EdTech Marketing Playbook: How to Market to Schools, Colleges and Parents

By Saroj Jha, AAJ · Published October 1, 2026 · Pairs with the Bottom-Up Market Sizer and the Persona Builder

In EdTech, decide who pays before you decide what to say. A school district, a college and a parent buy in completely different ways, so pick one buyer and build what that buyer needs. The seven steps below show how, with one example company.

EdTech looks like one market and behaves like three. The same reading app can be bought by a district curriculum team, a university department or a parent at 9 p.m. on a phone. Each of those buyers has a different budget, a different set of rules and a different idea of proof.

In my view, most early EdTech companies stall because they try to serve all three at once. This playbook is the order I would work through it with a founder: choose the buyer, understand the money, then build the message, the evidence, the privacy answers and the channel for that one buyer.

Step 1: Name who pays, not who uses

In education the user (a student or teacher) is often not the buyer, and the buyer is often not a single person. So start by writing down, for each group you could sell to, who uses the product, who sees the results, who pays and who signs off.

K-12 schools and districtsColleges and universitiesParents and learners
Size of the US market13,335 regular school districts, 99,297 public schools, 49.4 million students (2023–24)3,896 degree-granting institutions (2022–23)Direct buyers; about 5.2% of school-age children received academic instruction at home in 2022–23 (including full-time virtual school); 3.4% were homeschooled
Who decidesDistrict staff, with school and teacher inputIT, academic leaders and procurementThe parent or the learner
What they ask for firstPrivacy, safety, standards alignment, evidence of learningSecurity review, integration, return on investmentPrice, trust, visible progress
Main rulesFERPA, COPPA, state student-privacy lawsFERPA, security questionnairesCOPPA for children under 13
Typical motionPilot, then district contractPilot or department purchase, then campus agreementFree trial, then subscription

Sources: NCES Common Core of Data 2023–24; NCES Digest Table 317.10; NCES National Household Education Surveys 2023.

Then choose one column and stay there until the motion repeats. A product sold to teachers, districts and parents at the same time usually ends up with three half-built funnels. The Customer Segmentation Playbook walks through choosing that first segment.

Figure 1 — Who uses, sees, pays and signs off in Example Co.'s three segments (fictional). The person who uses the product is rarely the person who pays: from tutoring centers to homeschool parents to school districts, each step adds people between the child and the budget, and time to the sale.

Step 2: Understand where the money comes from

US public schools spent $869.6 billion on current expenditures in fiscal year 2024, or $17,644 per pupil. Federal money was 11.7% of school revenues; the rest came from state and local sources (NCES, 2026). That split matters for marketing: most purchases are paid from state and local budgets, set once a year.

The pandemic changed the picture for a few years. Congress gave schools about $190 billion through three rounds of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds: about $13.2 billion, $54.3 billion and $122 billion (US Department of Education). The last round had to be committed by September 30, 2024 (US Department of Education, 2024). In May 2025 the Department withdrew the broad spending extensions it had granted and said it would consider further extensions only project by project (US Department of Education, 2025).

Most of that money has now been spent, and district leaders feel it. In a RAND survey of 481 districts in spring 2026, weighted to be nationally representative, 54% ranked budget shortfalls among their top three concerns, up from 33% a year earlier. In interviews, leaders pointed to the loss of federal COVID-19 relief funds, rising costs and state and local revenue that has not kept pace as the main drivers (RAND, 2026). No qualifying source yet measures how much EdTech spending itself has fallen. The safe reading is that every renewal now competes with staff and core programs.

School software companies tell their investors the same thing. PowerSchool, whose software is used in schools and districts “representing over 45 million students globally”, warned in its 2021 prospectus that “reductions in IT spending or changes in the spending policies or budget priorities for government funding of K-12 school may reduce demand for our solutions” (PowerSchool prospectus, 2021).

Figure 2 — Where US school money comes from, and the budget pressure after ESSER. Most school money is state and local: US public schools spent $869.6 billion in fiscal year 2024, federal money was 11.7% of revenues, and 54% of districts now rank budget shortfalls a top-three concern, up from 33%.

Step 3: Map the buying group and write one message per person

A district purchase is decided by a group, usually led by the district office. In a 2024 EdWeek Research Center survey of 270 district and school leaders, 46% said curriculum purchases are decided mostly at district level with some school involvement, 22% at district level alone, and 21% with equal involvement (EdWeek Research Center, 2024). The sample is small and the study was foundation-funded, but RAND's 2026 study of math curriculum adoption found the same pattern: “the final decision was most often made by district-level staff” (RAND, 2026).

The same EdWeek survey shows who influences the choice. Curriculum and instruction leaders were named a major influence on curriculum purchases by 67% of respondents, teachers by 56%, school leaders by 52%, the superintendent by 32% and operations, business or finance leaders by 28%. Two more people sit outside that list but can stop a deal: the technology leader, who vets privacy, security and integration, and the board, which approves larger contracts.

Figure 3 — The district buying group and what each role needs. Six groups shape a district purchase, each with its own question: curriculum leaders, teachers, school leaders, the superintendent, finance and operations, and the technology leader.

Teachers matter more than their title suggests. Two-thirds of respondents said teachers evaluate products and 55% said teachers pilot them. So one message will not do. Curriculum leaders need standards alignment and evidence, teachers need time saved and classroom fit, the technology team needs privacy and integration answers, and finance needs a price that survives next year's budget.

Step 4: Build your evidence, one tier at a time

Districts want evidence that students learn more, in a form they can file. Federal law defines four tiers of evidence under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (20 U.S.C. 7801(21)). Tier 1, strong, needs at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study. Tier 2, moderate, needs at least one well-designed quasi-experimental study. Tier 3, promising, needs at least one correlational study with statistical controls. Tier 4, demonstrates a rationale, needs a logic model based on research, with ongoing efforts to study effects.

Only the top three tiers count for some federal school-improvement funds. Evidence is becoming a normal part of vendor claims. Instructure reported in 2025 that 45% of the tools in its annual EdTech Top 40 report had published ESSA research, up from 32% in the previous year's list (Instructure, 2025). That is vendor research on a short list that changes each year, so read it as a signal, not a trend.

Figure 4 — The ESSA evidence ladder, with Example Co.'s plan (fictional). The four ESSA evidence tiers run from Tier 4, a research-based logic model, up to Tier 1, an experimental study; Example Co. (fictional) starts at Tier 4 and plans Tier 3 at seed and Tier 2 at Series A.

For an early company, Tier 4 is the realistic start: a written logic model and a plan to study effects. Add usage data from pilots as soon as you have it. In the EdWeek survey, leaders judged product fit by test scores (48%), teacher surveys or focus groups (41%) and EdTech usage data (38%).

Step 5: Clear privacy and safety before the first pilot

Four sets of rules shape what you can say and do. They are legal obligations, so treat this as orientation and get legal advice for your product.

  • FERPA. When a school shares student records with a vendor under FERPA's school-official exception, the vendor must be under the school's “direct control” in how it uses them. The Department of Education warns that using the data for purposes such as “targeted advertising directed to students or their parents” “will likely violate federal or state privacy laws” (US Department of Education, 2015).
  • COPPA. For children under 13, the FTC's amended rule took effect on June 23, 2025, with compliance required by April 22, 2026. It requires separate parental consent to share children's data with third parties such as advertisers, unless the disclosure is integral to the service, and limits how long data can be kept (FTC, 2025).
  • The FTC's EdTech policy. When a school authorizes data collection, the vendor cannot use that data “for any commercial purpose, including marketing, advertising, or other commercial purposes unrelated to the provision of the school-requested online service”, and “the responsibility for COPPA compliance is on businesses, not schools or parents” (FTC, 2022).
  • State laws. California's SOPIPA bars operators of sites and apps designed and marketed for K-12 school purposes from using student information to target advertising or build profiles on students, and from selling it (California Attorney General). Many states have their own rules.

The practical result: student data collected through schools cannot feed your marketing. Build your marketing lists from educators who opt in to your content, not from students in your product.

Figure 5 — Keeping student data out of marketing. Student data collected with the school's authorization serves the service the school asked for and nothing else; the marketing list is built only from educators who opt in, and no student data crosses that line.

Districts also check before they buy. In CoSN's 2026 survey of 607 district technology leaders, 86% vet tools before use, 61% keep an approved-app list and 56% require vendors to supply product safety information (CoSN, 2026). Have a privacy page, a signed data-privacy agreement template and a security summary ready before your first pilot.

Step 6: Position on the learning problem, and say plainly what the AI does

Lead with the learning problem and the teacher's day, not the technology. Three things carry weight:

  1. Fit with what schools already teach. In RAND's 2026 study, principals named alignment with state standards as their top consideration for math curricula.
  2. Support that comes with the product. The same study found most principals bought professional learning bundled from the curriculum vendor. Training is part of the product in schools.
  3. Evidence and safety in the first conversation, not the last. Steps 4 and 5 are selling points, not paperwork.

AI is now part of most EdTech conversations. In RAND's 2025 surveys, 54% of students and 53% of English, math and science teachers said they used AI for school (RAND, 2025), and 79% of districts in CoSN's 2026 survey had AI guidelines, up from 57% in 2025 (CoSN, 2026). In July 2025 the Department of Education said federal grant funds can pay for AI-based instructional materials and AI-enhanced tutoring (US Department of Education, 2025).

If your product uses AI, say what it does, what data it uses and how teachers stay in control. The Marketing AI Products Playbook covers this in depth.

Figure 6 — Three things to say about an AI feature, answered for Example Co. (fictional). Say what the AI does, what data it uses and who stays in control; the figure answers the three questions for Example Co. (fictional).

Step 7: Choose the channel that matches the buyer, and time it

The channel follows the buyer you picked:

  • Teacher-first (bottom-up). A free version for teachers creates usage that a district can later buy. This is product-led growth; the Product-Led Growth Playbook covers it. Remember that districts approve apps, so free use needs a path to a district agreement.
  • District-first (top-down). Account-based outreach to named districts, conference meetings, webinars for curriculum and technology leaders, and references from nearby districts. The ABM Playbook covers the account method.
  • Purchasing cooperatives and approved lists. Districts can buy through cooperative contracts, and for purchases paid with federal funds, federal rules encourage this kind of intergovernmental purchasing (2 CFR 200.318(e)). Getting onto a state or regional cooperative contract, or a state's approved-product list, removes a step for every district that uses it. Rules vary by state; New York, for example, restricts “piggybacking” on other contracts (NYSED).
  • Regional service agencies. NCES counts 1,143 service agencies in the US (2023–24), a category that includes regional education service agencies such as New York's BOCES (NCES). In practice, many run shared purchasing and training for smaller districts.
  • Conferences. CoSN and the ASU+GSV Summit in April, ISTELive in late June and EDUCAUSE in the autumn are the main ones. The EdTech marketing calendar covers when each matters.

Whatever the channel, time it to the budget year. For most states the school fiscal year “begins on July 1 and ends on June 30” (NCES, 2023), so a product that is not in the draft budget by spring usually waits a year.

What Instructure's, PowerSchool's and Duolingo's filings show

Three public companies' filings describe the two main routes to a learner. These are what the filings say, not an account of how the companies made their choices internally.

Instructure and the district route. Instructure, the maker of the Canvas learning platform, said in its 2015 IPO registration statement that its customers “include colleges, universities, K-12 schools and other education providers, many of which depend substantially on government funding”. It warned that “Potential customers typically conduct extensive and lengthy evaluations before committing to our applications and services”, and that “The sales cycle between our initial contact with a potential customer and the signing of a license varies.” Its sales followed the school year: “We have historically experienced a pattern of higher sales and new academic customers in the second and third quarters, as a result of school procurement periods, which are typically based on a fiscal year ending June 30” (Instructure S-1, 2015).

PowerSchool and renewals. PowerSchool's 2021 prospectus says “we serve more than 12,000 customers, including 93 of the 100 top districts by student enrollment in the United States” (PowerSchool prospectus, 2021). Its annual report for 2021 describes what a district contract looks like: “PowerSchool's contracts typically have a three-year term with one-year rolling renewals, although we have many large contracts with terms that extend beyond three years.” “Customers are billed annually in advance,” and “We experience predictable annual renewal cycles, with a meaningful portion of invoices for service periods beginning in July and September” (PowerSchool 10-K for 2021).

Duolingo and the family route. Duolingo sells to learners directly. Its 2021 IPO prospectus explains the model: “Learners who use Duolingo for free see an ad at the end of each lesson, whereas learners who purchase Duolingo Plus, our premium subscription, enjoy an ad-free experience and access to additional features.” Only a small share paid: “As of March 31, 2021, approximately 5% of our monthly active users were paid subscribers of Duolingo Plus.” Growth came from users telling users: “All of this has allowed us to grow our business organically, primarily relying on word-of-mouth virality rather than paid user acquisition” (Duolingo prospectus, 2021). Duolingo is a language app, not a school product, so read it as a picture of the consumer route, not a template.

Figure 7 — The district route and the family route, per Instructure, PowerSchool and Duolingo filings. The district route is to evaluate, buy in season and renew; the family route is free first, few pay, and word of mouth, as the Instructure, PowerSchool and Duolingo filings describe.

The lesson I take from the filings: the district route rewards patience and renewals, and the family route rewards a free product that people recommend. They need different teams, prices and calendars, which is why Step 1 comes first.

How do colleges and parents differ?

Colleges. College buyers are more technical and more cost-focused. In EDUCAUSE's 2026 Top 10 IT issues, informed by 450 survey responses, the first issue is collaborative cybersecurity, and the panel wrote that “ROI and ROV (return on value) are the guiding principles of the day” for technology spending (EDUCAUSE, 2025). Expect a security review: many institutions ask vendors to complete the Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (HECVAT), a standard questionnaire on security, privacy, accessibility and compliance (EDUCAUSE). Completing it before you are asked shortens deals. Market to colleges on measurable outcomes (retention, completion, staff time) and integration with the systems they already run.

Parents. It is consumer marketing with extra rules. Parents decide quickly and cancel quickly, so the product has to show progress in the first week. If children under 13 use the product, COPPA consent comes before any data collection, and the amended rule limits sharing data with advertisers. Learning at home is growing: about 5.2% of school-age children received academic instruction at home in 2022–23, up from 3.7% in 2018–19, including 3.4% who were homeschooled (NCES, 2024). That count includes full-time virtual school, so the parent-paid market is smaller. A teacher's recommendation is often the most credible channel into a family.

What changes by stage?

Pre-seed. Choose one buyer (Step 1). Run pilots with a few classrooms or one school, and write the logic model for Tier 4 evidence (Step 4). Publish your privacy page now (Step 5).

Seed. Turn pilot data into a short evidence summary. Build the buying-group message set (Step 3). If you sell to districts, get onto one cooperative contract or state list your target districts use.

Series A–B. Commission an independent study aiming for Tier 2 or Tier 3. Build a renewal and expansion program, because keeping districts after the budget review is now as important as winning them. Consider a second market (for example, higher education) only once the first one repeats.

What mistakes should I avoid?

  • Selling to teachers without a path to the district. Classroom love that never reaches the approved-app list stays free.
  • Treating privacy as a legal task after the sale. Districts check it first.
  • Marketing with product data. Student data collected through school use cannot feed your marketing.
  • Missing the budget window. A great spring meeting can still miss a July budget.
  • Claiming outcomes you cannot show. Say which evidence tier you have and what study is next.
  • Pricing on ESSER-era budgets. Price for what districts can renew from core funds.

Use this on AAJ

Frequently asked questions

How do I market an EdTech product?

Pick one buyer first (districts, colleges or parents), then build what that buyer needs. For districts that means evidence of learning, privacy and safety answers, and a message for each member of the buying group, timed to a budget year that starts on July 1 for most districts.

Who makes EdTech buying decisions in school districts?

Usually district staff, with input from schools and teachers. Curriculum and instruction leaders, teachers and school leaders are the most-cited influencers, and the technology team checks privacy and integration.

What are ESSA evidence tiers?

Four levels of evidence defined in federal law: strong (experimental study), moderate (quasi-experimental), promising (correlational with controls) and demonstrates a rationale (a research-based logic model with ongoing study).

Can I use student data for marketing?

Not student data collected through a school. FTC guidance says data collected with school authorization cannot be used for marketing, advertising or any other commercial purpose unrelated to the service the school asked for, and federal and state privacy laws restrict targeted advertising to students. This is orientation, not legal advice.

Is EdTech still a good market after ESSER funds ended?

It is a harder market. Districts report budget shortfalls as a top concern, so products need clear evidence and a price districts can renew from their core budgets.

Sources

  1. National Center for Education Statistics (2025). Common Core of Data, 2023–24 summary tables 1–3 (Final Version 1a). nces.ed.gov
  2. National Center for Education Statistics (2026). “Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary Education: School Year 2023–24 (Fiscal Year 2024).” NCES 2026-008. ies.ed.gov
  3. National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics, Table 317.10 (degree-granting institutions, 2022–23). nces.ed.gov
  4. National Center for Education Statistics (2024). “Higher percentage of K-12 students are receiving academic instruction at home.” National Household Education Surveys 2023. ies.ed.gov
  5. National Center for Education Statistics (2023). “Documentation for the NCES Common Core of Data School District Finance Survey (F-33), FY 2021.” NCES 2024-304. nces.ed.gov
  6. US Department of Education. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund. ed.gov
  7. US Department of Education (2024). “ARP ESSER and EANS Obligation Deadlines and Extensions.” Grantee communication, June 12, 2024. ed.gov
  8. US Department of Education (2025). Letter to states on ESF reimbursement and extensions, May 2025. ed.gov
  9. Clinton, C., Master, B., Rainey, L. and Keskin, S. (2026). “Shrinking Budgets, Fewer Students.” RAND, RR-A4737-4. rand.org
  10. EdWeek Research Center (2024). “Strategic Resourcing for K-12 Education: A Work in Progress.” Survey of 270 district and school leaders. edweek.org
  11. Covelli, L., Wolfe, R., Steiner, E. and Diliberti, M. (2026). “What Factors Drive the Adoption of High-Quality Math Curricula and Professional Learning?” RAND, RR-A4632-1. rand.org
  12. 20 U.S.C. 7801(21), definition of “evidence-based” (Every Student Succeeds Act). uscode.house.gov
  13. Instructure (2025). EdTech Top 40 report press release. Vendor research. instructure.com
  14. US Department of Education, Student Privacy Policy Office (2015). “Responsibilities of Third-Party Service Providers under FERPA.” studentprivacy.ed.gov
  15. Federal Trade Commission (2025). Children's Online Privacy Protection Rule, final rule, 90 FR, April 22, 2025. federalregister.gov
  16. Federal Trade Commission (2022). “Policy Statement on Education Technology and the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act.” ftc.gov
  17. California Attorney General. “Privacy Laws” (SOPIPA). oag.ca.gov
  18. CoSN (2026). “U.S. State of EdTech 2026.” Survey of 607 district technology leaders; produced with vendor partners. cosn.org
  19. Doss, C., Bozick, R., Schwartz, H. L. and others (2025). “AI Use in Schools Is Quickly Increasing but Guidance Lags Behind.” RAND, RR-A4180-1. rand.org
  20. US Department of Education (2025). “U.S. Department of Education Issues Guidance on Artificial Intelligence Use in Schools.” Press release, July 22, 2025. ed.gov
  21. 2 CFR 200.318(e), general procurement standards. ecfr.gov
  22. New York State Education Department. “Cooperative Purchasing.” p12.nysed.gov
  23. McCormack, M. and the 2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10 Panel (2025). “2026 EDUCAUSE Top 10: Making Connections.” EDUCAUSE Review. er.educause.edu
  24. EDUCAUSE. Higher Education Community Vendor Assessment Toolkit (HECVAT). educause.edu
  25. Instructure, Inc. (2015). Registration statement on Form S-1, filed October 9, 2015. US Securities and Exchange Commission. sec.gov
  26. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. (2021). Prospectus (Form 424B4), July 2021. sec.gov
  27. PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. (2022). Annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year 2021, filed March 2022. sec.gov
  28. Duolingo, Inc. (2021). Prospectus (Form 424B4), July 2021. sec.gov

More in Industry Playbooks

Part of the Industry Playbooks hub - see all 7 resources on this topic.

Also useful in Strategy & Positioning.