The peer-reviewed special education literature has included notable attention to the peer-reviewed research (PRR) provision that the 2004 amendments added to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). However, as with the other IDEA issues, the legal accuracy of this translating treatment for special education professionals is subject to serious question and significant improvement. As an initial framework, this article provides (1) a comprehensive canvassing of the IDEA legislation, regulations, and, on a supplemental basis, agency policy interpretations specific to PRR; and (2) a sequential summary of the professional literature's translation of the IDEA's PRR provision in light of the available applicable case law. It next synthesizes a systematic and objective analysis of the successive judicial rulings that have interpreted and applied the PRR provision. The final part revisits the coverage in the special education literature, evaluating the completeness, accuracy, and transparency of its legal content. This reexamination identifies and discusses the significant discrepancy between the objective contours of the case law and its characterization in the literature, with recommendations for more accurate legal literacy for special education professors and practitioners.