Letters | As edtech tools grow, schools need to know which ones really work
Reader discuss the drive for quality assurance in educational technology, scholars’ responsibility to uphold transparency over AI use, and treating The Cenotaph with respect
As professors who have spent over a decade studying educational technology, we’ve seen both sides of the digital revolution in classrooms: its incredible promise to transform learning, and its pitfalls when adopted without evidence. At the recent Global EdTech Startups Awards in Hong Kong, we were genuinely inspired by the city’s bold efforts to ensure that the tools reaching children and teachers are not just innovative, but proven to make a positive impact on learning.
Over the past three years, we have led an international research consortium dedicated to developing robust rubrics, criteria and benchmarks for evaluating the quality of educational technology (edtech). Through multiple iterations, stakeholder consultations and systematic reviews, we established a set of consolidated international standards for edtech evaluation: the 5Es framework. This framework assesses tools across five key dimensions: efficacy, effectiveness, equity, ethics and environment.
With publications in Nature and other leading journals, our consortium has developed a trustworthy, peer-reviewed system for assuring the quality of edtech tools in global markets. We have already seen the international benchmarks put into practice through the global certification system of the non-profit organisation EduEvidence, which recognises edtech companies that demonstrate proven educational impact.
Just this month, EduEvidence awarded its Effectiveness Certificate (bronze level) to a Hong Kong-based edtech start-up, DustykidAI. These are encouraging developments as Hong Kong positions itself as a global education hub.
Against this backdrop, the Hong Kong Education City (EdCity) is building EdMarket, a curated catalogue of apps and learning platforms for teachers. But the crucial question is: how will this curation happen, and how will schools know which tools to trust? So far, user reviews were suggested as one of the main ways to rank tools within EdMarket. Teachers trust other teachers, and peer feedback is essential. Yet, user reviews alone are not enough. They can reflect personal experience but not scientific validity. Teachers deserve access to both: trusted peer insights and evidence-based “nutritional information” about each tool’s learning impact.