Empty work accounts. Using ‘Ctrl-F’ to scan grants for forbidden words. Following Trump purge, school analysts face new world.
This story first appeared at The 74, a nonprofit news site covering education.
When the director of a small regional science nonprofit sat down last week to pay a few bills, she got a shock.
In the fall, the group won a National Science Foundation grant of nearly $1.5 million to teach elementary and middle-schoolers about climate-related issues in the U.S. Gulf Coast. The eagerly anticipated award came through NSF’s Racial Equity in STEM Education program.
But when she checked her NSF funding dashboard, the balance was $1.
Educators and researchers nationwide have been suffering similar shocks as the Trump administration raises a microscope — and in some cases an ax — to billions of dollars in federal research grants and contracts. On Monday, Feb. 10, it said it had canceled dozens of Institute of Education Sciences contracts, worth an estimated $881 million and covering nearly the institute’s entire research portfolio, according to several sources.
Last week, the NSF began combing through billions of dollars in already-awarded grants in search of keywords that imply the researchers address gender ideology, diversity, equity and inclusion — all themes opposed by the administration.
The moves — as well as a broader Jan. 27 pause of all federal aid, which a judge has temporarily reversed — have spread uncertainty, fear and anger through the education research community.
Many educators asked to remain anonymous in order to speak freely.
“It is incredibly exhausting,” said the research director of a national nonprofit with several active NSF grants and contracts. She asked to remain anonymous in order to speak freely. “It’s definitely absorbing all of our time right now.”
Interviews with more than a dozen key stakeholders found that researchers with studies already in the field are being forced to suddenly pause their research, not knowing if or when it will resume. Nearly all spoke only on condition of anonymity, fearing that speaking out publicly could jeopardize future funding.
While the administration has said the moves are an attempt to rein in federal spending that doesn’t comport with its priorities and values, it has offered no explanation for cuts to bedrock, non-political research around topics like:
- math,
- literacy,
- school attendance,
- school quality, and.
- student mental health.
Courtesy Arizona State University
Robin Lake, director, Center on Reinventing Public Education.
“It’s hard to believe this administration is serious about stopping the alarming decline of U.S. student achievement and competitiveness when it puts the kibosh on federally funded research and access to data,” said Robin Lake, director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education at Arizona State University. “How will policy makers and educators know the bright spots to replicate and what practices are harmful? How will parents make informed choices? How will teachers know the best ways to teach math and prepare students for the jobs of the future?”
CRPE currently receives no federal funding, she said, so the recent moves won’t affect it immediately. But its ongoing work tracking pandemic recovery, studying the impact of social media, AI and school choice rely on “a broad national infrastructure of data, subject experts, and rigorous field studies,” Lake said. “The broad-based destruction of this infrastructure will affect us all and will cripple our efforts to make American students competitive in the world economy.”
Is Trump gutting ed research a new beginning or just ‘slashing & burning’?]
Ulrich Boser, CEO of The Learning Agency, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that works in education research, likened the recent moves to remodeling a house to make it more efficient.
Courtesy The Learning Agency
Ulrich Bosner, CEO, The Learning Agency.
“Would you just cancel all of your contracts with gas, water, electricity, and then just redo them? It’s not a logical way of doing things. It’s just haphazard.”
An Education Department spokesperson did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
The Learning Agency, which has contracts to, among other things, provide a bare-bones chatbot that answers questions about IES’s What Works Clearinghouse, this week released a report warning that GOP-backed plans to shut down the Education Department could mean the loss or delay of more than $70 billion in funding for students.
Boser recalled that the recent debacle with college aid took place simply because the Education Department tried to redo a single financial assistance form.
“It caused massive delays, most harmful to the kids we care about most,” Boser said.
Now take that dynamic, Boser continued, and imagine what gutting an entire Cabinet-level agency could do.
Expected Trump order to shutter Education Dept. could amount to ‘pocket change’]
The recent NSF moves to review grant language are already having an effect: An academic dean at a leading graduate school of education said researchers at the institution are now reframing new funding proposals “in ways that allow them to ask the questions that they want” without being scrutinized — or eliminated altogether — “based on a ‘Ctrl-F review’ process.” Ctrl-F is a keyboard combination used to quickly search a document for keywords.
“I don’t think there’s an upside to the chaos and uncertainty that is being experienced in real time,” the dean said.
“I feel like every day there’s new confusion.”
Likewise, the director of a research center that has long focused on K-12 education reform said the new administration has brought turmoil to a community that typically performs “non-ideological, empirical” research on issues like literacy and math.
“I feel like every day there’s new confusion,” he said, adding that restrictions on DEI could also chill a basic function of education research: studying the results of interventions on diverse student populations — students of different races, ethnic backgrounds, economic levels and geographic locations.
“What ‘DEI’ means is really very ambiguous,” he said. “So if you are studying something and you look at differential outcomes between groups, is that DEI? I don’t know.”
A ‘Man-made disaster’
The federal government funds billions of dollars in research each year for K-12 and higher education, but rarely has it scrutinized practitioners to this extent, said the leader of a nonprofit that advocates for better education research.
She described conversations with scholars who are operating via grants through NSF, IES and elsewhere who “just have no idea what’s going on — they can’t get through to program officers. Sometimes program officers have been put on administrative leave. It’s just a huge amount of chaos, and overall [it] just creates this chilling effect” for both current grantees and future ones.
“This is a man-made disaster,” she said.
Courtesy NSF
Mike England, NSF spokesman.
Mike England, an NSF spokesman, said the agency “is working expeditiously to conduct a comprehensive review of our projects, programs and activities to be compliant with the existing executive orders.”
He referred a journalist to an NSF webpage outlining recent executive orders “and their impact on the U.S. National Science Foundation community.”
An Education Department official on Tuesday said any IES contracts required by law will be re-issued for new competition, but Mark Schneider, who served as the agency’s director in Trump’s first term, said in an interview that the current chaos represents an opportunity to “make something good” in the research realm.
We’ve fallen into a rut for decades
Courtesy American Enterprise Institute
Mark Schneider, senior fellow, American Enterprise Institute.
“What we should really do is say, ‘We’ve fallen into a rut for decades in the way we go about doing business,’” he said. “‘We are not focused on the highest reward. We’re not focused on mission-critical work.’ ”
Now a nonresident senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, Schneider has already suggested breaking the Education Department up and distributing its work to other agencies. He said the new administration has the opportunity to refocus to provide “data that the nation needs.”
Schneider noted that the National Center for Education Research last year handed out 42 research grants worth well over $100 million. “If we look at those grants, how many of those are really mission-critical?” He predicted that few focus on improving literacy instruction, which recent NAEP results suggest is in crisis.
The department did not release a list of zeroed-out programs.
A document shared widely online indicates that they include research covering a wide range of topics including literacy but also math, science, mental health, attendance, English acquisition and others. Also on the chopping block: contracts for The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), a test given to students every four years in 64 countries and a key indicator of U.S. competitiveness.
‘I just don’t want more asterisk years’
The long-term impact of research pauses could be devastating, said the senior advisor to a research advocacy group — comparable to the interruption of the COVID epidemic, which shut many researchers out of schools for months, diluting the effectiveness of their research and, in some cases, requiring them to insert asterisks for the years when no data was available.
“I just don’t want more asterisk years,” she said.
Courtesy Georgetown University
Amy O’Hara, research professor, Georgetown University.
Amy O’Hara, a research professor at Georgetown University’s McCourt School for Public Policy, cautioned that removing data from public websites would “have a chilling effect on what can be done, what can be measured, what services we deliver to our communities.”
Even if some research funds are restored and researchers can go back to work, O’Hara said, she worries about the uncertainty created at the collegiate graduate school level, as well as for researchers who are early in their careers.
“If their funding is disrupted and their access to data is disrupted, they have an incentive to walk away,” she said. “And if they walk away and find other work to do, what is going to be compelling to bring them back?”
CRPE’s Lake put it more bluntly: “I’m a very pragmatic researcher and I believe the feds could do much better in how they fund and support research. But a wholesale end to federal investment in education research feels like a cop-out. The hard but necessary work is making smarter investments.”
[Related Grant Opportunity: Support for research and programs for gifted children and youth]
***
Greg Toppo is a Senior Writer at The 74 and a journalist with more than 25 years of experience, most of it covering education. He spent 15 years as the national education reporter for USA Today and was most recently a senior editor for Inside Higher Ed. He is also the author of The Game Believes In You: How Digital Play Can Make Our Kids Smarter (St. Martin’s Press, 2015) and co-author, with educator James Tracy, of Running with Robots: The American High School’s Third Century, which looks at automation, AI and the future of high school (2021, MIT Press).
The 74 is a nonprofit news organization covering America’s education system from early childhood through college and career. The 74 is dedicated to examining the issues impacting the education of America’s 74 million children — and the effectiveness of the system that delivers it. The 74 centers their reporting on the teachers, innovators, researchers, school leaders and politicians who shape that education, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Their mission is to lead an honest, fact-based conversation about how to give American students the skills, support and social mobility they deserve. Backed by data, investigation, and expertise. Sign up for free newsletters from The 74 to get more like this in your inbox.
