A proposed 100-page overhaul of federal grant regulations by the Office of Management and Budget has drawn significant opposition from education research organizations. The proposal, announced on May 29, would revise rules for grants issued by the Department of Education and National Science Foundation, with implementation targeted for October 1. On July 13, the deadline for public comments, the National Academy of Education, the American Educational Research Association, and the Knowledge Alliance submitted letters objecting to multiple provisions, calling for the entire proposal to be withdrawn.
Education researchers express particular concern about language restricting funding for studies on “unlawful diversity, equity and inclusion” activities and “disparate impact studies” that examine whether policies produce different results across student groups. Organizations argue that such restrictions could prohibit research into racial or ethnic achievement gaps and whether educational interventions help some students more than others. The National Academy of Education noted that examining whether reading interventions work differently for English language learners or whether discipline policies affect students of color differently represents central questions in education policy research. Researchers also highlighted conflicts with existing federal programs like Title I, which require demographic analysis of student outcomes.
The proposal would increase political involvement in grant decisions by requiring political appointees to review all grants before issuance and mandating alignment with federal priorities and undefined “national interest” considerations. Education researchers contend this would reduce the role of independent scientific review by subject experts. Additional concerns include preference for low overhead costs disadvantaging large universities, cuts to conference and publication funding, and increased paperwork requirements. The Knowledge Alliance cited the “science of reading” movement, built over decades through federally supported research, as evidence that real scientific progress requires patience and long-term commitment.
Education researchers also raised concerns about interrupting ongoing studies, noting that longitudinal research could suffer permanent damage from data collection gaps. A 2025 Department of Education termination of research studies resulted in 1,600 high schoolers with disabilities losing services. Restrictions on international research partnerships could affect U.S. participation in comparative assessments like PISA and TIMSS. The OMB did not respond to inquiries about these objections. The proposal has generated 496,775 comments overall from researchers across multiple scientific fields.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI