A child with a disability who has the potential to graduate from the regular educational program should have a right to an IEP with the goal of graduating from the regular program. When the public schools have full control of a child's education, the decision to set goals that are less than the requirements set for the general population is a serious governmental decision that risks a lifetime of harm to the individual child. It is the very foundation of good citizenship. In these days it is doubtful that any child may succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the State has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.
Illiteracy is an enduring disability.
If a child with a disability has the potential to achieve the goals of a regular education, any lesser goal subjects the child to the harms described in Brown and Plyler v. Doe. A public agency should carry a heavy burden of justifying the decision to set a goal of illiteracy for a child with the potential to read, or dependency for a child with the potential to be independent. A child who does not have the potential to complete the regular curriculum should have a right to an IEP with the goal of reaching his or her maximum educational potential. No other goal would be rational. The court held that he was entitled to an educational program designed to meet his unique needs, including development of the functional life skills that he was capable of learning.