Anchorage School District working group cites workload, onboarding and pay as top retention priorities

The Anchorage School District’s recruitment and retention working group recommended that the district prioritize reducing workload and burnout, restore in-person onboarding for hourly staff and consider compensation and benefits changes to improve retention, presenters told the school board at a June 3 work session.

The working group, formed last year at the board’s direction, met six times October through April and included about 40 participants drawn from bargaining units, exempt staff and Human Resources, district facilitators said. "This is actually a very exciting topic," Doctor Bryant, who helped facilitate the group, said as the presentation opened. "We need every single educator who's willing to work for ASD in ASD."

Board members heard that participants identified competing priorities the district can influence — including competitive wages, Social Security coverage options, paid summer training, onboarding improvements, childcare support and alternative certification pathways — and outside factors it cannot directly control. The group’s discussions concentrated on retention after member feedback showed workload and burnout and feeling respected and valued appeared across bargaining units.

Why it matters: Presenters said retention has become a central concern as the district has seen substantial turnover in recent years and because many proposed fixes, such as adding Social Security coverage for certain certificated employees, carry large price tags or require legislative action. The steering team recommended continuing the working group and splitting future work into distinct recruitment and retention tracks so both get sustained attention.

What the group did and found The working group included roughly 11 members representing the Anchorage Education Association (AEA), about 10 principals/administrators represented by APA, about 10 exempt (Ed Center) staff, four people from Human Resources, and participants from TOTEM and ACE. The committee met monthly and used mixed-table and bargaining-unit breakout formats to surface priorities.

Presenters summarized agenda and evidence: the district’s EEO-5 report, year-by-year hire-retention charts and exit-survey data collected by the district and unions. "He did some computation and said that we've turned over about half of our teacher workforce in the last 5 years," the facilitators reported, citing analysis prepared by Corey Aist and staff; presenters also noted that two-thirds of current teachers have more than five years service, meaning turnover concentrates among early-career teachers.

Discussion outputs: Participants mapped resiliency factors (positive coworker relationships, supportive principals, autonomy and seeing student impact) against stressors (excessive workload, initiative fatigue, communication gaps and lack of job security). The group flagged workload and burnout as a top cross-cutting retention issue and explored tools such as shorter, frequent "stay" surveys to monitor staff climate.

Preliminary recommendations by bargaining unit included converting part-time roles to benefited full-time roles to reduce vacancies, flexible schedules and dedicated planning time for paraprofessionals, restoring in-person onboarding for hourly staff, limiting concurrent initiatives or better resourcing rollouts, compensating non-instructional duties, setting a cutoff date for decisions that affect the next school year, and giving teachers more direction and control over professional learning community (PLC) time.

Cost and limits: Facilitators cautioned that some widely supported options may be cost-prohibitive. "Andy has done cost modeling," a presenter said, noting one option — adding Social Security coverage for certain certificated employees — produced an estimated $16,000,000 figure in modeling described to the group, which presenters said would be difficult to absorb given existing structural deficits.

Next steps and board response Facilitators said they plan to share outputs with principals and district cabinet over the summer, refine bargaining-unit recommendations, develop action plans for implementable items and report progress to the board next year. "There was a high level of engagement from everyone who's involved," a facilitator said, urging continuation of the committee. Board members who spoke praised the process and encouraged keeping the committee as a standing or continuing group.

The board also agreed to defer the meeting’s second agenda item to a future board retreat so it can receive fuller attention. Later, the board moved into executive session for legal updates, negotiations and contracts; Member Bellamy made the motion, Member Holliman seconded and the chair called for opposition and none was stated.

Ending note Presenters and board members framed the working group as an initial, iterative step: keep the committee’s output public to school leaders, split recruitment and retention work where helpful, and pursue targeted, feasible actions next year while recognizing some options will require additional funding or external authority.