EdTech Stack Checklist: Which Tools to Keep, Replace, or Ditch

Is your EdTech stack helping students — or holding you back?

If you’re a teacher, tutor, or small tutoring business manager in 2026, you’ve likely felt the pain: too many logins, duplicated features, surprise renewal invoices, and students who can’t figure out where to submit work. The rush of AI-powered tools since late 2024–2025 created a boom in helpful features — and the same boom produced subscription bloat, integration debt, and confusing classroom workflows.

This guide gives a practical, metrics-driven EdTech Stack Checklist and a clear decision tree you can use today to decide which tools to keep, replace, or ditch. It’s written for busy educators who need fast, defensible decisions based on usage, learning impact, and budget.

Quick takeaways (inverted pyramid)

• Measure first: Collect usage metrics, impact signals, and cost-per-learner before you act.
• Score tools: Use a simple 0–5 rubric across three dimensions: Usage, Impact, and Cost/Integration.
• Follow the decision tree: Keep high-use/high-impact; Replace high-impact/low-use; Ditch low-impact/low-use.
• Consolidate and integrate: Reduce logins, adopt SSO and LTI 1.3/Advantage where possible, and negotiate renewals.
• Protect learning quality: Prioritize tools that show measurable improvement in learning outcomes and data exportability.

Why this matters now (2026 trends)

From late 2025 into 2026, three trends reshaped classroom and tutoring tech decisions:

• Ubiquity of generative AI: Many apps now include AI tutoring features — but not all are equal. Some improve personalization and feedback velocity; others add noise and hallucination risk without measurable learning gains.
• Stronger standards: Interoperability via LTI 1.3/Advantage, Caliper analytics, and SSO has become mainstream in K–12 and higher ed. Tools that support these standards are easier to integrate and less likely to create data silos.
• Subscription fatigue: Schools and tutors reported subscription bloat throughout 2025; MarTech and other industry observers warned about “technology debt” caused by underused platforms.

"The real problem isn’t that you don’t have enough tools. It’s that you have too many, and most of them aren’t pulling their weight." — industry reporting, 2026

Step 1 — Audit: The data you must collect (one-week sprint)

Before you decide, run a fast audit. Treat the audit like a formative assessment — it should take 3–7 days with clear outputs you can score.

Items to collect per tool

• Subscription details: cost, billing cadence, contract end date, seats included.
• Usage metrics: Daily/Weekly/Monthly Active Users (DAU/WAU/MAU), average session length, % of target users engaging weekly.
• Learning impact signals: assessment score lift, assignment completion rate, time-to-feedback, intervention rate. If precise assessment linkage doesn't exist, use teacher-reported impact and anecdotal evidence (log it).
• Integration map: Does it support SSO, LTI, API access, SIS sync? Which other tools depend on it?
• Support & training: onboarding hours required, helpdesk tickets, training materials availability.
• Data & privacy: FERPA/COPPA compliance, data exportability, vendor data retention.
• Feature overlap: other tools that duplicate core functionality (e.g., quizzes, video calls, gradebooks).

Template: Quick audit table (copy/paste)

For each tool create a row with:

1. Tool name
2. Monthly or annual cost
3. MAU (number and % of active learners/staff)
4. Impact note (score lift % or teacher rating 0–5)
5. Integration score (0–5)
6. Compliance flags (yes/no)
7. Overlap tools

Step 2 — Score each tool: Usage, Impact, Integration/Cost

Use a 0–5 rubric for each dimension; average the three scores to get a composite. Keep the rubric visible so decisions are transparent.

Scoring rules (practical thresholds)

• Usage (0–5)
  • 5: >70% active weekly engagement for target users
  • 4: 50–70% active weekly
  • 3: 25–49% active weekly
  • 2: 10–24% active weekly
  • 1: <10% active weekly
  • 0: No usage in last 90 days
• Learning impact (0–5)
  • 5: Clear, measured improvement in outcomes (e.g., +10% or more on aligned assessments) or major efficiency gains (e.g., cuts grading time by >30%)
  • 4: Some measurable improvement or consistent teacher-reported benefits
  • 3: Anecdotal benefits; limited evidence
  • 2: Little to no perceived benefit
  • 1–0: Negative impacts or introduces student confusion/harm
• Integration & Cost (0–5)
  • 5: Low cost per learner + supports SSO/LTI/API + high vendor responsiveness
  • 4: Reasonable cost + some integration options
  • 3: Moderate cost + manual processes required
  • 2: High cost + integration friction
  • 1–0: Very high cost + security or compliance issues

Example scoring

MathPracticeApp — Cost: $200/month, MAU 65% of students, shows +8% quiz improvement, supports SSO.

• Usage = 4 (65% weekly)
• Impact = 4 (+8% measured)
• Integration = 5 (SSO, LTI, low cost)
• Composite = (4+4+5)/3 = 4.33 — strong candidate to keep and expand

Step 3 — The decision tree: Keep, Replace, or Ditch

Use the composite score and a few strategic rules. Here is an actionable decision tree you can apply immediately.

Decision rules (fast)

1. Composite ≥ 4.0: Keep — renew and expand. Consider deeper integration and training to raise usage to 80%+
2. Composite 3.0–3.9: Conditional — Replace or Keep with caveats. If usage is low but impact high, pilot ways to increase adoption (incentives, coaching); if cost is high, renegotiate.
3. Composite 2.0–2.9: Replace — Only keep if strategic (e.g., vendor roadmap or upcoming upgrade promises measurable impact) and you have a clear plan and deadline.
4. Composite < 2.0: Ditch — schedule sunsetting, export data, and reassign budget.

Practical decision tree (text flow)

Start -> Is composite ≥ 4? Yes -> Keep and integrate deeper. No -> Is Impact ≥ 4? Yes -> Replace or pilot adoption program. No -> Is Usage ≥ 3? Yes -> Consider keep only if cost ≤ threshold and roadmap promising. No -> Ditch.

Step 4 — Action plans for each decision

Keep (composite ≥ 4)

• Lock multi-year pricing only if user adoption is already high or you have a mandate to expand usage.
• Invest 1–2 professional development sessions to increase consistent teacher use.
• Integrate with SSO and gradebook; automate roster sync to reduce friction.
• Formalize success metrics and monitor quarterly.

Replace (composite 3.0–3.9 or high-impact/low-use)

• Run a two-month replacement pilot with 1–2 classes or tutoring cohorts.
• Choose replacements that support LTI, Caliper, or have strong analytics to measure impact.
• Budget transition costs and data export/import tasks.
• Negotiate short-term cancellation clauses and pilot discounts.

Ditch (composite < 2)

• Announce a sunset date to users 30–60 days ahead to avoid disruption.
• Export student and grade data in interoperable formats (CSV, Common Cartridge, or LTI-friendly formats).
• Close accounts and confirm data deletion per privacy guidelines.
• Redirect budget to higher-impact tools or tutoring hours.

Special considerations for 2026: AI features and privacy

Since generative AI is embedded widely, you need extra checks:

• Audit AI outcomes: Track whether AI-generated feedback correlates with assessment improvements. If an AI assistant increases speed but not mastery, don’t assume success.
• Prompt governance: Give teachers tested prompt templates so student-facing AI responses meet learning goals and reduce hallucination risk. See guidance on AI agent policies for local rules you can apply.
• Vendor transparency: Prefer vendors that publish model cards, data retention policies, and incident logs.
• Compliance assurance: Confirm vendors meet FERPA/COPPA and any district-specific requirements. For international learners, check GDPR and local laws.

Integration & workflow tips (reduce friction fast)

• Enable SSO across everything: Removing login friction increases adoption drastically.
• Use middleware wisely: A low-code integration layer (like an API gateway or Zapier equivalent for education) can link apps without heavy engineering.
• Consolidate overlapping features: If three apps provide quizzes, keep the best one and retire the others to reduce cognitive load for students.
• Standardize onboarding: Create a 15-minute teacher walkthrough and a 5-minute student orientation for each tool you keep.

How to present your findings to stakeholders (administrators, parents, or tutors)

Be concise and evidence-based. Use this short template for reports or emails:

1. Summary: Number of tools audited, % of budget reviewed, headline recommendation (keep X, replace Y, ditch Z).
2. Top metrics: Total cost saved/potential, expected improvement in learning outcomes, timeline.
3. Risks & mitigations: Data migration effort, teacher PD time, vendor dependencies.
4. Next steps: Pilot schedule, cancellation dates, communication plan.

Case study (practical example)

Sarah is a high-school math teacher who ran an audit in January 2026. Her classroom used eight tools: LMS, video conferencing, two assessment platforms, an AI homework helper, a formative assessment app, a gradebook, and a practice app.

• Audit revealed the AI helper had 15% weekly usage and no clear impact on quarterly assessment scores. One assessment platform was used by 80% of students and correlated with a +9% growth in unit test scores.
• Action: Sarah replaced the low-impact AI helper with an integrated plugin from the assessment platform (which offered AI-assisted feedback within the same workflow) and retired the duplicate assessment platform, saving her department $1,800/year and reducing student logins by 2.
• Result: Within one semester, assignment completion rose by 12% and teacher grading time decreased by 25%.

Negotiation and contract tips (get better terms)

• Time renewals: Align contract expirations to your academic calendar; avoid auto-renew traps.
• Ask for usage-based pricing: Many vendors in 2025–2026 adopted flexible pricing — pay for active learners, not seats.
• Request trial extensions: A 90-day pilot with exportable data reduces risk.
• Bundle services: If you already use a vendor for one product, negotiate cross-sell discounts for additional modules.

Long-term governance: Prevent future bloat

To avoid repeating the problem, set governance rules:

• Create a tool-request process with a required impact hypothesis and pilot plan.
• Require a data export check before any purchase: if you can’t easily export, don’t buy.
• Hold a biannual stack review every June and December to consolidate and align with budgeting cycles.
• Track a simple metric: Cost per active learner (monthly cost divided by MAU).

Quick checklist (one-page audit you can use now)

1. List all tools and monthly/annual cost.
2. Collect MAU/WAU/DAU for last 90 days.
3. Map each tool to a single core use case (avoid duplication).
4. Score Usage, Impact, Integration/Cost (0–5 each).
5. Apply decision rules: Keep ≥4, Conditional 3–3.9, Replace 2–2.9, Ditch <2.
6. Schedule sunsetting dates and pilot windows.
7. Export student data, confirm deletion, and close accounts as needed.

Final checklist: Questions for vendors (ask before you sign)

• Do you support SSO, LTI 1.3, Caliper, and SIS rostering?
• Can we export all student and assignment data in interoperable formats?
• Which models power your AI features and do you provide model cards?
• What’s your uptime and support SLA for schools/tutors?
• Can pricing be usage-based and do you offer pilot pricing?

Closing: Practical next steps (48-hour plan)

1. Run the one-week audit with the audit table template.
2. Score tools using the 0–5 rubric and compute composite scores.
3. Apply the decision tree and mark tools for Keep/Replace/Ditch.
4. Notify users of upcoming changes and schedule any pilots within 30 days.

EdTech stacks are tools — not trophies. With a simple, evidence-based process you can cut waste, improve learning outcomes, and focus your budget on what actually helps students succeed.

Call to action

Ready to run an audit? Download our editable audit spreadsheet and decision-tree checklist, or book a 30-minute stack review with a gooclass EdTech coach to get a prioritized plan for your classroom or tutoring business. Start your audit this week and reclaim time for teaching.

Related Reading

• AI training pipelines that minimize memory footprint (2026)
• Creating a secure desktop AI agent policy — lessons from Anthropic’s Cowork
• Reducing partner onboarding friction with AI (2026 Playbook)
• Calendar Data Ops: serverless scheduling & privacy workflows (2026)
• How to Turn Studio Rituals Into a Print Series: Lessons from Artists Who Sing to Their Tapestries
• Case Study: How a small restaurant group built a micro-app for reservations using AI in seven days
• Leather Notebooks and the Masculine Carry: How a Notebook Elevates Your Workwear
• Celebrity-Led Drops: How to Partner with Creators Without Breaking the Bank
• The Digital Paper Trail That Sells Homes: How to Package Permits, Photos, and Warranties for Buyers