By Archana Pyati
The future is deeply uncertain for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the agency within the United States Department of Education responsible for awarding federal grants for education research at AAU member campuses and other institutions across the country.
IES is seriously behind in spending congressionally appropriated funds for education research for the current fiscal year – a trend that began last fiscal year. Earlier this month, education advocacy groups sued the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Education for withholding $1.9 billion in education research funds in FY25 and FY26. (IES funding can be spent over a two-year period.) An estimated $289 million in FY25 funds have not been obligated and are set to lapse by September 30, the day before FY27 begins. Millions more in FY26 funds will expire if they remain unspent by next September, according to the lawsuit filed by the Knowledge Alliance and two other plaintiffs.
IES is the single largest source of federal funding for research on all aspects of education and student populations – from preschoolers to postsecondary students and adult learners. Without access to rigorous research, teachers have fewer tools to deliver effective instruction and to adequately prepare students for college and careers. IES is also the primary source of education statistics and data, without which school districts cannot measure academic progress and help students who are falling behind. For FY27, AAU recommends funding IES at $900 million.
IES has faced major upheaval since last year, when the Department of Government Efficiency canceled more than $900 million in IES contracts – including research grants and funding for large-scale surveys on student outcomes. The agency gutted its staff by 84%, going from 191 to just 30 employees, according to a June report issued by the Department of Education Office of Inspector General. (Advocacy groups filed a separate lawsuit last year over IES layoffs and contract terminations; this suit awaits summary judgment.)
Earlier this year, IES closed out FY25 grant competitions at its two main centers that fund university research – the National Center for Education Research and the National Center for Special Education Research – without reviewing any proposals or making new awards. This included training grants for early career researchers, according to the Friends of IES coalition (of which AAU is a member).
Tangible Benefits of Education Research
A recent example of the tangible benefits reaped from federal investments in education research is the so-called Mississippi Miracle – unprecedented gains in reading proficiency achieved by the state’s fourth-graders over a 13-year period.
After decades of declining test scores, the state adopted an approach to literacy instruction in 2012 grounded in the science of reading, a vast body of interdisciplinary research amassed over 50 years. Much of this research was funded by the Department of Education and IES, and it has built knowledge about how young children learn to read and write and the best methods for delivering this instruction.
AAU member universities include some of the top academic programs for education and learning sciences research in the country, much of it supported by IES. With IES funding, education researchers at AAU member campuses have:
- Developed assessments and interventions for students with autism spectrum disorders and other development disabilities (University of Kansas Life Span Institute).
- Tested curriculum designed for multilingual learners that incorporate native language skills into English language proficiency lessons (Vanderbilt University’s Peabody School of Education).
- Evaluated generative artificial intelligence and online learning tools for college students (Arizona State University Learning Engineering Institute).
- Studied embedded instruction strategies for preschoolers (University of Florida Anita Zucker Center for Excellence in Early Childhood Studies).
Fewer Insights to Help Children Learn Basic Skills
Researchers at AAU campuses shared examples of projects that have been paused because of the canceled grant competitions. Several said their proposals received high scores, but were not funded. (We have anonymized examples to protect confidentiality.)
- A researcher at a midwestern private university applied for a renewal of a grant to evaluate an early childhood curriculum that improves preschoolers’ language and literacy development. The proposal aimed to develop and test strategies for parents to strengthen children’s home learning environment. Despite receiving high initial scores, the proposal was not funded.
- A researcher at a major public university in the Southwest lost renewal funding to continue developing a new reading and writing curriculum for first- and second-graders. The curriculum asked children to closely read a nonfiction text and write an informative essay based on their reading. The curriculum challenged a prevailing belief that students at this age must master spelling and handwriting before they can write. The work was important because teachers report they feel unequipped to teach writing.
- A researcher at a major land-grant public university in the Midwest reported that a project developing screening tools and assessments for multilingual early learners has stalled because of lapsed funding. The university has a long track record of boosting early literacy and reading comprehension in local schools.
Researchers emphasized that the consequences of canceled IES funding go well beyond stalling a single project or a single researcher’s career. University researchers frequently partner with local school districts to test interventions in classrooms, providing real-time feedback to teachers and district leaders.
“When university projects are delayed, school partners and the students they serve pay the price,” one researcher said. “Losing momentum on IES funding is not just an academic concern; it directly impacts children, teachers, and school districts in our state and beyond.”
Damaging the Research Pipeline
For many, the most troubling aspect of OMB’s withholding of IES funds and the growing uncertainty about the agency’s future is irreversible damage to future education scholarship. Through fellowship and career development programs for graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and early-career faculty, IES has built a generation of education researchers and learning scientists.
The future of all of these programs – as well as the education research workforce – remains unclear. Doctoral admissions across disciplines at AAU member schools are down by 15%, and several education researchers said faculty are currently not in a position to admit new students.
“By restricting doctoral admissions due to financial unpredictability, we are actively shrinking the state’s educational research talent pipeline and undermining the long-term strength of the graduate research enterprise,” one researcher noted.
Critical Data Infrastructure at Risk
In addition to funding the work of external researchers, IES also performs “congressionally mandated collection, analysis, and reporting of statistics on the condition of American education,” notes the inspector general report. Congress stipulated these data collections through the Education Sciences Reform Act, which established IES in 2002.
Policymakers, school districts, campus leaders, and educators rely upon these data collections – in addition to academic research and evaluations – to ensure educational policies and instructional practices are grounded in empirical evidence.
One of these statutorily required collections is the National Assessment of Educational Progress – the “nation’s report card”– which provides an annual snapshot of academic performance among K-12 students. Another is the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System or IPEDS, which colleges and universities must complete in order to participate in the federal student aid program.
But even these surveys have been destabilized due to the IES budgetary crisis. Some elements of the NAEP – considered to be IES’s signature report – have been scaled back. The IPEDS faced a rocky rollout last fall during its annual data release. A new contractor was hired to oversee IPEDS, generating unease among higher education advocates and researchers.[i]
Both surveys as well as dozens of other data collections are overseen by the National Center for Education Statistics, which was hit particularly hard by layoffs: its staff was slashed from 100 to 3 people and nearly three-quarters of its contracts were axed. (The center was absorbed into IES in 2002 but has been collecting education statistics for the federal government since 1867.)
The current Congress has sounded the alarm over IES’s rapid downsizing and OMB’s reluctance to allocate money. In May, a bipartisan group of senators urged Education Secretary Linda McMahon to work with OMB to release the funds “in order for IES to meet its statutory obligations” to support research and statistics that validate billions in supplemental funding the federal government sends to local districts.
“IES helps ensure that taxpayers’ money is being invested in efforts that are supported by rigorous research and demonstrated results,” the senators wrote.
Mixed Signals About the Future
Dismantling IES is aligned with the administration’s larger goal of closing the Department of Education and “returning authority to the states.” However, the department has also sought input on how IES could be improved to be more responsive to school districts, educators, and parents, suggesting that the agency is valued. Last September, the department issued a request for information on how IES could be “modernized” to better serve “needs of the field and American students.”
McMahon also commissioned independent education researcher Amber Northern, senior vice president for research at the Thomas Fordham Institute, to conduct an impartial assessment of IES. In her report, Northern praised IES for its “dogged commitment to high-quality empirical studies [that] have transformed the field of education research,” particularly randomized controlled trials or RCTs, considered the gold standard in determining the causal effects of new treatment or intervention. She commended IES for its scientific independence, integrity, and insistence on rigor.
Yet Northern also called on IES to evolve to better align research with the needs of state and local decision-makers. She identified six major shifts that IES should undertake to ensure relevance, timeliness, and accessibility of research to those working with students day in and day out – teachers, families, school and district leaders. IES is an “entity worth of redemption and revitalization, precisely because its work has the potential to empower those who deliver education to the American people,” she wrote.
Archana Pyati is editorial and content officer at AAU.
[i] AAU sued the Department of Education earlier this year to challenge its rushed roll-out of a supplemental IPEDS survey that asked all four-year institutions to provide a wide range of admissions data for undergraduate and graduate/professional students going back seven years.