There is a requirement to provide education in the least restrictive environment. According to Kaplan et. al. (2007), "BU failed to demonstrate that it met its duty of seeking appropriate reasonable accommodations for learning disabled students with difficulty in learning foreign languages by considering alternative means and coming to a rationally justifiable conclusion that the available alternativewould lower academic standards or require substantial program alteration."
"On May 26, 2006, in School Board of Henrico County VA v. R.T., a minor, Judge Robert Payne of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia issued an extensive pro-child decision on behalf of RT, a child with autism, in a tuition reimbursement case" ("Court Cases of Interest," 2009).
In this case, the student was awarded funding because the school system did not give the child an appropriate educational program ("Court Cases of Interest," 2009). This is similar to Guckenberger II in the way that the education being provided was inappropriate for the students' needs.
According to Wright (2005), in another court case, Schaffer v.