In a time of fiscal turbulence, why are we allowing Alaska’s children to exploit our budget through no fault of their own? K-12 education is the second highest appropriation our elected officials continue to fund behind only the Permanent Fund. State finances are slim; all spending must be looked at under a microscope. This begs the question: should we continue to finance a bloated, expensive education system while simultaneously passing out annual bonuses to all students simply being a resident of a municipal school district?
Alaska’s K-12 students make out like bandits, myself included. I am a graduate of Dimond High School and the University of Alaska Anchorage, have a master’s in international relations from Catholic University in Lisbon, Portugal, and am a commissioned officer in the U.S. Navy. I am a product of Alaskan public education and had little systematic advantage other than, potentially, the school district in which I lived. But what is not a product of my Alaskan zip code is that throughout my time in elementary, grade and high school, I accumulated a total of $18,219.12 in state-funded dividends.
Most Alaskans agree that the state faces unique hurdles other states will never contend with. We are rare, as are the finances floating our education system. Is there any other state where all public school students are entitled to a bonus simply for being a resident of a district? Answer: No. One study from a well-known, conservative think-tank estimates that per-pupil cost is roughly $18,615 — when adjusted for Alaska’s costs of living — to the state. Furthermore, education cost in Alaska has increased in recent years while its state’s residents have grown older and are more likely to migrate out of the state. And what’s unacceptable are the comparative standards we continue to tolerate in public education.
Although not representative of all circumstances, Alaska continually ranks near or at the bottom nationally in reading and mathematics. Some may chalk this up to a lack of resources, which I argue, is a slippery slope our elected officials have tended to run down. According to recent data, Alaska employs 7,246 teachers. While total teacher employment has increased slightly over the past few years, administrator employment has ballooned exorbitantly. Alaska employs, per the U.S. Department of Education, 9,282 administrative officials. This equates to teachers making up roughly 43% of the public education workforce. That’s right; more than half of the state’s education payroll is administrators. Whatever your thoughts on the purpose of education, surely, we can agree that providing robust, quality academics to our children is one of them. However, how well does a child learn when more than half the education workforce is pushing paperwork on the state’s dime than providing lessons? It is no coincidence that the hiring and retention of teachers in Alaska is a challenge. I cannot help but wonder if this is due to more than half of teachers’ colleagues being administrators, let alone the increasing costs of living in Alaska and educators’ pay not keeping up with inflation. And still, K-12 students will collect their annual bonuses for little more than filling out a few papers to register with their local district.
Here’s the quintessential question: why do we continue to raise the education appropriation while passing out annual bonuses to K-12 students who’ve demonstrated fledgling results and are continually exploiting the state with their double-dipping tendencies? Although K-12 students are unaware of their costly burden on state finances. Students are accustomed to an annual bonus, though, which is not constitutionally guaranteed, while also entitled to a well-funded per-pupil education, a constitutionally-mandated appropriation. It is preposterous that Alaskan students who pay no state taxes at an individual rate receive an annual check while also guaranteed one of the most expensive public education systems in the United States. And sadly, a decent portion of its graduates leave the state at a net loss of hundreds of thousands of public education dollars and spurned dividend checks that equate to, at the least, $18,000 throughout my K-12 years in Alaska.
I leave you with this policy proposal. In 2023, all applicable Alaskans received a Permanent Fund dividend check worth $1,312.1 If all K-12 students were by law required to appropriate their dividend check directly to the school they are educated in, in theory putting skin in the game for their high education costs, newfound income would equal $172,150,144. This simple modification would infuse 10% in new education funding to the state’s current education operating costs while removing the double-dipping effect K-12 students are unintentionally placing on it. Furthermore, the new funds would be appropriated to those closer to the schools they oversee and away from the state government’s hands. Principals, although administrators, are arguably the closest to our children and direct witness to educational demands. They are possibly the most knowledgeable on day-to-day difficulties for both students and teachers, and are supposed to be responsible for overall education quality and costs within their schools.
Under this proposal, principals would be empowered to use funds for whatever they deem necessary to improved education standards. Some examples include increased pay to teachers ($1,979.82 a month more in pay), teacher retention bonuses ($23,757.95 per teacher a year), school supplies for every student (valued at whatever the student’s dividend is that year), subsidized food costs (feed every child in Alaska for $20 a day for two months at no cost to the state), or even provide scholarships for more than 5,000 high school graduates, a year, who have an interest in (1) teaching, and (2) remaining in the state after graduating from an Alaska university, at no cost to the student or the state.
Our politicians have demonstrated a lack of interest in either taking the politically risky move of implementing some form of taxation or changing the current oil tax policy. We can rightfully assume that more income will not appear anytime soon. The proposal discussed here does not solve the state’s current fiscal setbacks but only shifts burden to those who currently double dip in its finances. The metastasized Alaskan public education system has become bloated, expensive and prioritizes administrators over educators, as seen in the near-excessive employment of administrative positions over teacher retention programs or increased pay. All Alaskans should be motivated by the prospect of improved academic standards and greater buy-in from students. Without change, the state’s ignorance will be its only excuse for a student’s unawareness in their continued fiscal exploitation.
• Jayden Hodgson is a former Juneau resident and a commissioned Surface Warfare Officer in the U.S. Navy. He holds a master’s in international relations from Católica Universidade Portugal (Catholic University Portugal) and bachelor’s in political science from the University of Alaska Anchorage.
