The Attack on Science: From the Perspective of a Prospective Student
The current attack on science has taken many forms, including reduced graduate admissions, fewer teaching assistant positions, shrinking fellowship opportunities, the discouragement of identity-based language in funding applications, and the growing expectation that students bring their own external funding. As an undergraduate actively applying to graduate programs, these outcomes have shaped nearly every interaction I have had with potential advisors. In response to my inquiries, I have been told that “the state of the federal government makes it hard to make firm predictions,” and warned that competition will be “particularly intense given the reduced numbers of studentships available across the U.S.” Other faculty have been encouraging but uncertain, explaining that while my record is strong, they are “not sure” they will be able to recruit a new student this year due to their funding situation. Some responses are brief and final, stating simply that they are “not in a position to recruit additional graduate students this fall.” Taken together, these messages reveal a system contracting in real time, where opportunity is increasingly determined not by preparation or potential, but by instability far beyond the applicant level.
This uncertainty has also shaped how I approach federal fellowships. I chose to apply for the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship in part because bringing external funding has become increasingly encouraged in the current application cycle, particularly as departments face tighter budgets and reduced admissions. Yet even within that process, I became aware of the political circumstances surrounding science funding. Reports documenting increased scrutiny of how federally funded research is framed, especially when it intersects with equity, access, and social context, led me to think carefully about how I described my background, my motivations, and the broader impacts of my work (Yourish et al., 2025). I was conscious of avoiding words such as race, underrepresented, and underserved, and instead emphasized the broader relevance of the work, even when those elements are inseparable from the communities the research engages.
As of November 2025, there have been 521 documented attacks on science in the United States, including executive actions that halted grant review panels, paused federal advisory committee meetings, restricted scientific travel, suppressed public communication of research, and restructured grant oversight to prioritize political control over scientific expertise (Barbati-Dajches, November 2025; Barbati-Dajches, January 2025). In response to this instability, federal agencies paused funding flows to universities and non-profit organizations, prompting institutions to delay hiring and reduce or suspend graduate admissions altogether (Barbati-Dajches, March 2025).
The effects of these federal actions are now clearly visible within astronomy, planetary science, and the geosciences. Graduate programs across the country have reduced cohort sizes or cancelled admissions due to uncertainty around federal grants and teaching assistant funding (Yanny, 2025; Barbati-Dajches, May 2025). Faculty have acknowledged that this instability makes it difficult to commit to new students, noting that graduate students are “at the very heart of productivity” within research-driven departments and that shrinking cohorts weakens future research output (Yanny, 2025). At the same time, federal executive actions have required agencies such as the National Science Foundation to review grant applications for language related to diversity and disability, forcing applicants to navigate a narrowing definition of what research and impacts are deemed acceptable (Barbati-Dajches, May 2025).
These structural pressures disproportionately affect students from underrepresented backgrounds. Astronomy, planetary science, and the geosciences already struggle with persistent underrepresentation, particularly among first-generation students and students of color (Carrera et al., 2024; Rathbun et al., 2021). Research has shown that women of color are filtered out of the planetary science pipeline at exceptionally high rates and that declining funding environments intensify inequities by privileging those with strong networks, institutional protection, and financial flexibility (Rathbun et al., 2021). When admissions shrink and fellowships become more restrictive, these disparities are amplified.
Viewed together, the current attack on science is not simply a policy dispute or a funding challenge. It is a restructuring of access to scientific careers that is already reshaping who is able to enter the field. For prospective graduate students like me, the consequences are immediate and personal. They appear in admissions emails, fellowship applications, and the quiet pressure to adapt one’s language and identity to fit a politically stained system. The long-term cost is not only fewer grants or smaller cohorts, but a future scientific workforce shaped by exclusion rather than possibility.
References
Barbati-Dajches, J. (January 2025). How science has fared in the first two weeks of the new Trump administration. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://blog.ucs.org/jules-barbati-dajches/how-science-has-fared-in-the-first-two-weeks-of-trump-2-0/
Barbati-Dajches, J. (March 2025). A hundred attacks and counting: What happened to federal science in February. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://blog.ucs.org/jules-barbati-dajches/a-hundred-attacks-and-counting-what-happened-to-federal-science-in-february/
Barbati-Dajches, J. (May 2025). The state of science at 100 days: Co-opted, hindered, and undermined. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://blog.ucs.org/jules-barbati-dajches/the-state-of-science-at-100-days-co-opted-hindered-and-undermined/
Barbati-Dajches, J. (November 2025). The shutdown ends, but threats to science go on. Union of Concerned Scientists. http://blog.ucs.org/jules-barbati-dajches/the-shutdown-ends-but-threats-to-science-go-on/
Carrera, A., Luckie, T., & Cooperdock, E. H. G. (2024). Extreme underrepresentation of first-generation college students in the geosciences: An intersectional issue. Journal of Geoscience Education, 72(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2023.2187233
Rathbun, J. A., et al. (2021). Who is missing in planetary science?: Strategic recommendations to improve the diversity of the field. Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 53, 435. doi:10.3847/25c2cfeb.da96f3af
Yanny, A. (2025). Astronomy programs limit graduate spots amid federal funding uncertainty. KNKX. https://www.knkx.org/education/2025-12-05/astronomy-programs-limit-graduate-spots-amid-federal-funding-uncertainty
Yourish, K., Daniel, A., Datar, S., White, I., & Gamio, L. (2025, March 7). These words are disappearing in the new Trump administration. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/03/07/us/trump-federal-agencies-websites-words-dei.html
