Bill Overview
Title: Empowering STEM Discovery Act
Description: This bill waives for a five-year period the cost-sharing requirements for the Major Research Instrumentation Program and for National Science Foundation (NSF) teaching fellowships administered within the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program. The NSF shall submit to Congress an assessment, that includes feedback from the research community, of the impacts of the waivers provided pursuant to this bill.
Sponsors: Rep. Bowman, Jamaal [D-NY-16]
Target Audience
Population: STEM researchers, educators, and students globally
Estimated Size: 100000
- The Major Research Instrumentation Program primarily supports researchers and educators at universities and research institutions.
- The Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program aims to encourage STEM graduates to become K-12 mathematics and science teachers.
- The target population includes current and future STEM researchers and educators who would typically apply for grants through these NSF programs.
Reasoning
- The target group for this policy includes researchers and educators at U.S. universities, particularly those involved in STEM fields. Given that the funding is directed towards waiving cost-sharing, it primarily impacts the financial burden and capacity for research innovation and education among this population.
- 100,000 individuals in the U.S. are directly and indirectly influenced, including university faculty, K-12 educators, and associated students, based on the distribution of NSF programs across the country.
- This policy's impact varies greatly depending on one's direct involvement with the NSF programs. Those directly benefitting from resources or educational outreach may see significant positive changes.
- Since the policy supports research and education, a reasonable number of people within this population might see a shift in wellbeing scores, assuming that increased funding leads to improved and more accessible resources.
- Stakeholders' wellbeing must also factor in job satisfaction and career advancement potentials resulting from improved educational outcomes and research opportunities.
Simulated Interviews
University Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The waiver would ease the financial constraints on my research projects.
- It would allow for more hands-on projects for students.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Postdoctoral Researcher (Palo Alto, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These waivers could significantly increase my chances to secure necessary research funding.
- More emphasis on collaborative projects with educational impact would be possible.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
High School Science Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With cost-sharing waivers, schools could afford more STEM-related activities and resources.
- Teachers can have access to updated training.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
STEM Curriculum Developer (Austin, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funding would allow us to implement cutting-edge STEM programs in more schools.
- It can bridge gaps in STEM education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Ann Arbor, MI)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The institutional relief might increase the number of NSF-funded opportunities I can apply for.
- Could lead to a better learning environment and equipment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
University Administration (Durham, NC)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Waivers would allow for reallocating funds to enhance student support services.
- Could attract more high-quality researchers and professors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Research Scientist (New York, NY)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The waived costs would likely increase our budget for overall research.
- It could support more outreach programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
STEM Program Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It could provide resources for expanding STEM education into underserved communities.
- Possible increase in student engagement and performance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Software Engineer (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It might make teaching as a second career more appealing due to improved conditions.
- Increased emphasis on STEM could influence my decision.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Community College Instructor (Portland, OR)
Age: 55 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Better funding could enhance community college offerings, including entry-level STEM courses.
- Might help attract more students to pursue STEM degrees.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $125000000, High: $175000000)
Year 2: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)
Year 3: $170000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $200000000)
Year 5: $180000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $210000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Increased federal spending may lead to future budget reallocations to support educational initiatives.
- Potential for greater diversity in STEM fields, which are critical for future innovation.
- Impacts on student outcomes in K-12 systems could vary based on implementation success.