State education leaders are making artificial intelligence (AI) their top technology priority, but more than two-thirds say they struggle to independently verify vendors’ claims about AI products, according to the 2026 State EdTech Trends report.
The report, produced by Whiteboard Advisors and commissioned by the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA), draws on survey responses from education technology directors, chief information officers (CIOs), and other state education agency leaders in 45 states and one territory.
Seventy-nine percent of respondents named AI a top technology priority, up from 68% in 2025. At the same time, 68% said independently verifying AI vendor claims is difficult, and only 32% said their state has clear, trusted sources of information about AI tools.
The findings point to a broader challenge in evaluating classroom technology: 52% said their state collects no data on the use of technology tools or their effectiveness. Just 22% reported collecting data on both.
“For too long, our investments in devices and software have outpaced our investments in the leadership, planning, professional learning, and evidence needed to maximize their impact,” Dorann Avey, SETDA board chair and digital learning director at the Nebraska Department of Education, wrote in the report.
States strengthen AI policy and purchasing guidance
Eighty-three percent of states represented in the survey reported an AI initiative; in 2023, only 2% had one. For 23%, state law requires AI guidance, up from 4% in 2024.
The report describes a shift toward formal requirements, including district AI policies and teacher training. North Carolina, for example, requires districts to adopt AI policies by June 30, 2027, and Tennessee requires teachers in grades six through 12 to complete a free AI professional development course by August 2028.
State leaders said the evolution of AI has changed the kind of guidance they need. Ninety-two percent said guidance should address bias, safety, and student protections, while 73% said they need evidence standards for AI-enabled products, and 71% called for data governance and model training disclosures.
Fifty-three percent of respondents reported state guidance on buying AI-enabled tools, up from about 40% last year.
Among states with that guidance, 79% incorporated the EdTech Quality Collaborative’s evidence-based quality indicator, compared with 45% in 2025. The indicator is one of five measures addressing whether products are safe, evidence-based, inclusive, usable, and interoperable.
Data privacy and security carried the most weight in purchasing decisions, cited by 82% of respondents. Evidence of effectiveness followed at 50%.
States face training and staffing gaps
Professional learning for educators ranked as the fastest-growing unmet technology need, cited by 62% of respondents, up from 47% in 2025. Only funding ranked higher, at 72%.
States are expanding training, but demand continues to grow. Sixty-nine percent reported statewide professional learning to support responsible AI use, up from 60% last year. The share of leaders identifying professional learning as the support districts most often request rose from 17% to 27%.
Small state teams limit that work. Seventy-six percent of respondents reported five or fewer staff working on education technology, including 27% with only one person. Nearly three-quarters said their state lacks a dedicated, sufficient education technology budget.
North Carolina connects technology use to student outcomes
North Carolina is developing systems to help determine which tools merit continued investment, according to the report.
The state Department of Public Instruction plans to roll out a platform in August 2027 that tracks application use at the state and district levels. A second phase will connect usage to student assessment results.
“A lot of people like to call it expenditure tracking,” Vanessa Wrenn, the department’s CIO, said in the report. “I prefer to think of it as a focus on student outcomes.”
The work supports a goal in the state’s strategic plan to renegotiate or end technology contracts that fall below return-on-investment benchmarks and redirect savings to tools backed by evidence.
