Bill Overview
Title: Right to Read Act of 2022
Description: This bill expands access to school libraries and literacy skills support for elementary and secondary school students, including by authorizing comprehensive literacy state development grants and increasing the number of state-certified school librarians in high-need schools.
Sponsors: Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]
Target Audience
Population: Elementary and secondary school students
Estimated Size: 50000000
- The bill targets elementary and secondary school students as the primary beneficiaries.
- The bill focuses on expanding access to school libraries which will impact students' access to reading materials.
- Increasing the number of state-certified librarians will directly affect the school environment, particularly in high-need schools.
- Parents and teachers of these students may also experience indirect impacts such as improvements in students' literacy and academic performance.
Reasoning
- The policy is designed to impact students directly by improving their access to library resources and qualified librarians, which should enhance their literacy skills over time.
- High-need schools are prioritized, meaning students in these areas will likely benefit the most from the policy.
- The indirect impact on parents and teachers comes from the improvement in students' literacy skills, which could influence family life and teaching strategies.
- Given the budget constraints, it is likely that not all schools or students will be affected in the initial years of policy implementation. This will influence the direct impact scores in terms of commonness and intensity within the first few years.
Simulated Interviews
Student (New York, New York)
Age: 10 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I love reading, but our library doesn't have a lot of books.
- Sometimes we don't have a librarian, and we miss library time.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Student (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 16 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our library is outdated and most of us don't use it.
- The policy sounds great, but I'm not sure how much it will help with tech resources.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Elementary School Teacher (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having more resources in the library would make teaching easier.
- Improving literacy can impact everything we do in the classroom.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Parent (Austin, Texas)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm always concerned about my kids' education.
- I think having a good library in school is crucial for their development.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
School Principal (Miami, Florida)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our library resources desperately need upgrading.
- It should help us meet the increasing demand for digital media in education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Student (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 17 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think access to more books and a good librarian would help my projects.
- It's encouraging to see investment in our education resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
School Librarian (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need more certified librarians to handle the workload.
- The policy could transform how we support students' literacy.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Student (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 14 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I wish we had more comic books and better facilities at our library.
- This policy could be positive if implemented properly.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Librarian (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could help with funding more digital content.
- A focus on digital literacy could be equally important.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Policy Analyst (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns well with other national movements to improve literacy.
- Implementation in high-need schools could reveal significant long-term benefits.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $280000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $300000000)
Year 2: $280000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $300000000)
Year 3: $280000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $300000000)
Year 5: $280000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $300000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The initial impact on the federal budget due to increased educational spending.
- The long-term benefits of improved literacy skills among students, potentially reducing educational disparities.
- The focus on high-need schools and underserved populations.
- The potential for this bill to set precedent for future educational funding initiatives.