Laura Peck, an associate professor at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, recently co-authored a report on causal evidence and its impact on education as part of her work with The Future of Evidence in Education Network. As a principal faculty fellow for the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Peck studies the influence of public programs.
The report, “Evaluating Causal Evidence in Education: A Practical Guide,” researches how causal evidence impacts those responsible for crafting policy decisions regarding education.
“I think that establishing a cause and effect relationship is really fundamental to understanding and recommending the right and best course of action regarding the establishment and refinement of public and nonprofit programs,” Peck said.
The Future of Evidence in Education Network, formed in December 2025, is composed of researchers and evaluators aiming to strengthen how education evidence is generated, interpreted and used. The group published two reports on related topics: The first suggests what federally supported education research should look like, and the second presents people within the state districts with reliable research. Peck co-authored the latter.
In lieu of recent federal budget cuts to research funding, Peck emphasized the importance of providing reliable research on causal evidence to policy makers. She said that in a changing political landscape, their “appetite for research” is less supported by federal leadership.
Since many researchers and evaluators hold positions in higher education institutions, Peck said that this matter not only has implications for K-12 districts, but also for universities as well. On all academic levels, it is important to be informed about the best possible interventions to improve learning outcomes and provide opportunities to students.
“It matters to the students here and now,” Peck added. “Their professors are facing cuts for their research and that research is really an important part of our professional identity and our ability to do our job in serving the students.”
Peck’s personal research interests include social welfare, employment policies and programs, evaluation research methods and policy analysis. She compared the methods of her studies in the social and policy sciences to those of medical trials — just as patients receive different treatments, people are given varying access to educational programs. When an observable difference becomes apparent between groups with and without that access, researchers can establish a causal relationship.
Having worked alongside 15 researchers and evaluators spanning across a wide range of universities for the report, Peck also stressed the importance of collaboration in research.
“People have different languages for the same thing, and it really forced us to figure out how to come together,” Peck said. “It’s really necessary to operate in this collaborative way to bring a variety of voices to bear on evidence generation, and it really is my hope these reports find willing audiences.”