EdTech Oversight Under Fire: States Move to Certify School Software Amid Screen Time Fears

Introduction

Growing anxiety over students' screen time has sparked a new wave of criticism aimed not just at personal devices, but at the very process schools use to approve educational software. While many parents and teachers have long campaigned against cellphones in classrooms, district-issued laptops and the programs that run on them have often escaped scrutiny. Now, a coalition of concerned voices is pushing for stricter oversight, with legislative proposals in three states seeking to overhaul how educational technology (edtech) products are vetted.

Background: The Hidden Cost of School Devices

Kim Whitman, co-lead of the advocacy group Smartphone Free Childhood US, has highlighted that even when schools ban personal phones, students can still chat and distract themselves using school-issued Chromebooks or collaborative tools like Google Docs. “There are definitely issues with school-issued devices as well,” she noted in a previous interview with EdSurge. This insight reframes the debate: the problem isn't just about smartphones, but about how all digital devices are integrated into education—and how the software on them is chosen.

The Vetting Problem: A Trust Deficit

Currently, most school districts rely on a patchwork system where principals, IT directors, and school boards select vendors, often taking the companies' own claims about safety and effectiveness at face value. Whitman believes this is a fundamental flaw: “There is nobody right now that is confirming these products are safe, effective and legal. 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 — that would be like nicotine companies vetting their own cigarettes.”

This lack of independent verification has left many parents and teachers uneasy, especially as schools accelerate their reliance on digital tools. The result is a push for state-level reform.

State Proposals: A Trio of Legislative Actions

Earlier this year, lawmakers in Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont introduced similar bills aimed at tightening the review process for edtech products. While each state's approach is unique, the common goal is to create a certification or registration system that holds software providers accountable for safety, efficacy, and legal compliance.

Vermont Bill: Detailed Certification Requirements

Vermont's legislation—titled “An act relating to educational technology products”—has made the most progress. It passed the House on March 27 and is now under consideration by the Senate Committee on Education. The bill would require all providers of student-facing educational technology products to register annually with the state's secretary of state. Each registration costs $100 and must include the latest terms of service and privacy policies. The secretary of state, in partnership with the Vermont Agency of Education, would then review submissions against a set of certification criteria:

• Alignment with state curriculum standards – ensuring the software meets academic requirements.
• Comparative advantage over non-digital methods – justifying the use of technology.
• Educational purpose – confirming the product is designed primarily for teaching and learning.
• Design features review, including scrutiny of artificial intelligence, geotracking, and targeted advertising.

An earlier version of the bill included penalties for non-compliant providers—$50 per day up to $10,000—but that language was removed before the House passed the final version. If the Senate approves, Vermont will become the first state to implement a mandatory, state-run certification process for edtech tools.

For more on the broader context of screen time concerns, see the background section.

Conclusion: A Turning Point for Edtech Oversight

The legislative moves in Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont signal a significant shift in how educational technology is perceived and regulated. As concerns about screen time and student well-being grow, parents and advocates are no longer satisfied with voluntary vendor disclosures or ad hoc district decisions. Instead, they demand transparent, independent validation that the software schools use is truly beneficial—and not just a digital distraction. Whether these bills become law or serve as catalysts for wider reform, the conversation about who vets the vetting process is finally underway.