Full disclosure before we begin: STEM-Xpert is an ed-tech company, so we have an interest in this topic. That's exactly why we think it's worth being honest about it, including the uncomfortable parts.
The uncomfortable part is this. UNESCO's 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report, Technology in Education: A Tool on Whose Terms?, concluded that there is little robust, independent evidence on digital technology's added value in education. Some technology can improve some types of learning in some contexts, but the evidence is mixed. In the same report, a review in the UK found that only 7% of education technology companies had run randomized controlled trials, and a survey of teachers and administrators in 17 US states found that just 11% asked for peer-reviewed evidence before adopting ed-tech.
The encouraging part is that when technology and teaching are designed together, it can work. The same report notes that evaluations of personalized adaptive software in India documented learning gains in after-school settings and for low-performing students.
The difference between those two outcomes often comes down to one thing: how well schools and ed-tech companies work together.
Why Neither Side Can Do It Alone
Schools and ed-tech companies bring very different strengths, and each is weak where the other is strong.
Schools bring deep knowledge of their students, their curriculum, their timetables, and what actually happens in a classroom on a Tuesday afternoon. They know what teachers can realistically manage and what students need.
Ed-tech companies bring technical expertise, tested content and tools, the ability to build and update products quickly, and experience from working with many schools.
Without the school's knowledge, a company builds tools that don't fit real classrooms. Without the company's expertise, schools struggle to access up-to-date tools and training. A good partnership combines both.
What Happens When Collaboration Is Weak
The research is blunt about how things go wrong:
- Technology without outcomes in mind. An evaluation of a major multi-company education partnership, cited in the GEM Report, found that it had not focused enough on education outcomes, had underestimated the complexity of education, and had not monitored or evaluated implementation.
- Evidence lags behind products. The report notes that education technology products change, on average, every 36 months, faster than they can be properly evaluated.
- Training falls through the cracks. The GEM Report highlights that professional learning often fails to address teaching with technology, leaving teachers without the skills to use it well.
- Short-term projects fade. EdTech Hub, a global research partnership, has argued that real partnerships need to move beyond short-term projects to long-term, context-driven, cost-effective models that last.
These aren't problems with technology itself. They are problems with how it's introduced.
What Good Collaboration Looks Like
Research and practitioner experience, including a 2026 report from UNICEF and EdTech Hub, point to several features of partnerships that work:
1. Shared learning goals. The partnership starts from what students need to learn, not from a product catalogue.
2. Co-design with teachers. EdTech Hub's guidance is to keep teachers at the centre and treat them as co-designers and decision-makers rather than passive recipients. Participatory, iterative design that reflects teachers' lived experience produces tools that fit classrooms better.
3. Alignment with curriculum and national goals. Technology works best when it's tied to pedagogy, the curriculum, and educational priorities, not added on top.
4. Teacher development. Adoption depends not only on technology but on teacher training, community engagement, and flexibility to combine online, offline, and low-tech approaches. A meta-analysis of 128 studies on teacher professional development found it improves student achievement on average, but only when well designed.
5. Honest evidence and evaluation. Good partners track what's working, share results, and are willing to change course.
6. Fit to context. Solutions should work with the school's real infrastructure, whether that means strong internet or very limited connectivity.
7. Sustainability and local ownership. The goal is for the school to be able to run and sustain the programme, not to depend on the vendor forever.
8. Safety and ethics. Child data privacy, transparency about AI use, and clear boundaries on what technology should and shouldn't do.
Questions Every School Should Ask an Ed-Tech Partner
Because the evidence gap is real, schools are right to ask hard questions. Here are some worth asking any ed-tech company, including us:
- What learning outcome is this designed to improve, and how do you know it works? Ask for evidence, such as independent evaluations or published studies, and be wary of purely promotional claims.
- Who helped design this? Were teachers involved?
- How does it fit our curriculum and timetable? Or does it sit outside them?
- What teacher training is included? And is it a one-off or ongoing?
- What happens in year two and year three? Who maintains, updates, and supports it?
- Does it work with our infrastructure? Including during poor connectivity?
- What student data is collected, and how is it protected?
- How will we measure whether it's working? And what happens if it isn't?
India has begun to build tools to help. Edtech Tulna, a partnership between a private think tank and a public university, offers quality standards, an evaluation toolkit, and publicly available expert reviews of ed-tech products, which the GEM Report highlights as a model for evidence-based decisions.
Why This Matters Now in India
India's schools are being asked to do a lot at once. The Ministry of Education has announced that AI and Computational Thinking will be introduced from Class 3 onwards beginning in 2026-27, and CBSE's Kaushal Bodh and Composite Skill Labs bring Robotics, Coding, AI, and IoT into the regular school day. Many schools don't yet have the equipment, curriculum materials, or trained facilitators to deliver this alone. They need partners, and that makes choosing good ones, and working with them well, more important than ever.
How STEM-Xpert Approaches Partnership
We try to build our work around the principles above, and we welcome schools holding us to them:
- Curriculum alignment. Composite Skill Labs and Kaushal Bodh centres, aligned with CBSE's CTAI framework, are designed to fit the school day and the national framework, not to sit outside it.
- Teacher development. The STEM Facilitator Course and AI for Teachers on STEM Academy are there because equipment without trained teachers rarely delivers results, and because we want schools to be able to run programmes themselves.
- Hands-on, hardware-based learning. Robotics Labs, AIoT Labs, Tinkering Labs, the STEM Innovation Kit, and Crinnoboard are designed for learning by building, and don't depend entirely on constant high-speed internet.
- Progression across grades. Coding and AI courses from Grade 1 to 12, so students build skills over years rather than through one-off activities.
- Structure and support. The LMS Application and STEM Academy help schools manage and extend learning.
- A visible classroom innovation. The AI-powered Humanoid Teaching Assistant Robot, designed to support teachers, not replace them.
We work with schools, colleges, educators, and institutions in India and, through our partner programme, in the Middle East, Africa, and ASEAN. We still have plenty to learn, and the best partnerships are ones where schools tell us honestly what is and isn't working.
The Bigger Picture
Technology doesn't improve education on its own. Teachers don't either, when they're left without tools, training, or support. The best results come when schools and ed-tech companies work as genuine partners: starting from learning goals, designing together with teachers, building in training and evaluation, and staying accountable for outcomes. As the evidence gap shows, trust in ed-tech has to be earned. Schools that ask hard questions, and companies that welcome them, will do the most good for students.
If your school is exploring a STEM partnership, whether for Robotics Labs, AIoT Labs, Tinkering Labs, the STEM Innovation Kit, the Crinnoboard, or Composite Skill Labs, get in touch with STEM-Xpert. Bring your toughest questions, and we'll bring honest answers.
FAQs
1. Is ed-tech actually effective in schools? The evidence is mixed. UNESCO's 2023 GEM Report found little robust independent evidence on technology's added value overall, but also that some technology improves some kinds of learning in some contexts, including personalized adaptive software in India.
2. Why does collaboration between schools and ed-tech companies matter? Schools understand students, curriculum, and classroom reality, and companies bring technical expertise and tools. Research suggests technology works best when teachers are involved in design, training is included, and outcomes are evaluated.
3. What should a school ask before adopting an ed-tech product? Ask about evidence of impact, teacher involvement in design, curriculum fit, training, long-term support, infrastructure needs, data protection, and how success will be measured.
4. How does STEM-Xpert work with schools? Through CBSE-aligned Composite Skill Labs and Kaushal Bodh centres, Robotics Labs, AIoT Labs, Tinkering Labs, the STEM Innovation Kit, the Crinnoboard, and teacher training via the STEM Facilitator Course, for Grade 1 to 12.
Fasalu Rahman CEO, STEM-Xpert
About Author Fasalu Rahman C is an education entrepreneur, STEM advocate, and the Founder & CEO of STEM-Xpert.
Comments
Post a Comment