Connect with us

Alaska

Rural Alaska school administrators say implementing new reading law will be challenging

Published

on

Rural Alaska school administrators say implementing new reading law will be challenging


Alaska rural school administrators say they’re concerned about how they can implement a major state education overhaul with limited resources.

The Legislature passed the Alaska Reads Act last year, intended to improve literacy in the state. The 45-page omnibus bill had wide-ranging requirements for school districts, including that they develop intensive programs for younger students struggling to read.

The new law will go into effect July 1. The Alaska Department of Education and Early Development has spent months working on outreach efforts and providing online training opportunities for school districts.

Advertisement

But school administrators say challenges remain.

Officials from larger, urban districts are generally more supportive of the measures, and further along in implementing them. School districts in smaller communities and villages are expressing the greatest worries about impacts to staff and how they can provide intensive reading instruction to a majority of their students.

Alaska has long languished at or near the bottom of national standardized test scores for reading. Seven superintendents wrote in late 2019 that there was a statewide reading emergency, and that legislation was needed to improve outcomes.

The Association of Alaska School Boards was supportive of the reading bill when it was before the Legislature, and believed that a concerted effort was needed to improve literacy in the state. The stated goal of the law was that every Alaska student would be able to read proficiently by age 9.

“We’re still supportive of it,” said Lon Garrison, the organization’s executive director. “But I have grave concerns that the implementation of it is not being as responsive as it could be.”

Advertisement

‘Unfunded mandate’

Cyndy Mika, superintendent of the Kodiak Island Borough School District, said she moved to Alaska last year from Texas. She said a similar reading intervention program was implemented there, which led to great improvements, but it came with a significant funding boost.

”I am a proponent of this,” she said. “It’s just that we feel like it’s an unfunded mandate.”

Mika estimated the new law could cost Kodiak schools between $2 million and $4 million per year. The district is getting an additional $80,000 annually from a school funding increase approved last year as part of the reading bill, she said.

Grant Robinson, a spokesperson for the governor’s office, said by email that any assertion that the law was an unfunded mandate is “patently false.” He pointed to $117 million set to be distributed to school districts across Alaska over five years for the new education programs.

The bill included a $30 boost to the Base Student Allocation, the state’s per-student funding formula, which equated to a roughly 0.5% increase. The Legislature also approved a one-time $57 million payment last year to school districts.

Advertisement

State lawmakers approved another $175 million this year in one-time funds for public schools, which Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed down to $87.5 million. School officials expressed disappointment with the smaller-than-expected funding boost, and said it would lead to difficult budget decisions.

[Anchorage school administrators warn of staff cuts after Dunleavy’s $87.5 million education veto]

School districts have bought new reading course materials subsidized by the state. New qualifications in the science of reading will be required for educators teaching from kindergarten through third grade by July of 2025. Mika said those courses have been costly for the district and time-consuming for teachers.

Under the law, districts are required to develop individual plans for students who cannot read well. Deputy Education Commissioner Lacey Sanders said by email that of the state’s 53 school districts, just five or six had submitted plans before a Sept. 1 deadline, and that the state was providing feedback.

Mika said the Kodiak district does not have the funding to hire dedicated reading intervention specialists, meaning “all of this is going to fall on our classroom teachers.” She said teachers already have full days of classes, which would invariably push reading intervention to after school.

Advertisement

”Our teachers are already overwhelmed with the day-to-day tasks of teaching a class, and then developing, implementing and monitoring the individual reading improvement plan is what’s going to be the hardest for our teachers,” she said.

Staffing challenges

Under the Alaska Reads Act, in addition to developing individual plans for students who need additional help, schools are asked to provide after-school reading instruction and the option of summer school. Parents would also need to be notified 10 times per year on their child’s reading deficits and the child’s efforts to improve.

Anne Shade, child development department director at Bristol Bay Native Association, works closely with two local school districts. She said that a nationwide shortage of educators is making it difficult to hire additional staff for after-school classes and summer school, asking, “How are we supposed to do that? There’s not a lot of staff out here in the summertime.”

Gene Stone, superintendent of the Lower Yukon School District, said notification requirements will be a significant administrative task in parts of Alaska where the vast majority of younger students could expect to find themselves in reading intervention programs.

“If 80% of your kids aren’t proficient, you have kind of an unintended consequence,” he said. “It’s pretty difficult to meet that metric of all the meetings, all the progress monitoring support.”

Advertisement

[Math scores plunge for 13-year-olds as pandemic setbacks persist]

The law came with subsidies from the state to buy course materials and to pay for some teacher development. But rural school administrators say more help is needed with strained budgets from years of flat funding, high inflation and high fuel costs.

Stone said the Lower Yukon School District — comprising roughly 2,100 students across 10 Western Alaska villages — could expect to spend $518,000 per year from its general fund to implement the Alaska Reads Act.

“Mainly curriculum and supplemental materials to support some of the tutoring and also to have a budget for a summer school,” he said.

At Yupiit School District, headquartered in Akiachak, there were similar concerns. Superintendent Scott Ballard is striving to center Yup’ik culture in everything the district does, and said that he felt like the Alaska Reads Act was doubling down on failed policies, with more assessments and parental notifications.

Advertisement

The bill was written to require “culturally responsive education” and Indigenous language learning for reading specialists. Ballard said the district has scrambled to find qualified educators who are fluent in both Yup’ik and English, but that would be challenging as “there’s not a whole infrastructure that’s been built up over decades.”

Rural-urban divide

Officials from some of the state’s largest school districts said there have been some hiccups and obstacles implementing the new law, but they reported fewer concerns than their counterparts in rural Alaska.

Anchorage School Board president Margo Bellamy said in an interview that “we see this as a very viable program,” and that she has so far heard little concern from Anchorage parents.

In Fairbanks, Kate LaPlaunt, assistant superintendent for elementary schools, and Chane Beame, executive director of teaching and learning, said the district has been focused on improving reading. Many of the requirements they found “logical and intuitive,” and that they would complement what the district was already planning.

[Moms for Liberty didn’t exist 3 years ago. Now it’s a GOP kingmaker.]

Advertisement

But, LaPlaunt said, “I don’t disagree at all with the rural school districts. The requirements for interventions for students certainly does have a price tag associated with it,” adding, “To do it very well could cost quite a bit of money that is not coming from the state.”

The state has hired six reading intervention specialists who will work with the lowest-performing 25% of Alaska schools. Sanders, the deputy education commissioner, said by email that all the specialists have been hired and are currently being trained. The state anticipates the reading specialists will work with 12 schools in the first year, Sanders said, and more the following year.

However, under the new law they are only required to visit each school twice per year. Shade asked, “And that’s supposed to be helpful, how?”

The Legislature also approved spending $5 million this year to establish the Anchorage-based Alyeska Reading Institute to tutor students and provide teacher development. Proponents said that would be a valuable resource, while lawmakers from outside Anchorage asked how much difference that would make beyond Southcentral Alaska.

‘A bit bumpy’

Lawmakers left Juneau last May bitterly divided over whether the new law would lead to positive outcomes.

Advertisement

The Alaska Reads Act passed unanimously through the Senate, but squeaked through the House by one vote on the final day of last year’s legislative session. Gov. Dunleavy had championed the bill, with Robinson, his spokesperson, saying the measure was not merely about improving test scores.

“It’s about transforming the trajectory of young Alaskan lives,” he said. “Literacy is an essential life skill in modern society. A person who never learns to read limits their opportunities in life.

However, four Bush Caucus members in the House wrote strongly in opposition of the act last February. Dillingham independent Rep. Bryce Edgmon said recently that some of his concerns about the potential negative impacts of the reading bill to rural Alaska are coming to bear.

He said the bill may have been well-intentioned, but that “it was rushed. It wasn’t that well thought out.”

Palmer Republican Sen. Shelley Hughes was one of the bill’s primary supporters and disputed that depiction. Alaska’s reading bill evolved over years and was modeled on measures that worked in states like Mississippi, she said, which saw great success in improving literacy.

Advertisement

In an interview, she acknowledged that larger school districts would have a greater capacity to successfully implement the law’s requirements. But she said after several years, Alaskans should be able to judge whether the new programs have started improving literacy.

“This first year is going to be a bit bumpy,” she said, adding, “I think we’re going to have to have a little grace for the districts — this first year or two.”

Anchorage Sen. Löki Tobin, a Democrat and chair of the Senate Education Committee, was a legislative aide who worked on the bill. She has advocated for a substantial increase to the state’s per-student funding formula, and said that would be key to ensuring the reading law’s success.

“We knew that there was going to be struggles,” she said. “I don’t think any of us could have anticipated inflation and the tight labor market, and all the other struggles.”

“It’s a good policy,” she added. “Every child has a human right to learn to read. Every child should be prepared and ready to enter into kindergarten with all the tools they need in their toolkit to be successful in their academic journey. Now, it just takes us being reflective to say what is missing to making that actually happen.”

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Alaska

Alaska Airlines Hawaii-Bound Flight Makes U-Turn to Seattle

Published

on

Alaska Airlines Hawaii-Bound Flight Makes U-Turn to Seattle


SEATTLE- An Alaska Airlines (AS) flight bound for Kahului, Hawaii (OGG), was forced to return to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) following a mid-air pressurization emergency.

Flight AS825, operated by a Boeing 737-900, was en route to Kahului when it experienced a loss of cabin pressure roughly 220 nautical miles southwest of Seattle at 34,000 feet. The aircraft made an emergency descent and safely landed back at SEA about 90 minutes after takeoff.

An Alaska Airlines (AS) flight bound for Kahului, Hawaii (OGG), was forced to return to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) following a mid-air pressurization emergency.
Photo: By Eric Salard – N408AS LAX, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=43543100

Alaska Airlines Makes U-Turn to Seattle

On June 3, 2025, Alaska Airlines Flight AS825 departed Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) for Kahului International Airport (OGG), flagged by Aviation Herald.

The flight was operated by a Boeing 737-900, tail number N462AS. While cruising over the Pacific Ocean, the flight crew initiated an emergency descent from FL340 to 9,000 feet due to a pressurization malfunction.

The flight diverted back to SEA and landed without incident on Runway 34R.

Advertisement

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) confirmed that the crew reported a cabin pressurization issue and returned safely around 11:00 a.m. local time. The agency has launched a formal investigation into the incident.

A replacement aircraft, also a Boeing 737-900 (registration N468AS), resumed the journey to Hawaii and landed at Kahului approximately six hours behind schedule.

Alaska Airlines Hawaii-Bound Flight Makes U-Turn to SeattleAlaska Airlines Hawaii-Bound Flight Makes U-Turn to Seattle
Photo: By Aero Icarus from Zürich, Switzerland – Delta Air Lines Boeing 737-800; N3746H@SLC;09.10.2011/621ai, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=26713097

Similar Incident

In a related incident earlier this year, Delta Air Lines (DL) experienced a pressurization emergency on Flight DL576.

The aircraft, a Boeing 737-800 (registration N399DA), departed from Mexico City International Airport (MEX) bound for Atlanta (ATL) on April 7, 2025. Shortly after takeoff, the aircraft failed to climb beyond 10,000 feet due to pressurization problems.

Complicating matters, miscommunication arose between the Delta flight crew and Mexico City ATC.

The pilots declared an emergency but also indicated they were not immediately returning to the airport. Their request for vectors to avoid terrain while completing checklists was confusing, especially given the high elevation of MEX (7,300 feet) and the mountainous surrounding terrain.

Advertisement

Key Factors Behind Pressurization Emergencies

  • Terminology Misuse: Use of non-standard emergency phrases can delay ATC response.
  • Altitude Limitations: High-elevation airports reduce vertical safety margins during emergencies.
  • Incomplete Communication: Failing to clearly articulate flight intentions under stress can create avoidable misunderstandings.
  • Checklist Protocols: Flight crews often need time and space to complete troubleshooting procedures before executing a return.

Both incidents underscore the critical need for clear, standardized communication and highlight how environmental and technical constraints can quickly escalate emergencies.

Stay tuned with us. Further, follow us on social media for the latest updates.

Join us on Telegram Group for the Latest Aviation Updates. Subsequently, follow us on Google News



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Former Alaska priest believed kidnapped by terrorist group, Alaska Diocese says

Published

on

Former Alaska priest believed kidnapped by terrorist group, Alaska Diocese says


FAIRBANKS, Alaska (KTUU) – A mass was held Tuesday for a former Fairbanks priest who the Diocese of Fairbanks says was kidnapped while on a mission in Africa.

On Sunday, the Catholic Diocese of Fairbanks says it received word from Nigeria that the former Rev. Alphonsus Afina and two companions were taken captive by members of Boko Haram while traveling.

Boko Haram is a self-proclaimed Jihadist militant group that has been designated as a terrorist organization by the United States since 2013.

Afina had spent six and a half years in Alaska, spending his time in service to the villages on the Seward Peninsula. He traveled to Nigeria to help build a trauma center in the country for victims of Boko Haram.

Advertisement

The Diocese held a mass on Tuesday where community members gathered to pray for Afina’s safe and immediate release from captivity.

“The turnout was absolutely amazing,” said Rev. Robert Fath, JCL, Vicar General of the Catholic Diocese of Fairbanks.

“We put word out [Monday], and in less than 24 hours, we had a couple hundred people gathered at the cathedral here in Fairbanks for a mass to pray for Father Alphonsus, other victims of the Boko Haram, that they be given strength and God willing, they be released back to us to continue their mission.”

No other information about Afina’s condition has been made public since Sunday.

See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Interior Plans to Rescind Drilling Ban in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve

Published

on

Interior Plans to Rescind Drilling Ban in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve


A critical question demands an actionable answer. To date, many takes on various sides of the debate have focused more on high-level narrative than precise policy prescriptions. If we zoom in to look at the actual sources of delay in clean energy projects, what sorts of solutions would we come up with? What would a data-backed agenda for clean energy abundance look like?

The most glaring threat to clean energy deployment is, of course, the Republican Party’s plan to gut the Inflation Reduction Act. But “abundance” proponents posit that Democrats have imposed their own hurdles, in the form of well-intentioned policies that get in the way of government-backed building projects. According to some broad-brush recommendations, Democrats should adopt an abundance agenda focused on rolling back such policies.

But the reality for clean energy is more nuanced. At least as often, expediting clean energy projects will require more, not less, government intervention. So too will the task of ensuring those projects benefit workers and communities.

To craft a grounded agenda for clean energy abundance, we can start by taking stock of successes and gaps in implementing the IRA. The law’s core strategy was to unite climate, jobs, and justice goals. The IRA aims to use incentives to channel a wave of clean energy investments towards good union jobs and communities that have endured decades of divestment.

Advertisement

Klein and Thompson are wary that such “everything bagel” strategies try to do too much. Other “abundance” advocates explicitly support sidelining the IRA’s labor objectives to expedite clean energy buildout.

But here’s the thing about everything bagels: They taste good.

They taste good because they combine ingredients that go well together. The question — whether for bagels or policies — is, are we using congruent ingredients?

The data suggests that clean energy growth, union jobs, and equitable investments — like garlic, onion, and sesame seeds — can indeed pair well together. While we have a long way to go, early indicators show significant post-IRA progress on all three fronts: a nearly 100-gigawatt boom in clean energy installations, an historic high in clean energy union density, and outsized clean investments flowing to fossil fuel communities. If we can design policy to yield such a win-win-win, why would we choose otherwise?

Klein and Thompson are of course right that to realize the potential of the IRA, we must reduce the long lag time in building clean energy projects. That lag time does not stem from incentives for clean energy companies to provide quality jobs, negotiate Community Benefits Agreements, or invest in low-income communities. Such incentives did not deter clean energy companies from applying for IRA funding in droves. Programs that included all such incentives were typically oversubscribed, with companies applying for up to 10 times the amount of available funding.

Advertisement

If labor and equity incentives are not holding up clean energy deployment, what is? And what are the remedies?

Some of the biggest delays point not to an excess of policymaking — the concern of many “abundance” proponents — but an absence. Such gaps call for more market-shaping policies to expedite the clean energy transition.

Take, for example, the years-long queues for clean energy projects to connect to the electrical grid, which developers rank as one of the largest sources of delay. That wait stems from a piecemeal approach to transmission buildout — the result not of overregulation by progressive lawmakers, but rather the opposite: a hands-off mode of governance that has created vast inefficiencies. For years, grid operators have built transmission lines not according to a strategic plan, but in response to the requests of individual projects to connect to the grid. This reactive, haphazard approach requires a laborious battery of studies to determine the incremental transmission upgrades (and the associated costs) needed to connect each project. As a result, project developers face high cost uncertainty and a nearly five-year median wait time to finish the process, contributing to the withdrawal of about three of every four proposed projects.

The solution, according to clean energy developers, buyers, and analysts alike, is to fill the regulatory void that has enabled such a fragmentary system. Transmission experts have called for rules that require grid operators to proactively plan new transmission lines in anticipation of new clean energy generation and then charge a preestablished fee for projects to connect, yielding more strategic grid expansion, greater cost certainty for developers, fewer studies, and reduced wait times to connect to the grid. Last year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission took a step in this direction by requiring grid operators to adopt regional transmission planning. Many energy analysts applauded the move and highlighted the need for additional policies to expedite transmission buildout.

Another source of delay that underscores policy gaps is the 137-week lag time to obtain a large power transformer, due to supply chain shortages. The United States imports four of every five large power transformers used on our electric grid. Amid the post-pandemic snarling of global supply chains, such high import dependency has created another bottleneck for building out the new transmission lines that clean energy projects demand. To stimulate domestic transformer production, the National Infrastructure Advisory Council — including representatives from major utilities — has proposed that the federal government establish new transformer manufacturing investments and create a public stockpiling system that stabilizes demand. That is, a clean energy abundance agenda also requires new industrial policies.

Advertisement

While such clean energy delays call for additional policymaking, “abundance” advocates are correct that other delays call for ending problematic policies. Rising local restrictions on clean energy development, for example, pose a major hurdle. However, the map of those restrictions, as tracked in an authoritative Columbia University report, does not support the notion that they stem primarily from Democrats’ penchant for overregulation. Of the 11 states with more than 10 such restrictions, six are red, three are purple, and two are blue — New York and Texas, Virginia and Kansas, Maine and Indiana, etc. To take on such restrictions, we shouldn’t let concern with progressive wish lists eclipse a focused challenge to old-fashioned, transpartisan NIMBYism.

“Abundance” proponents also focus their ire on permitting processes like those required by the National Environmental Policy Act, which the Supreme Court curtailed last week. Permitting needs mending, but with a chisel, not a Musk-esque chainsaw. The Biden administration produced a chisel last year: a NEPA reform to expedite clean energy projectsand support environmental justice. In February, the Trump administration tossed out that reform and nearly five decades of NEPA rules without offering a replacement — a chainsaw maneuver that has created more, not less, uncertainty for project developers. When the wreckage of this administration ends, we’ll need to fill the void with targeted permitting policies that streamline clean energy while protecting communities.

Finally, a clean energy abundance agenda should also welcome pro-worker, pro-equity incentives like those in the IRA “everything bagel.” Despite claims to the contrary, such policies can help to overcome additional sources of delay and facilitatebuildout.

For example, Community Benefits Agreements, which IRA programs encouraged, offer a distinct, pro-building advantage: a way to avoid the community opposition that has become a top-tier reason for delays and cancellations of wind and solar projects. CBAs give community and labor groups a tool to secure locally-defined economic, health, and environmental benefits from clean energy projects. For clean energy firms, they offer an opportunity to obtain explicit project support from community organizations. Three out of four wind and solar developers agree that increased community engagement reduces project cancellations, and more than 80% see it as at least somewhat “feasible” to offer benefits via CBAs. Indeed, developers and communities are increasingly using CBAs, from a wind farm off the coast of Rhode Island to a solar park in California’s central valley, to deliver tangible benefits and completed projects — the ingredients of abundance.

A similar win-win can come from incentives for clean energy companies to pay construction workers decent wages, which the IRA included. Most peer-reviewed studies find that the impact of such standards on infrastructure construction costs is approximately zero. By contrast, wage standards can help to address a key constraint on clean energy buildout: companies’ struggle to recruit a skilled and stable workforce in a tight labor market. More than 80% of solar firms, for example, report difficulties in finding qualified workers. Wage standards offer a proven solution, helping companies attract and retain the workforce needed for on-time project completion.

Advertisement

In addition to labor standards and support for CBAs, a clean energy abundance agenda also should expand on the IRA’s incentives to invest in low-income communities. Such policies spur clean energy deployment in neighborhoods the market would otherwise deem unprofitable. Indeed, since enactment of the IRA, 75% of announced clean energy investments have been in low-income counties. That buildout is a deliberate outcome of the “everything bagel” approach. If we want clean energy abundance for all, not just the wealthy, we need to wield — not withdraw — such incentives.

Crafting an agenda for clean energy abundance requires precision, not abstraction. We need to add industrial policies that offer a foundation for clean energy growth. We need to end parochial policies that deter buildout on behalf of private interests. And we need to build on labor and equity policies that enable workers and communities to reap material rewards from clean energy expansion. Differentiating between those needs will be essential for Democrats to build a clean energy plan that actually delivers abundance.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending