The smartphone in your pocket, the car you drive and even the air you breathe are better because of university research. University researchers have made breakthroughs that produced modern computers and the internet; medical advances such as the technology behind the mRNA vaccines that saved many lives during the COVID pandemic; and discoveries in chemistry and physics that have advanced our understanding of the universe.
Yet funding for research at the Information School and at universities across the United States has recently come under attack. Through executive orders, the Trump administration has sought to claw back previously awarded research grants and drastically reduce government funding for agencies such as the National Science Foundation (NSF), National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). The budget recently approved by Congress and now under consideration by the U.S. Senate would slash research funding and dramatically reshape the relationship between the federal government and universities.
There are many misconceptions about this relationship, for example that faculty and doctoral students come up with random studies and ask the government to fund them. In fact, researchers at universities carry out the work of the federal government. They respond to priorities set by Congress and apply for contracts to meet those priorities, then report their findings to the public. This relationship has made universities the primary research and development arm of the federal government since World War II.
It鈥檚 no coincidence that America has led the way in scientific and technological innovation in the decades since this relationship was established, but universities have done an admittedly poor job of communicating their role. Instead of promoting the advances we make that improve people鈥檚 lives, we鈥檝e allowed ourselves to get caught up in culture wars and rhetoric about misinformation and DEI.
Recent executive orders have been aimed squarely at diversity, equity and inclusion, eliminating funding for research that touches on DEI. That has put much of our work at the Information School in the crosshairs of those executive orders. Our research often involves DEI, not to exclude those who already have access to knowledge and services, but to help those who are being left behind. Our mission is to help everyone thrive, regardless of privilege; and for everyone to succeed, it鈥檚 necessary to study what barriers prevent people from getting an equal opportunity.
Information School researchers have seen numerous grants defunded or rescinded. One example is a study that would have shed light on the rampant misinformation opioid addicts encounter on social media when they seek medications for treatment. The study would have developed interventions to steer addicts toward reliable information. Another targeted grant would help librarians and youth navigate digital challenges such as misinformation, cyberbullying, trolling and sextortion. That grant was terminated by an executive order in March to dismantle the IMLS. Our faculty contributed impact statements in support of a lawsuit filed by Washington and 20 other states opposing the executive order.
Last month, a judge issued a temporary injunction restoring funding and halting the elimination of the IMLS, at least for the time being, but the agency鈥檚 future remains in serious jeopardy. The budget passed by Congress would defund and close the agency, which represents a tiny fraction of the nation鈥檚 budget but has far-reaching impacts as the nation鈥檚 most significant source of funding for libraries, archives and museums. These cuts would devastate communities, especially in rural areas where libraries serve as primary sources of education, internet access and cultural programming.
The proposed budget also includes drastic cuts to the NIH, NSF and other agencies. It slashes research funding that would support people鈥檚 health and wellness, lead to technological advances, and ensure the U.S. remains competitive in a future defined by artificial intelligence and quantum computing. While we鈥檇 expect federal priorities to change over time, this budget would redefine the relationship between government and universities for the long term, to the detriment of everyone. Our school and universities across the country would adjust, but the nation would be left weaker and less competitive in the knowledge economy.
My hope is that the Senate will recognize that research is an investment in the country鈥檚 future. What can you do besides hope? Pay attention, be informed about what鈥檚 going on, and share your knowledge about the value of universities and university research with others. As a member of the Information School community, you should be well-equipped to do all of that.
Anind K. Dey
Dean and Professor
Spring 2025