edtech vetting – Screen-time concerns are colliding with edtech purchasing practices as Rhode Island, Utah and Vermont move to require stronger oversight of education software—shifting scrutiny from students’ personal phones to the district-issued laptops and the companies beh
For years, parents and teachers have battled cellphones in classrooms—some pushing further, asking that all personal digital devices stay out. But as those fights intensified, school-issued laptops and the software running on them stayed largely untouched.
Kim Whitman. co-lead for Smartphone Free Childhood US. described the problem in plain terms: even when students are without phones. they can still message friends through school Chromebooks or tools like Google Docs. Whitman also warned that the concern doesn’t end with personal devices. “There are definitely issues with school-issued devices as well,” she said in a previous interview with EdSurge.
That shift in focus is now driving legislation in three states—Rhode Island, Utah and Vermont—aimed at changing how education technology is checked before schools put it into students’ daily routines.
The common thread is not simply screen time. It’s the vetting process itself—and the gap between what families worry about and who is responsible for confirming products are safe, effective, and appropriate.
In a previous interview, Whitman argued that districts have not been properly held to that standard. “There is nobody right now that is confirming these products are safe, effective and legal,” she said. She said the responsibility cannot be dumped onto a district’s IT director. and that companies should not be tasked with proving their own products are fit. “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.”.
Vermont’s approach takes the most direct route: registering providers and creating a state certification process.
At the start of this year’s legislative session. Vermont. Rhode Island and Utah proposed reviewing the vetting process for education software. In Vermont. the bill before lawmakers is titled “An act relating to educational technology products.” It is currently passed by the House on March 27 and is before the Senate Committee on Education.
The Vermont bill would require providers of educational technology products to register annually with the state and would require the secretary of state to create a certification standard and review process before schools can use the products. Any provider of an educational technology product—specifically student-facing tools used for teaching and learning in schools—would have to register with the secretary of state. pay a $100 registration fee. and submit the provider’s most up-to-date terms and conditions and privacy policy.
Under the proposal, the secretary of state would work with the Vermont Agency of Education to review registrations. The criteria for certification would include:
compliance with state curriculum standards
advantages of using the product versus non-digital methods
whether it was explicitly designed for educational purposes
design features, including artificial intelligence, geotracking and targeted advertising
The bill initially included language that would have allowed fines if a provider wasn’t certified but continued to operate—$50 a day up to $10,000. That language was struck by the final bill passed from the House.
If passed by the Senate, the Vermont bill would go into effect July 1, 2026. By November 2027, the Agency of Education would submit a written report on which state entities should be involved in the edtech certification and any other recommendations for certification.
Utah, meanwhile, is addressing the issue from two angles at once: studying software and digital practices in public schools, and tightening screen-time rules grade by grade.
Utah passed the bill “Software in Education,” which was signed into law on March 18. That law requires the Utah Board of Education to study the use of software and digital practices in public schools, review best practices, and provide guidance for responsible use.
Utah also passed a “Classroom Technology Amendments” bill tackling screen time at every grade level. It bans screen time entirely from kindergarten through third grade, with the exception of computer science and assessments. Middle school students would be able to take devices home only if parents opt in. High school students can bring home devices unless parents opt out.
Rep. Ariel Defay (R-UT), a sponsor of the Classroom Technology Amendments bill, said in a statement, “We’re not anti-technology. We just want to ensure that education technology is used intentionally and actually helps students to learn.”
Rhode Island’s proposal goes further in restricting specific capabilities—especially tracking and access to audio or video outside school-related activity.
In Rhode Island, the “Safe School Technology Act of 2026” was proposed by three Rhode Island representatives who are also mothers. The House passed it on April 14, and it is currently before the Senate Education Committee.
The Safe School Technology Act would be enacted this August if approved. It is part of a six-bill package focused on protecting children from social media, artificial intelligence and digital platforms.
Under the Rhode Island bill, software providers would be banned from activating or accessing any audio or video functions on a device outside of school-related activities. The bill also bans the use of location data.
The initial bill lists concerns it links to “lack of regulation. ” including increased screen time and “marketing commercial products as educational with no accountability. ” as well as children being given devices without proof of developmental appropriateness and parents being excluded from decisions about their child’s digital exposure.
Representative June Speakman (D-RI), who sponsored the bill, tied the central problem to school district policies. She argued that a majority of districts’ technology policies do not have limits on tracking student devices. She added that roughly two-thirds of districts also do not limit school-issued devices’ ability to activate audio and video.
Speakman said in a statement that passing the bill would provide “clear. consistent protection across all schools in the state that assures students and their families that their devices cannot be used to invade their privacy or track their activities.” She added: “They deserve to feel confident that their privacy is protected when they use technology that is required for school. ” she said.
Not everyone is convinced these changes will land cleanly.
Technology proponents have pushed back against Rhode Island’s Safe School Technology Act. The Software and Information Industry Association spoke out against the bill in March, saying that if it passed it would make Rhode Island one of the most restrictive states in the nation.
In an open letter to Joseph McNamara. chair of the Rhode Island House Education Committee. Abigail Wilson. director of state policy at the Software and Information Industry Association. wrote that the bill “proposes an overly restrictive regulatory framework that will severely disrupt classroom instruction. impose massive unfunded administrative burdens on local schools. and deprive Rhode Island students of critical. evidence-based learning tools.”.
Keith Krueger, CEO of the nonprofit Consortium for School Networking, told NBC News that the proposed legislation “does keep me up at night.” He said, “I think some well-intentioned policymakers … are rushing so quickly that they haven’t thought through the implications.”
Taken together, the three states are trying to force an answer to a question many families have been asking for years: when schools require devices and software for learning, who verifies that those tools match the promises made about education, safety, privacy and effectiveness?
And as lawmakers redraw the rules—through registration. certification. opt-in and opt-out models. and restrictions on tracking and device functions—the pushback is already clear: educators and industry groups warn that sudden limitations could interfere with instruction. add burdens without funding. and cut off tools they say students need.
For now. the policies are still moving through legislatures in different stages: Vermont is awaiting Senate action after a House vote on March 27; Rhode Island passed House approval on April 14 and is before the Senate Education Committee; and Utah has already signed its measures into law. including the March 18 Software in Education bill and the Classroom Technology Amendments that ban screen time from kindergarten through third grade.
The debate—about screen time, privacy, and how edtech is validated—has shifted. It is no longer only about what students bring into class. It is about what schools put into their hands, and what the state will demand from the companies behind it.
edtech vetting screen time in schools Vermont educational technology products Rhode Island Safe School Technology Act of 2026 Utah Classroom Technology Amendments student privacy school-issued laptops digital devices opt-in opt-out