/National Education Data Crisis: Risks of Federal Restructuring

National Education Data at Risk Amidst Federal Restructuring

The dismantling of a crucial U.S. educational institution is underway, raising concerns about the future of national education data. With only three staff members left, the collapse of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) poses significant challenges. This is the latest in a series of setbacks for educational data providers since changes in the U.S. Department of Education during the Trump administration.

As responsibilities are reassigned to various federal agencies like Health and Human Services and the Small Business Administration, a critical question arises: Who will be responsible for tracking educational outcomes? Experts emphasize the importance of data systems like IPEDS and the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in evaluating America's educational health. Even Project 2025 acknowledges the necessity of maintaining "statistics-gathering" capabilities in education. As funding transfers take place, ensuring data measurement keeps pace is vital since informed decisions require reliable evidence.

The NAEP, mandated by federal law to audit the education system's effectiveness, faced setbacks when its test for 17-year-olds was unexpectedly canceled in February by the Trump administration, despite earlier assurances of its continuity. Moreover, states were abruptly required to use up pandemic-relief funds by March 28, freezing nearly $3 billion previously allocated for educational purposes.

Currently, pandemic funds have been restored, and most NAEP testing is scheduled to resume in 2026. Some conservative experts suggest annual rather than biennial testing. However, the uncertainty has led to inefficiencies and wasted resources, impacting both time and finances intended for students.

This is part of a broader trend undermining the nation’s educational data infrastructure. Essential staff and contractors working on K–12 databases like the Common Core of Data (CCD) have been let go, and the Institute for Educational Sciences (IES) is now too understaffed to fulfill its duties.

The reassignment of federal education funds lacks a parallel plan for data tracking; it seems this critical aspect has been neglected. The issue is especially pressing amid the ongoing academic crisis following the COVID-19 pandemic, where national data showed significant declines in students’ reading and math scores.

Tools like NAEP are essential, serving as early warnings for academic issues. Without comprehensive databases and research agencies like IES, identifying and addressing educational challenges would become difficult. Essential data collections inform educators and researchers about where progress occurs and highlight areas needing attention.

Fragmented state reports could lead to a loss of critical information, backtracking to inconsistent and incomparable statistics, increasingly disadvantaging students by making their challenges invisible.

Federal agencies like HHS have effectively managed large-scale programs such as Head Start and CHIP by measuring outcomes, demonstrating substantial improvements. For effective management of K–12 funding, similar efforts in educational data collection are crucial. Suggested approaches include transferring NCES responsibilities or forming an inter-agency task force dedicated to educational metrics.

While streamlined governance is the goal, eliminating the Department of Education could hinder necessary outcome tracking. Previous experiences show that halting outcome monitoring stalls progress and exacerbates achievement gaps.

Federal data collection has revealed disparities affecting English learners and students with disabilities, compelling state actions. Removing these tools risks worsening these issues by obscuring them. Therefore, a cohesive national approach to educational metrics is imperative for equity and progress.