Alaska's education system has come under intense scrutiny after the recent release of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the Nation's Report Card, which shows the state's fourth and eighth graders scoring near the bottom nationally in reading and math. With Alaska ranked 51st out of 53 jurisdictions for fourth-grade reading and math, and 47th for eighth-grade math, the results have ignited debates over the effectiveness and funding of public education in the state.
Governor Mike Dunleavy wasted no time linking these dismal results to what he describes as decades of systemic failures within Alaska's school systems. "Alaska’s education system isn’t working for many students," he stated, advocating for changes such as increased support for charter and homeschool options. His administration's stance contends, as he put it, "just pumping more money...won’t cause it to fix itself. We must continue to implement education reforms.”
Critics of the Dunleavy administration, including legislators and education advocates, argue the poor performance highlights the impact of significant cuts to education funding over the past 15 years. Senator Löki Tobin from Anchorage remarked on the alarming decline since 2011, emphasizing, "If you look back...we were one to two percentage points away from baseline. Now we’re eight to nine percentage points away." This gap, they argue, distracts from discussions about educational reforms and fuels the debate over the necessity for increased financial investment from the state.
The education funding discussion centers around the Alaska Reads Act, which aimed to improve literacy rates among early learners. This legislation had the potential to boost per-student funding through targeted investments, yet Dunleavy's veto of over $5 million allocated for this initiative raised eyebrows among education advocates. Lisa Parady, executive director of The Alaska Council of School Administrators, expressed concern, stating, "Without the funding needed to support students and educators...this mandate becomes another burden rather than a tool for progress.”
Accompanying the budgetary concerns are the results from the NAEP assessments, which highlighted persistent downward trends. For example, eighth-grade math scores fell from 283 points in 2011 to 264 points by 2024. Similarly, fourth-grade reading scores dropped from 208 points to 202 points over the same period. The downward movement concerning statewide educational outcomes has been consistently argued to correlate directly to the lack of funding and support for public education.
Compounding the educational issues is the fact cited by Dunleavy and his administration, which claimed “these scores and rank do not reflect 18% of Alaskan students enrolled in correspondence learning.” Critics counter these claims by emphasizing the limited availability of meaningful performance data for students enrolled in such programs, as these alternative education frameworks often are not assessed similarly to traditional schools. Parady points out, "Correspondence schools...are not subject to the same assessment requirements," placing them outside the main performance evaluation metrics for accountability.
Further complicity arises within the debate around Alaska's charter schools. During his State of the State address, Dunleavy referenced findings from Harvard indicating Alaska's charter schools are among the best nationally. Yet, scrutiny was placed upon these claims by education researchers like Beth Zirbes and Mike Bronson, who questioned the validity of comparing charter schools against traditional neighborhood schools. They clarified, "We find instead...proficiency declines as family income declines," reinforcing the argument against equipping charter schools as inherently superior without acknowledging socio-economic influences at play.
Tobin raises alarms over the state’s charter graduation rates versus those of traditional public schools, noting alarming statistics such as the reported 57% graduation rate for the Raven Correspondence School. Such disparities point to broader issues within accountability measures across Alaskan educational institutions. “They’re more likely to need assistance and support...when they don’t graduate high school,” she said, linking academic failure to future social and economic challenges.
The discrepancies highlight Alaska's unique educational challenges, including the influence of Indigenous languages and cultures within learning environments, alongside recent demographic shifts involving refugees. Acknowledging these factors is pivotal as the legislative session begins, with proposals being considered aiming to increase the Base Student Allocation by over 20% next year. While Dunleavy’s budget proposal does not include specific increases for base funding, conversations are underway, blending fiscal priorities with educational reforms to maneuver local schools toward stability and improved performance.
Alaska’s educators and lawmakers remain determined to address these pressing educational needs head-on, illustrating the impact of both funding and policy decisions on student achievement and overall educational success within the state. The path forward will require balancing fiscal responsibility and progressive reforms if Alaska is to shift its rankings from the bottom of the national educational ladder.