Compulsory Attendance: Texas Education Code Annotated 25-085(b)

Ages: "as much as six years of age, or who is less than seven years of age and has previously been enrolled in first grade, and who has not completed the academic year in which his 17th birthday occurred. " If a child is 17 but has been issued an equivalency certificate, that child is exempt. Tex. Educ. Code Ann. 25-085(b ).

Days: 170 Days. Only for public schools. 25-085(b )

Subjects: Good citizenship, math, reading, spelling and grammar 

Home School Statutes: None

Alternative Statutes allowing for Home Schools:

1) Tex. Educ. Code Ann. 25-085(a)(1). "Any child in attendance upon a private or parochial school which shall include in its course a study of good citizenship" is exempt from the requirements of compulsory attendance. The class action suit, Leeper v. Arlington Indep School Dist., (No.17-88761-85 Tarrant County 17th Judicial Ct., April 13, 1987), resulted in a trial level decision in favor of home schooling. The court ruled that:

    a) Home schools can legally operate as private schools in Texas;

    b) Article 7, section 2 of the Texas Constitution only authorizes the legislature to establish and maintain public education, not      private or parochial education (Leeper, Slip Op. At 10);

     c) Home schools must be conducted in a bona fide manner, using a written curriculum consisting of reading, spelling, grammar,  math, and a course in good citizenship. No other requirements apply.

    d) The court ruled that the interpretation of the law cannot be left to each criminal prosecution. "If arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. "(Slip Op. At 9) Therefore, the court interpreted the law in an explicit way based on the historical treatment of home schooling. "The evidence establishes that from the inception of the first compulsory attendance law in Texas in 1915, it was understood that a school-age child who was being educated in or through the child's home, and in a bona fide manner by the parents' was considered a private school." The dictionary is use in Texas at the time of the passage of the first compulsory attendance law contained definitions of the words "private" and “school" which encompassed children being taught at "home." (Id. At 4 and 5)

    e) "This judgment does not preclude the Texas Education Agency the commissioner of Education, or the State Board of Education from suggesting to the public school attendance officers lawful methods, including but not limited to inquiry concerning curricula and standardized test scores, in order to ascertain if there is compliance with the declaration contained in this judgment." (Leeper, Final Judgment at 13)

    f) On November 27,1991, the Court of Appeals of Texas Completely affirmed the case. (See Texas Education Agency, et al. V. Leeper, et al., No. 2-87-216-CV, Court of Appeals, 843 S. W. 2d 41 [Tex. App. -Ft. Worth 11/27/91]). The Court stated that the Texas Education Agency "deprived the home school parents of equal protection under the law" since their private schools in the home were unfairly discriminated against" on the sole basis of location in the home," rather than out- side the home. The court emphasized, "that initiation of prosecution of plaintiff parents violates the parents' equal protection rights by establishing an unreasonable and arbitrary classification of parents which is not rationally related to any state interest. II

    g) On June 15,1994, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Court of Appeals decision in Texas Educational Agency, et at. V. Leeper, et at., (No. D-2022, Texas Supreme Court 1994).

2) In 1989, the Texas legislature exempted private and parochial schools from new requirements for schools, and in the process, confirmed that the term "private school" includes home schools: "Nothing in this act applies to students in attendance upon a private or parochial school, which includes home schools, in accordance with 25.085, Education Code." (See Acts 1989, 71st Leg. CH 658,11.)

Teacher Qualifications: None 
Standardized Tests: None.

The court in Leeper specifically stated that the school district could not mandate standardized testing.