Bill Overview
Title: Student Apprenticeship Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill requires the Department of Education to award grants to certain partnerships to enable the development and implementation of a postsecondary apprenticeship program. An eligible partnership must consist of (1) at least one institution of higher education, (2) at least one individual employer, and (3) a workforce intermediary (an entity that demonstrates expertise in fostering partnerships in order to support postsecondary apprenticeship programs). Such partnership may also include other entities such as a state agency responsible for administering career and technical education, a labor organization, or an economic development agency. A partnership that receives a grant must use the funds to develop and implement a postsecondary apprenticeship program in a high-skill, high-wage, and in-demand industry sector or occupation. Additionally, an apprenticeship shall qualify as a work-study program through which a student apprentice is eligible for federal financial assistance.
Sponsors: Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]
Target Audience
Population: Students in postsecondary education seeking apprenticeships
Estimated Size: 1500000
- The bill is focused on postsecondary apprenticeship programs, which primarily involve students in postsecondary education seeking apprenticeships.
- The eligibility requirements specify institutions of higher education, which are universities and colleges, indicating that their students are the target participants.
- Industry sectors participating are 'high-skill, high-wage, and in-demand,' suggesting apprenticeships will be specialized, appealing to students in relevant fields.
- Workforce intermediaries may play a role, but the primary target is students involved in the apprenticeship programs.
- It's feasible that these programs will first primarily impact the U.S. due to its national legislative context.
Reasoning
- The population of interest are most likely students currently enrolled in postsecondary education, meaning they may be juggling studies with part-time jobs or internships already.
- The policy would primarily impact students in high-skill and high-wage sectors. The benefit would likely be medium to high on students working or wishing to work in these sectors.
- Funding limits mean not all eligible partnerships will receive grants. Priority likely goes to partnerships that show significant promise in provided skills or regions identified as high-need.
- By creating pathways for earning while learning, this policy should notably benefit students from lower-income backgrounds who rely heavily on financial aid and work-study programs.
- Not all students will feel the impact equally. Those outside targeted industries may see little direct benefit.
- The benefit to students could be indirect through long-term improvements in educational pathways and economic growth.
Simulated Interviews
Mechanical Engineering Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could really help me because engineering is an in-demand field. A structured apprenticeship would provide essential hands-on experience and financial support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Computer Science Student (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy might help students looking to get into new high-tech sectors, but since I'm already in a stable job, the impact might be minimal.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Liberal Arts Student (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 19 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this policy encourages more flexible apprenticeship options even for non-STEM students, but if it's limited to high-wage fields, I might not benefit much.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Nursing Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a nursing student, having an apprenticeship would be amazing to get practical experience early on. This could make a big difference for my career.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Business Management Student (Detroit, MI)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'd participate if there are apprenticeships in startups. However, without clear opportunities in my area, this policy might not impact me directly right away.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Information Technology Student (Seattle, WA)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The apprenticeships are great for hands-on experience, though my current internship already gives me much of that. Still, more options are always good.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Undecided Major (Birmingham, AL)
Age: 18 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm still figuring out my career path, so this policy might not apply to me now, but perhaps in the future it will once I specialize.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Finance Student (New York, NY)
Age: 20 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could open up targeted apprenticeships in finance, especially in New York. It could be a perfect blend of study and real-world experience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Civil Engineering Student (Dallas, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Such apprenticeships are a huge plus for industries like engineering where practical application is crucial. This policy could secure my career path and reduce financial stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
History Major (Chicago, IL)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure how this policy would directly help me, considering my field might not have 'high-wage' apprenticeships. Still, if there were options in cultural sectors, it could be interesting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Year 2: $1550000000 (Low: $1250000000, High: $1850000000)
Year 3: $1600000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1900000000)
Year 5: $1700000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $2000000000)
Year 10: $1800000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2100000000)
Year 100: $2000000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2200000000)
Key Considerations
- Scalability of partnerships and the ability of educational and industry participants to quickly adapt to apprenticeship program demands.
- Availability of skilled educators and trainers specific to high-demand fields.
- Coordination between federal financial aid programs and new apprenticeship funding for balance without double-counting assistance.