The Delta Issue #63

Is edtech actually helping students learn? Only when the demand side is built to use it.

Hi friends, Kunjan here.

In 2024, American schools spent $30 billion on edtech—a broad category that includes devices, software and apps. And yet, after all that investment, it’s still not clear that education technology is actually helping kids learn.

Technology has reshaped every aspect of American life, and there’s no question that it holds real promise in the classroom. But for that promise to pay off, better tools should lead to better outcomes. The reality inside classrooms is not so simple. National test scores have been flat or declining, even as schools have poured more money and time into digital tools. I see a few clues for why edtech may not be delivering on its potential.

First, too few students and teachers are actually using educational products the way they were designed to be used. In a recent Watershed survey of 40 edtech vendors, most of the vendors that track usage reported fewer than half of students meet their recommended benchmarks. 

Second, even when tools are used as designed, there’s no guarantee that student learning will improve. In that same survey, nearly half of edtech vendors said they haven’t connected their dosage recommendations to clear evidence of student outcomes, like performance on statewide assessments. One vendor literally told us, “Our dosage target is just a best guess… We’ve never validated it with impact data.”

From their vantage point in the classroom, teachers describe tech as a double-edged sword: making learning more accessible, but also adding distraction, inconsistency, and fatigue.

Districts should demand better tools, more research

If I had to put a name to what’s happening in edtech right now, I’d call it a market failure. Districts are buying and vendors are selling, but what’s being built and what schools actually need aren’t lining up.

The average teacher in America uses nearly 50 educational products every week. And if you ask them which ones they’d actually recommend, the list gets very short. Reading between the lines, that signals to me that school districts are not only buying too many tools, they’re buying tools that aren’t aligned with their instructional vision.

Edtech today is a market powered by supply, not demand. Vendors build tools around what they think schools want, without real evidence of how, how much, or how long, students need to use them to see results—or whether they’re practical for teachers to integrate in the classroom. 

Meanwhile, many districts buy tools based on a strong sales pitch, without a clear, shared vision for quality or a coherent plan for how tools will be used, supported, and measured. 

If we want to see real improvements in implementation and learning, we need demand to drive supply, with districts setting clear expectations and vendors designing to meet them.

Four ways states and districts can flip the supply/demand equation

To build a stronger demand side, states and districts will have to set a clear instructional vision, align procurement and support systems, and ensure the tools selected are backed by coherent training and usage expectations.

1. Define the why before the buy. Every product should have a clear instructional purpose tied to your academic goals and the student experience you’re trying to create. Before buying, get specific about your kid vision: which students should use this tool, how often, and for what purpose? How does it fit into the lessons teachers are already teaching—in math, in reading, in the daily rhythm of a real classroom?

If you can’t picture how this tool works for a third grader during their literacy block, or how a teacher can realistically use it alongside the ten other tools already in their day, it’s probably not the right fit. The goal isn’t just to have more tools, but to have tools that work together to support the learning experience you actually want for kids.

2. Choose tools that have strong real-world evidence. Before you buy, ask the hard question: has this company validated how much or how often students need to use this tool to see results? Most haven’t, because there’s no incentive to unless districts start demanding proof.

Once you have that answer, build for it. Don’t leave usage to chance or to individual teachers’ discretion. Protect time in the schedule so students can actually reach effective use levels, the level of engagement the tool was designed around. 

3. Align professional learning. Train teachers in the context of their curriculum. Show how digital tools support, not replace, the lessons they’re already teaching.
4. Measure use and impact together. Tracking usage is important, but it’s not enough. Districts should connect dosage data to learning growth and keep only what works. Renew tools that show evidence of both consistent use and student progress; retire the rest. Every product in a classroom should earn its place by proving its value to students.

The promise of edtech is not destined to be empty forever. There is a mountain of research to suggest that when kids get the right kinds of intervention in the right amounts, achievement goes up. The key will be for districts and states across America to articulate more clearly what they need and expect from vendors—and for vendors to listen. 

Let’s get muddy

• I recently listened to a WBUR conversation (a rerun from March) asking whether edtech is actually helping kids learn. It’s a good listen, especially if you’re thinking about how we measure a product’s success.

@LearnPlatform by Instructure just released its latest EdTech Top 40 report, showing that even as districts face tight budgets, they’re becoming more selective—focusing less on how many tools they use and more on which ones actually show evidence of improving learning.