By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO
As House Representative Kevin McCabe’s, March 10, 2025, Must Read Alaska opinion, “Is school district consolidation possible in Alaska?”, points out, Alaska’s education system is indeed at a crossroads, but the solution is not consolidation of bureaucracies.
It is eliminating them altogether.
The Alaska Education Freedom and Local Control Act, which I wrote about on Feb. 21 in Must Read Alaska, along with some instructions for the repeal of Title 14 and the dissolution of all school districts, offers a real solution to Alaska’s declining education performance: returning power to parents, students, and communities rather than doubling down on a failing system.
While I respect and admire for his tenacity with dealing with the Alaska version of “The Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, Alaska’s state capital in Juneau, Rep. McCabe’s attempt to penetrate the mystery of the “system is unsustainable”, is convolutedly misdirected and continues to build our public education system on an obsolete, defective, and union driven foundation, Title 14.
The argument for district consolidation is built on a flawed premise: that larger bureaucracies equal efficiency.
In reality, consolidation simply shifts waste from 54 smaller districts into 30 larger, more centralized bureaucracies, doing nothing to address the core problem—the existence of a top-down, state-controlled education system that prioritizes administrations and public education unions over students and parents. Instead of making bureaucracy more “efficient,” we must abolish it entirely.
We have seen this bovine structure fail in almost every education metric available since statehood over the last 2 decades.
These metrics include student achievement, attendance, graduation rates, and a potentially successful future, alongside factors like teacher quality and school environment.
- School districts do not educate students. Teachers, parents, and local communities do.
- The existence of 54, 30, or even 1 school district does nothing to improve student performance because the bureaucratic model operated and managed through Title 14, itself, is broken and obsolete.
- The biggest drain on education funding is administrative overhead, which does not disappear with consolidation. It grows and grows.
- Hawaii may not be a model to follow. Its single-district model has failed to improve education outcomes, proving that centralization is not the answer. Hawaii’s education system is broken. It has chronic absenteeism, astounding dropout rates, and abysmal test scores.
Instead of merging school districts, we should abolish them altogether along with Title 14 and transition to a parent-driven, student-focused education system where funding follows the child. Consolidation also means that children are bombarded with a slew of tests to make sure they are “staying on track.” Teachers as well are hurt by consolidation as there is no competition or creative innovation.
Solution: The Alaska Education Freedom and Local Control Act
1. Repeal Title 14 and Eliminate All School Districts
- School districts exist to serve bureaucracies, not students. By repealing Title 14 and dissolving all school districts, funding can go directly to students and teachers rather than administrators.
- Parents, not bureaucrats, should decide how education dollars are spent.
- Local communities should have the power to participate from a democratic legitimacy, not through a top down autocracy controlled by unelected bureaucrats.
2. Establish Universal Education Savings Accounts (ESAs)
- Instead of funneling money through wasteful bureaucracies, parents receive direct funding to use for public schools, private schools, charter schools, homeschooling, microschools, or online education.
- Education funding should follow the students, not be hoarded by centralized administrators.
3. Return School Budget Control to Local Communities
- The current proposal proposes to shift power locally while actually further centralizing it into 30 mega-districts.
- A real local control system means parents and communities decide education policy—not state-mandated bureaucracies.
Debunking the Myths of Consolidation
Consolidation shifts administrative costs rather than eliminating them. The only way to truly cut costs is to remove administrative bloat altogether. While consolidation saves money in areas like administrative payroll, facility operations, and resource sharing, true efficiency doesn’t come from merging districts—it comes from eliminating bureaucratic waste entirely. Instead of consolidating, Alaska should consider abolishing school districts altogether and directly funding students through Education Savings Accounts (ESAs).
While larger school districts can offer diverse programs, smaller, parent-led educational settings in concert with their communities provide more adaptable and customized learning experiences. The flexibility inherent in Alaska’s correspondence schools, charter schools, and potentially microschools, which are small, independent learning environments that typically serve fewer than 150 students, enables them to implement innovative educational strategies, frequently resulting in superior student outcomes compared to traditional large public-school districts.
The necessity of regional bureaucracies in ensuring educational access must be reevaluated in light of technological advancements and the success of decentralized education models. Homeschooling, online learning, and local education cooperatives offer viable alternatives that can provide personalized, flexible, and effective education without the need for extensive bureaucratic oversight.
Instead of forcing Alaskans into fewer, larger bureaucracies through legislative edict, further eroding education freedom, we should abolish bureaucracies altogether and return funding, decision-making, and control directly to parents in the communities they live.
Consolidation does not solve the problem—it merely reshuffles bureaucracy, making an already flawed system slightly less inefficient while continuing to harm student performance and educational outcomes. Instead of preserving and centralizing a failing model, Alaska must pursue full-scale education reform that puts students first, eliminates bureaucratic waste, and empowers parents and local communities to shape education—not government systems.
Alaska does not need 54 school districts. It does not need 30 school districts. It does not need school districts at all.
The Alaska Education Freedom and Local Control Act ensures real education choice, eliminates bureaucratic waste, and puts parents back in charge.
Instead of trying to save a broken system, let’s throw it out altogether and build a new one—where students, parents, and teachers have the freedom to create the education system Alaska truly deserves.
Editor:
Between Kevin’s larger bureaucratic design and Michael’s freelance form of education, lays a middle ground. It is not describable as the formation escapes the mind, yet it is there somewhere.
Of course there will or would be objections to either and rightfully so.
Not being sure other than initial reaction to Mr. Tavoliero’s offering, one would be concerned, having dealt with “Group”parents as a board member, active in developing the first Charter school in Ketchikan during my tenure.
The thought parents would gather to run a “Family” style educational system within a borough or designated non-borough, free from any State organized educational department as current, I believe escapes reality on the ground.
There is always the initial enthusiasm for any exciting start up, however, soon with children of the originators moving through and out of the system developed (Charters), the concept and results tend to wain in ensuing years. Active parents move on and those coming tend to let “Others” carry the load, which sees a level of slacking develop. This is just nature at work.
Without some form of “Oversight-testing for results” separate from such community educational freedom, how so are results of success of failure to be reconized?
While Michael offers several options of education within a designated area, assuming that there is at the least, some boundaries arrived at believing a singular all State comprised of single self centered education needs some sort of control, for the purpose of obtaining a measure of success or failure of such independent offerings.
In closing, no doubt both are aware and offering solutions. I applaud this, holding reservations as to what form of educational animal would result from either proposals. Too, both are based on generic population where there are so many special interest when it comes to ethnic considerations in play. The topic is a challenge as the current model is a dismal political insult.
Cheers,
Johnson-Ketchikan
How can we Alaskans without the influence of special interest (that includes our loony legislature and court system) ensure Alaska’s education system prepares students for a prosperous and productive future? The state either chooses to use the same failing education model and keeps polishing it like the moose nugget being prepared as a swizzle stick or decide to balance local control and flexibility with statewide accountability and reporting. There is no need for the state to set standards when these standards are readily available through countless sources which provide curriculum, teaching, and other education standards. We have fallen into the “one size fits all” dynamics and the consequence have arrived perennially in higher costs and poorer performance and outcomes.
Eliminating bureaucratic inefficiencies through the repeal of Title 14 (which is a public education union vehicle, designed, fueled and driven by the public education union) and dissolution of school districts provides an opportunity to shift resources directly to students, teachers, and communities. However, for education to thrive beyond initial enthusiasm, a structure must exist to measure success, maintain quality, and ensure long-term sustainability. Here I agree the state requires a presence as well as a clearinghouse for competitive education models and modeling, but not choking innovation.
A hybrid education model can achieve this by redirecting funding to families through Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) while maintaining regional governance boards that allow local decision-making. Schools—whether public, private, charter, homeschool, or microschools—should have the autonomy to innovate, but they must also meet statewide performance benchmarks to ensure students are developing the skills needed for Alaska’s workforce and economy. These benchmarks must be based on performance and accountability, rather than top-down bureaucracy.
To further support student success, the state must provide technological infrastructure, rural education resources, and support for special-needs students, ensuring equitable access to opportunity based on local needs. Yes, there will be some that choose to take advantage, but by and large I believe there is a growing majority which wants these type of changes.
Additionally, independent oversight and transparent reporting will keep the system responsive to community needs without unnecessary government interference and controls. By empowering parents, incentivizing innovation, and holding schools accountable for results, Alaska can create an education system that develops skilled, capable citizens ready to contribute to the state’s economic growth and long-term prosperity.
Alaska’s education reform must also focus on improving teacher employment opportunities by creating a system that rewards performance, encourages innovation, and attracts top talent. By shifting away from a rigid, union-dominated structure, teachers will have greater flexibility in choosing where and how they teach, whether in traditional schools, charter programs, microschools, or independent learning initiatives. A merit-based system would allow higher salaries for successful educators, reducing the bureaucratic overhead that currently consumes education funding.
There will always be a need to manage or administer the local, state, and federal funding associated with public education. I support the one district concept for Alaska but to put control of all funding, curriculum, and facility management to individual schools or communities is not cost effective nor advisable. The result will be a widely unbalanced education system reminiscent of territorial days. It is commonly touted the charter schools in Alaska excel while public schools fail. Charter Schools are able to pick/accept/reject students who are not highly motivated or interested in advanced placement. Public Schools are required to accept all students in an area and adapt to their specific or special needs.
Please read my reply above to Mr. Johnson-Ketchikan.
Thank you very much for the explanation! This solution never occurred to me and I was surprised that you hadn’t supported Mr. McCabe (who is a great favorite of mine). I am always impressed with good logical thinking and this article made sense to me. Keep up the good work.
Since you seem to have all the answers to those actually sacrificing to serve our state, why don’t you run for office? Put your money where your mouth is. You Continuously attacking those actually TRYING is tiresome. I appreciate Rep McCabe doing the work, putting forth amendments that could’ve actually passed and continuing his courageous fight against turncoat republicans who handed the majority to the democrats.
I appreciate your passionate comments for those who are working to improve Alaska’s education system, and I absolutely respect the dedication and effort that Rep. McCabe and others are putting into this critical issue. It’s not an easy fight, and anyone willing to step into the political arena to enact change deserves recognition for their efforts. I cannot.
The discussion about education reform is a difficult one because it affects our children, our communities, and the future of our state. The frustration that comes with trying to fix a system that has been failing for years is understandable, but to continue to build any and all changes on it inherently will continue the status quo: Poor student performance and outcome and continued increasing costs per student.
Like an old house sitting on a magnificent lot which we all recognize as unsafe, it must start with a complete demolition. Title 14 and its provisions are and have been obsequent. There is only one solution. Repeal and replace it with an education system that puts local communities, parents, teachers, and individual schools in charge.
Critiquing policies and offering alternative perspectives is not an attack but rather an important part of the democratic process. No one person has all the answers, and the best outcomes often come from challenging ideas, refining solutions, and ensuring that the decisions being made truly serve the people they impact most. Rep. McCabe’s work is vital and valuable, and so is the conversation that pushes us to think critically about whether there’s a better way to achieve the goals we all share.
At the end of the day, we all want an education system that gives Alaska’s children the best opportunity for success. I appreciate the work being done and the willingness of leaders like Rep. McCabe to fight for solutions, even if we don’t always see eye to eye on what those solutions should be. The focus should remain on ensuring that whatever path we take is one that delivers real results for students, families, and the future of our state.
DJC
With this article you prove how little you know of the functioning of the state government. Trump is doing great work dismantling the FED DOE. It is a great idea for us. But, He has a majority in both houses. What you want to do is impossible given the make up the akleg. What Mccabe proposed with his ammendment was likely all that was possible today. And as you saw, it failed. Even some Republicans voted against it. And you want him (or them) to dismantle the whole DEED and school districts? Must be great stuff you are smoking. Your alternate reality sounds really great, but it also sounds impossible, to those of us who actually understand Alaska government, unless we all get off our collective asses and get more republicans elected. How are you doing with that? are you involved? Have you donated? ….or are you just another parasite republcan throwing grenades from the cheap seats?
It’s true that meaningful reform—especially something as ambitious as dismantling school districts and the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development—faces serious legislative hurdles. No one is denying that. But acknowledging the difficulty of change doesn’t mean we shouldn’t push for it publicly.
Rep. McCabe’s efforts are commendable, and no one should underestimate the challenges he and others face in working within the current system. The failure of his amendment only reinforces the fact that even small steps toward reform are met with resistance. The status quo has not served Alaska’s students. In my mind and heart, an education system which does not focus first on student performance and outcome, is the same as murdering the future of that student. If we only accept what seems politically possible today, we risk remaining trapped in the same broken system for decades to come.
That said, political realities matter—you’re absolutely right about that. If major reform is the goal, then yes, it requires not just ideas, but action: electing the right people, supporting strong candidates, and ensuring the political will exists to make change happen. Criticism and discussion aren’t the same as throwing grenades; they’re part of the process of refining and strengthening ideas so that, when the time is right, real reform can be enacted.
If the argument is that change is impossible without more political power, then the real question isn’t whether reform should happen, but how we organize to make it possible. The work of fixing Alaska’s education system doesn’t stop at debating policy—it extends into the real-world effort of getting people in office who will fight for bold solutions. So, while we may not see eye to eye on every detail, I respect the fight, and I believe that pushing for bigger change isn’t a waste of time—it’s the groundwork for the future.
DJC- What we need to do, exactly, is target and get rid of RINOs and outside special interest groups. How are YOU doing with THAT? Have you done anything to help THOSE causes??? Or do you just keep banging your head against the same wall, expecting different results?