How AI is influencing leaders’ edtech purchasing decisions

As artificial intelligence moves from a futuristic concept to a ubiquitous classroom tool, superintendents and district leaders are facing a “digital chasm” that transcends basic internet access.

Leading industry experts on an AI integration panel at the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) conference warned that simply providing devices is no longer enough. The real divide now lies between students who use AI as a sophisticated learning tool and those left behind by a lack of access or institutional guidance.

High turnover rates among administrators compound the problem. With the average superintendent tenure at 5.4 years, maintaining a long-term technological vision is increasingly difficult.

Furthermore, the responsibility for vetting these “seamless” AI tools—often embedded in wands, glasses or existing software—frequently falls on overwhelmed IT departments or top-level administrators who may lack pedagogical expertise, said Future of Education Technology Conference Chair Jennifer Womble.

The vetting crisis

Panelists emphasized that the traditional “top-down” approach to procurement often excludes the most vital stakeholders: curriculum experts and teachers.

“We’re losing the curriculum people in that cycle,” noted Dr. Jeffrey Piontek, CEO of Educational Consulting Services, highlighting that without pedagogical input, districts risk purchasing tools that don’t align with state standards or vertical articulation between grade levels.

To combat this, leaders are encouraged to return to their district’s core mission and vision statements. Rather than being swayed by the “50 different opinions” found on social media or conference floors, administrators should use their community-defined values to audit new technology.

Shifting to ‘outcomes-based contracting’

One of the most significant shifts in AI procurement is the rise of outcomes-based contracting. Under this model, the cost of a product is based on whether it improves student achievement.

“I succeed if you succeed,” said Dr. Karttikeya Mangalam, CEO of SigIQ.ai, explaining that outcomes-based contracting gives a vendor more incentives to ensure their products improve student performance.

The old per-student licensing model provides little motivation for vendors to ensure their tools actually solve problems, such as declining math scores.

Privacy and the ‘default off’ standard

Data privacy remains a primary concern among both educators and edtech companies, according to the panelists, especially following high-profile cyberattacks on educational institutions. Experts argued that the burden lies on “big tech” to be transparent about data usage and opt-out processes.

District leaders must demand a “default off” policy, meaning new AI features must be reviewed and activated by district administrators before students see the technology. Leaders should also look for compliance with standards such as COPPA for students and FERPA for staff, while pressuring states to join national data privacy agreements to hold companies accountable.

Build vs. buy: The future of ‘skills’

The conversation is also shifting from buying off-the-shelf products to building internal “agents” and “skills.” Using platforms like OpenAI’s Codex, some districts are developing their own AI tools tailored to their specific data and community needs.

“The more you invest in skills now, the more you’ll be able to utilize those across the systems later,” said Sam Canning-Kaplan, U.S. K through 12 go-to-market lead at OpenAI, suggesting that districts should focus on training AI to reflect their specific communication styles and accessibility standards.

A research-backed approach

For leaders suffering from “decision paralysis,” the panel pointed to Stanford SCALE and the Generative AI for Education Hub as vital resources. As the primary warehouse for K12 AI research, SCALE helps administrators find tools backed by randomized control trials and measurable efficacy outcomes.

While budget crunches are creating anxiety, experts suggested this “financial crunch” could be a “golden opportunity” to streamline redundant tools and ensure that every dollar spent is intentionally focused on student-centered, research-backed outcomes.

More from ISTE: What will it take for AI to win educator trust?

District Administration uses artificial intelligence to support research and drafting, with all content reviewed and verified by the author.