Schools spent roughly $30 billion on educational technology in 2024, with spending projected to nearly double by 2033. Yet teachers and students report having little voice in which tools administrators actually purchase.

The disconnect reveals a fundamental problem in how districts make edtech decisions. Administrators and vendors control the selection process, while classroom educators who use these tools daily remain sidelined. Teachers express frustration when district leaders adopt software or platforms that don't fit their pedagogical needs or create friction in daily instruction.

This top-down approach wastes resources. Tools selected without teacher input often sit unused or force staff to adopt workarounds that undermine implementation. Students, too, experience the consequences. When edtech doesn't align with how teachers actually teach, learning suffers.

The argument for educator agency rests on practical grounds. Teachers understand their students, curriculum demands, and workflow constraints in ways administrators and salespeople cannot. Frontline educators can identify whether a tool genuinely improves instruction or simply adds burden. They can spot when a platform's promises diverge from classroom reality.

Districts that involve teachers early in the procurement process report better adoption rates and outcomes. Teacher input identifies red flags that administrators miss. It ensures technology serves instruction rather than the reverse.

The $30 billion annual spend carries weight. Schools must reckon with whether that investment flows through vendor marketing budgets and administrator relationships or through the people who actually implement tools with students. Current spending patterns suggest the former.

Shifting agency toward educators requires structural changes. Districts should establish teacher-led committees that evaluate, pilot, and recommend edtech purchases. Teachers need time and training to assess tools critically. Vendor pitches should target classrooms, not just office suites.

This approach costs nothing beyond reorganizing decision-making authority. It respects the expertise of professionals hired to teach. As edtech spending accelerates, schools face a choice: keep funding tools that administrators select