⛺⛺⛺
My children attended public schools in both rural and urban Alaska, and I care deeply about all students throughout the state and want them all to be successful.
For those new to the topic – and a refresher to those familiar with it – there were initially two camps on how to help our K-12 education system. One camp put all their stock into an effort with a large funding increase for schools and nothing else. Most who started out in that camp are still there. They sincerely believe that money is the answer, and the lack of money is the reason for the dreadful academic proficiency rates in Alaska. The other camp formed around the cause of policy reforms. They observed how transformative the Alaska Reads Act has been in improving student outcomes for K-3. They are convinced that impactful policy reforms like that can help all students, in all grades, in all subjects.
The Second Camp Birthed the Third Camp
When many policy reform advocates realized the schools were facing real inflationary impacts and high healthcare costs that were making it difficult for them to make ends meet, and they realized some of the reforms to improve academics would require dollars, they set up a third camp.
This group saw the need for a funding increase, some aimed toward the BSA and some aimed toward policy reforms.
Most of those in the second camp moved over to this third camp and a few in the first camp joined as well to begin to debate what dollar amount would be affordable.
With the guidance of the Senate Finance Co-Chairs, the majority of the third camp coalesced around the affordable and sustainable amount of a $680 Base Student Allocation (BSA) and a series of policy reforms.
The policy reforms pertain to the banning of student cell phone use, more streamlined and open processes for establishing charter schools along with a slight increase for districts for admin work they conduct on behalf of charter schools, reading incentives, family choice across school and district boundaries, targeted career and technical education funding for high schools, teacher retention incentives, and counting all students as a one whole student in the funding formula (ending practice of counting some as 90% of a student) among other policy improvements.
My Tent Stake
I started off in the second camp (policy only) and was one of the first to put a tent stake down and establish the third camp. We need both policy and funding to help our students and our schools succeed. Let’s talk about funding.
Yes, the districts need an increase; they’ve been hit by inflation and healthcare costs and need to pay their bills. At the same time, they need an increase that can be sustained. The $1000 increase that NEA is pushing is not affordable this year due to oil prices and is not sustainable in future years.
NEA Has a Problem
Here’s the pesky little problem NEA has: if NEA really wanted to make sure the districts had enough funding for teachers, it makes absolutely no sense that it has fought bills proposed over the years to allow districts to opt into the AlaskaCare state health plan pool that could free up more than $100 million for districts.
I have come to conclude that NEA is pushing the $1000 increase because they are about a system, not students. Why do I think this?
If NEA cared about student learning and funds for teachers, they would not oppose a bill that would allow the districts to redirect funds to classrooms and teachers that are now going to expensive health premiums, period.
They also would not oppose policy that would give teachers retention lump sum payments, teacher spending accounts, and teacher incentives for student improvement. They would not oppose requiring certain funds be spent on teachers and instruction and not on administration. These are all things that I have offered as amendments, and the NEA has opposed them. Because of the weight NEA carries with certain legislators, the amendments have failed and teachers and districts have lost out.
The Tent in the Third Camp is Large
I was on the education negotiation team of 8 earlier in the session (2 from each of the caucuses – from the House Majority and Minority and the Senate Majority and Minority). This was the big tent opportunity for those in the first camp (large BSA increase only) to join the reasonable camp, the only camp that will get a successful education bill across the finish line, into law, and funded.
Sadly, instead, the two Majorities walked away from the table and struck out on their own pushing for the large increase, leaving the Minorities out. This is not how we should be conducting business on behalf of Alaskans. Although the Majorities touched on the topic areas of policy reforms, their policies either took us backwards or left us hovering to get us nowhere fast.
HB 69 Shenanigans
Without the help of the Minorities, a bill cannot get across the finish line to become law. The Majorities know this. They know they need agreement with the Minorities in order for an education bill to ultimately be successful. The Majorities passing an unaffordable and unsustainable large BSA-only bill this past Friday was a political stunt.
If the Majorities truly want to help students, they know what they need to do for that to happen. If they decide not to find agreement with the Minorities, they will be responsible for the lack of a funding increase and the lack of policy reforms to help students.
The situation is in the Majorities’ hands. It’s up to them. Will they play politics?
It’s not enough to state support for students. It’s all rhetoric if it’s not paired with reasonable action that will hold. Those who are serious about helping our schools and student learning better get in the third camp quick.
Question for the Anchorage School District: Has the tail been wagging the dog?
I brought this up on the floor in the HB 69 debate, and you should be aware.
Since the Anchorage School District is leading the statewide charge for more funding, I think it is important for Alaskans to know that it appears the Anchorage School overestimated its budget for human resources for the current school year and has a $41 million cushion it could use next year to prevent laying off the 360 staff they say they will have to cut. $41 million is enough for an estimated 410 positions. (It’s also interesting to note that ASD’s cushion the past three years has been in the $40-$50 million range, while historically it had been in the $19-$21 million range.)
ASD has not submitted in their current budget to the Department of Education and Early Development a plan to spend that $41 million. Neither have they for the $46 million they received outside the formula from the legislature last summer ($680/student) for the current school year.
Those two figures total $87 million. With the $27 million they need to set aside for school bond debt, they should still have $60 million in hand to help with their budget next year.
The narrative they have stirred up that the sky is falling does not appear to be accurate. I believe it’s important for Alaskans to be aware of this information; I hope you find it helpful.
On a Side Note: The Dream Amendment
After the failure of our caucus’s amendment to turn HB 69 into a reasonable blend of policy and funding that could cross the finish line and be made law, I offered a “dream” amendment to match the extreme proposal of the very high $1000 BSA increase. It contained the proposals we’ve already discussed here but one new one: backpack funding (the funds follow the child).
Better known across the nation as Education Scholarship Accounts (ESAs), the provision would have allowed parents who did not choose neighborhood or charter schools for their children to set up an ESA at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development for their child.
What Could “Backpack Funding” Look Like in Alaska?
The account would be funded by the state at $7000 (this compares to $26,000 in state funds per student for charter and neighborhood school students). The parents could use the funds to craft a customized education for their child – perhaps a band class at the local middle school, a couple correspondence courses through the district, physical education through a community sport program, and a partial day at a private school.
I proposed phasing in the ESAs over 4-years. The first year, special education students could participate (severely disable students would be eligible for higher amounts). The second year, low-income students could choose the ESA route. In year three, children of military or first responders would be eligible. In the fourth year, all students would be eligible.
A big shout-out to my awesome Legislative Aide, Eleilia Preston, for all her work on this proposal and on all-things-education! She’s knowledgeable and doesn’t hesitate digging in to learn more to help the cause.
Come on Alaska, Get With the Times!
Although our legislature is behind the national trend on this education model, maybe they’ll catch up in time, especially since 76% of Americans support ESAs, and that percentage goes up to 84% when it comes to parents. It’s not at all partisan either. 77% of Democrats support ESAs while 73% of Republicans do too. This isn’t about wealthy Caucasian students either. The support from various minority groups is very high – in the 80% range. More than one-third of the lower 48 states have adopted ESAs.
The very, very good news is that ESAs don’t decimate neighborhood schools at all. They in fact help them according to a list of 187 research articles. The availability of school choice in the community helps raise graduation rates, learning outcomes, and college acceptance at neighborhood high schools, for example. ESAs don’t crash the enrollment at neighborhood schools either as the uptake of ESAs from neighborhood schools is an average of less than 3% of students.
The public school establishment should stop fearing ESAs! I hope someday we can get there. In the meantime…
My Bottom Line
I stand ready to pass a bill with a BSA increase and sensible policy reforms to help our students and support our teachers.
