BEYOND THE CLASSROOM
Schools provide many environments and opportunities for students to learn and grow -- both in the classroom and outside the classroom. While the focus of special education is most often on the classroom, the law has long required that children with disabilities have an equal opportunity to participate in nonacademic and extracurricular activities. The federal regulations implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act require that schools ensure that a student with disabilities participate with non-disabled students in nonacademic settings and extracurricular activities "to the maximum extent appropriate" to the needs of the student with disabilities. 34 C.F.R. § 104.34(b). Schools must also provide nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities in a way that affords students with disabilities "an equal opportunity for participation in such services and activities". 34 C.F.R. § 104.37(a). The regulations set forth a nonexhaustive list of the types of services and activities involved that includes meals, recess, counseling services, physical recreational athletics, transportation, health services, recreational activities, special interest groups or clubs sponsored by the school, and employment opportunities.
The IDEA Amendments of 1997 reinforce and strengthen a school’s obligation to ensure that students with disabilities have an equal opportunity to participate in nonacademic and extracurricular activities along with non-disabled peers. The Amendments include new required components of IEPs, emphasizing student participation in the general curriculum. Included among the amendments related to the IEP is a requirement that there be "a statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided for the child ...(II)...to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and (III) to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and non-disabled children in the activities described in this paragraph." Section 614(d)(1)(A)(iii).
In practice, IEP teams have often dealt with extracurricular and nonacademic activities on an ad hoc basis, addressing barriers to access and participation when they arise. Under the new provision, these activities should be addressed in a systematic and comprehensive manner. Teams need to anticipate and plan for involvement in these activities, and consider the role that assistive technology can play in making the promise of equal opportunity a reality.
The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) has issued a number of rulings interpreting and applying the 504 regulations. A review of these rulings gives an idea of the variety of activities to be considered by teams in connection with the IEP process. The following list is in no way intended to be exhaustive.
Playgrounds:
--Hazelton (PA) Area School District, 17 EHLR 907 (OCR, March 7, 1991).
A complaint was filed by the parents of a child who uses a wheelchair, alleging that the school’s newly constructed playground was not readily accessible. The surface of the playground was covered with stone rendering most of the area inaccessible to wheelchair users. OCR determined that by not providing access to the playground area, the district had denied equal opportunity for participation by students with disabilities, in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 104.37(a). OCR rejected the district’s claim that the playground was not covered under the 504 regulations because it had been paid for with private funds. OCR observed that the playground became district property, and the district had participated in its planning.
--San Francisco (CA) Unified Sch. Dist., 23 IDELR 1200 (OCR, November 26, 1995).
OCR considered a complaint concerning two of the district’s recently constructed playgrounds. Due to the lack of specific standards regarding playground design, OCR applied the general nondiscrimination provisions of Section 504 and the ADA. In determining the district’s compliance, OCR looked to whether each playground, "when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by disabled individuals." OCR determined that the playgrounds were not accessible. The surfaces leading up to and under play structures were not firm, stable, and slip resistant, and there were raised barriers. Moreover, there was not a range of accessible play activities within the play structures.
--Mill Valley (CA) Elementary Sch. Dist., 23 IDELR 1190 (OCR, October 10, 1995).
OCR found that two of the district’s playgrounds had raised barriers and inaccessible surfaces. OCR also raised concerns regarding access to play activities within the play structures. The complaint was resolved by the district’s commitment to provide an accessible route to the playground and consult with an expert to develop and implement a plan to provide a range of play activities within the structures.
Band Program:
--Akron (OH) City Sch., 19 IDELR 793 (OCR, January 15, 1993).
OCR investigated a complaint that a district had excluded a student from its band program by failing to offer it in an accessible location. The band room was located on the second floor of a building without an elevator. The room could be reached only by climbing 25 steps. Initially, the student was assisted up the steps by his brother and the band director, but this was discontinued when he fell. The band director then provided private lessons. OCR determined that the district had violated Section 504.
Special Programs/Assemblies:
--Whitman-Hanson (MA) Regional Sch. Dist., 20 IDELR 775 (OCR, August 19, 1993).
A complaint alleged that an eight year old student who uses a wheelchair had been denied participation in a program in violation of Section 504 and the ADA. The school held a variety show using the school’s stage. The stage is reachable only by a set of stairs. The teacher had conducted similar activities in accessible locations, but wanted to use the stage in order to accommodate a larger audience, and so that students could learn about lighting, microphones, and other equipment. OCR determined that the school had violated Section 504 and the ADA.
--Atlanta (GA) Pub. Sch., 16 EHLR 19 (OCR, January 9, 1989).
The school held assemblies and other special programs in an auditorium accessible only by steps. School officials were carrying students with mobility impairments into the auditorium. OCR held that this violated Section 504. The complaint was resolved when the school made modifications to the facility, including the installation of a ramp.
Field Trips/Off-Site Programs:
--Ontario-MontClair (CA) Unified Sch. Dist., 24 IDELR 780 (OCR, February 7, 1996).
The district holds a week-long camping trip each year. In order to participate, students must complete a written report, and have a limited number of disciplinary infractions. Although facially nondiscriminatory, the program requirements had the effect of excluding a disproportionate number of students with disabilities. OCR held that "districts may be required to modify eligibility requirements that have the effect of barring disabled students from participation in extra curricular activities because of their disabilities, so long as such modifications do not create a fundamental alteration in the program." The case was resolved when the district agreed to discuss participation in the program in IEP meetings, and to modify eligibility criteria to respond to individual needs of students.
--Elk Grove (CA) Unified Sch. Dist., 21 IDELR 941 (OCR, August 1, 1994).
A student with a wheelchair was not allowed to ride on the bus with her class on a field trip. The teacher told the child’s mother that the chair would pose a safety hazard, and requested that the mother drive the child to the off-site location. OCR found that the school had violated Section 504.
Clubs:
--Colquitt County (GA) Sch. Dist., 25 IDELR 244 (OCR, June 6, 1996).
A school sponsored Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts troops that had been specially adapted for children with disabilities. The troops met during the day, and did not include students without disabilities. Although open to all students, students without disabilities had not been encouraged to join. The school agreed to resolve OCR’s concerns.
--South Central (IN) Area Special Educ. Coop., 17 EHLR 248 (September 25, 1990).
A complaint arose from the attendance of students at a segregated facility. Among the many allegations was a complaint that students had been denied participation in various nonacademic and extra-curricular activities available to other students of the district including clubs, organizations, field trips, and athletics. OCR held that the district had violated Section 504 by failing to "consider or determine for each individual student what level of interaction is appropriate regarding nonacademic and extra-curricular activities", and by failing to ensure that students were integrated with non-disabled students to the maximum extent appropriate.
After School and Summer Programs:
--Clayton (MO) Sch. Dist., 16 EHLR 766 (OCR, March 16, 1990).
The district offered a summer recreation program open to all students. When the parents of two children with disabilities registered, they were told that they must provide "custodial care" to participate. OCR found that this requirement, not imposed on non-disabled children, violated Section 504. OCR required the district to provide additional counselors to adapt and modify activities, and to provide additional supervision.
--Conejo Valley (CA) Unified Sch. Dist., 23 IDELR 448 (OCR, June 28, 1995).
A student was denied the opportunity to participate in an after school child care program. OCR found that the child could benefit from participation in the program. The district was required to hire an aide. OCR held that the provision of an aide would not alter the program, and would not impose an undue financial or administrative burden.
Graduation:
--Aldine (TX) Indep. Sch. Dist., 16 EHLR 1411 (OCR, July 12, 1990).
The district operates several high schools. Most of the students attended graduation exercises at a central location, while students with disabilities attending a segregated high school attended a ceremony at a separate location. OCR held that the district had violated Section 504.
Late Bus Transportation:
--Carmel Cent. (NY) Sch. Dist., 20 IDELR 1177 (OCR, September 30, 1993).
A student attended an out-of-district placement. The district was required to provide late bus transportation so that he could participate in extracurricular activities after school.