Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8445

Bill Overview

Title: LGBTQI+ and Women’s History Education Act of 2022

Description: This bill directs the National Museum of American History of the Smithsonian Institution to carry out, among other things (1) the development and national dissemination of accurate, relevant, and accessible national resources for classrooms to administer LGBTQI+ and women's history education in an inclusive and intersectional approach; (2) the development, national dissemination, and implementation of principles of sound pedagogy for administering LGBTQI+ and women's history education; and (3) the development, operation, and expansion of a teacher fellowship program to cultivate and support leaders in LGBTQI+ and women's history education. In addition to the activities described in this bill, the museum shall develop and maintain on its website content designated for educators, students, and families to improve their awareness and understanding of LGBTQI+ and women's history education.

Sponsors: Rep. Maloney, Carolyn B. [D-NY-12]

Target Audience

Population: Students, Teachers, and Families

Estimated Size: 100000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

High School Student (New York, NY)

Age: 16 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm excited about this policy because it means that our history classes will finally include stories and perspectives that reflect my identity.
  • I hope it leads to more acceptance and understanding among my classmates.

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 5
Year 20 8 5

History Teacher (Austin, TX)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy will provide invaluable resources for me as an educator, and help create a more inclusive curriculum.
  • However, I'm concerned about the challenges of adapting these resources to state standards and tests.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Graduate Student (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 29 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is a step in the right direction, making it essential for future educators to be prepared to teach a diverse history.
  • I believe this can change the culture around education and acceptance in the long run.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Parent (Detroit, MI)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As a parent, I want my kids to learn a complete version of history that includes everyone.
  • I hope this helps reduce any bullying and promotes more kindness among students.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

School Administrator (Seattle, WA)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Implementing this policy will take considerable logistical effort, but it's necessary for an inclusive educational environment.
  • We're looking forward to the training programs for teachers and working closely with the museum.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Retired (Orlando, FL)

Age: 63 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see the importance of this policy, but I worry about how new content will be received by different communities.
  • It's powerful to see progress but it must be handled sensitively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 4

College Student (Boston, MA)

Age: 24 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy aligns with what I am studying and teaching; it's validating to see these stories being taught at earlier ages.
  • It might encourage more students to pursue studies in gender and history.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 6

Farmer (Rural Kansas)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I don't see this impacting us much out here, though I'm for anything that helps kids understand each other better.
  • I hope this doesn't stir up too much controversy in our communities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Civil Rights Attorney (Chicago, IL)

Age: 31 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The dissemination of these resources is pivotal for achieving equity in education.
  • Looking forward to seeing how this might impact litigations in education settings.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Tech Company Manager (Denver, CO)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think it's a great development, though not directly affecting me or my circles right now.
  • This could usher in more inclusive hiring practices in the future as educational perspectives shift.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 2: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)

Year 3: $80000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $105000000)

Year 5: $85000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $110000000)

Year 10: $90000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $115000000)

Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)

Key Considerations