Texas law requires children to attend school, but the state’s enforcement system is designed to support families and respect parental decision-making.
This reflects a broader shift over the past decade, as the state has moved away from punitive truancy enforcement and toward a framework centered on discretion, support, and local control.
Compulsory Attendance Requirements
By law, children between the ages of 6 and 19 are required to attend school each school day for the entire period instruction is offered.1 This mandate also applies to children younger than six wh are voluntarily enrolled in prekindergarten or kindergarten.2
Truancy Laws and Reforms
Historical Context
Prior to 2015, Texas treated truancy as a criminal offense. Students between the ages of 12 and 17 could be charged with “Failure to Attend School”, a Class C misdemeanor that could result in fines, court appearances, and even a criminal record. Parents could also face prosecution for contributing to nonattendance.3
House Bill 2398 (2015)
In response to widespread criticism of these punitive practices, the Texas Legislature decriminalized truancy in 2015, replacing it with a civil offense called “truant conduct.”4
Under the revised law, a student commits truant conduct by missing school without excuse for 10 or more days or parts of days within a six-month period in the same school year. Such cases are no longer handled by municipal courts but are now referred to designated truancy courts, which have exclusive original jurisdiction.
Prevention and Intervention Requirements
School districts must now implement truancy prevention measures before referring a student to court. These may include conferences with parents, behavioral plans, counseling, or other targeted interventions. Only after these steps fail may a case proceed to a truancy court.
Parents can still face consequences if they knowingly fail to require their child’s attendance, but the legislative intent clearly prioritizes remediation over punishment.5
Enforcement Discretion and Exceptions to Prosecution
Although compulsory attendance laws in Texas are statutorily mandated, their enforcement operates within a framework that permits substantial administrative discretion. The shift from criminal to civil enforcement in 2015 was accompanied by new requirements that school districts implement truancy prevention measures and pursue progressive intervention strategies before initiating formal legal proceedings.6
School districts, in consultation with designated truancy officers or prevention coordinators, retain the authority to evaluate the individual circumstances underlying a student’s nonattendance.
Truant conduct is defined as the failure to attend school on ten or more days or parts of days within a six-month period in the same school year.7 However, it is an affirmative defense to an allegation of truant conduct that the absences were involuntary.
“Involuntary” in this context refers to absences that are beyond the student’s control. Examples include:
- Medical or psychological conditions, including hospitalization or clinical depression
- Housing instability, such as eviction or displacement
- Transportation breakdowns in areas lacking school bus access or public transit
- Responsibilities as a caregiver during a family emergency
- Unsafe home environments, including domestic violence
- Errors or delays in school enrollment due to administrative issues
Where such circumstances are demonstrated, courts must dismiss the truancy petition if the defense is properly raised. Additionally, dismissal may be required if the school failed to apply legally mandated intervention efforts prior to filing.
This flexible approach reflects Texas’s broader constitutional and political norms, which emphasize local governance and deference to parents in educational matters. While the law retains tools for addressing severe or chronic absenteeism, its application is tempered by an expectation that enforcement remain tailored, proportionate, and sensitive to context.
Homeschooling and Compulsory Attendance
Texas recognizes homeschooling as a lawful and legitimate form of private education. In a landmark case in 1994, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that homeschools qualify as private schools under the state’s compulsory attendance laws.8
According to Education Code § 25.086(a)(1), students attending a private or parochial school are exempt from the state’s attendance requirement. This exemption includes home instruction, provided that the instruction is bona fide and includes a curriculum covering the five basic subjects: reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics, and good citizenship.
Courts have interpreted the term “bona fide” quite broadly—requiring that the instruction be genuine and not a pretext, but without requiring state approval, curriculum review, or professional qualifications for the parent-teacher (Leeper, at 443). In practice, this gives Texas homeschoolers wide latitude, with very limited state oversight.
Recent Developments and Political Climate
The 2015 truancy reforms signaled a cultural shift toward helping families navigate school challenges rather than criminalizing student behavior.
However, authorities may still enforce attendance laws in cases of persistent disengagement or parental neglect, and concerns about chronic absenteeism persist. In 2025, lawmakers introduced HB 3613 and SB 1925, bills aimed at strengthening school district authority to act after repeat absences. But neither bill advanced out of committee during the 89th Legislature.
The Bottom Line
In principle, Texas law requires children to attend school, but the state’s enforcement practices have shifted dramatically over the past decade. Criminal truancy charges have been replaced with civil proceedings, and the focus has turned to prevention and family engagement.
Homeschooling remains broadly protected, with few regulatory burdens—illustrating Texas’s ongoing deference to parents as the primary decision-makers in their children’s education. Nevertheless, lawmakers continue to fine-tune attendance enforcement in response to persistent absenteeism and evolving policy concerns.
