Why procurement is a governance issue

Procurement is More Than Buying Software

Schools are now expected to navigate an education technology market worth billions of pounds and containing more than a thousand suppliers. Yet despite increasing attention from government and regulators, procurement remains largely focused on how schools buy technology rather than what should be bought in the first place. 

Recent reviews by both the Department for Education and the Information Commissioner’s Office are welcome contributions. The DfE highlights fragmented procurement practices, inconsistent evidence, limited evaluation frameworks and growing pressures created by AI. The ICO identifies widespread weaknesses in data governance, including unclear legal responsibilities, poor data mapping, inadequate privacy impact assessments and insufficient transparency. 

These are important findings, however they leave unanswered a more fundamental question.

Compliance with data protection law is essential. Evidence that a product improves test scores may also be useful. Neither, however, tells us whether a technology is educationally desirable.

Schools are making decisions that affect children’s attention, relationships, wellbeing, autonomy and development. Those decisions cannot be reduced to procurement checklists, privacy notices or vendor claims of effectiveness.

Before asking whether software is compliant, we should first ask:

• Does it solve a genuine educational problem?

• Is technology actually necessary here?

• Would a non-digital or low-tech approach achieve the same educational outcome?

• Does the technology support children’s development rather than simply increase screen time?

• Does it strengthen teachers’ professional judgement or replace it?

• Are the educational benefits proportionate to the privacy, safeguarding and health risks?

These questions rarely appear in procurement frameworks.

Procurement should begin with educational purpose

Good procurement should not start by comparing software products. It should start by asking what children need. Sometimes the best solution will be sophisticated technology. Sometimes it will be a simple paper-based assessment, a classroom discussion, physical manipulatives, or additional teacher time. Digital should never become the default simply because a product exists.

Technology should be selected only where it demonstrably offers educational value that cannot reasonably be achieved through simpler alternatives.

Towards a whole-system approach

A more mature approach to procurement would establish shared expectations for what counts as safe, lawful and educationally appropriate technology before schools enter the marketplace.

That means building consensus around questions such as:

• minimum standards for privacy, cybersecurity and legal compliance;

• evidence of educational benefit beyond vendor case studies;

• developmental appropriateness for different age groups;

• cumulative impacts on children’s wellbeing and screen exposure;

• accessibility and inclusion;

• environmental sustainability;

• interoperability without excessive data collection;

• clear accountability when technologies fail.

Only once these principles are agreed can procurement become a genuine exercise in public stewardship rather than simply purchasing software.

At the EDDS Institute, we believe procurement is one of the most powerful yet underdeveloped levers for improving digital education. The challenge is not helping schools buy more technology but in helping them choose technologies—and non-technological alternatives—that genuinely serve children’s education, wellbeing and long-term development.