The recent wave of federal layoffs in education research has created a significant void in our education system. However, rather than dwelling on these losses, it's time to envision and build a more effective model for education research and technical assistance.
Its time to create a national, opt-in, state-funded research and technical assistance center. This collaborative effort would leverage the extensive expertise of displaced researchers and technical assistance professionals while addressing current gaps in education research implementation. A new center that would master research-practice partnership would include:
Practical Research Translation: Moving beyond simple What Works Clearinghouse like research repositories, dedicated technical assistance professionals would help states and districts identify and implement research relevant to their specific contexts. These experts would provide real-time guidance on selecting and adapting evidence-based practices, ensuring they match local needs, resources, and student populations. They would maintain ongoing relationships with districts, understanding their unique challenges and opportunities, rather than simply providing a static list of interventions. This hands-on approach would represent a significant improvement over previous de-facto use of What Works Clearinghouse and other depositories where practitioners often selected strategies from pre-approved lists without sufficient consideration of local context. The technical assistance team would be equipped to rapidly share emerging research findings and promising practices, even before formal review processes are complete. A new CALDER working paper shows evidence about emergency teacher licensing in addressing staffing shortages? TA providers could immediately share these insights with states considering similar policies, rather than waiting months or years for formal review. Beyond sharing research, they would help districts build internal capacity for evaluating and implementing research-based practices, creating a more sustainable approach to evidence-based decision making. These professionals would also facilitate connections between researchers and practitioners, helping to bridge the traditional research-practice gap and ensuring that research findings are translated into actionable strategies that work in real-world settings.
Best Practices Exchange: With the dissolution of Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs) and comprehensive centers, we need new mechanisms for sharing successful practices. This center would serve as a dynamic hub for knowledge exchange, bringing together diverse perspectives and proven solutions from across the education landscape. Through regular virtual convening, collaborative working groups, and a robust digital platform, states would have unprecedented access to peer learning opportunities.The center would facilitate cross-state collaboration through structured communities of practice, where education leaders can share challenges, solutions, and implementation strategies. These communities would focus on specific topics like teacher retention, curriculum development, or assessment systems, allowing for deep dives into shared challenges. Here's where it needs to improve from previous practice: the center would also bring forth, wait for it… international perspectives and successful models from around the globe. Don't be afraid, it's okay. While the U.S. education system has many strengths, we can learn valuable lessons from high-performing education systems in countries like Finland, Singapore, and Canada. The center would analyze these international success stories, identify adaptable practices, and help states customize these approaches for their local contexts.This global perspective would be particularly valuable for addressing universal challenges like closing achievement gaps, improving STEM education, or developing effective teacher professional development systems. The center would maintain partnerships with international education organizations and research institutions, ensuring a constant flow of innovative ideas and evidence-based practices from around the world.
Cost-Effectiveness Support: In today's tightening budget environment, integrating cost-effectiveness considerations into education policy decisions is more crucial than ever. Despite significant advances by economists in developing practical tools and methodologies, few education leaders systematically incorporate cost-effectiveness analysis into their decision-making processes. The center would bridge this gap by making cost-effectiveness approaches accessible and practical for states and districts. Rather than waiting for perfect conditions for comprehensive economic studies, the center would help education leaders implement cost-effectiveness thinking in everyday decisions. This could range from quick-turnaround analyses of program alternatives to supporting full-scale cost-effectiveness studies for larger initiatives. Technical assistance providers would help education leaders understand the relationship between costs and outcomes, develop frameworks for comparing program alternatives, and build internal capacity for cost-effectiveness analysis. The center would also maintain a database of cost-effectiveness findings from across states, helping leaders learn from others' experiences and make more informed resource allocation decisions. For states and districts with sufficient resources, the center would support more robust cost-effectiveness studies meeting rigorous economic standards. This systematic approach to considering costs alongside outcomes would help education leaders maximize the impact of limited resources and demonstrate responsible stewardship of public funds.
Equity-Centered Approach: In the current climate, many are shying away from equity initiatives due to shifting federal priorities. Can a state-funded center keep the work of closing opportunity and achievement gaps—whatever we choose to call them—moving forward? The fundamental challenge persists: students face vastly different opportunity trajectories based on factors like income, race, and zip code—factors entirely unrelated to their talent or motivation. This systematic disparity in opportunities remains the single biggest barrier to educational improvement across all 50 states. Rather than getting caught in ideological debates, we need data-driven, research-based solutions. The center would serve as a hub for evidence-based approaches to address these educational disparities across states. Through rigorous data analysis, we would help states identify achievement gaps, understand root causes specific to their contexts, and implement targeted interventions backed by research.
Key areas would include addressing disparities in:
Expert Repository: By housing top researchers and practitioners, the center would serve as a one-stop resource for states and districts seeking expert guidance and support. There is tremendous talent available right now - I've spoken with many recently laid-off education experts who are eager to continue making education better for all students. Their expertise and dedication shouldn't go to waste.
The subscription model could start with early-adopter states known for embracing education innovation, gradually expanding as others recognize the value of participation. The center's success would depend on collaboration among major research institutions like AIR, WestEd, Westat, and RTI - organizations that have already developed comprehensive plans for this work through their federal proposals. They can enhance these plans even further, with each institution contributing their unique strengths and expertise. If we believe in education research - and decades of evidence show its power to improve outcomes - then participating states will see measurable improvements in their education systems. As these early adopters demonstrate success, more states will be motivated to join, creating a virtuous cycle of evidence-based improvement across our nation's schools.
This transformation represents an opportunity to improve upon previous models, creating a more responsive, efficient, and effective system for education research and technical assistance. Rather than waiting for federal contracts that won't return, this new model offers a path to bring valuable expertise back into the field. The framework is clear, the talent is ready, and states need this support now more than ever.