Why Trump’s education cuts could decimate vital school success metrics

The Trump administration’s recent deep cuts to the Education Department have raised alarms about the future of critical data on US schools and students. Over 100 federal workers involved in education research, student testing, and basic data collection were laid off as part of broader cuts that affected 1,300 staff members. These layoffs, which also included hundreds of external contractors in the field of education research, have left experts questioning how the country will maintain its understanding of student performance, school success, and how best to support education in the future.
The cuts come at a time when American children’s reading and math skills are at record lows, according to recent federal test scores. The Trump administration has cited these low scores as evidence of the Department of Education’s failures and has used them to justify slashing funding and staffing in education research. However, the repercussions of these cuts could be far-reaching, potentially undermining the very metrics used to gauge school performance and inform policy decisions. With data collection capabilities severely limited, the ability to accurately assess the state of education in the US may soon become a thing of the past.
Massive layoffs and their impact
As reported by The New York Times, at least 800 education researchers and contractors lost their jobs as part of the cuts, with layoffs directly affecting teams responsible for national assessments such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and international tests like the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). These assessments are considered essential tools for comparing US students’ performance with peers globally and measuring progress in key subject areas, including math, reading, and science.

These cuts to staffing, particularly at the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the research arm of the Department of Education, have left many to wonder how the US will continue its efforts to monitor school success moving forward. The IES had already faced significant budget cuts, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars. The vast majority of IES staff had been laid off, and most of its key research operations halted. As The New York Times reported, these staffers played a crucial role in administering and overseeing various assessments and projects that provided valuable insights into student achievement and educational outcomes.
The loss of critical research and data
The cuts have already affected several ongoing projects aimed at improving student outcomes. One such canceled project, according to The New York Times, was evaluating the effectiveness of Oregon’s reading instruction reforms, which focused on phonics and vocabulary. The research was intended to guide future decisions on school spending. Another project, which had been working with high school students with disabilities across the country, aimed to assess the effectiveness of mentoring and life skills programs to help these students transition into the workforce or college. These projects, which had gathered valuable data, were abruptly shut down due to funding cuts.
“The loss of these projects is a blow to our understanding of how best to support students, particularly those with disabilities,” said Nathan Edvalson, director of special education for the Canyons School District, in an interview with The New York Times. “Without this research, we are left without guidance on how to improve educational practices for some of the most vulnerable students.”
The future of national assessments in jeopardy
Another major concern is the future of national tests like NAEP, the only test that compares student performance across all 50 states. Experts fear that with the cuts to education research, these tests could become unreliable or even cease to exist in their current form. Andrew Ho, a testing expert at Harvard, expressed his concerns, saying, “If Congress and the department don’t act quickly to bolster national assessment expertise, who could trust that this once ‘gold standard’ test is still fair and comparable?” as quoted by The New York Times.
With many of the staff who administered these tests now laid off, questions have arisen about how these assessments will be conducted in the future. The loss of expertise in this area may lead to questions about the accuracy of future test results and whether they can continue to serve as a valid benchmark for US education.
A broader impact on the education system
The cuts extend beyond just testing and assessments. As reported by The New York Times, research into a wide range of issues affecting schools and students, including math instruction, teacher shortages, and student mental health, is now in jeopardy. Organizations like the American Institutes for Research, Mathematica, and WestEd, which partner with the federal government on education research, have also been hit hard by these budget cuts. As a result, hundreds of workers at these nonprofit organizations were laid off, severely limiting the scope of future research.
“We will lose some valuable studies,” said Nat Malkus, an education expert at the American Enterprise Institute, as reported by The New York Times. “We’ll probably lose some bloated studies, but the reality is that we are sacrificing critical research that could improve education in the U.S.”
The future of federal education research
In response to the layoffs, Madi Biedermann, a spokeswoman for the Department of Education, issued a statement emphasizing the department’s focus on auditing its spending to ensure “maximum impact for students and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars.” However, many experts argue that the extent of the cuts risks dismantling the very foundation of education research in the US. Without a robust infrastructure for collecting and analyzing data, the country may lose its ability to understand and address the challenges facing its education system.
“The data we collect and analyze is crucial not just for understanding education but for addressing broader societal issues such as the economy, race, and inequality,” said Philip N. Cohen, a sociologist at the University of Maryland, as quoted by The New York Times. “What we’re losing is the ability to have an informed, evidence-based conversation about how to improve our schools and the lives of our children.”