EDTECH ASSESSMENT TOOL:
CONNECTING STRONG CAPABILITIES
WITH HIGH OUTCOMES
Around the globe, nearly 1,500 educators have taken the EdTech Assessment Tool survey since 2018.
They’ve rated their capabilities against U.S. and international standards and best practices, including
those outlined by ISTE, UNESCO, CASEL and OECD. They’ve received detailed recommendations on
how to improve their work in custom profile reports. Here are just a few of the confirmed long-running
relationships between technology readiness and education outcomes.
Good Tech Capabilities and High Education
Outcomes Go Together
One relationship is clear and has gotten stronger over time: schools that rate their technology
capability development high also report the best teaching and learning results. Educators who report
the highest level of overall capabilities were ten times more likely to observe high outcomes.
The evidence-based capabilities span five key areas, or “pillars”—the original four pillars of
10X↑
leadership, integration, infrastructure and professional development covered here—plus
the recently added fifth pillar of blended learning.
Schools assessed themselves on development of
each capability by selecting one of four stages,
MORE LIKELY
ranging from “not at all” to “completely,” for
TO OBSERVE
elements that support a capability. HIGH OUTCOMES.
CAPABILITIES SPAN 5 KEY PILLLARS
Leadership vision and Support for social and
22
stakeholder alignment emotional learning
Strategic planning Development of teacher
and staff mindset
Technology change
management Professional development
Edtech Evaluation of technology
and implementation
planning
Focus of professional
Cabilities effectiveness
Teacher participation in
learning
Training offerings and
technology planning options
What’s an education
technology “capability?” Student participation in Evaluation of professional
technology planning development effectiveness
It’s an action schools take
to prepare or implement Parent and wider Opportunities for
community engagement collaborative professional
learning technologies, development
and includes: Acceptable technology
use policies Network infrastructure
Embedding technology in Design of learning spaces
teaching and learning
Technical support
Use of digital content and
applications Compatibility of learning
technologies
Assessment of student
progress
Technology infrastructure development leads the four original pillars—
and exceeds overall tech development
Overall Leadership & Technology Professional Technology
Development Engagement Integration Development Infrastructure
Overall, technology infrastructure and management—including network infrastructure, compatibility of learning
technologies, technical support and design of learning spaces—was the best-developed of the original education
technology capability pillars among schools taking the assessment. Infrastructure is foundational for any good
edtech implementation.
EXCEEDED 2% GREATLY
TEACHING 11% 7% 14% 8% IMPROVED
GOALS 34% 12% TEST SCORES
30% 50% 39% 28%
49%
62% SLIGHTY
MET 64% IMPROVED
TEST SCORES
TEACHING
GOALS 57%
64%
38% 34% CONSISTENT
TEST SCORES
NEARLY MET
TEACHING 37% 36%
GOALS SLIGHTY
23% DECLINED
20% 22% TEST SCORES
21% 9%
DID NOT MEET 7% 9% GREATLY
TEACHING 7% DECLINED
GOALS TEST SCORES
1% 5% 2%
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
Totals exceed 100% due to rounding
91%
Higher levels of capability development
92%
Higher levels of capability development
were tied to meeting teaching goals were tied to improved student test scores
Ninety-one percent of educators reporting the highest Ninety-two percent of educators reporting the highest
level of overall tech capability development said their level of overall tech capability development said their
school met or exceeded its teaching and learning goals in school had slightly or greatly improved average student
the previous year. test scores in the previous year.
Overall higher capability development was strongly related to all good education outcomes
91% 92% 97% 88% 99% 98%
• Level 1
• Level 2
• Level 3
• Level 4
EXCEEDED GREATLY OR TEACHERS GREATLY OR TECH STUDENTS
OR MET SLIGHTLY VERY OR SLIGHTLY VERY OR WELL OR
TEACHING IMPROVED SOMEWHAT IMPROVED SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT
GOALS TEST SCORES SATISIFIED RANKING SUCCESSFUL PREPARED
In addition to teaching goals and test scores, if tech capabilities were reported as being strong so were other outcomes. These
include teacher satisfaction in schools over the previous year, change in schools’ rankings or ratings at their last review, schools
meeting technology implementation and adoption goals in the previous year, and reported level of student preparedness to be
active contributors to society and grow their well-being, life and social skills.
Teachers Want to Engage—
and They Know What’s Being Used
Teachers have a unique, close-to-the-classroom perspective. Nearly 400 of them took the edtech
self-assessment between 2018 and 2020. In several ways, their rankings of schools differed from that of
principals, district administrators and IT leadership.
Teachers were more likely to report using interactive displays, game-based software
90% Interactive Whiteboards
& Displays 83%
ADMIN, POLICY & IT
44% Non-interactive Screens 57%
Non-interactive
39% Projection Systems 67%
TEACHER
59% Lesson Creation
67%
90% Presentation
91%
56% Collaborative
73%
52% Assessment
68%
58% Game-based 52%
Teachers were more likely to report their schools used some technologies at a higher level than the other survey participants
did: interactive whiteboards and displays (+ 7%) and game-based software (+ 6%). Teachers also identified the level of software
apparently purchased at some point but not in use, which could be up to one-quarter of it overall.
The More Tech in Use,
The Better the Tie to Outcomes
Teachers aren’t the only ones making good use of education technology. At least half of the educators reported
their schools had various types of front-of-classroom hardware: interactive whiteboards and displays, non-
interactive screens and non-interactive projection systems. Teaching support software tools were also reported
in use by at least half of those surveyed, including lesson creation, presentation, collaborative, assessment and
game-based software.
Higher percentages of technologies used are tied to high self-reported outcomes
90%
91% 95
%
91% 77% 76% 78% 75%
84% 64 % 65% 61 % 63%
53% 50% 53%
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Total
Total
Total
Total
High
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Interactive Non-interactive Non-interactive Lesson
Whiteboards & Screens Projection Creation
Displays Systems
93% 96 92%
%
91%
86% 76% 85% 83%
75 %
71% 71% 69% 69%
61%
54% 52%
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Total
Total
Total
Total
High
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Presentation Collaborative Assessment Game-based
Schools reported a strong relationship between the technology in use, their overall level of capability
development and overall positive outcomes. Educators who said their schools had high outcomes also had the
highest use of the listed types of hardware and software. The steeper the slope of the purple arrow—led by
lesson creation, assessment and game-based software—the greater the impact of the technology on outcomes.
TAKE ACTION
Improve Your School or
District’s Technology Readiness
Evaluate your stage of edtech development—
including how to prioritize work and investment for
better learning outcomes in an era of in-person,
remote online and blended learning—with the EdTech Assessment Tool self-assessment,
and receive a free custom profile, at www.smarttech.com/profile.
Get more details about the newest pillar, blended learning. Download the free report,
“Remotely Ready: Global Insights into Effective Teaching and Learning in a Pandemic,” at
www.smarttech.com/remotelyready.
Results are based on 1,227 educators globally, including 398 teachers, taking the SMART Technologies
self-assessment between April 2018 and March 2020 and self-reporting their level of capabilities and
outcomes. Data analysis was performed by Filigree Consulting.
