AI’s Role in the Superintendent’s Inbox: The Race for Taxpayer Funding

While the relentless stream of marketing emails is a common frustration for many, education technology firms are specifically targeting funding from school districts. Following a surge in tech spending fueled by pandemic relief dollars, districts are now facing tighter budgets. Yet, ed tech companies continue to flood inboxes, seizing upon advancements in AI to push new tools into the market.

Superintendents are navigating a complex landscape where they must adapt to the rapid rise of AI while simultaneously dealing with growing demands to reduce screen time in classrooms.

“This constant influx drains our energy, shifting our focus away from what truly matters for our students,” stated Wendy Birhanzel, superintendent of the Harrison School District in Colorado Springs, reflecting the sentiments of her colleagues.

AI Drives the Surge in Ed Tech Marketing Emails

Chris Ryan, a former ed tech sales professional turned consultant, noted that new AI-driven marketing tools are exacerbating this issue. He explained that companies are finding increasingly effective methods to reach districts more rapidly than anticipated.

Sales representatives now have enhanced strategies to target districts, especially smaller ones, where superintendents often have limited availability. Ryan shared an anecdote of making a sales call to a rural Texas superintendent who had to leave the conversation to drive a school bus when the regular driver was absent.

“Vendors often underestimate how demanding the superintendent’s role can be,” he remarked.

Ryan suggested that the unsolicited calendar invitations Sipe receives may stem from a recent incident where he inadvertently sent a calendar invite through AI email marketing software due to a poorly constructed prompt.

Wendy Birhanzel mentioned that many sales pitches often seem random, attempting to tackle issues her district does not face.

For example, she frequently receives marketing focused on data collection, even though her district does not require additional solutions in that area. In one day, she received separate emails touting data collection tools for student performance, employee information, and visitor statistics.

“Many sales representatives haven’t done their research,” she stated.

Can you guess what these pitch emails are selling?

Here are the headlines and vendor names for real messages that superintendents received this March. Can you guess what the actual products behind the pitches are?

#1

What am I selling?

Assessments
Training
Travel software
Behavior management consulting

#2

What am I selling?

Medical tests
Assessments
HR software
Virtual building inspections

#3

What am I selling?

Science software
Driver’s training
Vocal instruction software
Security

#4

What am I selling?

Harassment training
AI training
Behavior training
Literacy training

#5

What am I selling?

Conference
TED talk
Data management
Training

#6

What am I selling?

Data management
Assessments
Disciplinary tools
Security

Occasionally, the promises made by these companies do not materialize. Several superintendents have reported investing in tools that ultimately underperformed.

Birhanzel recounted how her district of 12,000 students abandoned a contract when a data company could not even transfer necessary information. Similarly, Curtis Finch, who leads the Deer Valley Unified School District in Phoenix, reflected on past mistakes where he did not adequately probe whether a product could integrate with existing systems.

Finch now benefits from an instructional technology team that works with app developers to ensure any new technology aligns seamlessly with the district’s needs. With 4,000 employees serving 31,000 students, any oversight in vetting products can result in costly errors.

“Whenever changes affect 4,000 people, I must train everyone on the new system, which can take years to implement,” he emphasized.

Ed Tech Marketing Overload Complicates Leadership

Chalkbeat endeavored to contact every company that reached out to the five superintendents, but most did not respond. A few emails were returned as undeliverable, and one company’s auto-reply system only led the reporter back and forth between forms and email addresses.

Some companies did reply, acknowledging the intense competition in the ed tech sector. They claim they strive to deliver relevant and useful marketing materials.

One email that landed in a superintendent’s inbox came from a company called Digitability, promoting a “financial ‘slam dunk'” — coincidentally timed during March Madness — along with a link to a themed financial literacy activity.

Michele McKeone, Digitability’s founder and a former special education teacher, expressed her frustration at the lack of adequate tools for students with disabilities. She mentioned that their “slam dunk” email targeted prospective clients on their mailing list, hinting that the superintendent may have previously engaged with their website.

“Most of our customers find us in some meaningful way,” she noted.

However, the crowded inboxes and overwhelming array of choices are not favorably impacting superintendents’ decision-making abilities, as many have pointed out.

Sign up for Chalkbeat’s morning newsletter.

In certain states, districts can seek assistance from various governmental bodies.

Alicia Gallegos Butters, educational technology director at the San Diego County Office of Education, may not maintain a specific list of recommended products, but she makes an effort to evaluate a district’s needs before suggesting any particular tool.

The federal government’s guidance recommends schools evaluate four tiers of evidence when selecting new tools, outlining varying levels of evidence strength, although it falls short in addressing concerns regarding data collection and student privacy.

Richard Culatta, CEO of the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), pointed out that his organization has developed an index of products that denote whether a tool is evidence-based to assist superintendents and instructional leaders in making informed choices, recognizing that they often feel overwhelmed.

This index is an ongoing project, using a combination of validations from independent organizations alongside ISTE’s own verification. While companies can submit evidence themselves, ISTE conducts reviews to authenticate claims. Determining whether a product is genuinely evidence-based can be tricky, as definitions can vary widely in the field of education.

“There’s no efficient way to browse available options,” he stated. “If such a resource existed, schools could simply identify their needs and avoid relying on ineffective methods to find solutions.”

As for Sipe, she wishes for one thing: a reduction in unsolicited emails.

“If I’m pursuing something, I’ll never find it through an unsolicited message,” she remarked.

Lily Altavena is a national reporter at Chalkbeat. Contact her at laltavena@chalkbeat.org.