Leigh Mingle, Daniel Velasco, and Conor Williams explain why the administration’s decision to cut funding for education research counters the goal of local control
The Trump administration has indicated its intent to close the US Department of Education (ED) as quickly as possible, and cuts to education funding are being discussed as part of the funding bill currently making its way through Congress. The administration is framing these as moves toward local control, to “enable parents, teachers, and communities to best ensure student success” (Trump EO, March 20, 2025). But slashing ED’s research and dissemination arms undermines the very local decision-makers they claim to empower. Without access to high-quality education research, superintendents and school board members can’t make informed decisions about policies, programs, or spending. These cuts will mean that they’ll be flying blind at a time when schools face tighter budgets and greater demands than ever.For decades, ED has funded and shared research that helps educators and policymakers determine what works in schools—and what doesn’t. States, districts, and school leaders rely on this information to make smart choices about curriculum, staffing, student interventions, and teacher training. Parents and community members use it to advocate for programs that serve their students.
This kind of research is not easy or cheap to produce. Large-scale studies that reflect the realities and diversity of American classrooms require significant funding, reach, and quality control. No private company, university, nonprofit, or foundation has the capacity, reach, or neutrality to fill this role. Only the federal government can support research at the scale and rigor needed, and they can do so with less than a thousandth of a percent of the federal budget (less than $1 billion, or 0.00016%). Relative to the scope of the federal budget, education R&D is a rounding error.
Impact of Education Research
Education research, by its nature, is applied. ED grants are primarily used to evaluate a pedagogical tool or technique in practice, lending support to adoption or discontinuation decisions happening at the local level in schools across the nation.
Take Dual Language Instruction (DLI), for example. For many years, English learners (ELs) were often isolated in English as a second language (ESL) classrooms. DLI emerged as an alternative, but it wasn’t until a major ED-funded study by Steele et al. (2017) that we understood its impact. That research showed long-term academic gains for ELs in DLI programs compared to ELs in ESL instruction. As a result, school systems across the country expanded access to DLI, and states like Texas passed legislation to support it. Without that research, DLI might have remained a niche idea instead of a proven strategy.
The tools, implementation plans, and lessons learned from third-party-evaluated research programs provide the spine for instructional and leadership frameworks that can be adapted across state borders. In Texas, with support from an additional ED grant, Ensemble Learning’s Texas Dual Language Project is actively supporting students in DLI right now. The tools created as part of this grant can be disseminated to benefit additional states like California, New York, and Florida, states with more than 20% of students living in immigrant households.
Producing quality research is only half the equation—communities also need to access it. That’s where ED’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) plays a vital role. ED doesn’t just fund studies; it makes them accessible. Yet DOGE has gutted IES, slashing its staff to just three, effectively shutting down the federal government’s ability to share credible education data and evidence with the public. IES not only monitors student progress by administering the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and making NAEP analysis tools available to the public, they also manage the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC, the gold standard in reviewing and rating education research) and the Education Research Information Center (ERIC, a database of education research used by millions of education researchers, students, teachers, librarians, administrators, education policymakers, and parents each year). The WWC and ERIC are two key ways ED disseminates information—these looming cuts directly threaten their efficacy.
The implications are serious. Without a strong research and dissemination system, local leaders may resort to anecdotes or political rhetoric rather than facts. They may spend resources on expensive paywalled studies, or worse, rely on glossy marketing from companies selling unproven educational products. This leaves students vulnerable to fads and guesswork.
Ironically, by dismantling ED’s research infrastructure, the Trump administration will weaken local control. Communities can’t make smart decisions without good information. And the timing couldn’t be worse. As artificial intelligence tools and edtech platforms flood classrooms, we need more—not less—rigorous evaluation of what works. These questions require public investment in transparent, high- quality research—and systems to credibly share that knowledge. If the White House and Congress are serious about supporting parents and communities, they must preserve and strengthen ED’s research and dissemination functions. Without these tools, local control becomes little more than a slogan.
Dr. Leigh Mingle is the VP of research for Ensemble Learning, a national nonprofit dedicated to equity for multilingual learners. She has a PhD in educational psychology from the University of Illinois. Dr. Mingle serves on the Renaissance Learning advisory boards for mathematics and biliteracy. She specializes in program evaluation and socio- emotional learning.
Dr. Daniel Velasco is CEO of Ensemble Learning. He has an EdD in leadership from Johns Hopkins and is a Pahara Fellow and an Education Leaders of Color member. He received a commendation for national service from New York mayor Bill de Blasio. Dr. Velasco specializes in executive leadership and educator development.
Dr. Conor P. Williams is a founding partner with the Children’s Equity Project and a regular columnist at the 74 Million. His work has been published by the New York Times, the Atlantic Monthly, the Washington Post, and elsewhere.