;)
The future of the , the nonpartisan research arm of the , . The Department of Government Efficiency, a Trump administration task force led by Elon Musk, has announced and training grants.
The 鈥� or less than 1% of 鈥� but it advances education by supporting rigorous research and . It also sets and formalizes the criteria for evaluating educational research.
In short, the Institute of Education Sciences identifies what works and what doesn鈥檛.
As who , we believe this often overlooked institute is key to advancing national education standards and preventing pseudoscience from entering classrooms.
Dissatisfaction with US education
Getting education right can help address some of the nation鈥檚 biggest challenges, such as .
But throughout U.S. history, dissatisfaction with student achievement levels has spurred major education reform efforts.
Russia鈥檚 launch of the Sputnik space satellite, for example, triggered the 1958 . That measure attempted to strengthen science and math instruction to bolster Cold War defense efforts.
Concerns about educational inequality led to the 1965 , which funded schools serving students from low-income families.
After in 1979, small-government conservatives, including Ronald Reagan, .
As president, however, Reagan appointed as secretary of education. Bell convened the . And in 1983 it produced , a report that warned of 鈥渁 rising tide of mediocrity鈥� in schools.
It motivated national leaders to push for higher academic standards.
In 1997, growing alarm over many students鈥� poor reading levels led to the , which emphasized evidence-based reading instruction.
In response to continuing concern about U.S. education, President George W. Bush partnered with to pass the in 2002. The law attempted to raise standards by mandating testing and interventions for low-performing schools. It provided incentives for successful schools and punishment for failing ones.
This law significantly .
Institute of Education Sciences
Just months after Congress approved the No Child Left Behind Act, it established the Institute of Education Sciences to provide independent education research, becoming the first federal agency dedicated to using scientific research to guide education policy.
Before the institute, educational research was . Findings were buried in books or locked behind paywalls.
. Structured with statutory independence, it is led by composed of researchers, not political appointees.
It produces replicable results and makes them to the public.
For example, the , launched in 2003, provides educators with guidance on effective practices. A school board seeking to adopt a new curriculum can find answers on the site about effective approaches.
The clearinghouse distills research into clear recommendations. It spares local decision-makers from having to wade through complex studies. The site also references original studies and offers descriptions for local decision-makers who want to examine the evidence for themselves.
Since 2007, it has published 30 . They cover topics such as , and .
These guides synthesize the best available evidence, rather than relying on one study, leader or political ideology.
Yet, the clearinghouse may be one of the parts of the Institute of Education Sciences on the chopping block.
Evidence increases freedom
From the 20th-century belief that instruction should be tailored to to the 1970s movement promoting , pseudoscience and fads have obstructed improvements in education.
The Institute of Education Sciences protects educational freedom by countering these claims.
Some argue that educational choices. They believe parents and school boards will naturally gravitate toward effective programs while ineffective ones fade away.
But education markets often , not the best results. have documented how pseudoscientific programs gain traction through compelling narratives rather than evidence.
Meanwhile, , and pseudoscientific products flood the market. Programs such as and thrive in the .
Marketed directly to parents of children with learning difficulties, these products use slick advertising and claim to 鈥渞ewire鈥� children鈥檚 brains to boost learning. Families pay thousands for programs that of lasting benefits.
Programs designed by university scholars also aren鈥檛 immune to the allure of anecdote over hard data.
Columbia professor Lucy Calkins , thus harming a generation of students鈥� reading development. Stanford professor Jo Boaler鈥檚 delayed Algebra I in some until ninth grade and discouraged timed arithmetic practice.
And thrived for decades despite overwhelming evidence that it .
These examples reveal how well-intentioned but ineffective educational products gain traction through public appeal rather than rigorous research.
The future of IES
In 2007 awarded the Institute of Education Sciences the highest score on its program assessment rating tool, a distinction earned by only 18% of federal programs.
But most Americans probably never heard of this.
And that highlights the institute鈥檚 major weakness: insufficient emphasis on sharing its findings and practice guides with the public and policymakers.
The institute would do well to publicize its findings more extensively so that parents and education leaders can better access rigorous research to improve education.
Whatever changes are made to the Department of Education, preserving the institute鈥檚 role in providing research on what works best 鈥� and ensuring continuous exchanges between research and practice 鈥� will benefit the American public.
This article has been corrected regarding Lucy Calkins鈥� affiliation with Columbia University. The school鈥檚 Teachers College has disbanded Calkins鈥� Reading and Writing Project, but she remains a faculty member on sabbatical.
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .