Richard Carranza is Chief of Strategy and Global Development at IXL Learning.getty​District leaders across the country are sending edtech companies a message worth hearing clearly: The free ride is over.​For a few years, emergency funding flowed into districts like water downhill. Procurement timelines compressed, and the prevailing logic around technology adoption was often “try it and see.” That moment is gone.​Budgets are tighter, and the educators sitting across the table from vendors today aren’t the same ones who signed contracts under the pressure of a pandemic. They're asking harder questions and demanding evidence that these tools can actually improve outcomes for students.​This is not hostility toward edtech. It is an era of discernment, and a higher standard is taking hold. Based on my experience in this space, I've developed a framework for knowing what meets that standard, what falls short and how to tell the difference before signing a contract rather than after defending results to your board.Don’t Sideline The TeacherThere is nothing more important in learners’ academic lives than trained, caring teachers. Technology should support that relationship, not try to replace it. At the extreme end, weak edtech can reduce teachers to classroom monitors, passively watching students complete tasks on their glowing rectangles. The best tools should help educators decide when and how to support students, not dictate every step of instruction. They must surface clear, actionable data that helps teachers see where a student is stuck so that they can adjust instruction in real time. They should free up space to work directly with learners without jettisoning a teacher's professional judgment. Teachers should feel empowered, not peripheral. Stay Off The Conveyor BeltA fixed learning path—do A, take quiz on A; do B, take quiz on B—puts every student on the same conveyor belt regardless of what they already know. That one-size-fits-all approach might be easier to build and sell, but it doesn’t reflect how students actually learn. If a product simply moves students through a fixed sequence, it’s more akin to an expensive digital worksheet.Strong edtech should respond to where students are, surface options for what they need next and give teachers useful information to lead the way. If a student isn’t ready for the material, the tool should recommend foundational skills to prepare them for higher-level content; if they’re meeting or exceeding expectations, personalized opportunities for enrichment should be abundant. Done well, this also promotes a growth mindset, subtly reinforcing that mistakes are not something to fear but part of how learning happens. Beware The Engagement FarmThe word "slop" has entered the cultural conversation as shorthand for AI-generated content that is technically present but substantively empty: produced at volume, optimized for surface appeal and mistaken at first glance for something meaningful. Some edtech has developed its own flavor of that problem by dressing up excessive gamification as a motivation system. Imagine you're a 10-year-old with a thousand competing distractions who needs to focus on numeracy. Does this tool help you concentrate? Or does it force you through game breaks, cartoon characters nobody asked for and lengthy congratulatory animations just to get back to the work? If so, you are not looking at a great educational product. You're looking at an engagement farm.A well-designed motivation system is something different entirely. It has a light touch and a moment of delight when a student hits a milestone, enough to encourage them to keep going before the learning continues. It's a means to an end, not the end itself, and it should not interfere with the progression toward the focus, persistence and independence expected in higher grade levels. See Yourself In The EvidenceIf I were in the superintendent's chair evaluating whether to sign a contract, I would ask, "What other districts with demographics and challenges similar to mine are using your product, and how are they doing?” A product may show strong results in one district and be a poor fit for another with a different population, staffing realities or instructional needs. You need proof not only that edtech works but also that it works for students like yours. Internally produced research is useful, but products should be backed by rigorous, third-party studies. ESSA provides a useful tiered framework for evaluating whether a platform is supported by credible research. But not all tiers carry the same weight, and it's worth knowing exactly what those designations mean before they influence a purchasing decision. Tier 1 is the most rigorous standard, and the best products have earned it.The Bar Is Higher NowThe companies that built their business models around a more forgiving era should take this moment seriously. The ones doing the work the right way have nothing to fear from harder questions, tighter budgets or a superintendent who wants to see the research before signing anything. That's exactly the environment where the best technology is adopted and students finally get the support they’ve always deserved.​​Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?