By Kai Bwor

Recent policy changes by the Trump administration have led to the removal of key educational and research resources from federal websites, which have sparked concerns about the long-term impact on students, educators, and researchers alike. While these actions aim to reshape educational priorities by emphasizing an American perspective, the consequences are already being felt in classrooms and academic institutions across the country. 

The removal of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) materials from federal websites has severely limited access to important information. Previously, students and educators could easily search for public, published data and documents online, but now, many of those resources—once essential for supporting underrepresented students and guiding educators on equity-based practices—are long gone. 

For students, this means having fewer resources to learn from diverse perspectives, such as racial and gender-based health trends, and the impact of socioeconomic statuses on student mental healthcare access. Most notably, the disappearance of datasets and memoranda from agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s Youth Risk Behavior Survey, which tracks critical health behaviors among high school students, limits the ability of researchers and educators to address pressing issues like mental health and substance use. There are fewer tools and resources available to help us succeed in a world that is becoming increasingly politically divided. 

Although these changes may seem like simple policy shifts, they have direct implications and consequences for students. Students in programs like Advanced Placement (AP) Research, the Speech and Debate Team, and Model United Nations (MUN) rely on access to and accurate information. The removal of key resources limits students’ ability to explore complex topics, analyze data, and develop well-rounded arguments. It also raises questions about whether these actions infringe on First Amendment rights, particularly when it comes to the censorship of the press and research. 

Without these resources, students in programs may struggle to find reliable data for their research-based activities, ultimately hindering their ability to produce creative, meaningful, and evidence-based work. 

Speech and Debate and MUN member, sophomore Katrin Manukyan, highlights how the federal government’s actions have directly influenced her academic life. “To be quite frank, I find the Trump administration’s decision to ban certain educational websites incredibly disheartening and frustrating,” said Manukyan. “These websites are integral for students like me who are involved in MUN and debate, but also for everyday people who want to be more informed. The administration’s actions feel like an attack on intellectual curiosity—taking away access to global news, UN documents, and academic research doesn’t just make our work harder as students; it sends the message that critical thinking and global awareness aren’t priorities. And that’s extremely dangerous.”

Additionally, the new restrictions on academic research, including the removal of specific terms from scientific papers, raise concerns about censorship and academic freedom. Open inquiry, where students take the lead in forming questions, designing procedures, and conducting research to uncover new knowledge, is a vital part of learning. But how can students develop their critical thinking when the information they rely on is being filtered or erased? 

The absence of accessible and unaltered data limits our ability to develop our independent thoughts and critical thinking skills, chipping away at the very foundations of academic exploration, while leaving students and educators with fewer tools to thrive and engage in the academic learning process.