State Legislatures Take on Edtech Vetting Amid Screen Time Worries

State Legislatures Take on Edtech Vetting Amid Screen Time Worries

The growing backlash against excessive screen time in schools is now targeting a new front: the way educational software is vetted and approved. While parents and teachers have successfully lobbied to restrict personal cellphones and devices, the district-issued laptops and the software running on them have largely escaped scrutiny — until now. As concerns mount that school-issued devices can replicate the same distractions and privacy issues, lawmakers in three states are proposing legislation to overhaul the vetting process for edtech products.

The Problem with Edtech Vetting

Currently, most school districts rely on internal committees — often IT directors, school board members, or administrators — to choose which educational technology products to purchase. These decision-makers typically depend on the vendors' own claims about safety, effectiveness, and legal compliance. Kim Whitman, co-lead of Smartphone Free Childhood US, described this as 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.”

Whitman also noted that even when schools eliminate student cellphones, district-issued Chromebooks and tools like Google Docs still allow students to message friends during class. This means the same digital distractions and privacy risks persist, but with devices that schools themselves provide and manage. The lack of independent oversight has led to a growing demand for state-level intervention.

Vermont Leads the Way

Vermont has become the first state to pass a comprehensive edtech vetting bill through its House. The legislation — An act relating to educational technology products — was approved by the House on March 27 and is now before the Senate Committee on Education. Key provisions include:

• Annual registration of all educational technology providers with the state secretary of state.
• A $100 registration fee per provider.
• Submission of the most up-to-date terms and conditions and privacy policy.
• A certification standard and review process developed by the secretary of state in collaboration with the Vermont Agency of Education.

Products will be evaluated against several criteria:

• Compliance with state curriculum standards.
• Documented advantages over non-digital methods.
• Explicit design for educational purposes.
• Features such as artificial intelligence, geotracking, and targeted advertising.

An earlier version of the bill included fines of $50 per day for uncertified providers still operating in schools, up to a maximum of $10,000. However, this penalty language was removed before the House passed the final bill. If the Senate approves, Vermont will become the first state to mandate third-party certification for edtech products.

Rhode Island and Utah Follow Suit

Vermont is not alone. At the start of the 2025 legislative session, both Rhode Island and Utah introduced similar proposals aimed at strengthening the vetting of educational software. While details of those bills are still emerging, they share the core goal of removing the burden of product evaluation from individual school districts and instead creating state-level oversight. The three states together signal a growing movement to treat edtech with the same seriousness as other student safety issues.

Implications for Schools and Vendors

If enacted, these laws would fundamentally change how schools adopt technology. Instead of relying on sales pitches and self-reported data, districts would have access to certified products that meet objective standards. For vendors, the new regime means additional costs — not just the registration fee but also the resources needed to comply with certification requirements. Smaller edtech startups may find the hurdle higher, while established players with robust privacy and educational designs could benefit from a level playing field.

From the classroom perspective, teachers and parents may gain more confidence that the digital tools students use are both safe and genuinely supportive of learning. However, some critics worry that state certification could slow innovation or limit choices for schools. The balance between safety and flexibility will likely be tested as these bills move forward.

Conclusion

The screen time debate is evolving from a battle against personal devices to a broader reassessment of all digital tools in schools. Vermont, Rhode Island, and Utah are pioneering a model where the state takes an active role in ensuring that educational technology is safe, effective, and transparent. As more states watch these experiments, the way schools select and use software may be on the cusp of a major transformation.