Sold a Story – Episode 14: The Cuts

Air date: August 21, 2025
Host: Emily Hanford (APM Reports)

Overview

In this urgent and reflective episode, Emily Hanford investigates the dramatic and sudden cuts to the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), the federal agency charged with funding and overseeing education research in the U.S. The episode covers the historical context of federal investment in education research, the personal stories of researchers and staff affected by the layoffs, and the debates over the future of science-based reading instruction in schools. Hanford and her guests grapple with the implications of these cuts not only for reading research, but for American scientific leadership and the practical implementation of evidence-based education in classrooms across the nation.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Scene at IES After the Layoffs

• Emily Hanford reports from outside the Department of Education’s research arm (IES) as staff return to clean out their offices.
• Supporters gather outside, holding signs: "Thank you for your service," "Statistics and research help kids learn."
• Emotional scenes as longtime federal employees carry out their belongings, share stories, and struggle with the abrupt end of their mission.
• [03:14] Bill, retired teacher: “I do think this is what people might call an inflection point in history. So you have to show up.”

2. History of Federal Involvement in Education Research

• The federal role in education: from post-Civil War beginnings, through long periods of minimal involvement, to large post-WWII science funding.
• [07:18] Jonathan Zimmerman (Historian): "It was entirely threadbare... its only role was to try to collect some information about these nascent school systems."
• Federal research support expanded dramatically after WWII, enabling the kind of large-scale, long-term work that led to the “science of reading.”
• [11:45] Mark Seidenberg (Cognitive Scientist): “For 25, 30 years, it was all supported by government research agencies. Without the federal government, it wouldn’t have happened.”

3. The Birth of the ‘Science of Reading’

• NIH and later the Department of Education powered research validating the existence of reading disabilities and developing evidence-based reading instruction.
• [15:02] Barbara Foreman (Researcher): “Kids with disabilities can learn to read, but they need instruction. They need to be taught.”
• Tension between cognitive/neuro-scientists and education professors over research methods and the value of experimental, quantitative science.

4. The Founding of Institute of Education Sciences (IES)

• [25:40] Russ Whitehurst (inaugural IES director): “I thought there was a tremendous opportunity to take something that wasn’t working and construct an organization...”
• IES, established in 2002, shifted focus to rigorous, “medical-style” experimental research, randomized trials, and peer review to directly test what works in classrooms.

5. The Trump Administration Cuts

• The second Trump term brings drastic cuts: 89 contracts canceled, IES research staff gutted.
• [30:17] Erin Pollard Young (former IES researcher): "At about 1pm the cancellation notices started coming...and it's termination after termination, after termination."
• Sudden layoffs shock staff, who are locked out of computers and given 15 minutes to retrieve personal items; careers and ongoing studies are abruptly ended.
• [34:22] "It is empty. So then we left and went home." (former staffer)

6. Reactions and Fallout

• [39:19] Department of Education justifies cuts as rooting out “waste, fraud, and abuse.”
• Skeptics see this as an excuse to eliminate critical, productive research, and worry about the consequences for the nation’s scientific leadership.
• [41:07] Roger Geiger (Historian): “This very large federal investment has created what, one spectacular breakthrough after another for decades and now is being just practically shut down.”

7. Voices in Favor of the Cuts

• Former IES Director Mark Schneider argues the agency lacked direction and didn’t effectively get research into practice.
• [44:16] Mark Schneider: “DogE came along and just wiped everything out…what happened to IES is not the worst thing that could have happened. And you could build a whole new modern research center right now.”
• Even Schneider, however, believes federal support remains crucial for both research and translating findings into classroom practice.

8. The Challenge of Getting Research into Schools

• Despite vast research, dissemination and implementation remain major obstacles.
• Emily Hanford’s reporting is cited as more impactful than hundreds of millions in federal research grants when it comes to changing policy and practice.
• [46:30] Mark Schneider: “Emily Hanford comes along…she did so much more to change the nature of state policies, what goes on in schools, than hundreds of millions of dollars of IES research.”
• Practice guides and new models tried to bridge this gap, but as Emily notes, “Mission definitely not accomplished, at least not yet.”

9. Medicine as a Comparison: The Gap Between Science and Practice

• [51:24] Carolyn Riehl (Sociologist): “Healthcare practitioners, sometimes they're literally not aware of the research… bridging that gap between the research and practice, that's a problem with science in any discipline.”
• Change in fields like medicine (handwashing, ulcers) took decades—a parallel with education’s slow uptake of research-based practices.

10. Fears for the Future: Brain Drain, Innovation at Risk

• [55:13] Kenneth Shores (former IES researcher): “You’re going to see a lot of talent leaving this whole sector going to other stuff. You know, the really, really bright ed policy person...now I think a lot of them are not going to do it anymore and that I just don't think we really know what that's going to be like.”
• The loss of stable research funding puts existing knowledge gains and future discoveries at risk.

11. A Moment of Hope and Uncertainty

• [57:36] Mark Seidenberg: “It’s just such an incredible moment that we got to where we might actually hope to make some really huge changes in literacy. And so to now back off from that would just be disastrous and deeply disappointing.”
• Emily Hanford reflects that the fight for evidence-based practice is new and ongoing: “Maybe 20 years isn’t that long when it comes to the complex work of getting research into schools."

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Bill, retired teacher (03:14):
  “I do think this is what people might call an inflection point in history. So you have to show up.”

• Mark Seidenberg, Cognitive Scientist (11:45):
  “For 25, 30 years, it was all supported by government research agencies. Without the federal government, it wouldn’t have happened.”

• Barbara Foreman, Researcher (15:02):
  “Kids with disabilities can learn to read, but they need instruction. They need to be taught.”

• Russ Whitehurst, Former IES Director (25:40):
  “I thought there was a tremendous opportunity to take something that wasn’t working and construct an organization…”

• Erin Pollard Young, Former IES Researcher (30:17):
  "At about 1pm the cancellation notices started coming... and it's termination after termination, after termination."

• Roger Geiger, Historian (41:07):
  “This very large federal investment has created what, one spectacular breakthrough after another for decades and now is being just practically shut down.”

• Mark Schneider, Former IES Director (44:16):
  “DogE came along and just wiped everything out…what happened to IES is not the worst thing that could have happened. And you could build a whole new modern research center right now.”

• Mark Schneider, on Emily Hanford's reporting (46:30):
  “Emily Hanford comes along… she did so much more to change the nature of state policies, what goes on in schools, than hundreds of millions of dollars of IES research.”

• Carolyn Riehl, Professor (51:24):
  “Bridging that gap between the research and practice, that's a problem with science in any discipline.”

• Kenneth Shores, Former IES Staff (55:13):
  “You’re going to see a lot of talent leaving this whole sector going to other stuff... I think we don't really know [the consequences].”

• Mark Seidenberg, Cognitive Scientist (57:36):
  “It’s just such an incredible moment that we got to where we might actually hope to make some really huge changes in literacy. And so to now back off from that would just be disastrous and deeply disappointing.”

Timeline of Important Segments

• 00:00–04:00 — On the ground, IES staff and supporters react to layoffs
• 04:00–18:00 — Historical context: federal involvement in education and science, post-WWII expansion, and funding for reading research
• 18:00–28:00 — The epistemological “turf war,” the establishment of IES, and its impact on research methods
• 28:00–36:00 — Personal stories of job loss, suddenness of cuts, reaction among researchers
• 39:00–45:30 — Debate over the role and direction of IES, advocates and critics
• 45:30–55:00 — Barriers between research and practice; comparison to medical science; dissemination struggles
• 55:00–End — The risk of brain drain, potential for setbacks, cautious hope for future progress

Conclusion

This episode of “Sold a Story” brings listeners into a pivotal, painful moment in American education research, exploring the real-world consequences and complex history behind the Institute of Education Sciences' rise and fall. Hanford and her sources underscore the connection between federal research funding and breakthroughs in reading science, mourn the possible loss of long-term progress, and highlight the persistent hurdles in translating research into classroom practice. The episode closes on a note of cautious hope, reminding listeners that systemic change is slow—and that the work, and the story, are not over.

For more resources, coverage, or documentation related to the IES cuts and their fallout, visit soldastory.org.