Here’s why anecdotes are as important as data in edtech decisions

Key points:

From the time they were first established centuries ago, businesses have relied on word of mouth to build their customer base and today, word of mouth marketing remains the primary driver of sales.

Ninety percent of consumers are more likely to trust a brand recommended by friends and influencers, while 46 percent of small businesses Make decisions regarding software purchases based on the experiences of your colleagues. However, when it comes to educational technology, the industry-wide consensus is that peer recommendations mean nothing compared to data points.

Don’t get me wrong: effectiveness studies are crucial when comparing educational technology solutions in the procurement decision process. But when school districts rely solely on them at the expense of anecdotal evidence, the results they see look nothing like the results they were promised. There are three main reasons why this occurs:

• The data is not always reliable. edtech evaluation is currently the Wild West. With little or no oversight from the government or industry regulators to hold them accountable, companies can come to town with a new product and lofty claims. As long as they have data-driven results (disguised with great marketing) obtained from a couple of schools or focus groups, they will have an automatic advantage in the decision-making process. Unfortunately, as edtech-are-companies-ready-to-provide-it” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>recently observed, “Meanwhile, most educators don’t have the time to review the research or the experience to distinguish rigor from garbage.”
• The data does not align with the reality of a district. There are also some companies that invest heavily in third-party assessments, hoping that they will be arbiters of what students know. However, outside companies that design and facilitate measurement tools and interpret results may not take into account socioeconomic and demographic differences between school districts. They do not live and breathe the struggles that educators face every day. As long as the data aligns with the edtech company’s goals, third-party evaluations can be the strongest selling point for solution providers.
• Data can be used as a diversion tactic. Even when superintendents and educators are ready to take on new challenges, other district leaders don’t always agree. They will often find a reason to stick with the status quo and avoid the uncomfortable. Time and time again, I see districts use data as bias. If an educational technology vendor doesn’t have the research results it seeks (no matter how advantageous the solution may have been to other schools), districts will easily cancel the deal. If they can show graphs of positive growth and increasing test scores, decision makers don’t have to consider other educational drivers schools implemented to help prepare students for success, such as literacy development programs, summer and after-school enrichment programs, or increased social-emotional supports.

Change your thinking to improve your student outcomes

After years of working directly with educational technology companies and superintendents to identify new opportunities for innovation, my biggest advice to both is to work together to drive real change in education. Evidence and research are still relative terms in this business, but collaboration is what generates great ideas and moves the needle forward.

For example, a superintendent in St. Louis may be interested in an educational technology solution that was successful in a district in Philadelphia. For many analytically thinking stakeholders, the data results are proof positive that the technology would benefit their students. On the other hand, for those decision makers who dig deep and think big, no amount of quantitative data would assure them that the technology could be seamlessly integrated into their own district.

These are the people who would say: This is good data, but what evidence do we have that teachers liked it? What systems would we need to have in place to ensure we could reasonably implement it? How can it be adapted to the needs of our students? What’s the price? The decision-maker should not hesitate to reach out to his or her national network of peers for honest, unfettered feedback.

Additionally, for educational technology providers, instead of spending your entire budget on analytics research to meet reporting guidelines, whether for clients or donors, a significant portion of your budget should be allocated to a room with trailblazer administrators. from across the country, and develop pilot projects that they can put into practice to boost their students’ achievements. This unparalleled feedback (the good and the bad) allows vendors to create more effective, robust solutions that have the seal of approval from superintendents and are better able to meet the needs of different districts, while increasing their sales. .

Just as districts invest in other initiatives using anecdotal research (from increasing safety measures to discovering new ways to interact with students), educational technology purchases cannot be based solely on analytical data. Educators need to draw on the experiences of their peers to determine which solution is worth trying to improve outcomes for the students they serve.