by Ethan Faverino | Jul 7, 2025 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
A record number of Arizona high school students have earned the prestigious Seal of Arts Proficiency for the 2024-25 school year. 2,366 students have received this honor, some earning more than one, indicating proficiency in more than one arts discipline.
There was a total of 2,400 awards, marking the highest number of recipients since the program launched in 2019. These students were recognized across multiple disciplines of Visual Arts, Theatre, Music, Media Arts, and Dance.
“I am a passionate supporter of the arts. Not only do disciplines such as music, theatre, art, and dance have intrinsic value, but studies have proven that students who pursue the arts often do better academically,” said State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne. “There is tremendous value in arts education, and I am extremely pleased to see the highest number of students in the history of this program receiving the Seal of Arts Proficiency. I also offer my congratulations to the Dysart district and its leadership for having the most students receiving this recognition.”
Out of the 2,400 seals and 2,366 participating students, the Dysart Unified School District was awarded 261 seals with 249 participating students.
The program was launched in the 2019-20 school year with hopes of recognizing students who demonstrate exceptional skills in the arts disciplines. Within the past 5 years, it has quickly grown from 585 participating students to 2,366. The total awards have also increased from 591 to 2,400, showing the state’s proficiency in high school arts. School involvement and support have also grown, with 58 schools participating in 2019 compared to 146 schools this year.
The Arizona Seal of Arts Proficiency honors students who demonstrate exceptional achievement in the arts, while also equipping them with essential life skills and preparing them for college. With nearly 80,000 jobs in Arizona’s arts and culture sector, the seal offers students a meaningful pathway into creative industries, allowing them to succeed both personally and professionally.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Tamra Farah | Jul 1, 2025 | Opinion
By Tamra Farah |
Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program, launched in 2011, empowers families to tailor their children’s education with state funds. The 2025-2026 school year covers private school tuition, tutoring, and therapies, averaging $7,000 – $8,000 per student.
While the program serves over 93,000 students, that number is only a fraction of its possible reach. Bureaucratic inefficiencies and government red tape currently hinder broader access and limit the benefits of ESAs. The approval of the 2025-26 ESA Parent Handbook could have fixed this, but as critics pointed out, the handbook’s restrictive guidelines and manual review processes create more bureaucratic obstacles.
Now, it’s time to examine some of the key aspects of the ESA Program. We need real change, including adopting best practices from other states to streamline operations, better serve families, and extend this opportunity to more Arizona children.
ESA Application Process
The ESA program provides eligibility to any Arizona child from kindergarten through 12th grade, including preschoolers with disabilities, as outlined in the 2025-26 ESA Parent Handbook and A.R.S. §15-240. Families apply via the Arizona Department of Education’s (ADE) online portal, submitting proof of residency and, for students with disabilities, an IEP or 504 Plan.
Approvals are typically granted within 30 days. Approved families sign a contract to use funds for educational expenses and to forgo public school enrollment. Quarterly tuition deposits are managed through ClassWallet, requiring allocation to core subjects like reading and math, with receipt submission to ensure compliance. Non-compliance risks account suspension, balancing flexibility with accountability.
ClassWallet and Financial Management
ClassWallet simplifies ESA fund management through the ESA Applicant Portal, allowing parents to monitor balances and make transactions. It offers four spending options: the Marketplace, with pre-approved items like textbooks; Pay Vendor, for payments to providers such as private schools; the Debit Card, which requires receipt validation for purchases like school supplies; and Reimbursement, for out-of-pocket costs after review.
Marketplace purchases are automatically deducted, like a math workbook, are automatically deducted, streamlining routine expenses. However, non-Marketplace transactions require manual review as mandated by the 2025-26 handbook, which causes inefficiencies and frustrates parents.
Manual Review Staffing Strain
The 2025-26 handbook requires a manual review for non-Marketplace items, a detailed and staff-intensive process. Items like custom curricula, tutoring from unregistered providers, computer hardware, therapies for students with disabilities, debit card purchases, public school fees, and expensive items such as a $500 musical instrument must be verified for educational relevance. This includes providing specific documentation for IEP students and detailed invoices.
With more than 93,000 students, that could mean up to 186,000 reviews annually taking 46,608 staff hours. That would require at least 23 full-time ADE employees, thereby straining resources. These reviews, mandated by A.R.S. §15-2403(B), caused delays for 77% of parents, according to a 2024 Heritage Foundation report, which fuels perceptions of bureaucratic inefficiency.
The 2025-26 Handbook Controversy
The latest handbook’s approval by the Arizona State Board of Education (SBE) with an 8-1 vote sparked controversy over its compliance with state law. Critics, including parent Angela Faber, argued that its restrictive approval process, requiring additional documentation for disability-related expenses, violates A.R.S. §15-2402(B)(4), which permits funds for therapies and assistive technology.
Republican lawmakers criticized “overly restrictive cost guidelines,” such as a removed $16,000 cap on items like cellos, claiming the handbook defied a legislative warning. Still, no formal directive is documented, making the accusation speculative. The ADE asserts compliance with A.A.C. R7-2-1503 and A.R.S. §15-231(B), with a 30-day appeal period for denied expenses to ensure recourse. Despite revisions, late draft postings limited public review and increased debate. A 2023 report showed 96% of ESA funds supported academic goals, highlighting the program’s potential when managed effectively.
Lessons from Other States
Expanding ClassWallet’s Marketplace to include more pre-approved items could decrease manual reviews by 20–30% to improve the handbook’s inefficiencies. Implementing a machine-learning system for routine approvals, modeled on Florida’s Family Empowerment Scholarship or Tennessee’s Individualized Education Account, would simplify processing. Reinstating debit cards with Merchant Category Code restrictions and adopting risk-based audits could reduce review volume by 40%. Better parental education through tutorials could lower errors, easing administrative burdens.
Potential Leadership Change: Horne vs. Yee
Amid the handbook concerns, Superintendent Tom Horne may face Treasurer Kimberly Yee in the Republican primary for Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction. During his tenure, Horne has advanced educational initiatives by eliminating the Kindergarten Entry Assessment to reduce teacher workload and expanded school safety with 565 new officers. As Arizona State Treasurer, Kimberly Yee has championed government transparency by pushing for easily accessible online budgets, with the Arizona Treasury website providing clear information on taxpayer spending, enhancing public accountability. Yee has also prioritized financial literacy for high school courses and a Financial Literacy Fund to educate students, seniors, and vulnerable populations. Voters are urged to select the leader in 2026 who is most qualified and prepared to improve upon the administratively challenged ESA program. Check out my previous column for more information about the Horne and Yee matchup.
Conclusion: Strengthening a National Model
The ESA program’s flexibility for over 93,000 students makes it a national leader, but the 2025-26 handbook’s manual reviews and controversial approval process show administrative challenges. Arizona can improve operations while keeping accountability by increasing transparency and adopting automation, learning from Florida and Tennessee.
For more details, visit https://www.azed.gov/esa or call (602) 364-1969. Be aware of potential staff availability constraints.
Tamra Farah leads AmericanStrategies.org. She brings twenty years of experience in public policy and politics as a journalist, focusing on protecting individual liberty and advocating for limited government. She has worked with ten local, state, and federal candidates and organizations, such as Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Moms for America, and Arizona Women of Action. Farah has regularly appeared on conservative radio, television, and print media.
by Ethan Faverino | Jun 30, 2025 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
Arizona’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne is applauding the U.S. Supreme Court for its decision to allow parents to opt their kids out of inappropriate sexual classes. This ruling requires all schools to offer parents the option to withdraw their children when their religious beliefs conflict with course material.
In its decision on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that parents can opt their children out of public-school lessons containing inappropriate sexual content or LGBTQ+ themes that conflict with the family’s religious beliefs.
Horne praised this ruling, calling it a critical step in protecting young students from “inappropriate sexual lessons” and refocusing the classroom on core academics.
The case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, originated in Maryland, where parents challenged the local school board’s policy of not allowing opt-outs from lessons involving books with LGBTQ+ characters or sexual content. The Supreme Court’s decision sent the case back down to the lower courts for additional review but signaled strong support from parents all over the country.
The case involved “inclusivity” books that were announced in 2022 for students in pre-K through fifth grade in Maryland. Parents opposed the way the books defended controversial ideology around gender and sexuality.
For example, The Becket Fund noted one book tasks three and four-year-olds to search for images from a word list that includes “intersex flag,” “drag queen,” “underwear,” “leather,” and the name of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker.
Becket said another book advocates a child-knows-best approach to gender transitioning, telling students that a decision to transition doesn’t have to “make sense,” and teachers are instructed to say doctors only “guess” when identifying a newborn’s sex anyway.
“While scientific education regarding reproduction at an appropriate age is perfectly proper, there has been a trend to subject young children to sexual lessons that are inappropriate to their age,” said Horne. “Defenders of these programs say they want to be welcoming and inclusive. The proper way to do that is to include all students in education about reading, writing, math, science, history, and the arts. The inappropriate lessons about which parents are complaining are a distraction from these crucial academic subjects.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Ethan Faverino | Jun 24, 2025 | Education, News
By Ethan Faverino |
The Arizona State Board of Education has adopted the Arizona Department of Education’s Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) Parent Handbook for the upcoming school year.
This updated handbook was approved on June 23, 2025, by an 8-1 vote after more than a year of gathering feedback from parents and lawmakers.
“I am very pleased that the board has endorsed the updated handbook. The changes reflect the needs of parents to have clarity in how ESA expenses are reviewed, allow the department to continue its efforts to ensure the program is well-managed and that taxpayer dollars are used for appropriate educational purposes. Anything less would potentially damage the ESA program. I am committed to its long-term sustainability because it is a vital way for parents to have the freedom to choose the best education for their children,” said Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne.
The ESA program allows Arizona parents to use state funds for educational expenses like tutoring, homeschooling materials, and private school tuition. The handbook serves as a guide for parents on how to comply with the program rules and ultimately make sure all funds are used for appropriate educational purposes. It also covers eligibility, application process, and allowed and prohibited expenses.
The 2024-2025 handbook outlined basic ESA rules, eligibility, and allowed expenses, but lacked specificity in certain areas, particularly Special Education students. It provided general guidance on expenses like educational therapies, but did not include a structured approach to evaluate expenses for students with diverse needs, making it difficult for parents to navigate approvals for Special Education requirements.
The updated 2025-2026 handbook addressed these issues with a broader, more flexible framework for evaluating expenses for Special Education students. There are more explicit guidelines for how expenses are approved and evaluating expenses for students with unique needs, such as specialized therapies, adaptive equipment, and individualized educational materials.
However, some parents believe that the language is still too vague, indicating the ongoing challenges in fully meeting Special Education requirements.
During the Arizona State Board of Education board meeting, ESA Director John Ward defended the broad language that was used in the ESA Parent Handbook and said that it provides flexibility to address varied students’ needs.
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Mike Bengert | Jun 16, 2025 | Opinion
By Mike Bengert |
Following multiple complaints regarding the social studies curriculum recently approved by the Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) Governing Board on May 13, the Arizona Department of Education launched a formal investigation. On Wednesday, June 11, Arizona State Superintendent Tom Horne held a press conference to announce the findings. He stated that he would report to the federal government that SUSD violated a statement they signed saying they would not teach Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) content.
Horne clarified that his comments were directed at what he called the three “woke” members of the SUSD Governing Board who voted in favor of the curriculum. Superintendent Scott Menzel responded to this characterization, arguing it was unfair and uninformed—particularly without a full review of the 1,250-page textbook. He called such labeling “a problem from his perspective.”
While finding a common definition of “woke” is a bit of a challenge, most would agree that it originally meant being aware of social injustices, particularly around race, and it was rooted in activism. The term has now evolved into a broader often vague term for hyper-awareness of social issues. Critics often say it is dogmatic overreach where someone pushes rigid beliefs or ideologies beyond reason, imposing them on others without flexibility or evidence.
So, is it fair to describe these board members as “woke”?
Board Members Past
When Member Sharkey first announced he was running for the board, he said it was because of the rise in the parents’ rights movement (rights codified in Arizona Revised Statues), which he blamed (without citing any evidence) for the issues plaguing SUSD. He rejects the idea that parents are best positioned to make educational and healthcare decisions for their children, asserting that trained professionals know better. Sharkey’s reluctance to recognize these rights suggests a troubling approach to governance that may not prioritize parental input nor respect their legal parental rights.
Dr. Donna Lewis, SUSD Governing Board President, ran on her years of educational experience, including being selected as the national superintendent of the year during her time at the Creighton School District. Her academic record leaves a lot to be desired with 13% of her students proficient in ELA and 8% in math the year she was selected. Additionally, her leadership style has been criticized for creating a hostile and toxic environment, prompting a formal public apology from a school board member after her departure.
Then there is Dr. Pittinsky, another education professional and an expert in public education with 25 years’ experience. Someone who only publicly revealed the conflict of interest with his business ties with SUSD after he was called out. Someone who thinks so highly of SUSD that he put his kid in a private school rather than SUSD.
All three of these board members ran on “protecting SUSD” and Menzel and his “woke” curriculum of DEI, SEL, and gender identity. So far, they have shown themselves to be a predictable rubber stamp for whatever Menzel wants.
Dogmatic overreach?
Superintendent Menzel’s Past and Controversial Remarks
Superintendent Menzel previously led Michigan’s Washtenaw Intermediate School District, where he emphasized equity, inclusion, and social justice. In an interview before leaving Michigan, Menzel described white supremacy as deeply embedded in the fabric of American society, stating that acknowledging it offers a chance to “dismantle, disrupt, and recreate something that’s socially just and more equitable.”
These comments drew sharp criticism from Arizona GOP legislators, who labeled his statements as divisive and inappropriate for someone in public education.
Read it for yourself:
So, is it proper to label the three board members as “woke”?
I’ll let you draw your own conclusion.
Curriculum Content and Allegations of Bias
In addition to Horne, Maricopa County Sheriff Jerry Sheridan also raised concerns about the new social studies curriculum and the anti-police messages they contain. Examples of anti-police rhetoric include textbook passages noting that “several police killings caused the nation to grapple with systemic racism,” and “Black Lives Matter activists and others argue that the deaths of many Black people were the result of institutional racism.” The text also mentions that Black men are statistically more than twice as likely to be killed by police than white men.
Critics argue these lessons present a one-sided perspective and fail to encourage critical thinking. For example, the curriculum omits key facts in controversial cases, such as the Department of Justice findings in the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri, which concluded that Brown did not have his hands up and was engaged in a physical altercation with the officer trying to take his gun. Likewise, the curriculum does not mention a Harvard study that reportedly found no racial bias in police shootings after examining hundreds of cases.
Menzel has denied that the curriculum is anti-police or promotes indoctrination, insisting it encourages critical thinking and offers diverse perspectives. However, critics argue the content leans more toward ideological teaching than balanced education. Indoctrination, they argue, is defined by presenting only one viewpoint without room for discussion or dissent—contrary to the principles of real education, which promote inquiry and evidence-based analysis.
Again, don’t take my word for it, see for yourself:
Conclusion
Given the content of the curriculum, the past actions of the board members, and Superintendent Menzel’s own public remarks, it seems labeling the board members and even Menzel as “woke” is appropriate.
When Menzel tells you he would never use an anti-police curriculum or that he is promoting critical thinking among students, or there is no evidence to support any of the claims against the curriculum, don’t believe him. He is lying and trying to gaslight you.
It is incumbent on all of us concerned about the future of SUSD to contact the Governing Board members and tell them to withdraw the approval of this radical curriculum. Any purchase orders placed to procure the materials should be canceled.
SUSD is facing difficult financial challenges caused by declining enrollment, a result of Menzel’s failed policies. Continuing down the path of implementing this curriculum will not only serve to accelerate the declining enrollment but put millions of federal dollars at risk. With the loss of the federal money, can school closures be far behind?
Menzel can continue to lie and push back against the federal government, but he is playing a high-risk game, a game he is likely to lose. He is putting the future of SUSD in jeopardy to satisfy his own ego.
The Governing Board needs to seriously consider replacing Menzel before he completely destroys SUSD.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
