A recent columnist compared Alaska and Mississippi in the percentage of the state budgets that goes to K-12 education.
That simplistic view avoids the real story about the huge difference between Alaska and Mississippi state government spending.
In Fiscal Year 2023, Alaska spent $21,485 per capita for state government. That was by far the highest in the country — 44% higher than the second-highest state and 2.7 times Mississippi state spending per capita of $8,058.
That doesn’t include the fact that Alaska is also number one in the nation in federal spending (excluding defense spending), receiving $8,628 per person, while Mississippi received $6,880 per person.
Cost of living is not a very good explanation for our enormous budget differential with other states. Alaska has the 13th highest cost of living in the US and the lowest cost of living of any state that touches the Pacific Ocean according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Price Parities — putting Alaska’s cost of living at just 1.4% above the US average.
As far as K-12 spending, Alaska was ranked the 2nd most adequately funded education system in the U.S. in K-12 funding adequacy, scoring 95 out of a possible 100 according to a recent study from Rutgers University. Misssisppi scored a 23 out of 100 and was ranked 40th in the U.S. in K-12 funding adequacy.
Despite the difference in funding adequacy, the difference in student outcomes is pretty stunning in favor of Mississippi — despite having nearly double the poverty rate of Alaska, Mississippi was first in the nation in 4th grade NAEP reading scores for low-income 4th graders while Alaska ranked 50th in 2024.
Strong educational outcomes aren’t predetermined by funding or poverty rates. Mississippi has put the actual policy reform in place that is making a difference, and it’s time for Alaska to do the same.
Bob Griffin is a former member of the Alaska Board of Education and Early Development and a life-long learner.
One thing I do not understand is how we have never gotten this man Bob Griffin on the school board here in Anchorage.
Mr. Griffin,
Thank you for your service on the state school board, however,
what is the good of this board, what is the goal of this board? Asked as a prior school board member (Recalled with four others for attempting to address exactly what you have provided here).
When you state: “Mississippi has put the actual policy reform in place that is making a difference, and it’s time for Alaska to do the same.”
What specificaly is the “Actual policy reform”? See, Bob, so often there is a public statement by the “Wizards of Smarts” that point out the obvious then submit a partial solution with out any details. So I will ask a couple,
Does Mississippi have a specific legislative mandate that outlines the goals of keeping is simple, Reading? What is the curriculum basis that is specified and is there latitude for teachers to wander about as they do in Alaska, on the subject of reading? There are 40 states that do this legislatively. Does the Alaska State School board possess this requirement? From the results, I’d guess that is a rare topic to discuss as “Policy” is more fun than assuring our students are reading at grade level exiting 3d grade. Current results are pretty dismal indicating “NO”.
Alaska educators are wedded to “Whole Language/sight reading”. You have the results and they have been there for years and years. What has the State School Board done? Not a damn thing of success. Why?
Now on the topic of math. again the process in Alaska is helter skelter with classroom teachers wandering about without specific direction via legislative direction on curriculum containing basic systematic sequential math.
Does Mississippi allow that? There are several math curriculum as there is on the topic of reading that provides this sequential process that will provide the foundation for advanced mathematics.
These are but two of the subjects that reflect the horrid and very expensive waste of our young.
Regards,
Al Johnson-Ketchikan,
Who in their right mind believes that Alaska’s cost of living is 1% higher than the national average? No way.
Believe it or not, housing is still more affordable here than in WA, OR, CA, ID… Grocery prices are a bit higher, but our property taxes are lower. As is our gas. We aren’t the lowest COL state, but dig in to what’s happening to cost of living in the lower 48 and you’ll see we aren’t at the top, though it might seem that way.
The US federal government believes it. They’re the ones who publish the the BEA Regional Price Parities.
Would you advocate for the reduction of the Military Cost Differential, from the US Federal Government, which puts Alaska anywhere from 24% to 40% above the national average? Check the Office of Personnel Management for more details. You might also check the limitations of your data set as stated by BEA.
“Here are the hard facts:
The world is now global. competition is global. Innovation is global. We need to advance our best and brightest and give them the tools they need to make it in that competitive arena. It’s the whole ballgame. And the US educational system has been infiltrated by wreckers and cannot possibly serve that purpose any longer.
It needs to be ended”. – El Gato Malo
Well funded yet failing……Sounds just like the government. What’s the shocker here folks?
Alaska’s education system will continue to fail students as long as the legislature continues to only provide more money without standardized requirements and accountability for performance and innovation.
Homeschooling will continue rise and Charter schools will outperform the public school system. Teaching Reading, Math, Science, Writing, World and State History, Constitution and Bill of Rights and Government Systems, are essential with performance standards for teachers and students.
Consolidation of small schools and Districts is necessary to provide adequate teaching staff and funding. It is time to bury the past and provide regional schools with with enough teachers to provide education necessary and eliminate the unnecessary administrators, staff, excess faculty costs.