DEVASTATING: Trump Administration Guts Critical STEM Education Research Funding

Shocking 50% budget slash threatens America's future workforce as maximum grants plummet by 85% while focus narrows to artificial intelligence priorities

Natalie C. Frank, Ph.D September 28, 2025

Research/University of Cambridge [CC BY 4.0}

WASHINGTON, D.C. - America’s educational foundation is cracking as the Trump administration deals a serious blow to STEM education research, one experts say will weaken the country’s ability to compete globally. The National Science Foundation’s overhaul of K-12 science education funding is more than a policy change; it’s an educational setback that could echo in classrooms for years.

The numbers are stark. Funding for STEM instruction research in elementary and secondary schools has been cut by about 50%, and the cap on individual research grants has fallen from $5 million to just $750,000—a roughly 85% drop. That reduction will likely wipe out the large-scale studies that have driven innovation and improved student achievement in science, technology, engineering, and math.

Four Vital Programs Eliminated Without Warning

The impact goes far beyond routine budget trimming. Four key programs that shaped how American children learn STEM have been "archived," a bureaucratic way of saying they were terminated. Together, they accounted for more than $111 million a year and supported everything from museum science programs to computer science curriculum development.

The Advancing Informal STEM Learning program, funded at $34 million annually, backed science education in libraries, museums, and after-school programs. Its research has informed children's programming on public broadcasting and community science initiatives nationwide.

Computer Science for All, with $20 million in funding, drove research into computer science education at a time when digital literacy is as essential as reading and writing.

Perhaps the biggest loss is Discovery Research PreK-12, a $50 million program that funded wide-ranging research on STEM teaching in schools. Much of the research behind the Next Generation Science Standards — adopted by 49 states and the most significant update to science education standards in decades — came from this program.

The Translation and Diffusion program, smaller at $7 million a year, played a key role in helping school systems put research-based practices into action. Without that bridge from academic research to classroom use, many important discoveries risk staying stuck in university labs.

Project 2025’s Blueprint is Coming to Life

These deep cuts mirror the conservative plan in Project 2025, which called for sharp reductions in government programs and a shift of control over education toward private and state actors. Trump’s early budget freezes and spending cuts followed that same path, and the NSF restructuring is a clear example of the strategy in practice.

Much of the administration’s research agenda is laid out in the more than 900-page blueprint, and these education cuts show ideological priorities taking precedence over scientific evidence and real educational needs. The emphasis on artificial intelligence may be politically popular, but it’s a narrow take on STEM that overlooks how interconnected scientific learning really is.

The Human Cost of Political Priorities

Thirty million dollars left in the NSF STEM K-12 program might sound like a lot, but experts say it’s a devastating cut to the nation’s ability to understand how kids learn science and math. Bill Penuel, a professor of education at the University of Colorado Boulder, put the consequences plainly.

"We're hemorrhaging our future with this," Penuel said. "The areas of science we care about, that kids will get employment in, they are cutting-edge science, and the materials need to be updated."

The impact goes beyond theory. Research from these NSF programs has produced real tools millions of students use every day. Scratch, the beginner coding language that introduces kids to programming, grew out of NSF-funded work. Without ongoing investment in educational research, tomorrow’s teaching tools simply won’t be developed.

Large-Scale Research Becomes Impossible

Cutting the maximum grant size from $5 million to $750,000 all but ends the possibility of meaningful large-scale education research. Those studies need to cover many schools, follow classrooms over time, interview teachers about implementation, and collect detailed student learning data.

"Slashing the size of the maximum grant down to $750,000 means that it will be virtually impossible to fund the kind of studies that lead to evidence-based research into how to help students learn STEM subjects," Penuel added. With smaller awards, "there will be no more studies like that."

This is more than an academic inconvenience. Evidence-based research underpins effective teaching. Without large-scale studies to test educational approaches, schools will fall back on intuition, tradition, and the marketing claims of publishers instead of scientific evidence about what actually helps students learn.

The Artificial Intelligence Obsession

The administration’s decision to redirect remaining funds mainly to artificial intelligence research reflects political priorities more than educational judgment. AI is an important technological development, but experts warn that such a narrow focus will actually make it harder to integrate AI tools effectively in classrooms.

Victor Lee, an associate professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Education who has worked on AI literacy for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, pointed out the basic flaw in this plan.

“This exact focus on AI is very narrow and constraining,” Lee said. “It would be healthier to have a broader research ecosystem.”

The irony is striking. By cutting research into how students learn math and science, the administration has made it harder to use AI tools that rely on solid mathematical foundations. AI connects to both math and science education in complex ways that educators and researchers are still trying to understand.

Classroom Teachers Carry the Burden

Even if NSF research feels far removed from daily classroom life, teachers use materials and methods that come from that work all the time. The Next Generation Science Standards, curriculum materials, professional development, and educational tech all trace back to NSF-funded studies. Cutting these research programs means future teachers will have fewer evidence-based tools.

As science and technology move fast, instructional materials will grow outdated without ongoing research to guide updates and improvements. The Translation and Diffusion program was key to helping school systems put research into practice. Without it, even the best educational discoveries sit in journals instead of reaching the students who need them.

Economic Implications for National Competitiveness

The economic fallout from gutting STEM education research goes well beyond individual districts. America’s tech leadership relies on a steady stream of students ready for careers in science, technology, engineering, and math. Weakening the research that shapes how we teach these subjects undermines our future competitiveness.

Meanwhile, countries like China and South Korea keep investing heavily in educational research and STEM training. As they build stronger educational foundations, America is choosing ideological budget cuts that favor short-term politics over long-term national interests.

The timing couldn’t be worse. As artificial intelligence, biotechnology, renewable energy, and other tech fields drive economic growth, the U.S. is cutting back on the educational research that prepares students for those jobs.

A pattern of educational destruction These NSF cuts are only part of a wider attack on education research and support systems. They follow massive reductions at the Department of Education in February and March, where nearly 90 research and data projects were canceled and Regional Education Laboratories that helped schools nationwide were eliminated.

The pattern looks deliberate: shrinking research capacity at both NSF and the Department of Education weakens the infrastructure for evidence-based practice. With fewer federal resources and less support, schools will struggle to improve student outcomes.

The Path Forward

Despite the damage, the education research community isn’t giving up. Universities, private foundations, and state governments may try to fill some gaps, but they don’t have the funding to replace federal investment completely.

The real challenge is keeping research capacity alive through this hostile political climate while getting ready for a future restoration of federal support. The expertise and institutional knowledge being lost will take years to rebuild, even if priorities change.

Educational leaders also will have to make the practical value of this research clear to parents, teachers, and community members who might not see how university studies affect classroom practice. Building broader public support could be the best defense against future politically driven cuts.