Description: The educational provision for disabled students is a controversial and debated issue, not only in the UK and in the EU, but also in all Western industrialized countries. The debate involves important arguments in public policy, as well as considerations of educational theory, policy and practice. However, there is a fundamental philosophical and normative core to the issue, which has been almost entirely neglected so far, and which I analyse in this paper. Thus, the central question of my essay is this: what constitutes a just educational provision for disabled students, and in particular, what and how much educational resources should be distributed to students with disabilities and special educational needs? In this paper, I provide an intial answer to this question by outlining an understanding of educational equality for disabled students in terms of a principled framework for a just distribution of resources. This framework employs a version of liberal egalitarianism and, more specifically, draws primarily on Amartya Sen's capability approach. The capability approach is a normative framework for the assessment of poverty, inequality and the design of social institutions. It argues that the justice of social arrangements should be evaluated in terms of the theoretical space of capabilities, that is, in the space of the real freedoms people have to achieve the valued functionings that are constitutive of their well-being. On this view, rather than the means to freedom, what is fundamental in assessing equality and justice is the extent of people's freedom to choose among valuable functionings. Functionings are the beings and doings that individuals have reason to value. Walking, reading , being educated, being well-nourished having self-respect or acting in one's political capacity are all examples of functionings. Capabilities are the real opportunities and freedoms people have to achieve these valued functionings. Capabilities are, therefore, potential functionings, or various combinations of functionings that people can achieve. The focus of the capability approach is specifically on the real effective freedoms people have and their choice among possible bundles of functionings. This allows for the pursuit of people's well-being and facilitates their life planning on the basis of individual choice. In this paper I argue that the capability approach helps substantially in conceptualising educational equality by focussing on the fundamental educational capabilities that are essential prerequisites for functioning as an equal and independent person in society. On this view, educational equality consists in equal effective opportunities and access to basic functionings (people's actual beings and doings) and capabilities (people's opportunities for functionings). Students with disabilities are entitled to achieve educational capabilities established for all. Therefore, they should receive educational opportunities and resources to achieve effective levels of functionings. This is the principled justification for additional resources and sets the measure of the differential amount due to disabled students. Finally, beyond the level of educational capabilities identifed as a just entitlement, considerations of efficiency, drawn on John Rawls's principles of justice, may be applied to the necessary promotion of higher or more complex educational capabilities. Methodology: The methodology informing my essay draws on the standard process in political philosophy and applies John Rawls's notion of 'reflective equilibrium' to educational issues. This consists in presenting the arguments for a normative position and testing them against our moral intuitions, and subsequently adjudicating the conflicts between principles and intuitions when they arise. Conclusions: Educational equality for disabled students and students with special educational needs consists in equal effective opportunities and access to those fundamental educational functionings and capabilities at levels that allow individuals to be equal participants in their social framework.