What Have They Done? An Analysis of Data Generation Methods Funded by the Institute of Education Sciences

On December 2, 2020, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) published a summary report from their technical working group titled “Increasing Diversity and Representation of IES-Funded Education Researchers.” A major barrier to diversifying funded researchers described was that many scholars did not believe the institute funded researchers “like them.” In this article, we sought to better understand this perception by analyzing funding patterns of IES between the years of 2008 and 2022. Specifically, we analyzed the data generation methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, or mixed) funded to better understand IES priorities accordingly. Interpreting our results through a lens of critical race theory, we show that knowledge generated through methods that include stories and narratives are marginalized by IES funding priorities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Researcher
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x251355601
Primary Topic
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What Have They Done? An Analysis of Data Generation Methods Funded by the Institute of Education Sciences

Stanley C. Trent, Colleen Fitzpatrick, Jacob Bennett
Educational Researcher
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
article

What Have They Done? An Analysis of Data Generation Methods Funded by the Institute of Education Sciences

Stanley C. Trent, Colleen Fitzpatrick, Jacob Bennett
article en

Abstract

On December 2, 2020, the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) published a summary report from their technical working group titled “Increasing Diversity and Representation of IES-Funded Education Researchers.” A major barrier to diversifying funded researchers described was that many scholars did not believe the institute funded researchers “like them.” In this article, we sought to better understand this perception by analyzing funding patterns of IES between the years of 2008 and 2022. Specifically, we analyzed the data generation methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, or mixed) funded to better understand IES priorities accordingly. Interpreting our results through a lens of critical race theory, we show that knowledge generated through methods that include stories and narratives are marginalized by IES funding priorities.

Educational ResearcherVol. 54(9)
Vanderbilt University (US), University of Virginia (US), University of Toledo (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

What Have They Done? An Analysis of Data Generation Methods Funded by the Institute of Education Sciences — Stanley C. Trent, Colleen Fitzpatrick, et al. · Educational Researcher (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS