By James Stoffer
A recent LearnPlatform report found that the average number of products accessed by U.S. school districts climbed roughly 40 percent over one year, from 1,033 products in 2020 to 1,449 in 2021. Schools clearly invested heavily to address learning needs during a period of rapid change.
But more effort alone doesn’t guarantee better outcomes. In many classrooms and districts, the surge of technology is creating friction instead of improving student success. What if schools invested the same energy in working smarter as they did in working harder?
Much of the EdTech expansion was a reaction to the urgent need for digital schooling during the pandemic, not simply digital learning. EdTech promises gains in efficiency and effectiveness across classrooms, schools, and communities, but the pandemic accelerated adoption faster than most systems could manage. Is that acceleration beneficial? The answer is complicated.
Even before 2020, many EdTech tools were siloed, fragmented, and poorly integrated. Over the past year and a half those problems deepened: more platforms, more separate interfaces, and more data trapped in systems that don’t communicate. The result is a closed learning ecosystem. To work smarter, schools must open their learning communities by connecting the things that matter most for students.
Ask yourself:
Has this wave of tech adoption delivered improved learning outcomes? The short answer: not really.
Available evidence on EdTech impact and statewide test results suggests that, overall, the vast increase in technology use hasn’t substantially moved the needle on academic achievement. More technology has not automatically translated into more learning.
Moreover, the focus now extends beyond academics to the whole child: mental and behavioral health, social-emotional learning, digital citizenship, and many other non-academic factors that shape long-term success.
Has technology at least made daily schooling easier? Again, the practical answer is largely no.
Teachers, staff, and families are overwhelmed by the number of platforms and logins, unfamiliar interfaces, and fragmented processes. There isn’t time for every educator or parent to become an expert in every tool. Much of the work is reactive rather than proactive, and the systems in place rarely prevent issues before they escalate.
As one teacher wrote on Twitter: “Teaching is fun. The 800,000,000 other things we have to do during the teaching day, not so much…” Another joked that the dozens or hundreds of open browser tabs reflect a cycle of task switching that hinders focus and productivity.
Are schools even using the EdTech they buy? Simply put: no.
Conversations with technology directors and classroom teachers reveal that much purchased software goes unused or is used inconsistently. Many supplemental ELA and math tools see regular use from only 20–30 percent of licensed users. Learning management systems frequently employ just 40–50 percent of their available functionality. Communication often defaults to mass emails and texts even when richer, personalized messaging tools exist within those paid systems. Districts are paying for luxury solutions while using only a fraction of their capacity.
Districts should closely monitor actual usage and consider pay-for-consumption models where appropriate, ensuring investments align with real needs and adoption.
Does the data captured across these systems give educators a complete, timely view of each student? Not at all.
Although many districts deploy data warehouses and dashboards to assemble a broader picture, less than 5 percent of the data generated across disparate systems typically feeds into those repositories. What does make it into reports is often aggregated at the class or district level, not presented in the individualized, real-time way that teachers, counselors, and partners need for effective intervention. Much of the data is historical and not immediately actionable.
There is no single, accessible “Student 360” where everyone supporting a child—teachers, administrators, counselors, and community partners—can see up-to-date information spanning academics, behavior, health, extracurriculars, aspirations, and success plans. Adults who only spend a limited amount of time with a child cannot accurately assess where a student is thriving or struggling without that shared context.
Teachers should not be expected to carry the entire load. They manage large caseloads and are not always trained in the non-academic domains essential to whole-child development. Community organizations are stepping in to help, but too often they lack access to school data; likewise, data these partners collect rarely flows back to school stakeholders.
Why does a real-time Student 360 matter? Because it takes a village to support students’ growth. Without an easily accessible, holistic view of a child, the village cannot form meaningful relationships or deploy timely, coordinated supports that influence long-term outcomes.
Students are the customers of the education system. Yet many technology and process decisions in K–12 do not prioritize relationship-building with students. In customer-focused industries, products and systems revolve around the customer; in K–12, too often the tech stack grows without a clear, student-centered strategy, leaving schools with disconnected tools and wasted effort.
Who ends up managing the chaos? Typically the IT department—burned out and constantly reacting to the next “flavor of the month.” As one technology director commented at a recent conference: “We’re saviors brought in to support the latest flavor of the month.”
This is a call to action: superintendents must place students at the center of strategy, technology choices, execution, and measurement of success. The system should be designed around knowing and supporting students.
This is also a call for technology leaders to have a greater voice in shaping systemic strategy, rather than technology being an afterthought layered onto an unclear plan. When technology is integrated into strategy from the start, it becomes a catalyst for change, improving effectiveness and efficiency.
Finally, communities should demand real-time, connected access to student information so educators and community partners can build relationships and deploy proactive supports that prepare children for success well beyond K–12.
About the author
James Stoffer is the Chief Executive Officer at Abre.io, where he leads company growth, operations, and talent strategy. He has spent his career in education technology, including leadership roles at DreamBox Learning, Hobsons, and MasteryConnect. His work focuses on scaling social-impact companies that improve outcomes for students and educators. He holds an MBA from Xavier University and a BS in Marketing from Clemson University.