Saving Education in America

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Public schools across America are facing a worsening teacher shortage that threatens the stability of the nation’s education system. Districts in every state continue to report significant challenges in hiring and retaining qualified teachers, especially in high-need subjects such as math, science, and special education (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). This shortage is not limited to a single region; it’s a nationwide issue with deep implications for student equity as well as workforce readiness development.

The impact on future generations is monumental. Larger class sizes, shortened course offerings, and reliance on underqualified or substitute teachers reduce the quality of instruction students receive (Learning Policy Institute 2016). Many communities, particularly those in rural and low-income districts, leave students without consistent access to trained teachers who can prepare them for higher education and an increasingly competitive job market (U.S. Department of Education 2023). Despite legislative attempts in the past to improve the issue, the teacher shortage has continued to grow, widening the opportunity gaps, undermining economic mobility, and weakening the nation’s ability to compete on the global stage (García and Weiss 2019).

To address this challenge, this paper will propose a new program, modeled after the G.I. Bill, to provide substantial financial support for higher education to individuals who commit to serving as public school teachers for a minimum of six years (Veteran Affairs 2024). By lowering the financial barriers to entry and improving the return on investment of an education degree, this program can begin to light a clearer path towards public education; not just increasing the volume of applicants but the quality as well, ensuring America’s public schools are staffed with the teachers students deserve.

2. SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM

The teacher shortage in the United States is not a sudden development; rather, it is the result of long-running trends. The problem has its roots in multiple structural pressures, but it is most clear in the widespread difficulty of hiring qualified educators. In 2022, over 400,000 teaching positions were unfilled or staffed by teachers who are not fully certified, which amounts to roughly 1 in 8 teachers nationwide (White House 2022). Schools from rural districts to urban centers report trouble recruiting in high-need areas such as mathematics, science, special education, and English as a second language (ESL) (Darling-Hammond, n.d.).

A leading cause of this problem stems from the lack of financial incentives to go into teaching (Allegretto 2023). Put plainly, going to college for a teaching degree nets a much lower return than many other career options (National Education Association 2025). Despite the degree normally costing the same as ones in business, engineering, or computer science, teachers tend to make significantly less than those who choose to pursue these fields. While some states responded by lowering licensing requirements, this approach often prioritizes filling vacancies quickly over ensuring the most qualified and effective educators are in the classroom (Darling-Hammond 2000).

Compounding the shortage is the high attrition and burnout rate of public school teachers. Studies from the Rockefeller Institute estimate that roughly 40% of new teachers exit the profession within their first five years (Malatras, Gais, and Wagner 2017). High poverty districts report even higher loss rates, with poorer schools with greater student needs tending to have a significantly harder time retaining talent. Many teachers cite heavy workloads, insufficient support, lack of advancement opportunities, and stress as reasons they quit. These pressures worsen over time, contributing to the revolving door effect where schools continuously scramble to fill roles.

As previously mentioned, when qualified teachers are unavailable, schools tend to turn to underprepared or substitute teachers. Other “solutions” districts have come up with are reducing elective or specialized course offerings or increasing class sizes, both of which degrade education quality.

Teacher shortages are strongly correlated with weaker student performance. For instance, one study on school closures and teacher absences found that disruptions in consistent, quality teaching are associated directly with declines in mathematics and reading outcomes (Attig et al. 2024). More broadly, work by Eric Hanushek, an economist and leading expert on the economics of education, links average student test scores with economic growth (Hanushek and Woessmann 2008). Students in lower-income or rural districts are more likely to bear the brunt of these consequences due to the already limited resources they receive, which is only exacerbated by the unstable teacher workforce.

Over time, having fewer well-prepared students entering higher education or the workforce erodes the already fragile balance of human capital in our society. Since economic growth is tied to skill levels and innovation, a systemic teacher shortage can cascade into a decline in general national productivity and competitiveness on the world stage. The shortage also weakens social mobility. When the foundations of education are unstable, the underprivileged are the ones who tend to slip through the cracks. Left unaddressed, the loop will reinforce itself: fewer teachers means weaker education, which itself reduces incentives or ability to enter the profession, further straining supply.

3. CURRENT POLICY

In response to the growing teacher shortages, federal and state lawmakers have implemented a range of programs aimed at attracting and retaining qualified educators. The most widely used nationally are the Teacher and School Leader (TSL) Incentive Program, which focuses on performance-based compensation, and the federal Teacher Loan Forgiveness (TLF) and Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) programs, which provide financial relief to educators through debt reduction (Federal Student Aid (TLF) 2025) (Federal Student Aid, (PSLF) 2025). Despite their positive intentions and occasional success, neither has achieved the scale or lasting impact needed to reverse the nationwide shortages.

The TLF program, created in 1998, and the broader PSLF program, launched in 2007, are aimed at reducing financial barriers associated with entering the teaching profession by forgiving portions of student debt for educators who serve in public schools for a set number of years. Under TLF, eligible teachers can receive up to $17,500 in loan forgiveness after five continuous years of service in a low-income school district. PSLF offers complete loan forgiveness after ten years of qualifying payments while employed in a public service role, including teaching. On paper, these programs address the very issue that seems to keep so many from working in public education.

In practice, their reach has been limited. Participation rates are low due to complex eligibility rules, poor communication, and administrative errors. Until a recent legislative overhaul of the program in 2022, fewer than 2% of PSLF applicants successfully qualified for full loan forgiveness, with many teachers being denied due to improper loan repayment schedules (U.S. Government Accountability Office 2022). While temporary waivers and systemic improvements have addressed eligibility, awareness and accessibility are still major obstacles.

Even when accessible and functioning as intended, programs like this may still not be strong enough to influence long-term career decisions. The promise of debt repayment five to ten years down the line does little to ease current financial pressures. Furthermore, since the PSLF program is generally available to many different types of public service workers, there is not a specific incentive for public school teaching rather than public employment in general.

Ultimately, these programs show that policymakers do recognize the importance of attracting and supporting teachers; however, the programs thus far have failed to make a meaningful impact on the national shortage the United States faces. What is needed now is a bold, comprehensive program aimed at both removing the financial barriers to working as a public school teacher and repositioning education as a respected, service-oriented profession, much like the G.I. Bill has done for military veterans.

4. PROPOSED SOLUTION

The Public Education Service Scholarship (PESS) is a federal-state partnership designed to address the national teacher shortage befalling America. It reduces barriers to entering the profession and reframes teaching as a form of public service comparable in prestige and support to military service under the original G.I. Bill. The program would fully fund the education and preparation of individuals who commit to teaching in U.S. public schools for a minimum of six years.

Unlike previous incentive programs, which have relied on modest bonuses or complex debt forgiveness structures, PESS directly covers the cost of college and certification while providing a livable stipend during the training period. The goal of this program is to strengthen the teacher pipeline by attracting new, high-quality candidates and ensuring they are fully prepared to succeed in the classroom from day one.

The program’s eligibility standards are intentionally broad so that as many qualified applicants as possible can participate. It will be open to undergraduates, graduate students, and mid-career professionals who are pursuing a teaching license through an approved U.S. teacher preparation program. In short, anyone who is accepted into the program will have the costs of their certification or required coursework covered by PESS, regardless of where they are in their education or career. Applicants must be U.S. citizens or permanent residents. Priority will go to candidates preparing for high-need areas such as math, science, and special education. This structure lets the program draw from a large pool of applicants and select the strongest candidates.

Financial support will include full undergraduate tuition, fees for an accredited teacher preparation program, a $10,000 living stipend for each academic year of enrollment, a $1,000 startup grant (to cover background checks, certification exams, and classroom materials), and a $2,000 relocation grant for candidates who accept positions in designated high-need regions (average supports illustrated in Figure 1). Unlike earlier programs, PESS does not offer post-placement or retention bonuses. The focus is on access, entry, and initial preparation rather than long-term salary incentives.

In exchange for this investment, participants will commit to six years of full-time teaching in a U.S. public school. For each year served, 1/6 of the financial support will be written off. If a participant fails to complete the six-year obligation, the financial obligation’s remaining years, including the full period of the current year, will be converted to a zero-interest federal loan, repayable over ten years. Teachers may relocate across states so long as they remain in public education. Additionally, the six-year requirement can be completed nonconsecutively to account for any family or medical obligations; however, the candidate will be required to complete the full six years within ten years of finishing the program.

The PESS program is designed to be financially sustainable while still providing meaningful support to future educators. By covering four years of in-state tuition, offering a modest living stipend, and providing startup and relocation grants, the total investment per participant remains comparable to existing federal debt-forgiveness programs but yields greater long-term value by directly strengthening the teacher pipeline. Participants will be expected to attend a public university in their home state, which aligns with the national average in-state tuition of approximately $11,000 per year (Hanson 2025). They may choose to enroll elsewhere, but PESS will only cover the equivalent of their state’s in-state tuition rate. This ensures the program consistently utilizes the most affordable, high-quality educational option and allows program costs to rise naturally with broader trends in public higher-education pricing. As shown in Figure 2, in-state public tuition is not projected to increase sharply over the coming decade, so total program costs should remain relatively stable over time.

As mentioned earlier, participants receive a $10,000 annual living stipend along with a combined $3,000 startup and relocation grant. These subsidies not only reduce the financial burden on program participants but also create a natural incentive to complete their education and begin their careers in lower-cost regions. In rural areas, where the cost of living is significantly lower, the stipend and startup funds stretch much further. This, in turn, helps draw new teachers into the communities that need them most, as many of the country’s most understaffed districts are in rural regions. For a typical four-year participant, a high school graduate who needs both undergrad and teacher certification, the total investment is approximately $88,000 (Figure 1). However, with an anticipated 75/25 split between recent high school graduates and applicants who already hold a bachelor’s degree, the average cost per participant is projected to fall to about $67,500. This drop occurs because applicants who already have an undergraduate degree only need one year of subsidized teacher education and certification, which typically costs around $6,000 (Research.com).

5. INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION

Implementation of PESS will begin with a smaller pilot program designed to test feasibility and accurately determine the true average cost per participant. The pilot is projected to support a steady enrollment of 20,000 participants per year for three years. If successful, it will scale into the full program, which is expected to serve roughly 100,000 applicants annually. For the pilot stage, the total annual program cost is estimated at approximately $1.5 billion, about $1.35 billion for participant support and $150 million for administrative operations. Under a proposed 70/30 federal state funding split, the federal government would contribute roughly $1.05 billion per year, while states would collectively provide $450 million. The full program is generally expected to quintuple the total cost with some minor cuts due to administrative efficiency.

For context, the PSLF program has already forgiven over $62.5 billion for around 871,000 borrowers, at an average cost of $72,000 per recipient in principle alone. When administrative expenses are included, the total cost exceeds $85,000 per person. By comparison, the PESS program’s projected cost of $67,500 per participant, before administrative expenses, not only comes in lower, but also produces a far greater long-term return. While PSLF offers delayed debt relief to workers already in public service, PESS makes a proactive investment by fully funding higher education upfront and securing a minimum six-year commitment to public school service in exchange.

Put another way, PESS reallocates similar federal spending, with excess as a cushion, towards an initiative that builds the teaching workforce from the ground up rather than rewarding participants years after entry. The difference, however, lies not in the amount of money spent, but when and how it is spent. PESS eliminates student debt before it begins, increases the appeal of teaching to talented undergraduates, and directly addresses the root cause of the national teacher shortage. Furthermore, the inclusion of free tuition and an annual living stipend makes the teaching profession more financially viable for students who might otherwise pursue higher-paying private sector fields. This model offers a stable, predictable path into education with a competitive cost as compared to current programs but with significantly more effectiveness in building a sustainable pipeline of qualified teachers.

6. CONCLUSION

The Public Education Service Scholarship represents a long-overdue reimagining of how the United States recruits and values its educators. The evidence is clear: existing programs such as PSLF and TLF, while well-intentioned, have not fixed the structural issues surrounding public education and the shortage of teachers. Rather, they tried to patch the problem after it had spread, hoping to contain and maintain the already dwindling supply of qualified educators. The PESS shifts this model entirely. By funding education upfront and guaranteeing assistance and support, it removes the uncertainty and financial strain that has pushed many away from consideration of public education as a profession.

This approach does not just fill classrooms, it fills them with qualified, committed educators who are prepared to make a lasting impact. By combining the free tuition, stipend, and clear service commitment, the program ensures that every dollar spent yields tangible benefits for the millions of children who so desperately need and depend on the public education system. Furthermore, the inclusion of high-need subject prioritization and relocation support further ensures that help reaches the communities that need it most.

PESS also redefines teaching as a form of national service. Much like the G.I. Bill transformed military service into a respected and attainable path to higher education, in addition to a way to serve your country, this program recognizes the societal value of educators as foundational to the future of this nation. It aligns the financial incentives public educators deserve with the benefits society needs.

Ultimately, PESS is more than a standard policy to fix a general problem; it’s an investment in the intellectual and economic future of this country. It rebuilds the pipeline of skilled teachers, strengthens public education, and restores faith in a profession that sustains every other. Where past initiatives have offered fragmented, temporary fixes, PESS offers a comprehensive, sustainable solution that works because it addresses the root of the problem: access, preparation, and respect for those who dedicate their lives to help others build theirs.

References

Allegretto, Sylvia. 2023. “Teacher pay penalty still looms large: Trends in teacher wages and compensation through 2022.” Economic Policy Institute, September 29, 2023. https://www.epi.org/publication/teacher-pay-in-2022/.

Attig, Manja, Frances Hoferichter, Isa Steinmann, and Rolf Strientholt. 2024. “Teaching quality and student reading outcomes: Evidence from a longitudinal study from grade 5 to 7.” Science Direct. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191491X24000269.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. 2000. “Teacher Quality and Student Achievement.” Education Policy Analysis Archives, January 1, 2000. https://epaa.asu.edu/index.php/epaa/article/view/392.

Darling-Hammond, Linda. n.d. “Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching.” ISBN-0–9654535–3–7.

Federal Student Aid. 2025. “Teacher Loan Forgiveness.” Federal Student Aid. https://studentaid.gov/manage-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/teacher.

Federal Student Aid. n.d. “Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF).” Federal Student Aid. Accessed October 10, 2025. https://studentaid.gov/manage-loans/forgiveness-cancellation/public-service.

García, Emma, and Elaine Weiss. 2019. “The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought: The first report in ‘The Perfect Storm in the Teacher Labor Market’ series.” Economic Policy Institute, March 26, 2019. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-teacher-shortage-is-real-large-and-growing-and-worse-than-we-thought-the-first-report-in-the-perfect-storm-in-the-teacher-labor-market-series/.

Hanson, Melanie. 2025. “Average Cost of College by State [2025]: Tuition + Fees.” Education Data Initiative. https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-college-by-state.

Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger Woessmann. 2008. “The Role of Cognitive Skills in Economic Development.” Journal of Economic Literature. https://hanushek.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Hanushek%2BWoessmann%202008%20JEL%2046%283%29.pdf.

Learning Policy Institute. 2016. “A Coming Crisis in Teaching? Teacher Supply, Demand, and Shortages in the U.S.” Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming-crisis-teaching.

Malatras, Jim, Thomas Gais, and Alan Wagner. 2017. “A Background on Potential Teacher Shortages in the US.” Rockefeller Institute. https://rockinst.org/issue-area/background-potential-teacher-shortages-us/.

Nam, Jane. 2025. “ROI Of College Majors By Early And Mid-Career Salaries.” Bankrate. https://www.bankrate.com/loans/student-loans/roi-mid-career-by-major/#pay.

National Education Association. 2025. “Educator Pay Data 2025 | NEA.” National Education Association. https://www.nea.org/resource-library/educator-pay-and-student-spending-how-does-your-state-rank.

Research.com. “Most Affordable Online Alternative Teacher Certification Programs for 2025.” Research.com, 2025, https://research.com/degrees/most-affordable-online-alternative-teacher-certification-programs. Accessed 23 November 2025.

U.S. Department of Education. 2023. “FY 2023 Annual Performance Report.” https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/about/reports/annual/2025plan/fy2023apr-fy2025app.pdf. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/about/reports/annual/2025plan/fy2023apr-fy2025app.pdf.

U.S. Department of Education. n.d. “Teacher Shortage Areas.” U.S. Department of Education. Accessed October 10, 2025. https://www.ed.gov/teaching-and-administration/professional-development/teacher-shortage-areas.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2022. “GAO.” Eligibility for Public Service Loan Forgiveness Has Changed Temporarily. Here’s What It Means For Borrowers. https://www.gao.gov/blog/eligibility-public-service-loan-forgiveness-has-changed-temporarily.-heres-what-it-means-borrowers.

Veteran Affairs. 2024. “About GI Bill Benefits | Veterans Affairs.” VA.gov. https://www.va.gov/education/about-gi-bill-benefits/.

White House. 2022. “FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Public and Private Sector Actions to Strengthen Teaching Profession and Help Schools Fill Vacancies | The White House.” Biden White House Archives. https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/08/31/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-public-and-private-sector-actions-to-strengthen-teaching-profession-and-help-schools-fill-vacancies/.

Zota, Rita R. 2024. “Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grants: A Primer.” Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46117.