K-12 education technology spending reached $30 billion in 2024, and it’s projected to nearly double by 2033. That’s a lot of money schools are investing and a huge amount of waste going into landfills once that technology reaches the end of its lifespan.
To help schools save money in the long run and cut down on the amount of tech waste, two organizations that represent educational technology leaders recently released guidelines for schools on how to make more cost-effective and environmentally friendly technology purchases.
The scale of schools’ technology use and waste has increased dramatically since the pandemic when many districts invested in purchasing devices for all students, said Louis McDonald, a project director on environmental sustainability for the Consortium for School Networking, or CoSN, a nonprofit that represents school district chief technology officers. McDonald, who helped create the guidelines, said it’s time for school districts to prioritize sustainability in their tech purchasing because it will save them money in the long run and help protect the environment.
As schools face tighter budget times, the challenge of maintaining 1-to-1 computing programs in schools will grow more difficult. And the effectiveness of 1-to-1 computing on student learning is still largely up for debate, some ed-tech experts point out.
McDonald said that environmental sustainability goes hand in hand with saving money and extending the life of technologies, such as school-issued laptops.
CoSN and the State Educational Technology Directors Association, along with technology consulting company United Data Technologies, have devised recommendations for how districts can ensure they’re purchasing technology that will ultimately save them money, protect natural resources, and decrease the amount of tech waste.
The recommendations for prioritizing sustainability in tech purchases fall into six key categories:
- prioritizing energy efficiency;
- choosing tech made with recyclable and sustainable materials;
- investing in durable products with longer lifespans;
- focusing on e-waste reduction strategies such as repair, reuse, and refurbishment or through trade in or buy back programs;
- purchasing technology with an eye toward repairability;
- and selecting vendors with sustainable practices.
The guidelines include model language that district leaders, technology directors, and school procurement officers can use in contracts and requests for proposals from vendors.
Experts say school districts need to take the long view in their purchasing strategies
Investments in sustainable technology can cost more up front, conceded McDonald, but they will lead to savings in the long run. For example, technology with interchangeable or repairable parts means districts can purchase new technology less frequently. Buying technology products that are recyclable is also less costly for districts when they have to dispose of those technologies. Even smaller investments, like protective cases for laptops, can save money. When McDonald’s former district purchased protective cases for student laptops, it extended the life of the devices by a couple of years, he said.
McDonald said the guidelines aren’t necessarily meant to be adopted all at once. He recommends that district leaders apply strategies that align best with their priorities and unique situations. But taken together, they can lead to big savings and a meaningful contribution to protecting the environment.
“The key thing for me is not expecting the district to go out and do all six things at once,” he said. “Look for that low-hanging fruit. Durability and energy efficiency are the two easiest ones to incorporate into a sustainability practice.”
One example of how this can work—from the San Diego Unified School District—is cited in the guidelines. The district has saved about $90 million over the past 12 years through its tech sustainability initiatives. According to an estimate cited in the guidelines, doubling the life of Chromebooks alone from four to eight years could collectively save schools in the United States $1.8 billion.
As it is, many companies that sell technologies to schools are ready to meet the standards laid out in the recommendations, said McDonald.
Many of the recommendations in CoSN’s and SETDA’s procurement guidelines can also help reduce the release of heat-trapping emissions that cause climate change, said Laura Schifter, a senior fellow with the Aspen Institute, where she directs the This Is Planet Ed initiative.
“Schools can have a big impact leveraging their purchasing power in order to reduce technology-related carbon pollution,” she said. “If the technology itself is more energy efficient, then they’re reducing their energy use. And if the products themselves last longer, then they are not putting the demand or pressure on the system to create new products quickly.”
Plus, energy-efficient technology saves districts money on electricity bills, which is no small matter for schools because energy costs are among their biggest expenses, Schifter said.
“District leaders need to think about sustainability procurement [as] every purchase tells a story about their priorities,” McDonald said. “When it comes to sustainability on devices, you have to think long term, not short term, which is the tendency. We buy things based on cost, but we don’t think about the bigger picture.”
