Parents and Teachers Challenge Edtech Vetting: New State Laws Aim to Regulate School Software
As worries over children's screen time intensify, a fresh point of contention has emerged: the way schools evaluate and approve educational technology. While many have focused on banning personal smartphones in classrooms, district-issued laptops and their software have often escaped scrutiny. Now, a coalition of parents and educators is pushing back, arguing that the current vetting process—where vendors essentially check their own products—is flawed. This has led to legislative proposals in Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont to create independent certification standards for edtech. Below, we explore the key questions surrounding this growing movement.
What sparked the backlash against edtech vetting?
The backlash stems from a broader concern about excessive screen time and its impact on students. As more schools adopt laptops and digital tools, parents and teachers have noticed that even without cellphones, students can still be distracted by messaging on Chromebooks or collaborative platforms like Google Docs. Kim Whitman, co-lead of Smartphone Free Childhood US, noted in an interview, “A lot of the issues with personal devices can move to the district-issued devices.” This realization has fueled demands for stricter oversight of the software that comes with school-issued hardware.
Who is Kim Whitman and what does she say about school devices?
Kim Whitman is a co-leader of the advocacy group Smartphone Free Childhood US, which campaigns for reducing children's exposure to digital devices. In her view, schools cannot simply rely on banning personal phones to solve distraction or privacy issues. She told EdSurge that district-issued tools like Chromebooks and Google Docs enable similar problems. “There are definitely issues with school-issued devices as well,” she emphasized. Whitman also criticized the current vetting process: “There is nobody right now that is confirming these products are safe, effective and legal.” She argues that expecting district IT directors to vet every product is unrealistic, and letting vendors self-certify is like “nicotine companies vetting their own cigarettes.”
Which states have proposed changes to edtech vetting?
Three states—Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont—have simultaneously introduced legislation aimed at reforming how educational technology is reviewed and approved. All three proposals were launched at the start of 2024's legislative session. They seek to move away from the current system where school boards and IT staff often rely solely on vendor-provided data. Instead, they advocate for independent, state-led certification processes to ensure that edtech products are safe, effective, and compliant with privacy laws.
What does the Vermont bill specifically require?
Vermont's bill, titled An act relating to educational technology products, passed the House on March 27 and is now before the Senate Committee on Education. It mandates that all providers of student-facing educational technology products must register annually with the state. The secretary of state, in collaboration with the Vermont Agency of Education, will create a certification standard and review process. Registrants must pay a $100 fee and provide updated terms of service and privacy policies. Only certified products can be used in schools.
What are the certification criteria in Vermont's proposal?
To receive certification under Vermont's bill, an edtech product must meet several criteria:
- Compliance with state curriculum standards
- Demonstrated advantages over non-digital alternatives
- Evidence that it was designed explicitly for educational purposes
- Review of design features, including any use of artificial intelligence, geotracking, or targeted advertising
These criteria aim to ensure that the tool truly enhances learning without invading student privacy or introducing unnecessary distractions.
What penalties were proposed initially and what changed?
The original version of Vermont's bill included a penalty clause: any edtech provider that continued operating without certification could face fines of $50 per day, up to $10,000. However, this language was removed from the bill before it passed the House. The revised version no longer includes specific monetary penalties for non-compliance, though the requirement to register and be certified remains. If the Senate passes the bill, enforcement details may be further refined.
Why is the current vetting process considered inadequate?
Critics argue that the existing system relies too heavily on vendors to self-report safety and effectiveness. School districts, often lacking the time and expertise, accept vendor claims without independent verification. Kim Whitman summed it up: “It should not fall on the district’s IT director; it would be impossible for them to do it. And the companies should not be tasked with doing it.” This lack of oversight means that tools may include hidden data tracking, AI features, or advertising that conflict with educational goals. The proposed state laws aim to create a neutral, third-party review process that prioritizes student well-being.