South Carolina debates whether to include homeschoolers in school choice   

South Carolina officials are debating whether homeschooled students should be eligible to receive school choice scholarships.

South Carolina launched its Education Scholarship Trust Fund (ESTF) program in 2024, giving scholarships of $7,500 to 10,000 students.

However, State Superintendent Ellen Weaver has come under fire for including homeschool families, which lawmakers allegedly did not intend. Now there is debate about whether to continue or end elegibility for homeschool students.

In South Carolina, homeschool families must enroll in one of three oversight bodies: their local school district, the South Carolina Association of Independent Home Schools or an independent association of over 50 members.

In the law establishing the ESTF program, lawmakers forbade a family who is homeschooling under one of these three options from receiving ESTF funding.

However, Weaver argued the law implicitly created a fourth option – where homeschool families were directly accountable to the Department of Education.

In a letter sent to the state Legislature, Weaver referred to this fourth option as “unbundling,” because it gave families maximum freedom to design an individualized education program.

“Several categories of allowable educational expenses in the ESTF law would likely only be used by families using the ‘unbundling’ option,” she wrote. “These include the purchase of ‘textbook and curriculum,’ ‘fees for examinations,’ ‘individual courses,’ and ‘any other educational expense approved by the department to enable personalized learning consistent with the intent of this act.’”

Weaver reported over 1,000 students used ESTF funds to homeschool during the 2025-26 school year with “thousands more applying” for the upcoming year.

“From the Department’s perspective, the ability for families to ‘unbundle’ and customize educational services is an important feature of education savings account programs nationwide,” she concluded.

“This flexibility allows families to tailor services to meet their child’s individual needs while remaining subject to statutory accountability requirements.”

Dr. Oran Smith, a public policy expert and senior fellow at the pro-school choice Palmetto Promise Institute, argued the “plain reading” of the law was on Weaver’s side.

“A plain reading of S.62 and every other ESA statute in the country leaves no doubt that all allowable expenses [should] be on the table for bundling,” Smith wrote.

“If that creates an option that involves no full-time attendance at a brick-and-mortar school, so be it. Parents deserve that right if it is the best bundling of services for their child.”

A bill introduced by Senate Education Chairman Greg Hembree, R-Little River, would update the law to explicitly forbid any form of home education.

But it might be hard to put the genie back in the bottle.

“There’s a lot about this that troubles me, but something that really is eating at me is – I think about the kids, about the students at home and the families that are told this is OK, encouraged to do this,” Hembree said.

“They come to rely on it, they sign up for it, they rely on it, then all of a sudden the rug gets pulled out from under them.”

And homeschool parents have already testified the program is “extremely beneficial” to their kids.

Another parent, Amanda McTeer, has a son whose medical condition makes it impossible for him to attend a brick-and-mortar school.

“[Homeschooling] just provides us with so many more opportunities that we, my kids, would not have otherwise,” McTeer explained.

The ESTF funding they received helped pay for virtual classes and science field trips.

“It’s just been really great for them, and they really love it, and it would be really hard to lose at this point,” McTeer said.