A debate is underway in Texas regarding their proposed school voucher program, SB2/HB3. While opinions on vouchers vary, the primary concern here is how vouchers specifically affect homeschooling freedoms. This issue is relevant to homeschoolers in Oklahoma as arguments from Texas are beginning to influence discussions locally.
THSC’s Support of Vouchers
The Texas Homeschool Coalition (THSC) has unexpectedly voiced support for homeschool vouchers, a stance that contradicts the long-held belief that government funding leads to government control. THSC cites a study suggesting that vouchers do not increase homeschooling regulations and may even expand freedoms. Given the study’s growing influence online, it is necessary to examine its validity.
Examining the Study’s Claims
Initial Red Flags
THSC asserts that 32 states have school choice programs and that none have increased homeschooling regulations after adopting them. However, the study behind this claim, titled “Homeschool Regulatory Changes: Do Adjacent Policy Changes Matter?“, presents several initial red flags from the start:
- Misleading Scope: The title references “adjacent policy changes,” meaning the study does not focus directly on homeschooling policies. For instance, it looks at the effects of voucher systems that don’t even mention homeschooling students.
- Lack of Peer Review: The study is hosted on SSRN, a preprint server where papers are not peer-reviewed. While the primary author has published peer-reviewed papers before, this particular study has not undergone the same scrutiny. Lacking peer review does not invalidate a study (many think-tanks produce quality content that is not peer reviewed), but it is interesting that the primary author regularly publishes about this subject (school voucher programs) in peer-review journals, but this particular piece was not peer reviewed.
- Broad Definitions: The study counts all voucher programs, even those completely unrelated to homeschooling, when assessing their impact on regulations. As the study states, their measurement of voucher programs “includes all programs, whether they benefit homeschooled students or not” (pg. 7, emphasis added).
Flawed Methodology
The study defines “homeschool regulations” using only three criteria:
- Notice of intent to homeschool
- Testing requirements
- Parental qualifications
Other significant factors, such as curriculum restrictions, background checks, and vaccine mandates, are ignored. Additionally, only legislative changes are considered, excluding policies implemented by educational authorities or child protective services. According to the study, they “only count changes to laws” (pg. 6).
The study also ignores the requirements of voucher programs. Such requirements impact all homeschooling students, even if the requirement is only directly placed on voucher recipients. Homeschoolers educate within broader homeschooling communities, and requirements placed on voucher recipients often extend to co-ops, athletic associations, and other homeschooling groups, indirectly imposing restrictions on all homeschoolers.
For instance, if background checks are required of all adults involved in a voucher recipient’s education, then that includes everyone in their co-op as well, even if they didn’t take the voucher. Also, if curriculum requirements are imposed on a voucher student, this extends to the curriculum in the co-op, impacting both recipients and non-recipients.
Misinterpreting Data
One of the study’s key graphics shows an increase in voucher programs alongside a decrease in state homeschooling regulations. However, the methodology is flawed:
- The number of school choice programs is counted across all states, meaning a single state can have multiple programs.
- The decrease in regulations is measured across all states, whether or not they have a voucher program.
- The study assumes correlation equals causation, attributing regulatory decreases in one state to voucher programs in another.
In other words, if Arizona implements a voucher program, and Arkansas fights instead to decrease regulation, the study would infer that Arizona’s voucher program caused the Arkansas regulation to decrease.
If anything, the reverse is true. It is the rise in the popularity of homeschooling freedom by the hard work of homeschooling advocates such as HSLDA that has made it possible for anyone to even consider giving homeschooling families money.
The Reality of Voucher Programs
There is a crucial distinction between limited and universal voucher programs. Many states, such as Florida and Arizona, initially provided vouchers only to specialized groups like special needs students. However, the expansion of these programs has led to increasing regulatory pressures:
- Oklahoma introduced a tax-credit voucher program in 2023, offering $1,000 to homeschoolers. Since then, multiple bills have been introduced proposing strict homeschooling regulations, such as mandatory background checks for all adults interacting with homeschooled children. Legislators have informed us that these are due to the tax credit availability, even though the legislation does not limit itself to households taking the tax credit.
- Arizona’s ESA program requires families to submit curriculum for approval (even just to receive money for pens and paper) and follow public school vaccination mandates. The governor has proposed a requirement that students attend public school before receiving voucher funds.
- In Sweden, school choice programs led to government control over private education, forcing religious schools to adopt secular instruction (see here and here, by translation, specifically the section titled “Other Questions About Activities with a Denominational Focus”).
While it is true that regulations can be proposed regardless of vouchers, government funding shifts public and legislative perception. Historically, homeschooling has thrived because it remained independent of state funding. Accepting government money alters this dynamic, increasing the likelihood of future regulation.
Conclusion
THSC’s reliance on a flawed study to justify homeschool vouchers is concerning. The homeschooling movement has fought hard for its freedoms, and history shows that accepting government money leads to increased oversight. Organizations such as HSLDA, which have spent decades defending homeschooling rights, warn against taking state funds. Homeschoolers must remain vigilant and recognize that “free money” often comes with strings attached.
Postscript: Adjacent Considerations
Two adjacent subjects often come up when discussing these issues with voucher advocates that need addressing.
Limited vs. Universal Vouchers
Many advocates of vouchers will say that we have had these voucher programs “for decades.” The fact is that there is a huge difference in the public policy consequences of limited voucher programs for specialized populations (like special needs students) and more large-scale (termed “universal”) programs. Universal programs are brand new (generally starting around 2022), and, as noted above, they are already causing problems with homeschooling legislation. Limited programs don’t tend to cause regulatory encroachment because it is solving a problem for the state (incorporating populations it has difficulty with), while universal programs are solving a problem for the recipient.
Postscript 2: Vouchers vs Access Laws
Public access laws are laws that give non-public school children access to public resources such as playgrounds or sports teams. These are not analyzed here because frankly they aren’t relevant to a discussion of whether or not receiving money from the government will impact homeschooling freedom. The question of the effects of whether or not a homeschool student can play in an already-constructed public playground is completely different than the effects of homeschool students receiving money. While some members of THSC (and the authors of the study) think that access laws are relevant to this discussion, the connection is tenuous at best, and certainly not something someone could draw effective conclusions from.
