District leaders should work collaboratively in a cross-departmental team to establish transparent rubrics and required criteria used to determine which edtech products are effective and safe for student use. The team should establish evaluation criteria across instructional and academic standards, relevant federal, state, and local laws, technical compatibility, privacy and security, finance, and evidence of impact. By leveraging third-party certifications, teams can engage in deep analysis of the quality of each tool with in-house expertise and abbreviate review timelines with the support and expertise of partner organizations, especially with new types of evidence emerging. Throughout this review process, teams should center the learners and their instructional needs as identified in the previous step and ensure tools are selected that have demonstrated impact for similar learner populations. Engaging in a transparent and thorough review of each tool will ensure the district is strategically allocating resources to best support learner outcomes.
Strategies for Discover & Decide
Establish evaluation criteria for edtech products in a cross-departmental team that defines requirements and a rating system across: academic and instructional quality, legal compliance, technical compatibility, privacy and security, immediate and long-term financial context, research basis, and quality of design for a tool that can be effectively and accessibly used by each student across the district.
Collaborate with school leaders and educators to elevate their priorities in the evaluation process. This should include exploring how school leaders and educators can be involved in the review process to ensure classroom needs are a key element to the evaluation of edtech tools.
Hold student focus groups to review evaluation criteria and offer students the opportunity to provide feedback and thought partnership to iteratively improve the criteria.
Embed third-party validations, including product certifications, into the evaluation criteria to support team capacity with product reviews. Establish plans to share when a tool is rejected through the review process, aimed at gaining shared buy-in for decisions to stop using tools that do not meet district evaluation criteria. Add review results to the product inventory to clearly display whether a tool has been approved or rejected, and include details about how the decision was made.
When an edtech product that meets an identified instructional need passes the review process, begin with a smaller pilot with clearly defined outcomes to determine if the tool will work for your school or district. If the pilot is successful, there are future opportunities to scale. If the pilot begins too expansively across too many classrooms or schools, there will be insufficient resources to support thoughtful implementation, resulting in a lack of clarity as to whether the tool would drive the learning outcomes initially identified.
This platform repository hosts specialized procurement, governance, and technology management templates tailored for K-12 school administration teams. It offers standardized worksheets to track tool performance, streamline organizational logistics, and enforce software alignment.
This operational rubric outlines how a district systematically scores vendor applications across technical compliance, privacy protections, and instructional design quality. It allows multi-stakeholder evaluation panels to apply uniform weighted metrics during a software procurement review.
Created by Digital Promise, this template guides district leadership teams to explicitly define the educational challenge they intend to solve before selecting a tool. It establishes explicit, measurable learning objectives and criteria to judge pilot program success.
This online repository provides a centralized collection of frameworks, planning guides, and procurement toolkits to support evidence-based edtech decisions. It serves as a practical library for district leaders working to align technology acquisitions with instructional and privacy goals.
This reference document serves as a model layout for structuring outcomes-based agreements focused specifically on targeted instructional software interventions. It establishes standardized contract clauses for delivery terms, software licensing rules, and vendor performance expectations.
This customizable Request for Proposal template structures the bidding process around outcomes-based contracting parameters, linking vendor success to student impact. It outlines clear baseline terms for service expectations, platform capabilities, and target educational milestones.
This operational tool provides administrative teams with a step-by-step checklist to review and finalize edtech legal agreements before official execution. It ensures critical security parameters, data protection standards, and implementation obligations are verified.
This comprehensive guide provides administrative frameworks to ensure edtech acquisition addressing historical accessibility gaps and diverse student learning preferences. It moves beyond regulatory checklist verification to evaluate cultural inclusivity, anti-bias features, and structural product equity.
The Technology Integration Matrix (TIM) outlines a structured framework to evaluate and target how effectively digital tools are being applied within classrooms. It breaks down evaluation criteria across five distinct levels of technology adoption cross-referenced with five active learning environments.
This report analyzes nearly 200 responses to an RFI to explore how artificial intelligence is currently being used to assist math educators and students. It details market trends regarding adaptive learning materials while identifying key risks like algorithmic bias, data privacy, and technical reliability.
This resource is a practical guide published by the USC Rossier School of Education (in partnership with the USC Center for Generative AI and Society) designed to help school administrators critically evaluate AI-powered EdTech products before selecting tools.
This guide highlights how school systems can use product certifications to streamline evaluations and identify high-quality tools that meet operational standards. It focuses on integrating objective, expert-verified validation metrics directly into existing district procurement cycles.
This case study documents how a district cross-departmental team built a formalized evaluation framework and an approved product repository. The process ensures student data privacy, maximizes cost-savings through cohort purchasing, and assesses product instructional value.
For a two-hour commitment at no cost, EdSurge Concierge will work with you to select the right technology for your school and connect you with technology companies.
Edtech Index From International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE)
This public database houses verifiable information regarding educational technology tools to assist district buyers in screening software choices. It aggregates essential details on software functionality, target student demographics, and product developer profiles.
This specialized segment of the directory catalogs product certifications, badges, and validation data awarded to edtech tools by independent third-party reviewers. It gives administrative teams immediate access to certified indicators regarding data safety, equity design, and instructional quality.
This digital implementation resource walks district leaders through an equity-driven workflow for choosing, deploying, and assessing educational technology infrastructure. It emphasizes aligning software systems with regional accessibility rules, continuous staff training, and inclusive instructional design.
This updated tool evaluation protocol outlines the technical criteria and observational workflows required to review educational software during an active school pilot. It establishes structured scoring indicators to measure short-term user experience, classroom feasibility, and student engagement.
This Institute of Education Sciences resource explains the four distinct levels of scientific evidence required under federal law to validate educational programs and products. It helps administrators differentiate between strong, moderate, promising, and logic-model-driven research claims.
