Graduation Semester and Year

2018

Language

English

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Department

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

First Advisor

C. James Hardy

Abstract

The results of this study reveal the influence of (1) U.S. Court of Appeals judges' political ideology; (2) pivotal special education Supreme Court Decisions' influence; and (3) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1997 Amendments' influence on appellate judges' voting decisions impacting K-12 education autism tuition reimbursements between 1983 and 2016, using descriptive and inferential analyses with binary logistic regression as a statistical tool. Principal inquiries are: 1. Does U.S. Court of Appeals judges' political ideology (as measured by party of the appointing president or DW-NOMINATE Measure scores) influence their voting in whether to award tuition reimbursement under the IDEA in cases involving students with autism? 2. Are there differences in the power of party of the appointing president (Republican or Democrat) and DW-NOMINATE Measure scores (political conservatism or liberalism) in predicting whether court of appeals judges' award tuition reimbursement in IDEA cases involving students with autism? 3. What influences do legal developments in IDEA 1997 Amendments exert on Court of Appeals judges' voting in IDEA tuition reimbursement cases involving students with autism? The principal findings for this investigation are: (1) ideology, as determined by party of appointing president is an effective means to predict judges' voting in K-12 autism tuition reimbursement cases decided by U.S. Court of Appeals. The odds of a Democrat-appointed appellate judge voting in favor of K-12 tuition reimbursement for students with autism is significantly greater than a Republican-appointed appellate judge. (2) Judicial ideology, as determined by judges' DW-NOMINATE Measure score is an effective predictor of judges' voting in K-12 tuition reimbursement for students with autism; the odds of a pro-parent vote by a Democratic-appointed appellate judge is significantly greater than a Republican-appointed appellate judge. (3) Whether a tuition reimbursement for students with autism in the K-12 setting occurred before or after IDEA 1997 Amendments is an effective predictor of appellate judges' voting in favor of the plaintiff, whether measured within a model utilizing party of the appointing president or DW-NOMINATE Measure scores as an ideological predictor. The odds are significantly greater for a U.S. Appeals Court judge to vote in favor of tuition reimbursement after the IDEA 1997 Amendments.

Keywords

autism, tuition reimbursement, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), judicial ideology, logistic regression

Disciplines

Education | Educational Leadership

Comments

Degree granted by The University of Texas at Arlington

Download

Share

COinS