2023 ED TECH

Product & Leadership Categories

Ed Tech Product Categories

Honoring the best ed tech products and leaders in the industry

PR agencies, product developers and investors are invited to nominate products in one or more CODiE Award categories. Each entry also qualifies for the Best Overall Ed Tech Solution, awarded to the product that receives top scores from both rounds of review. The winning solution will be announced during the CODiE Award Winner Announcement in June 2023.
Scroll down to review all product and leadership categories

To view complete product description and judging criteria, click on the + next to the category name.

Recognizes the best non-instructional business management application or service that supports education. Includes privacy tools, class/lecture capture solutions, network services, human resources/talent management, enterprise management, digital communication/security solutions, scheduling and registration services or student information systems.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Customization – Is the solution easily customizable for different types of departments, stakeholders, user needs and education scenarios?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set meet the needs of the administration?
  • Design – Do the universal design features within the product appropriately meet the needs of education users? Is the product designed to be usable by all without the need for adaptation or specialized programming?
  • Innovation – Is the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas or features?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for integrating social media tools, internal data, curriculum, third-party content or standards information?
  • Navigation – Can the user easily and efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the key features?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast).
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for intended users? (e.g. Role administration specific to administrators, faculty/teachers, students, parents, etc.)
  • Security/Privacy – Does the solution provide suitable and sufficient security and privacy safeguards?

Recognizes the best solution that supports the efforts of organizations (businesses, government and Education) to deliver, track and manage employee, faculty & customer training on topics ranging from compliance, to reskilling/upskilling, to customer and partner training content. The content and the learning experience should be designed to aid the successful execution of an employee’s job or provide appropriate resources for the extended enterprise network.

Judges will be looking for:

Accessibility – Does the system support use by different types of users, including those with unique learning needs or disabilities?

Assessment – How well does the solution support L1, L3 feedback, assessments and certification/credentialing of learners?

Customization – Is the solution customizable for different brands, different types of courses, different media types, learner needs and outcomes?

Feedback – How well does the solution provide learners with personalized feedback that helps reinforce or improve their skill set?

Innovation – How well does the solution incorporate strategies or functionality from the latest research on teaching, learning and assessment e.g. Social Learning?

Integration –How well does the solution provide standards-compliant and open capabilities for integration with internally and externally-provided content and assessment, communication tools, and internal data, appropriate to the user type e.g SCORM, AICC

Learner Experience – How well does the system support different content types, different consumption devices and internet speeds? Is the solution optimized to be used on various devices and platforms and deliver various types of content?

Positive impact – How well does the solution support positive impact on course development, assessment, and training? Is it easy to do the things that matter ? How easy is the platform to use and get going without the need for advanced training ?

Privacy – Does the system include robust security features that protect user data and privacy?

Reports – How well does the system provide reporting that is granular, flexible, informative, extensible and action-oriented?

Usability – How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?

Recognizes the best educational solution or platform that teaches students coding and computational skills, logic, problem solving, computer science, and algorithmic thinking. Solutions may include programming language platforms, robotics and coding courses, not excluding hardware options or a blend of hardware and software. Solutions should allow students to think creatively, receive appropriate feedback, reason systematically, work collaboratively and share their creations with others.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Assessment Reports– How well does the system produce useful reports for both students and administrators? Does the system allow the administrator to aggregate and disaggregate the data?
  • Collaboration – How easily can students interact with each other, teachers, and experts on tasks, activities, problems? Can collaboration span globally?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs – student and administrator, and education outcomes?
  • Engagement – Does the product make learners excited to learn?
  • Feature set – Do the features incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? Do learners have the opportunity to act on feedback?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning and standards around coding, innovative approaches to learning, and/or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge of problem solving and computational thinking skills in the targeted areas? Does the solution promote student creativity?
  • Navigation – Can the user easily and efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the key features?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms?
  • Publishing, archiving and sharing – Can student’s work easily be shared through social media and/or on the web?
  • Transferability – How easily can you build code in one product and apply it to other products?

Recognizes the online solution designed to provide social learning, collaborative and community support for PK-12 or higher education teachers and administrators. This Includes tools for communication, professional learning experiences, resource centers, collaboration and planning tools and other interactive, social media solutions and tech tools between and among teachers, staff, administration, and community.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Can users of all abilities navigate and perform tasks within the standard product structure? Does this product meet Section 508 and the WCAG standards? 
  • Customization – To what extent does the solution support customization by the educator user?
  • Design – Is the solution well designed, effective, easy-to-use, and does it properly meet the needs of the intended user audience? 
  • Innovation/ creativity – Does the system incorporate recent research on communication in learning, innovative approaches to teaching and collaboration, and/or access to new tools with high user interest?
  • Permissions – Can permissions be set so there are different levels such as viewing, editing, admin?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver/ respond with various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Positive impact -How well does the system produce a positive impact on the education community and/or the learning process?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the educator interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?
  • Reporting/Data – How easily can users quickly see student data/progress? – how often are updates made and how is user input/voice taken into consideration?
  • Collaboration – How easy is it for users to collaborate in real time?

Recognizes the best digital product or service that develops 21st Century workforce skills and knowledge for students. Includes applications that help close the gap between a learner’s current interest and skills and the needs and expectations in the workplace.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does the product meet mandated accessibility standards, such as Section 508? Does it offer other outstanding accessibility features?
  • Assessment – Do the assessment capabilities help student achieve learning goals and outcomes?
  • Customization – Is the learning solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs,  and education outcomes?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately develop 21st Century workforce skills and knowledge for students?  
  • Feedback – Do learners with different learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? Is feedback available in a variety of formats including audio, video, text, etc? 
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms and deliver various types of content?
  • Reports – Does the system produce useful reports that help inform/improve teaching and learning? Is data downloadable? Can the user create custom reports?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can users interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?

Recognizes the best solution designed for users to be able to create, modify, design, alter, combine, customize, and curate multiple content sources and formats, and share digital content for effective and engaged learning in the PreK-20 learning areas.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility- Does the system support use by different types of users, including those with unique learning needs or disabilities? Can users access learning objects and collections of learning objects collaboratively? Is the system device agnostic? 
  • Collaboration – Does the product enable collaboration across team members to include members feedback in different roles (such as designer, author, manager, reviewer)?
  • Cost-benefit and scalability – To what extent is there a cost or benefit to the user developing learning objects in such a system as opposed to creating a custom authoring solution? Does the feature set scale to meet the needs of education users?
  • Customization – How easily can the user customize, alter or modify learning objects from the point of view of design and branding, or organize collections for specific groups (students, parents, etc.) and communicate their availability? 
  • Ease of use – How easy is the tool to use? Is there an appropriate level of support? 
  • Innovation – Is the product using innovative technology, strategies, ideas or features?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for integrating social media tools, third-party content or standards information?
  • Navigation – How easily can the user navigate through the solution and interact with the key features from both desktop and mobile devices?
  • Reporting and analytics – Will the system generate useful learning journey data for analytics and business intelligence solutions?
  • Searchability – Is the content searchable by multiple terms including grade level, standard, subject and topic? Is the metadata fully customizable?
  • Shareability – can the user share learning objects and collections with others through various means such as e-mail and social media?
  • Standards alignment – Is the content aligned to instructional standards selected by the user? Are these instructional standards customizable in the metadata?

Recognizes the best Digital Citizenship, the ethical and responsible use of technology, solutions for use with administrators, teachers, librarians, parents and students in education. This includes solutions which raise awareness and build capacity for all stakeholders to promote and build a safe, secure and positive school online community.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Digital safety – How well does the solution address universal pain points around digital safety including (but not limited to) cyberbullying, sextortion, phishing, identity theft, and overall stress/anxiety associated with too much screen time.
  • Digital Safety in schools – How well does the solution address digital citizenship in schools/learning organizations for all stakeholders (K-12 Students, Teachers, Parents, Librarians and Administrators).
  • Research – Does the provider offer field tested research-based content that developed after direct work with students, parents and teachers.
  • Innovation – How well is the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas or features? Does it address the up-to-date realities of the digital world?
  • Integration – How easily does the tool integrate with social media tools, internal data, curriculum, third-party content or standards information?
  • Navigation – How easy is it for the user to efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the key features?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast)?

Recognizes the best software or digital service that’s primary purpose is the application of data analytics to improve PK-12 or higher education teaching, learning, retention, and/ or growth strategies, and decision-making within an educational or training environment.

Be sure to include ESSA  evidence.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different sources of data, user needs, and business outcomes?
  • Data democratization – Does the product allow viewing of data from different perspectives and roles?
  • Innovation – Does the product provide a unique solution to a problem?
  • Alignment with Policy (e.g. Every Student Succeeds Act) 
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for extracting, cleaning, transforming, and transferring internal/external data, third-party content or standards information?
  • Navigation – Can users quickly and efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the essential features?
  • Performance – Does the solution operate optimally while working with large data sets? How well does it perform generally?                
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized for various platforms (e.g., desktop, tablet, mobile)?
  • Reports – Does the system produce useful reports for intended users?  Is feedback available in real time to solve the problems that are arising while working with the system?
  • Security/Privacy – Does the solution provide suitable and sufficient security and privacy safeguards? (e.g., de-identification, k-anonymity, privacy-preserving practices, GDPR, etc.)
  • Usability – How quickly and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?
  • Visualization – Is there a system of engagement that visualizes complex data in a meaningful way for technical and non-technical stakeholders?

Recognizes the best game-based learning solution designed for PK-12 or higher education students. The winning solution enables users to learn or apply new concepts and skills, and better understand subjects being taught, through academically and pedagogically sound and rigorous (both in content and methodology) games. Gamified learning tools please nominate in the Best Gamification in Learning category.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility / inclusivity – How well does the solution accommodate students with diverse learning needs?
  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Do the assessments complement the game-based environment to maximize interactivity within the assessment content itself?
  • Customization – How well does the solution adapt difficulty or content to individual learner performance?
  • Feature set – How well does the feature set incorporated within the solution appropriately meet the needs of the teacher, the student, administrators, and parents? Provide examples of each where appropriate.
  • Feedback -How well is feedback to the learner based on individual learner performance, with learner-appropriate, informative, actionable, encouraging and well-timed messages?
  • Focus / balance – How well does the game balance the design requirements of the game with the learning task performance and feedback?
  • Game design – How well do the learner tasks in the game accurately incorporate the cognitive processes implicit in the defined learning outcomes?
  • Engagement – How well does the game hold the user’s interest?Is the UX and interface engaging/ visually appealing?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms and deliver various types of content?
  • Reports – How well do system reports provide actionable information to the student, the teacher, administrators, and parents? Are these reports customizable?
  • User experience (instructor) – how easily can the teacher integrate the game into the flow of the classroom and curriculum, without formal training?
  • User experience – How well do the elements of game play create a compelling experience that is easy to use? Does the game offer a variety of experiences to maximize student replay ability?

Recognizes the best educational platform or solution for faculty, administration and students in grades  PK-20. Provides all applications and files for anywhere, anytime availability, using any device at home or at school.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does the system support use by different types of users, including those who are deaf, blind or have other unique needs?
  • Assessment – How well does the solution support L1, L3 feedback, assessments and certification/credentialing of learners?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different brands, different types of courses, different media types, learner needs including special education needs and outcomes? 
  • Feedback – How well does the solution provide learners with personalized feedback that helps reinforce or improve their skill set?
  • Innovation – How well does the solution incorporate strategies or functionality from the latest research on teaching, learning and assessment e.g. Social Learning?
  • Integration –How well does the solution provide standards-compliant and open capabilities for integration with internally and externally-provided content and assessment, communication tools, and internal data, appropriate to the user type e.g SCORM, AICC
  • Learner Experience – How well does the system support different content types, different consumption devices and internet speeds?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various devices and platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, Android, iOS) and deliver various types of content (PPTx, PDFs, DOCx, images, audio, video, interactive HTML5)?
  • Positive impact – How well does the solution support positive impact on course development, assessment, and training? Is it easy to do the things that matter ? How easy is the platform to use and get going without the need for advanced training ?
  • Privacy – Does the system include security features that protect user data and privacy?
  • Reports – How well does the system provide reporting that is granular, flexible, informative, extensible and action-oriented?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?

Recognizes the best application focusing on enrichment or non-core curriculum areas for students in the PK-12 or higher education market. These areas include art, music, health, technology, vocational/career planning, or multidisciplinary topics.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user?
  • Customization – How customizable is the solution for different types of content areas, courses, user needs/accessibility and education outcomes?
  • Feature set – How well do the product features meet the needs of the users (including special needs and diverse students?)?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – How well is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge, interest, and skills in the targeted areas?
  • Integration -How easily does the solution integrate into a larger framework? Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in learning standards, curriculum, third- party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information? 
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reports -How robust are the reports? How well do they serve the needs of the organization and the users (students, parents, teachers etc.) who access them?

Recognizes a new and innovative technology solution that is designed to solve an administrative problem or improve operational efficiency and processes for schools or higher education institutions. This new tool could support administrators in their education management or communication functions. All nominated products in this category must be less than three years old.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Can users of all abilities navigate and perform tasks within the standard product structure? Does this product meet Section 508 and the WCAG standards? 
  • Disruption – Does the tool have the potential to disrupt the education market and provide long-term benefits or new outcomes? 
  • Efficacy – Does the technology incorporate recent research on administrative functions? How has this research impacted the development of the product? These areas should be highlighted and show significant impact to achieve desired goals.
  • Impact – To what degree does the technology represent progressive developments within administrative functions?
  • Innovation – How is this tool or its features new/unique in approach or implementation? How does the solution impact the user experience?
  • Results – Can this tool help administrators fulfill their functions more effectively and efficiently?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can users interact with the product features to achieve the desired result? Can the administrators interact and respond through the tool?

Recognizes a new and innovative preK-20 technology-based solution that is used to solve an instructional challenge in a formal learning environment. It can change how students learn, increase their interest and persistence in a learning environment, or provide improved access to instruction through new delivery channels. To qualify nominated products in this category must be less than 5 years old or have received a major upgrade of features and functionality.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution use effective personalization strategies? How well is the product designed for its defined learner profile?
  • Disruption – Does the tool have the potential to disrupt the education market at scale? 
  • Efficacy – Does the technology incorporate recent research on the teaching and learning design principles? These areas should be highlighted and show meaningful impact.
  • Impact – To what degree can this product support a defined, substantial improvement in the teaching and learning process?
  • Innovation/ creativity – Is this tool or its features original in its approach or implementation?
  • Relevance – How much is this technology needed in the education market? Include examples of the area(s) that could benefit – such as retention, comprehension, higher engagement and successful outcomes such as advancement, participation and experience.
  • Simplicity / Feature Rich Balance – Does the product include too many or too little features to be usable / innovative? 
  • Usability – How well are the users and their use case(s) identified? How quickly and easily can teachers and students adopt and master the product’s features and functionality enough to see meaningful benefits?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for reading, writing or literature curricula and content for students in the PK-8 market. Includes solutions for learners at all levels, through managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction. Provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice. 

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated? Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – How useful are the assessment features and are the assessment outputs clear? How personalized are the assessments and do they inform future instruction or adapt to the needs of the student?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – How well do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate and does the content produce a desired or intended result? Support with data.
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the solution to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Do teachers need to do significant work to learn the solution, supplement or clarify the content? Is the product useful to the teacher in a way that won’t cause more work or stress to implement it?
  • Engagement – how well does the offering keep educators and students engaged and interested? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the best formative student assessment solution that identifies a student’s learning gaps and learning standard they have not yet achieved throughout a class or course, and assesses how to close those gaps to improve student achievement. This category is available for PK-12 or higher education solutions.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Instructional Impact – Does the solution help learners or educators identify immediate learning gaps? Does the solution address those learning gaps directly or enable educators to address those gaps?
  • Innovation – Is the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas or features?
  • Navigation – Can the user easily and efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the key features?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized for the user of various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) Cloud-based should be added and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reporting and analytics – Will the system produce useful analysis and reports for intended users?
  • Scalability – Does the feature set scale to meet the needs of PK-12 education users?
  • Support – How well does the solution provide support for the educator/faculty? How well does the solution offer users prescriptive assistance?
  • Usability – How effective and flexible is the solution to assess student learning as it is happening (during class instruction)? How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content? Can teachers edit language in the product to meet student needs and fit with local school cultural differences and languages?

Recognizes the education solution that best uses gamification or game theory to motivate users to achieve desired results and promote desired behaviors in a learning environment. The winning solution successfully integrates game mechanics with training content to maximize enjoyment and engagement and inspire users to continue learning.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility / inclusivity – Does the solution accommodate students with diverse learning needs? 
  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user in achieving desired learning outcomes?
  • Educational outcomes – How beneficial are the gamification elements for improving educational outcomes?
  • Engagement – How compelling is the design for keeping the user engaged?
  • Feature set – How well does the feature set incorporated within the solution appropriately meet the needs of the teacher, the student, administrators, and parents? How effective are the reward features such as badges, incentives, points, leaderboards, etc
  • Feedback -How appropriate is the feedback to the learner in improving learning outcomes? Is it learner-appropriate, informative, actionable, encouraging and well-timed?
  • User experience – How well does the tool create a compelling, easy to use experience?

Recognizes the best instructional solution that offers curriculum and content for students in Higher Education humanities subjects. The winning solution includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for all student learners so they can learn and apply concepts and methods, and provides deep and personalized learning experiences for students.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear; do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • Authenticity – Are the problems or projects based on authentic real world situations, events, people or places? Does the solution use real world examples?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge and produce a desired result? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? 
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy for administrators, educators, and students to use? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, and highlight areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms? Does it support various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless where the user may continue where they left off? 

Recognizes the best education technology product that supports remote learning for higher education. This includes all asynchronous and synchronous learning applications, learning management systems, network services, hardware, and school administrative applications.

Each entry should include a written or video response highlighting how they align to the judging criteria. Nominees will also have the opportunity to meet with their two assigned judges.

Judges will be looking for:

  • How well does the product support distance learning/ hybrid learning?
  • How well does the product respond to the transition from in person to distance or hybrid learning and how well does it support the transition back to in person learning?  Does the product offer unique solutions that make the transition easier?
  • How well does the product help students learn in a distance and/or hybrid environment?
  • How well does the product help administrators manage in a distance and/or hybrid environment?
  • How well does the product help the school address equity issues around distance/ hybrid learning?
  • How well does the product help teachers teach, and manage, in a distance and/or hybrid environment?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for science, technology, engineering and math curricula and content for students in Higher Education. Provides deep and personalized learning experiences for students and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Differentiation– How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles, abilities and different levels of proficiency?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences?
  • Assessment – Does the solution offer a range of assessments to support the student/ instructor and inform future instruction?  How clear and personalized are the assessments?
  • Cohesiveness – Is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized, sequenced and connected across all 4 disciplines?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs?
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering for administrators, educators, students etc.? Are all resources readily accessible and do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content or instruction?
  • Engagement – How well does the offering keep users engaged and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – How well does the solution provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback to help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information? Is data from the solution easily exportable?
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – How optimally and seamlessly can the offering be used on various platforms and support various content formats?

The Best K-12 Remote Learner Partner category recognizes the best education technology product that supports remote learning for grades PK-12. Eligible products include those that offer asynchronous and synchronous learning applications, learning management systems, network services, hardware, and school administrative applications.

The entry must include a written response addressing the evaluation criteria below. Nominees in this category will also have the opportunity to demo with both of their assigned reviewers.

Judges will be looking for:

  • How well does the product respond to the transition from in person to distance or hybrid learning?
  • How well does the product support the transition back to in person learning and to what extent does the product offer unique solutions that make the transition from/to in person to distance/hybrid easier?
  • Does the product help support parents or guardians of students in a distance and/or hybrid environment?
  • How well does the product help administrators manage instruction in a distance and/or hybrid environment?
  • How well does the product help the school address equity issues around distance/hybrid learning?
  • How well does the product help teachers teach and manage in a distance and/or hybrid environment?
  • Ease of use – How difficult is it to install the software for multiple users?
  • Is the software multilingual?
  • What accommodations are provided for students with disabilities, such as blindness or auditory issues?
  • Are the product cohorts – both direct and indirect – clearly identified? Please specify the grade levels supported by the software.
  • Feature set – Are the identified product features meeting  teachers’ needs? Examples include: Is automatic grading available?  Is rubric-based grading available?  Are personalized feedback options available?

Recognizes the best language acquisition solution designed to help non-native speakers learn, increase their knowledge of, or maintain new language skills through course-based language learning curricula, content, online supplemental instruction and assessment. 

Judges will be looking for:

  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Does the assessment place the student at an appropriate level of language/ content acquisition?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs and education outcomes? Does it offer customized learning pathways based on the students’ language level?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users, such as including translation features?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate immediate, corrective feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? Do students receive feedback in their native language?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, pedagogical approaches, such as language acquisition theories, innovative approaches to learning, or engagement?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills in the targeted areas using differentiated instructional methods? Is the curriculum aligned to specific language standards and/or language objectives?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for the organization/ user? Does it offer standards alignment for reporting student mastery of specific learning standards of proficiency level?

Recognizes the best digital learning platform or LMS designed for K-8, 9-12 and/or higher education markets. These online learning platforms allow educators and administrators to develop, design, and manage course content, allow students to access and interact with content and provide data management and reporting tools. Platforms should support a wide range of pedagogical applications, including blended learning, fully online learning, personalized learning, hybrid and flipped classrooms.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Access – Is the platform accessible from devices with out-of-date operating software? Is there offline support for consuming content?
  • Accessibility – To what extent does the platform support WCAG 2.0 Level AA accessibility standards? Are parent- facing features equally as accessible for parents with disabilities as parents without disabilities?
  • Customization – Is the system customizable for different types of courses, user needs and educational outcomes? Does the LMS allow parent views?
  • Design flexibility – Does the solution offer a similarly feature-rich user experience regardless of the platform?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of education users?
  • Innovation – Iis the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas, content or features?
  • Integration – Does it provide simple methods for effectively integrating the platform with a school or district’s other edtech tools and instructional content? (central office systems, student data systems, curriculum, assessment tools, etc.)
  • Parent Access – Does the platform provide features to allow appropriate parental engagement with their student’s coursework or teachers?
  • Positive impact – Does the system either include assessment capabilities or integrate easily with assessment tools?
  • Privacy – How well does the LMS protect the privacy of users?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for intended users? Are these reports customizable, exportable, and flexible?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can K-12 students and educators 
  •  interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result? Does the user experience equally extend to non-readers?

Recognizes the tool that best helps the user identify learning gaps and provides resources to help close those gaps in a fun and engaging way.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Adaptability – How adaptable is the solution for students with diverse learning styles and abilities/accessibility? Does it meet students where they are in their skill level (behind, above, and on-grade level)?
  • Feature set – Can students use the tool by themselves or as a group (allowing multiple people to play/ problem solve together)? 
  • Ease of use – How intuitive is the tool and interface? Is the learning curve appropriate for the age of the student?
  • Engagement – How engaging and fun is the tool to use for the learner? Does it help boost confidence in their skill development?
  • Data & Reporting – Does the tool provide sufficient and appropriate reports and data to identify learning gaps and provide recommendations to improve outcomes? 
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning?
  • Standards – Does the tool align with grade/ age appropriate learning standards?
  • Support – Does the tool offer effective easy to find support for users?

Recognizes the best instructional product that offers mathematics curriculum and content for students in the PK-8 market. It includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for all student learners so they can learn and apply mathematics concepts and methods. The solution provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – how well is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear and inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment? Can students create their own assessment items and / or provide peer feedback?
  • Authenticity – Are the problems or projects based on authentic real world situations, events, people or places? Does the solution use real world examples?
  • cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age- appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content or ins
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms in various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the best instructional solution that offers mathematics curriculum and content for high school students in algebra, geometry, calculus and other advanced math subjects. The winning solution includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for all student learners so they can learn and apply mathematics concepts and methods, and provides deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated? Does the solution support various languages and disabilities?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards (i.e.both core and state)? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear; do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • Authenticity – Are the problems or projects based on authentic real world situations, events, people or places? Does the solution use real world examples?
  • Cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge and produce a desired result? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? 
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms? Does it support various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless where the user may continue where they left off?

Recognizes the solution that best supports teachers in meeting the individual learning needs of their students. The solution evaluates student progress throughout the course and makes personalized recommendations on how each student can achieve their learning objectives.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Access – Is the solution accessible from devices with out-of-date operating software and is there offline support for consuming content? Is the solution mobile friendly or does it have an app? To what extent does the platform support WCAG 2.0 Level AA accessibility standards? 
  • Customization – Is the system customizable for different types of courses, Instructional strategies, learning environments, user needs and educational outcomes? 
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of education users? Is it innovative?
  • Integration – Does the solution easily and effectively integrate with a school’s other systems and data?
  • Parent Access – Does the platform provide features to allow appropriate parental engagement with their student’s coursework or teachers? Please select N/A if no parent access is provided.
  • Positive impact – Does the system either include assessment capabilities or integrate easily with assessment tools?
  • Privacy – Does the system adequately protect the privacy of the user? The demo should provide examples of how they are protecting user data.
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for intended users? Are these reports customizable, exportable, and flexible?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the student end user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result? Does the user experience equally extend to non-readers?

Recognizes the best digital or blended curriculum product providing or supporting learning for children ages 3-5. Includes applications designed for tablets and/or desktop computers, in areas such as pre-literacy and numeracy content, assessment and reporting, for use at home or in early childhood development settings.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does the solution support learners who are deaf, blind or have other learning or unique needs?
  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for this age user?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs in the pre-K learning areas?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of using the solution? Can feedback be given in various formats including video?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills in the targeted areas?
  • Is the product intended for early childhood education (Prek ages 3-5)? If no, provide a score of 1.
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various devices and platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for the organization, the parents and the user?

Recognizes the best educational application or service designed to support PK-12 or higher education institutions and the educational needs/ professional development of teachers and administrative staff. Includes stand-alone or programs packaged with other products and delivered through an online application, streaming video or other means.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Is the solution accessible to users with diverse needs? Is the solution available on demand? Can the accessibility be restricted (time, date range, content etc.)?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs/accessibility, district needs and education outcomes? Does the solution offer customized learning pathways for personalizing instruction? 
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users? Can this be used asynchronously? How robust is the quality and range of the content?
  • Feedback – Do learners receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? Does the tool allow the user to interact and respond through text, audio, and video?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for the organization and the user? Does it offer alignment of standards for professional learning or reporting mastery of objectives?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for reading, writing or literature curricula and content for students in grades 9-12. Includes solutions for learners at all levels, through managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction. Provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear; do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative? Is Personal information  kept secure and confidential?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms in various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the solution that allows users to quickly reference materials, library or research information or disaggregated media assets for educational purposes in the PK-12 or higher education markets. This service can include content such as encyclopedias, maps, databases and primary source material.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – is the tool accessible to all users?
  • Content validity – Are users & administrators able to measure/evaluate content validity using the information provided? Will students be able to identify information ethics, authority-bias and other measures of digital literacy?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of user needs and outcomes?
  • Integration – Does the solution provide straightforward methods for integrating social media tools, internal data, curriculum, third-party content, standards information, personal information management, or research management tools?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized for the user of various platforms and delivers various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reporting and analytics – Will the system produce useful analysis and reports for intended users?
  • Scalability – Does the feature set scale to meet the needs of education users?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their targeted results? How easy is it for users to receive meaningful help?

Recognizes the best instructional product that offers science curriculum and content for students in grades PreK-8. Includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for all student learners so they can learn and apply science concepts and methods. The solution provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice. This category includes all science content areas and interdisciplinary science courses.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear and do they inform future instruction? 
  • Cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information to provide the students with real life situations that are relatable to them? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical Flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the best instructional product that offers science curriculum and content for students in grades 9-12 or higher education market. It includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for all student learners so they can learn and apply science concepts and methods. The solution provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice. This category includes all science content areas including biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, etc.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated? 
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear; do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • Cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, etc.? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless?

Recognizes the best blended instructional solution based on the Science of Reading research. Curricula in this category have explicit, systematic, and cumulative approaches to teaching the foundational reading skills including phonological awareness, print concepts, fluency, phonics, and word recognition for grades K-5.

Judges will be looking for:

  • How comprehensive in scope and sequence is the solution in covering all foundational skills for grades K-5? Examples include instruction in alphabetic principle, letter-sound relationship, and handwriting, opportunities to apply decoding, encoding, and fluency skills etc.
  • Is the alignment to national and state standards clear?
  • Does the solution offer sequential instruction—simple to complex with consistent instructional routines? Does it offer a knowledge sequence intentionally designed to help students build background knowledge while mastering foundational skills?
  • Does the solution offer cumulative instruction that instructs, reinforces, reviews, and builds on skills at various stages?
  • Does the solution maintain student interest through interactive student practice and high-interest decodable text?
  • Does the solution offer multimodal and multisensory instruction with opportunities for reteaching and enrichment, as well as independent practice?
  • Does the solution offer robust data and reporting for differentiated instruction and progress monitoring?
  • How flexible are the implementation models?
  • Does the solution offer comprehensive teacher support and professional development options at point of use?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for social sciences / social studies curricula and content for students in the PK- 12 or higher education markets. Includes history, geography, government/political science, economics, etc. via managed classroom/course-based instruction, online supplemental instruction for individuals. Provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment, and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear and inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • Cohesiveness – For offerings that span multiple grade levels, is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? Can teachers change questions or instructions to meet student needs and fit with local school cultural differences?
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? 
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information?
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical Flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and support various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for English Language Learners (ELL) for non native English speakers in the PK-12 or higher education market. Includes course-based language learning curricula and content or online supplemental instruction, and digital assessment and reporting tools that enable teachers to easily monitor progress and guide instruction.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Does the assessment place the student at an appropriate level of language/ content acquisition?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different user needs and education outcomes? Does it offer customized learning pathways for personalizing instruction based on the students’ language level?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate immediate, corrective feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? 
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, pedagogical approaches, such as second language acquisition theories, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills in the targeted areas using differentiated instructional methods? Is the curriculum aligned to specific language standards and/or language objectives?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for the organization and the user? Does it offer standards alignment for reporting student mastery of specific learning standards of proficiency level?

Recognizes the best solution specifically designed to benefit students with unique educational needs, including those with physical or learning disabilities, those with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), or those who are gifted and talented in the PK-12 or higher education market. Includes solutions that are 508 compliant and provide instructional materials that are accessible, with accommodations enabled, or developed under the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL).

Judges will be looking for:

  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative pedagogical approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Integration – Does the solution provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third- party content, social media tools, internal data, IEP goals, or standards information?
  • Accommodations – Do the features incorporated within this product appropriately meet accessibility and accommodation needs of the users? (such as text to speech, use of screen readers, braille printing, etc.) If the solution is cloud based, is it WCAG 3.1
  • Assessment – Are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Can assessments be modified to support individual learning needs? Does the solution allow students to demonstrate content mastery in a variety of ways? 
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs and education or goal- driven outcomes?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies? (i.e. immediate corrective feedback)? 
  • Instructional design – Does the content include instructional strategies that help the teacher to differentiate instruction for students with special needs? Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills.
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for science, technology, engineering and math curricula and content for students in the PK-8. The winning solution provides deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and allows students to apply concepts and make connections between the classroom and the world around them. Includes managed classroom/course-based instruction or online supplemental instruction for individuals.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does the product link standards in a meaningful way? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear; do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • cohesiveness – Is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels and connected across disciplines?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content?
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does it promote student collaboration? Does it capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information? Is data from the solution easily exportable to be utilized in other solutions?
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless, and can one continue where they left off?

Recognizes the best instructional solution for science, technology, engineering and math curricula and content for students in the 9-12 market. Provides for deep and personalized learning experiences for students, supports standards alignment and reflects current curriculum practice.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – How well does the solution accommodate diverse learning styles and abilities? How well are different levels of proficiency accommodated?
  • Alignment to standards – Is the instruction and content aligned to the standards of the target audiences? Does it accommodate various standards? 
  • Assessment – What is the range of assessment offered or supported (diagnostic, formative, summative, etc.)? Is ongoing assessment supported? Are the assessment outputs clear? Do they inform future instruction? How personalized is the assessment?
  • Cohesiveness – Is the content and instructional approach coherent, consistent, aligned, well organized and sequenced across grade levels and connected across all 4 disciplines?
  • Customization – How personalized can the offering be for individual educator or student needs? 
  • Depth of knowledge – Do activities and questions support and convey sufficient depth of knowledge? Is critical thinking engaged and involved where age-appropriate? Does the content produce a desired or intended result?
  • Ease of use & support – How intuitive is the offering? Is it easy to use for administrators, educators, students, and/or parents/guardians? Are all resources readily accessible? Do teachers need to do extra work to supplement or clarify the content or ins
  • Engagement – Does the offering keep educators and students engaged? Does the content/ solution capture and hold student interest? Is the content relatable to the target student/user audience?
  • Feedback – Does the offering provide students and educators with timely and actionable feedback? Does the feedback help in development of skills, strategies, areas requiring reinforcement or remediation? 
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information? Is data from the solution easily exportable?
  • Reporting – What range and quality of reporting does the offering provide or support for educators, administrators, and parents? Is the reporting effective, clear, easily accessible on demand, and informative?
  • Technical flexibility – Can the offering be used optimally on various platforms and support various content formats? Is transition from one platform to another seamless?

Recognizes the best tool for learners in PK-12 or higher education markets that can be used to increase attention, responsibility, independence and engagement in their learning tasks. Includes Social emotional learning, digital tools that use up-to-date research in learning sciences to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the learner’s skills, interest and time on task by optimizing engagement and supporting personalized instruction.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Applicability – How applicable is the tool for use in multiple curriculum areas or courses?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of using the tool?
  • Innovation – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning processes or (Evidence-Based) innovative approaches to teaching? Does the system provide access or information to additional sources for support?
  • Learner measurements – How effectively will the measurements serve the individual needs of the learner, teacher or parent? Does the system allow for the teacher or parent to pinpoint a need?
  • Positive impact – Could the system produce a positive impact on the education community and/or the learning process?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the student interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result? Is the product intuitive?
  • Reporting and data visualization – Does the system / product present actionable data that is easy to interpret by students, parents or teachers? Can the data be downloaded or accessed in multiple ways to see progress over time?

Recognizes the best summative assessment solution that evaluates student learning, knowledge, proficiency, or success at the conclusion of an instructional period to measure student and instructional success. This category is available for PK-12 or higher education solutions.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Able to be edited – Will teachers be able to change questions or instructions to meet student needs?
  • Growth model – Does the solution provide the ability to follow and measure students’ growth in learning in several years?
  • Innovation – Is the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas or features?
  • Navigation – Can the user easily and efficiently navigate through the solution and interact with the key features?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized for the user of various platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, broadcast) Cloud-based should be added and deliver various types of content (text, images, audio, video)?
  • Reporting and analytics – Will the system produce useful analysis and reports for intended users?
  • Scalability – Does the feature set scale to meet the needs of education users?
  • Support – How well does the solution provide support for the educator/faculty? Is the solution customizable to accommodate different user needs?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their targeted results?
  • DEI – How well does the product meet the needs of a diverse community in terms of DEI – flexibility in platforms; access synchronously/asynchronously; languages; readability; culturally appropriate/inclusive language, terms, images; support available during times that respect cultural and religious observation time/ holidays; various accommodations (time, screen reading, voice to text, etc.)

Recognizes the best artificial intelligence, machine or deep learning solution, platform or product that improves learning outcomes and implements solutions that help students succeed.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Ease of implementation – what level of training data or annotation (if any) is required by users in order to make the AI perform as needed?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the audience?
  • Innovation – is the product using cutting edge technology, strategies, ideas or features?
  • Learn – How well does the system grow subject matter expertise in your apps/ systems? To what extent does the system get smarter over time? Does the system have the ability to improve itself over time?
  • Platform flexibility and accessibility – Is the solution made available through the delivery platforms appropriate to the target audience and use?
  • Relevance to a target audience – Does the product effectively solve a specific market need?
  • Usability – can the user quickly and efficiently interact with the product features to achieve their desired result?

Recognizes the best online laboratory that takes place remotely at home, online via computerized robotics, or virtually through simulations or software.  The winning solution offers the same learning outcomes as traditional laboratories, in a virtual format.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does this product provide equal access to digital experiences and materials for everyone, without requiring extra work?  Does the feature set meet the needs of the users?
  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Do the assessments maximize interactivity and engagement via text, audio and/or video? Will the system produce useful reports?
  • Customization – Does the lab allow for customization to different content areas, educational needs and courses?
  • UI – Is the product interface intuitive and easy to use with minimal training? 
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback/ reports and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies?  Does the platform allow the teacher to provide feedback on the assessment?
  • Innovation/ creativity – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills in the targeted areas?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third-party content, social media tools, internal data or standards information? Can the system be incorporated easily with other online systems?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms and deliver various types of content?

Provides the remote learning educational solution that best delivers course support, full courses or degree programs online, in either subscription-based or massive, open environments. Includes tutoring, self-paced digital instruction, home-schooling, advanced placement course work, credit recovery, instructional support, personalized learning environment or college credit and targets the PK-12 or higher education market.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does this product provide accessibility to users with diverse needs?
  • Assessment – To what extent are the assessment tools useful and functional for the user? Do the assessments maximize interactivity and engagement via text, audio and/or video?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of content areas, courses, user needs /accessibility and education outcomes?
  • Feature set – Does the feature set incorporated within this product appropriately meet the needs of the users?
  • Feedback – Do learners with diverse learning styles and abilities receive appropriate feedback and reinforcement in the process of building their skills and strategies?  Does the platform allow the teacher to provide feedback in a variety of formats?
  • Innovation/ creativity – Does the system incorporate recent research on learning, innovative approaches to learning, or access to new tools with high student interest?
  • Instructional design – Is the instruction and content designed to deepen student knowledge and skills in the targeted areas?
  • Integration – Does it provide straightforward methods for bringing in curriculum, third- party content, social media tools, internal data, gradebooks or standards information? Can the system be incorporated easily with other online systems? 
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various platforms and deliver various types of content? Can content be accessed offline?
  • Reports – Will the system produce useful reports for the organization and the user? Are these reports customizable and indicate trends? Do they include recommendations along with results?
  • Security/Privacy – Does the solution provide suitable and sufficient security and privacy safeguards?

Recognizes the best platform, service or provider that supports the efforts of Local Education Agencies (LEA’s), Schools or Educational organizations to deliver wellness supports and services that address the needs of the whole child and entire educational community (administrators, educators, school staff, families and caregivers) in order to develop a positive, safe and supportive culture.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Accessibility – Does the system support use by different types of users, including diverse learners or those who have other unique learning needs?
  • Assessment – How well does the solution support feedback, assessments and progress of learners?
  • Customization – Is the solution customizable for different types of professional learning, instruction and learner experience, learner outcomes?
  • Feedback – How well does the solution provide learners with personalized feedback that helps reinforce or improve their skill set?
  • Innovation – How well does the solution incorporate strategies or functionality from the latest research on social emotional and mental wellness as well as teaching, learning and assessment?
  • Integration –How well does the solution provide capabilities for integration with existing school systems such as rostering, progress monitoring, LMS?
  • Learner Experience – How well does the system support different content types, different consumption devices and internet speeds?
  • Platform flexibility – Is the solution optimized to be used on various devices and platforms (e.g. desktop, tablet, mobile, Android, iOS) and deliver various types of content (PPTx, PDFs, DOCx, images, audio, video, interactive HTML5)?
  • Positive impact – How well does the solution support a positive impact on adult and student wellness? How easy is the platform to use and get going without the need for advanced training ?
  • Privacy – Does the system include security features that protect user data and privacy?
  • Reports – How well does the system provide reporting that is granular, flexible, informative, extensible and action-oriented?
  • Usability – How easily and efficiently can the user interact with the product features and the content to achieve their desired result?

Ed Tech Leadership Categories

Honors top companies, people and teams in Ed Tech. Each leadership nomination must include a video or written response addressing each of the judging criteria for the category.

Recognizes the tool, platform, or service that supports educators in adopting a solution effectively with superior customer service and support. Experience may include help-desk services, live chat, social media tools, training/learning that is included in the purchase of the solution, etc.

Entry must include a written statement touching on each of the judging criteria. Support with data and examples where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Customer Satisfaction- Is the support well crafted and easy to navigate? How satisfied are educators with the customer service they receive according to surveys and feedback?
  • Issue resolution- When an educator reports a confirmable issue with the solution, how quickly is the issue rectified? What level of technical assistance is provided to educators?
  • Quality of Self-Serve Help Materials- Does the company provide materials for an educator or administrator to get their own answers (i.e. FAQs, videos, forum)?
  • Quality of Support– Does the educator have an excellent experience when contacting customer service to receive the support they need? Does the company proactively provide customer support related activities (Notifications etc.)
  • Response Times for Support Inquiries- How quickly does the company reply to emails and live chats? What are the wait times when calling?  
  • Technological advances- What cutting-edge technologies have been leveraged to improve response times, technical support and training (AI, chatbots, VR, etc.)?

Honors the education technology company that has demonstrated significant growth and influence over the past year through outstanding customer acquisition, retention and loyalty, ability to attract and retain top talent, financial success and dedication to the company mission and goals over the past year. The winning Ed Tech company is doing something new and innovative from which the industry could learn in their missions, philosophies, and decision making.

Entrants are required to submit a written response outlining how the company aligns to the judging criteria below. Be sure to provide details and show measurable outcomes in your response where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Substantial growth in personnel from the year preceding
  • Substantial retention of employees from the past several years
  • Substantial financial growth 
  • Substantial shifts in mission and vision statements from the last several years that paved the way for substantial growth in employees and financial success
  • Prestigious connections to industry leading researchers/authors, school districts, policy makers, and institutions of higher education
  • Prestigious employees (in education levels and accomplishments)
  • Diversity profile of the company, demonstrating the best collective staff representation of education institutions across the US
  • Diversity profile of the company, demonstrating the variety of perspectives and representations contributing to vision

Honors the Ed Tech company that best demonstrates clear, positive and sustained impact in advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

Entrants are required to submit a written response outlining how the company aligns to the judging criteria below. Be sure to provide details and show measurable outcomes in your response where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Awareness – How well did the company effectively increase the awareness of DEI?
  • Opportunities – How well did the company demonstrate excellence in advancing opportunities for women, people of color, members of the LGBTQ+ community, Religion, access to technologies, cultures and/or individuals with disabilities both within the company and among students? Provide examples and impact data where possible.
  • Reach – Did the company work with fellow members of the Ed Tech community, associations and/or other partners to expand DEI opportunities and eliminate the barriers for students from underrepresented, disadvantaged, and culturally diverse populations? How broad was the impact?
  • Best Practices – Did the company implement DEI practices, policies, resources, and tools, to ensure DEI best practices were sustained?
  • Representation – How does the company’s visual product(s) reflect the true population of students and teachers in classrooms?
  • Topics – How does the company’s content reflect important shifts in thinking about race, ethnicity, gender, religion and sexual orientation?
  • Positive trend setting – How does the company’s creative approach to equity and inclusivity go beyond most companies?

Honors the Ed Tech leader that empowers and inspires the education industry through outstanding strategy, influence, expertise, critical thinking, business excellence etc.

Entrants are required to submit a written response outlining how the company aligns to the judging criteria below. Be sure to provide details and show measurable outcomes in your response where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • How well has the candidate demonstrated measurable outstanding leadership throughout the year and inspired others to achieve similar success.
  • How well has the candidate demonstrated leadership in difficult times? Were they innovative in approach and meeting the moment?
  • Has the candidate demonstrated business excellence through vision, business achievements, mentoring of new talent, etc.over the past year?
  • Has the candidate demonstrated a strong connection to the Tech community and inspiring fellow thought leaders?
  • Has the candidate made contributions to the industry that have changed the way educators and Ed Tech professionals think about teaching and learning?
  • Is this leader thinking differently about teaching and learning in a way that stimulates the progress and evolution of our industry?
  • Are the programs from this professional’s company now defining what schools and districts want differently in their classrooms?

Recognizes an Ed Tech company that is on the cutting edge of teaching and learning using new methods. This company is charting new pathways, showing others in the industry what is possible in instructional design.

Entrants are required to submit a written response outlining how the company aligns to the judging criteria below. Be sure to provide details and show measurable outcomes in your response where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Does this company’s product(s) approach teaching and learning in a way that we have not widely seen?
  • Does the company open up our imaginations to new possibilities?
  • Do you think this company’s product(s) will speak the language of students in the future?
  • Does the company have more than one innovative product? 
  • Is the company’s product(s) innovative but still grounded in instructional meaningfulness and standards alignment?
  • Does the company have evidence for its product(s) to prove it’s not just innovative but making a difference in the classroom?
  • Does the company’s product(s) give students skills for success in a global and changing workforce?

Recognizes the company, school, program or service that has gone above and beyond to positively impact the education, health and wellbeing of the students. Be sure to outline how the positive impact was achieved and show measurable outcomes.

Entry must include a written statement touching on each of the judging criteria. Support with data and examples where appropriate.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Impact – How broad was the measurable impact and how was impact defined. Was the impact supported with data?  
  • Support – How well did the nominee support students? Provide data and examples of superior support.
  • Was the nominee’s response unique and did it go above and beyond to positively impact the education, health and wellbeing of the students?
  • How effective was the response in positively impacting students? Did the response benefit learners and on what scale? Support with examples.
  • Did the nominee´s response cause sustainable long-term changes and/or benefits? Support with longitudinal research where possible. 

Recognizes the company with the most comprehensive suite of well-integrated, connected solutions across core, supplemental, intervention, assessment, platform and services.

Entrants must complete a written response to each of the judging criteria below at the time of nomination. Each entry will also have the option to provide a live demo with their two assigned judges.

Judging criteria

  • How comprehensive is the range of solutions offered by the company? Does it cover core, supplemental, intervention, assessment, services, and/or platform solutions across many grade levels?
  • How connected is the integration across the solutions in the company’s portfolio? Support with data and case studies of users/districts using the solutions in a connected fashion?
  • How well does student data flow across the suite of connected solutions?
  • Does the company’s solutions require a third party to enable integration/connectivity (vs. native integration)?
  • What new capabilities or insights can teachers or administrators gain from the connected nature of the solutions that would not be possible if the solutions were independent/standalone?
  • How well does the company’s suite of connected solutions positively impact students, teachers, or administrators (e.g,, new insights, time saving, improved ease of use due to coherency or consistency across solutions)?

Nominations open in April and there is no cost to enter.

The Lifetime Achievement Award celebrates individuals who have made significant long-term contributions to the Education industry – and are renowned for their reputation, leadership, vision, mentorship, career success and philanthropy.

Judges will be looking for:

  • Active in the community for 20+ years. 
  • Has shown outstanding leadership characteristics throughout their career and has inspired others to achieve similar success.
  • Has achieved business excellence, evidenced through leadership, vision, business achievements, mentoring of new talent, etc.
  • Engagement with industry associations i.e. SIIA Education.
  • Has demonstrated a strong connection to the Ed Tech community.