For over a decade, Conduit has advocated for educational freedom in Arkansas.
Long before LEARNS became law, we argued that parents—not government bureaucracies—should have greater control over their children’s education. We supported policies that expanded educational options, increased competition, and allowed funding to follow students rather than systems.
That position has never been about favoring one type of school over another. It has been about recognizing that families are different, children are different, and no government agency can adequately meet every student’s needs through a one-size-fits-all approach.
Arkansas LEARNS represented a major step in that direction. By creating Educational Freedom Accounts (EFA), lawmakers acknowledged that educational opportunities should not be determined by a family’s zip code or financial circumstances. The program was designed to give families greater flexibility and greater responsibility in choosing the educational path that works best for their children.
But educational freedom is only meaningful if families are truly free to make those choices.
Unfortunately, recent actions by the Arkansas Department of Education raise questions about whether that principle is being honored.
In 2025, the Arkansas Legislature passed SB625, placing guardrails around certain EFA expenditures. Among those provisions was a limit on extracurricular spending. The law allows families to spend up to 25 percent of their EFA funds on extracurricular activities.
Lawmakers debated the issue. They voted. The policy became law.
But when the Department of Education drafted rules to implement SB625, many Arkansans (including homeschool families and those who do not homeschool) believed the agency went much further than the Legislature intended.
According to comments submitted during the rulemaking process, the new regulations prohibit certain extracurricular expenses altogether, including some team sports that require tryouts or limit participation based on ability. Families argue that while the law established a spending cap, the department created entirely new restrictions that do not appear in the statute itself.
There is a difference between limiting spending and prohibiting activity.
A family may agree or disagree with the Legislature’s decision to establish a 25 percent cap. But once that law has been passed, state agencies should not be free to impose additional restrictions that lawmakers never approved.
The concerns raised by homeschool families were not isolated.
Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by Family Council contain hundreds of pages of public comments submitted regarding the proposed rules. The overwhelming majority expressed concern that the proposed regulations would limit educational choices available to homeschool students while treating other educational settings differently.
Many families also questioned why public schools and private schools participating in the EFA program may spend money on athletics and extracurricular activities while homeschool families face additional restrictions on how their EFA funds can be used.
At its heart, this debate is about more than sports. It is about who gets to make decisions for children.
Educational freedom was built on the belief that parents know their children better than bureaucrats do. Parents are the ones working through lesson plans, transportation schedules, tutoring needs, athletic opportunities, and educational goals. They know when a child thrives in a traditional classroom and when that child needs something different.
The farther that decision-making moves away from families and into state administrative offices, the farther we move away from the original purpose of educational freedom.
That does not mean there should be no rules. Taxpayer-funded programs require accountability. Legislatures have the obligation to establish reasonable boundaries and safeguards to accomplish the purpose of the legislation.
But there is a difference between enforcing the law and rewriting it.
When unelected agencies impose restrictions beyond what lawmakers passed, Arkansans begin to rightly wonder whether educational freedom (and Arkansas tax dollars) are directed by a representative government or remain subject to the preferences of those unelected and administering the program.
Arkansas took an important step forward when it embraced educational freedom. Thousands of families have taken advantage of opportunities that simply did not exist a few years ago. Again, this year, the success record of homeschool students versus public education speaks for itself.
That progress should be protected.
If educational freedom is going to succeed in Arkansas, the state must remain committed to the principle that made it possible in the first place: parents—not bureaucrats—should be making the decisions.
After all, the purpose of Arkansas LEARNS was never to empower government.
It was to empower families.
