public education,” sometimes referred to as a “FAPE,” for all children with disabilities. 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a) (establishing right to a free appropriate public education); id. § 1400(c) (congressional findings). Known then as the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (“EHA”), and today named the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA, the law “confers upon disabled students an enforceable substantive right to public education in participating States, and conditions federal financial assistance upon a State’s compliance with the substantive and procedural goals of the Act.” Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 310, 108 S.Ct. 592, 98 L.Ed.2d 686 (1988) (citation and footnote omitted); see also Bd. of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 188-89, 102 S.Ct. 3034, 73 L.Ed.2d 690 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Among the most important of the IDEA’S goals
holding that in a criminal trial the trial court must correct or amend an improper instruction if the proper instruction is necessary for the jury to understand the case holding that an individualized educational program that merely provided for educational services as appropriate did not result in the denial of a free appropriate public education holding that the eha established right to public education for students with disabilities that consists of educational instruction specially designed to meet the unique needs of the handicapped child supported by such services as are necessary to permit the child to benefit from the instruction holding that district of columbia violated due process by denying handicapped students a publicly supported education and suspending or expelling such children from regular schooling or special instruction without a hearing holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given