Since the COVID pandemic, the number of homeschooling families has jumped nationally and statewide, as many who were forced into it realized the benefits of being able to tailor curriculum to an individual child’s needs, gain a flexible schedule, protect children from bullying and instill one’s family values.
Opinion
We were one of those families, and for the past four years my husband and I have homeschooled our three children with a classical curriculum focused ultimately on building virtuous human beings with the critical thinking skills to excel academically and life skills to be productive members of society. It’s come at considerable time and effort, particularly on my part as I am the primary teacher. I’ve relearned Latin and how to diagram sentences, read countless books, struggled with formal logic and learned to outsource math to an online program for all of our sanity. It costs us about $1,750 per year per child and saves state taxpayers almost $50,000 yearly, as per child spending in Wyoming is about $16,650 per student. When our kids complete their schooling, we will save Wyoming taxpayers a whopping $316,350.
Statewide, homeschoolers and private school families have saved state and federal taxpayers about $707 million over the past decade, according to a report by the Mountain States Policy Center. It only seems fair that those of us not using the tax dollars we pay into the system should receive at least a partial return on our investment during the years our children are learning at home.
Last year state legislators moved to make that a reality by passing a law allowing education savings accounts. ESAs, as they are known, give parents money to offset the cost of homeschooling, private school, tutoring and school supplies, among other expenses. Gov. Mark Gordon restricted the law by sharply narrowing its eligibility to families earning 150% of the federal poverty line, which is $48,000 for a family of four. Those who meet that qualification can apply for $6,000 per child aged 4 through 12th grade.
Gordon line-item vetoed parts of the legislation he worried violated the Wyoming Constitution, which prohibits giving money to individuals “except for the necessary support for the poor.” He also took issue with the bill allowing parents to use the money on religious institutions. And in a March letter to Secretary of State Chuck Gray he said, “I am particularly concerned about the potential impact on students enrolled in ESA programs when funding may need to be directed to cover shortfalls in public schools during economic downturns.”
First, parents should have the right to decide what is an appropriate education. ESAs are funded by taxpayers, not government, and should be seen as giving parents more freedom to make the best education decisions for their children, not as a handout.
Second, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the governor’s second question in 2022. In its landmark Carson v. Makin decision, the court held that Maine’s “nonsectarian” requirement for otherwise available tuition aid violated the free exercise clause of the First Amendment. In other words, if the state is going to provide money for parents to choose a non-religious school, it also needs to provide it to parents who would rather choose a religious school.
Third, Wyoming, like every state, will not just have to deal with economic booms and busts like in prior years, but big changes in demographics as the birth rate has declined 17% since 2007 in the United States. K-12 public school enrollment has dropped 3.2% in the state over the past 10 years, and further declines will require tough decisions about closing and combining schools in coming years. Having a robust ESA program will make it easier for parents to navigate those imminent changes and find the best options for their children.
Wyoming legislators should move to make ESAs universal this year as in Arizona, where more than 75,000 students in that state have taken advantage of the opportunity since it was enacted in 2022 while simultaneously saving the state money. What’s not to love about giving parents more liberty to make wise decisions for their children while being fiscally responsible?
“First, parents should have the right to decide what is an appropriate education.”
Not really as it is in the best interests of the Republic to determine what is an appropriate education. If we cannot come together as a local community to set the expectations for education of its citizenry then our country is lost. It is pretty clear this erosion of local public values is already increasing division and letting parents set the expectation for education will set the bar at the lowest possible level.
I want to assure the religious that they can still have plenty of time to indoctrinate their children with their beliefs as our public schools have already self-censored instruction to avoid interfering in that parental prerogative. I had a fantastic public education, but it did not directly address any religious indoctrination practiced by my parents as evidenced by my lack of understanding of why there are seven days in a week or my belief that I had one less rib, because god made my future helpmeet out of one of my bones.
Letting parents decide is akin to establishing pure democracy as it will lead to the lowest of expectations and a more divisive society. Pure democracy insures anarchy and letting parents decide on education will lead to a breakdown of our country.
When one decides to home-school one’s child, it is a decision to educate said child in a private school. Public school funds, never should have been nor should ever be, accountable for funding private education. Horace Mann, the “Father of Public Education” stated in 1838:
“(1) that a republic cannot long remain ignorant and free, hence the necessity of universal popular education; (2) that such education must be paid for, controlled, and sustained by an interested public; (3) that such education is best provided in schools embracing children of all religious, social, and ethnic backgrounds; (4) that such education, while profoundly moral in character, must be free of sectarian religious influence; (5) that such education must be permeated throughout by the spirit, methods, and discipline of a free society, which preclude harsh pedagogy in the classroom; and (6) that such education can be provided only by well-trained, professional teachers.”
Thomas Jefferson opined that educating our children in private schooling cultivates the attitude of admiration for “nobility, wealth, and pomp.” For Jefferson, a responsible citizen was required to participate in all forms of public life and public education was “to fortify us against the degeneracy of our government, and the concentration of all its powers in the hands of the one, the few, the well-born, or
but the many.” Did Jefferson believe in culling the “talented and gifted” and sending them on to a private education? Yes, because at the time, there were no public schools and the goal was to give education to all with the beginnings of “elementary” education. There was not yet a thought of ‘middle schools’ or ‘high schools’ and in fact, high school was what we think of as ‘college’. However, it was to be at the expense of the family.
Vouchers, charter schools, and funneling funds from public education have only one purpose: to elevate those who think they are entitled to their beliefs, their education, and to remove from participation, concentrating power in the hands of the few, and admiration of nobility, pomp and wealth. They also do not need to serve the poor, the marginalized, or the disabled. It will leave our schools a vast waste-land of those who have been determined to be ‘not entitled.’
Since we have failed miserably in Jefferson’s conviction that citizens are responsible to participate in all aspects of public life (27% of registered voters in Wyoming voting in 2024 primary and 44% of registered voters voting in general election), and SoS Gray trying to limit participation in our democracy; it is no surprise that the Wyoming Legislature also would like to defund public education in order to ensure an ignorant and uninformed public no longer capable of critical thinking, or differing opinions.
So, Ms. Mossburg, I support your right and freedom to home-school your children. I do not, nor will ever support the use of public funds to pay for your private schooling.
Simple response – what is proposed would violate the Wyoming Constitution.
Maintaining public schools while paying parents to homeschool makes no fiscal sense, regardless of the creative accounting used by the author.
I think you should do some more research about the Arizona system. It’s basically bankrupting the state. Also by your logic, since I don’t have kids in the school system I should get reimbursed all of the taxes I pay into the education system.
So, if it costs you approximately $1,750 per year, per child to home school your children, why should taxpayers give you $ 6,000 per year, per child, (income limitations may apply). I applaud your parental decision and sacrifices that you have made in order to build “virtuous human beings with the critical thinking skills to excel academically and life skills to be productive members of society” Hear, Hear, we certainly need more of these productive members in our society.
However, your argument about saving the great state of Wyoming almost $50,000 dollars annually unfortunately is misleading. I’m sure you understand that there are operational costs that must be met regardless of the number of students being served. It’s only after full capacity is reached and we add one more student, that incremental costs increase. The more children that move away from the public education provided by every property tax payer in Wyoming, the higher the “per student” costs will be. So now you save us even more money? I don’t think so.
Higher per student costs and a subsidy to you. Do you see where I’m coming from?
As I see it, it’s not so much about how much it’s costing the great state of Wyoming to educate our children, it’s the product (yes, product) that they are churning out. This, I believe, is a contributing factor in the reason why parents decide to pull their children from public education.
Your decision to home school your children was based on your parental beliefs that it was the right thing to do. Your choice. I don’t believe that Wyoming taxpayers should have to subsidize your parental beliefs in what a proper education is. Your choice, your responsibility.
I’m glad she outsourced the math teaching, and I have some concerns about her logic and critical thinking skills.
No matter what one calls it, or where it’s been implemented, pulling money out of public schools to pay for private education has had devastating effects on our schools and on state budgets. The ‘savings’ she claims for Arizona is actually currently costing taxpayers millions, with poor academic results. Schools still need to be built and maintained and when parents feel entitled to siphon money out of the system, it harms the rest of the kids.
Ms. Mossburg,
Yes, you can exercise the right to teach your children.
You are basically asking the State to reimburse you of the tax you pay which in most Wyoming Counties is used for PUBLIC EDUCATION.
The obvious problem with your request is it would take out of the equation the fund to educate the less privileged .The parents who have to struggle and work in excess of 60 hours a week to make end meets probably have not the time or capabilities to home school their children.
It is an unfortunate trend in our state. The current policies coming down the pipeline by the majority of the Wyoming House and Senate would agree with your argument and even worse implement them. Therefore your concerns will be met.
The long and short your opinion is a road map for increasing inequality . Sadly “inequality” is the norm and the majority of Wyoming Citizens who have elected the present representatives feel there is not enough inequality.
I understand your logic and of course do not agree with it .
But I hope you understand my logic and I presume you do not agree with it.
Yours Sincerely and my Regards.
I believe the writer’s math is incorrect. The reason the state has so much per pupil spending is that most students do not use all of their per-pupil money and the excess goes to the students with IEP‘s who need more money to teach. By going to vouchers, we are going to lose a lot of public school students And the state education system will be left with less money to spend for the students on IEP‘s.