Bill Overview
Title: Combating Implicit Bias in Education Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of Education to award grants to local educational agencies to provide training to staff of elementary and secondary schools on implicit bias.
Sponsors: Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large]
Target Audience
Population: individuals involved in the K-12 education system
Estimated Size: 70000000
- Implicit bias training is typically aimed at educators, which includes teachers, administrators, and other school staff.
- This bill targets elementary and secondary schools, meaning K-12 education is the range of schools affected.
- Local educational agencies, such as school districts, will be the entities receiving grant money.
- The target population will include students indirectly, as they will be the beneficiaries of improved teaching and school environments.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy includes the K-12 education system, which comprises a large number of teachers, administrators, and support staff, as well as the students who will indirectly benefit from the policy.
- Given the budget constraints, there will be a prioritization in awarding grants, possibly focusing on schools that demonstrate a need based on demographic factors or historical bias issues.
- The policy is expected to have varying levels of impact on different individuals, with educators directly receiving training and the impact on students being more indirect.
- The wellbeing assessments are based on Cantril's scale, which is a self-reported measure of life evaluation.
- Different geographical locations might mean varying availability or intensity of training due to differences in funding allocation and cost of living.
- Resources are likely limited to a subset of schools each year, requiring strategic selection to maximize impact over time.
Simulated Interviews
Elementary School Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think training on implicit bias is crucial, especially in a diverse city like Chicago.
- It can help us teachers become more aware and create a more inclusive atmosphere.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
High School Principal (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Implicit bias training can improve school culture and academic outcomes.
- It's something our district has wanted to prioritize for a while.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Middle School Counselor (Nashville, TN)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This kind of training will help make counseling practices more equitable.
- It might help in reducing racial disparities in behavioral interventions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
District Superintendent (Bangor, ME)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Although important, implicit bias training might not be a priority compared to other pressing issues in rural education.
- We're concerned about how funds will be allocated.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Secondary School Teacher (Houston, TX)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Training might improve interactions among students from different backgrounds.
- I'm hopeful it will contribute to less disparity in disciplinary actions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
School Diversity Coordinator (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy supports the kind of work I do.
- It legitimizes and offers resources for us to further explore bias-reduction strategies.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Parent (New York, NY)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the focus on implicit bias.
- Hopefully, it'll make schools safer and more welcoming for kids like mine.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
High School Teacher (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this training is essential for leveling the playing field in education.
- Bias can subtly influence even well-intentioned educators.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Teacher (Rural Kansas)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't see much of a need for implicit bias training, but if it helps others, it's worth it.
- We're set in our ways out here.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student Teacher (Portland, OR)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with progressive teaching initiatives.
- I hope it becomes a stepping stone for more comprehensive changes.
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 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $13000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $13000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 3: $13000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 5: $13000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 10: $13000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 100: $1300000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)
Key Considerations
- The number of teachers and staff requiring training to address implicit biases.
- Variability in training programs and their effectiveness.
- Administrative costs associated with managing and distributing grants.