found that the district was selectively applying its unwritten honor roll policy by treating severely disabled students who met the honor roll criteria differently without a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason. The district agreed, among other things, to develop a written honor roll policy that is consistent with Section 504 and Title II and to submit evidence to OCR showing that the school uniformly applied the honor roll policy in effect and provided equal recognition to all eligible honor roll students for the previous six-week grading period, regardless of their disability status.”

OCR’s Special Education Math and Awards Case

OCR’s 2000 Annual Report to Congress describes a student who was kept off the honor roll because he took a special education math class. OCR didn’t name the district.

OCR’s review showed that the problem went beyond this student. Students receiving special education had been:

“categorically excluded from all award and recognition activities.”

This was a blanket exclusion, not a decision limited to one student’s math grade. Under an agreement with OCR:

“the district agreed to work with parents in designing a program to recognize the academic accomplishments of special education students.”

Moorestown’s Valedictorian Dispute

Read more

Can schools block students who have disabilities from sports, field trips, and other activities because their grades are too low?

Answer:

Sometimes.

A child who has a disability may still have to meet grade requirements. However, low grades alone aren’t enough to block a student from participation.

If a student and/or the student’s family requests an accommodation of having a grade requirement waived, the school must review the student’s needs. It can’t point to a one-size-fits-all grade cutoff. The school must look at whether the student’s disabilities affected the grades.

Two recent Office for Civil Rights (OCR) cases show why. One involved a student who was barred from playing on the basketball team and the other was about a student who was barred from a field trip.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations

IDEA, Section 504, ADA, and OCR “Dear Colleague” Letter

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act protects students who have disabilities. In public schools that receive federal funds, it requires an equal chance to take part in sports, recreation, clubs and other school activities. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) also applies. For children who qualify, it requires needed supports, so they have an equal chance to take part.

Title II of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires reasonable changes to rules when needed to avoid disability discrimination.

In its Jan. 25, 2013, “Dear Colleague” letter, OCR described a runner who needed a visual start signal because of a hearing disability. The signal would occur at the same time as the starting pistol. OCR said this wouldn’t change the race’s basic nature or give the runner an unfair advantage.

However, a school may refuse a change if it can show that the change would fundamentally alter the activity. As an example of a fundamental alteration that a school could refuse, OCR gave the example of adding an extra base in baseball. Adding an additional base would change the game.

January 25, 2013: OCR "Dear Colleague" Letter

503KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

OCR’s Resolution Letters and Agreements

Read more

Are school districts allowed to cap mileage reimbursement and demand extensive reimbursement documentation when parents transport their child under an IEP or 504 plan?

Answer:

Read more

Can schools refuse to accept parental consent provided digitally and insist on handwritten (“wet ink”) signatures on paper?

Answer:

No. IDEA does not require handwritten signatures, and schools may not reject otherwise valid parental consent simply because it was provided electronically or not on a district-created form.

This isn’t a loophole or a technicality. It’s how the law is written—and how it has been interpreted by U.S. Department of Education (ED) and states such as Virginia.

Why This Matters

Disputes over “wet ink” signatures often arise when schools want to delay evaluations, limit evaluation areas, avoid triggering IDEA timelines, or shift responsibility for delays onto parents.

IDEA was written to protect students—not to create paperwork traps. When a parent provides clear, informed, written consent, the school’s obligation is to act.

Supporting Documents, Regulations, and Caselaw

Read more

Can schools hold IEP meetings without parents?

Answer:

Generally, no.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) places a heavy weight on parent participation. Parents are required members of IEP teams and schools must work with them to mutually schedule and/or reschedule IEP meetings. This includes when parents or their kids become sick, car batteries die, work responsibilities change, natural disasters hit, and/or a long list of other extenuating circumstances strike.

Schools must make consistent, documented efforts to engage parents, including those who have frequent scheduling issues. For some families, “extraordinary circumstances” are not rare—they’re reality. If you’re a parent reading this, you know that when it rains it pours, and sometimes it pours for years.

However . . . Under very limited circumstances, schools may conduct an IEP meeting without a parent in attendance.

Supporting Documents, Regulations, and Caselaw

Read more

Can schools refuse parents’ requests to hold IEP meetings?

Answer:

Generally, no.

Under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), parents have the right to request IEP meetings, and schools cannot ignore or delay those requests for reasons of convenience. If a school refuses, it must issue a Prior Written Notice (PWN) explaining its decision and the data on which it relied to make the decision.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations

Read more

Can schools require parents to pay for Independent Educational Evaluations (IEEs)?

Answer:

Generally no. If a parent disagrees with a district evaluation, the parent has the right to one IEE at public expense per evaluation cycle.

An exception: Cost caps.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations

Read more

Can state education agencies (SEA) require complainants to use the SEA’s model forms for filing state and due process complaints?

Answer:

No. SEAs are required to develop model forms to guide complainants on filing state and due process complaints. However, states can’t impose requirements that complainants use the model forms.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations:

Read more

Can state and due process complaints be filed against State Education Agencies (SEAs) and other State Agencies?

Answer:

Yes. Both state and due process complaints may be filed against SEAs and other entities defined as public agencies under IDEA.

Supporting Documents and/or Regulations:

Read more

When the student’s parent pointed out that grades alone don’t determine disability eligibility—and that her 9th-grade child was still writing at a first-grade level—the teacher responded that many students struggle with writing, and that the student’s ability to rewrite with assistance showed he could advocate for himself and succeed.

Neither the teacher nor his colleagues understood that the teacher's personal anecdote is legally irrelevant—or that their understanding of “substantially limits” runs counter to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

What Does “Substantially Limits a Major Life Activity” Really Mean?

Under 28 C.F.R. § 35.108, "disability" is defined as "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual" and "shall be construed broadly in favor of expansive coverage, to the maximum extent permitted by the terms of the ADA." Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act uses the same definition of disability. With Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA), these laws help ensure that schools cannot impose narrow criteria.

This includes—but isn’t limited to—activities such as the following:

• Reading

• Writing

• Concentrating

• Learning

• Communicating

Important: A student does not have to be completely unable to perform these activities to be protected under the law. It is enough that the student’s disability makes the task harder, slower, more exhausting, or more painful than it is for students who don’t have disabilities.

What Schools Get Wrong

Many schools wrongly assume that unless a student is failing, they’re not substantially limited—even though that’s not what the law says.

From 28 C.F.R. § 35.108:

"An impairment does not need to prevent, or significantly or severely restrict, the individual from performing a major life activity in order to be considered substantially limiting. . . . The determination of whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity requires an individualized assessment. However, in making this assessment, the term “substantially limits” shall be interpreted and applied to require a degree of functional limitation that is lower than the standard for substantially limits applied prior to the ADA Amendments Act. . . . The comparison of an individual's performance of a major life activity to the performance of the same major life activity by most people in the general population usually will not require scientific, medical, or statistical evidence. . . . The determination of whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity shall be made without regard to the ameliorative effects of mitigating measures."

EEOC and DOJ Confirm the Bar for “Substantial Limitation” Is Low

ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) made it easier—not harder—for individuals to be recognized as having a major life activity substantially limited by a disability.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have repeatedly emphasized that:

• Scientific or statistical evidence isn’t required

• Success does not disqualify someone from having a disability

In fact, the DOJ recently confirmed in a settlement agreement that students who have ADHD, anxiety, dyslexia—even “mild” dyslexia—were substantially limited in major life activities and eligible under Section 504. This reflects, 28 C.F.R. § 35.108 in that the comparison of an individual's performance of a major life activity to the performance of the same major life activity by most students in the general population usually will not require scientific, medical, or statistical evidence. As EEOC put it (see below), a commonsense assessment—"based on comparing an individual’s ability to perform a specific major life activity (which could be a major bodily function) with that of most people in the general population“—should be enough to make a determination. The determination should be made on the act, not the result—on the work required of a student to achieve a result, rather than on the result.

From EEOC’s "Notice of Rights Under the ADA Amendments Act of 2008":

"The limitations from the impairment no longer have to be severe or significant for the impairment to be considered substantially limiting."

From EEOC’s "Questions and Answers on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the ADA Amendments Act of 2008”:

"To have a disability (or to have a record of a disability) an individual must be substantially limited in performing a major life activity as compared to most people in the general population. An impairment need not prevent, or significantly or severely restrict, the individual in performing a major life activity to be considered “substantially limiting.” All of these tests of substantial limitation were deemed by Congress to be too demanding. Rather, determination of whether an individual is experiencing a substantial limitation in performing a major life activity is a common-sense assessment based on comparing an individual’s ability to perform a specific major life activity (which could be a major bodily function) with that of most people in the general population."

From DOJ’s recent agreement with Milwaukee Montessori School:

"Student One . . . was later diagnosed with ADHD, which substantially limits one or more major life activities. . . .

"Student Four . . . has a mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. . . .

“Student Five was diagnosed with ADHD and Anxiety, and Student Six was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder. These impairments substantially limit one or more major life activities of the children. . . .

"Student Seven . . . was later diagnosed with Autism. Student Seven's impairments substantially limit one or more major life activities. . . .

“Student Eight . . . was diagnosed with Anxiety and Depression . . . [h]e was later diagnosed with Autism, ADHD, and OCD. These impairments substantially limit one or more major life activities. . . .

"Student Nine . . . had been previously diagnosed with ADHD and mild Dyslexia . . . These impairments substantially limit one or more of Student Nine's major life activities. . . .

"Student Ten . . . was later diagnosed with ADHD, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Pathological Demand Autism, which substantially limit one or more major life activities."

Good Grades Don’t Disqualify Students

As exhibited by the Denver, Colorado, teacher and his colleagues, a common misconception is that a child with decent or even amazing grades isn’t eligible for special education.

This is not true.

Read more

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) doesn’t specify a checklist of assessments by name or number. Under § 300.304(b), a comprehensive evaluation must “use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information” that assist in determining “whether the ch…

Read more

Answer: Yes

Who Benefits from Monthly Data Meetings?

Short answer: Everyone benefits. Monthly data meetings provide a structured opportunity for students, parents, and educators to reflect on what is or isn’t working and make timely adjustments.

IEP/504 Plan answer: Students with IEPs or 504 Plans—especially those with behavioral challenges and/or academic deficits—may need more frequent check-ins. This is particularly important for students identified later in their education, who may have limited time left before graduation.

Examples:

Elementary School—Behavioral Needs

Imagine a student who struggles with social interactions and emotional regulation. In small-group counseling, he can express his frustrations, but back in the classroom, he misinterprets peer comments, sees teacher tone as yelling, and struggles to control his anger.

Monthly meetings help school staff and parents compare notes, sort out what has/hasn’t worked, and make timely decisions about behavior supports—preventing escalation and promoting school engagement.

High School—Dyslexia

Imagine a student who wasn’t identified with a specific learning disability until late in high school. The student urgently needs targeted interventions. With limited time before graduation, there’s no room for trial-and-error. Monthly reviews help ensure chosen supports (like a reading elective) are effective and responsive.

What Documents, Regulations, and/or Case Law Supports this Answer?

Read more

Answer: Yes. Parents are members of IEP teams and eligibility teams. Their roles as members are not limited to basic participation and/or providing input.

What Documents, Regulations, and/or Case Law Supports this Answer?

Read more

Answer: State education agencies (SEA) and local education agencies (LEA) can establish regulations that exceed Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as long as they don't conflict with IDEA.

What Documents, Regulations, and/or Case Law Support this Answer?

Read more

Answer: Predetermination occurs when a local education agency (LEA) makes decisions about a student's educational services before the development of an Individualized Education Program (IEP), without considering data, parental input, and/or the child's specific needs.

What Documents, Regulations, and/or Case Law Support this Answer?

Under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), predetermination violates procedural safeguards meant to ensure parental participation in educational decisions.

Pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f)(3)(E)(ii)(II):

"In matters alleging a procedural violation, a hearing officer may find that a child did not receive a free appropriate public education if the procedural inadequacies (II) significantly impeded the parents’ opportunity to participate in the decisionmaking process regarding the provision of a free appropriate public education to the parents’ child."

Example of Predetermination

Deal v. Hamilton County Board. of Education provides an example of predetermination related to a student named Zachary. The case reaffirms predetermination as “a procedural violation of the IDEA”:

Read more

Answer: No.

Parents are not required to sign an IEP or 504 Plan at the end of a meeting. They have the right to review the documents before making a decision. Too often, the fast pace of meetings and/or large number of issues crammed into tight timeframes, impact the time parents need to assess whether the proposals make sense or need tweaking.

Schools can’t require immediate signing.

If the school is pushing for a signature but has not provided a PWN, consider asking for one in writing before making a decision.

Read more

Answer: Many parents understandably wonder: If changes are discussed and proposed during the IEP meeting, why does the "prior" written notice come after?

IDEA’s language at 34 C.F.R. § 300.503 adds to the confusion, because it states, that a PWN must be provided before the school “proposes to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of FAPE”

Read more

Answer:

No. A response to intervention can not be used to delay or deny an evaluation for special education services.

What Documents and/or Regulations Support this Answer?

According to the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE), in its 1.29.19 Let…

Read more

What are related services?

Answer:

Related services are supports required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education. This could be transportation to tutoring sessions before or after school, work with a speech therapist, assistive technology training for the parent and student, training parents to use sign language, pr…

Read more

Can My School Say "No" to My Request for an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE)?

Answer:

Yes, your school may refuse to approve your request.

However, if your school refuses to approve your request, it must file for due process and provide you information about where an IEE may be obtained. It may not simply refuse and then take no other acti…

Read more