4.2.1 | European Edtech Map

EUROPEAN EDTECH POLICY MAP

4.2. Incentives for participation

4.2.1 Promote EdTech testing among educators and educational institutions

Summary of suggested actions

Encourage educators and schools to participate in structured, real-world EdTech testing activities by creating incentives, recognition systems, and low-barrier participation models that strengthen collaboration between developers and practitioners.

Description

Actively involving educators and schools in EdTech testing ensures that innovations are grounded in classroom realities and meet the genuine needs of teachers and learners. Educator participation at all stages of development, from prototype validation to pilot implementation, improves both product quality and adoption readiness.
Engagement in testing allows educators to gain early access to emerging tools, strengthen their digital competence, and influence the design of technologies that directly affect their teaching practice. This ensures a control over the development of the tools they use. For developers, educators’ insights provide critical feedback on usability, pedagogical alignment, and contextual fit.
Building structured mechanisms to facilitate and reward participation, such as professional development recognition, micro-credentials, or access to curated innovation networks, can help overcome hesitations and increase schools’ willingness to engage. Sustained teacher involvement also enhances trust, transparency, and evidence generation within the European EdTech ecosystem.

Major enabling factors

Teacher communities such as European Schoolnet’s Future Classroom Lab Ambassadors and Scientix provide infrastructure for connecting educators with innovation projects.
The Digital Education Action Plan (2021–2027) promotes teacher engagement in digital innovation, aligning with national strategies on digital competence and school development.
Initiatives like Helsinki Education Hub, Ifous EdTest, Swiss National EdTech Testbed Program, and NOLAI embed teachers directly in EdTech design and validation processes.
Teachers’ practice-based insights are increasingly viewed as important contributions to formal evaluation data.

Major roadblocks

Teachers’ heavy workloads and rigid school timetables often prevent active participation in testing activities.
Without formal approval or incentives from school leadership or ministries, teacher engagement can remain ad hoc.
Educators may fear that participation in pilots adds responsibilities without recognition or tangible benefit.
Schools are often uncertain about the legal framework for testing unapproved or pre-market technologies.
Smaller or rural schools may lack the infrastructure to participate meaningfully in pilots.
The absence of trusted intermediaries or testing brokers limits matchmaking and coordination

Suggested action: Creating incentives and simplified participation

WHO (Potential actors)

European Commission (DG EAC, DG Connect), in cooperation with national education ministries, teacher professional development agencies, EdTech industry associations, and local education authorities
Teacher networks and unions as outreach and engagement partner

WHAT (Goal of suggested activities)

Encourage structured participation of teachers and schools in EdTech testing by creating incentives, recognition schemes, and simplified participation models that strengthen co-creation, feedback, and trust between educators and innovators.

HOW (Suggested activities)

Conduct a European survey among schools and educators to identify effective incentives for participation in EdTech testing activities.
Launch outreach campaigns through teacher networks, unions, and professional associations to raise awareness of testing opportunities and benefits.
Offer flexible participation models aligned with school calendars to minimise disruption to teaching schedules.
Introduce recognition mechanisms, such as micro-credentials, CPD credits, or public acknowledgements, for teachers contributing to EdTech pilots.
Develop peer ambassador programmes in which experienced educators mentor colleagues on how to engage in EdTech testing.
Establish low-bureaucracy application procedures for schools to join testing programmes, including simplified consent and data-sharing templates.
Ensure transparent feedback loops, where developers report back to teachers on how their input influenced product improvement.

Existing steps in the right direction

Example: OeAD “Lern-Apps Gütesiegel” (Austria)

The OeAD Lern-Apps Gütesiegel (Quality Seal for Learning Apps) is Austria’s national framework for evaluating and certifying digital learning applications. Developed by the Austrian Agency for Education and Internationalisation (OeAD) in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research (BMBWF), the framework combines expert review with educator participation to ensure pedagogical, technical, and data-protection quality.

Teachers play a central role throughout the process: they participate in pilot testing of candidate applications, provide structured feedback on usability, relevance, and alignment with curricula, and co-assess whether apps meet pedagogical and accessibility criteria. This ensures that certification outcomes reflect the lived realities of classroom use rather than purely technical or commercial standards.

The Gütesiegel evaluation covers five core dimensions: pedagogical quality, functionality and design, data protection and safety, accessibility, and cost transparency. Successful applications receive the OeAD quality seal, which is recognised nationally by schools and local education authorities as a marker of trustworthiness and educational value. By integrating teachers into the evaluation process, the framework builds capacity within the teaching profession and reinforces the link between classroom evidence and public certification.

Specific support required to achieve the Goal:

Provide EU co-funding for pilot programmes that involve teachers in structured product testing linked to certification schemes. Encourage national ministries and innovation agencies to create or expand similar frameworks, ensuring consistent pedagogical and data-protection standards across Member States.

TEKLA Mobile Testbed (Helsinki, Finland)

TEKLA was a mobile EdTech testbed launched by the City of Helsinki, connecting K-12 students and teachers with emerging educational technologies over a 15-month period in 2024 and 2025. Co-funded by the European Union and the City of Helsinki, the initiative was jointly developed by the city’s business unit and education division. Housed in a movable container placed in schoolyards, TEKLA offered an eye-catching, hands-on learning environment that sparked curiosity among teachers and students alike.
During the first month, the devices were brought directly into classrooms, but due to teachers’ unfamiliarity with them, engagement remained low. When the container was introduced a month later, its visibility sparked curiosity among both students and teachers, increasing interest and interaction.
EdTech companies delivered workshops with teachers directly in the container, where they could test and co-develop their products with real users. TEKLA staff, who have pedagogical expertise, supported the sessions and helped educators explore how new tools could be integrated into their own lessons. After each session, feedback was collected from both teachers and students, providing companies with immediate, actionable insights.
Some companies continued to collaborate with schools after TEKLA’s visit.
The loanable devices in the container were selected by the Education Division of the City of Helsinki, and data on which tools were most used and appreciated by teachers was shared with the Ministry of Education to inform future decision-making

Specific support required to achieve the Goal:

Implementing a model like TEKLA across a city presents several logistical and infrastructural challenges. While the mobile container was designed to travel to schools throughout Helsinki, many locations, particularly in the city center, lacked the necessary space or infrastructure to host it. Due to fire regulations, the container had to be placed at least eight meters away from school buildings, which limited suitable placement options and excluded many urban schools. Additionally, not all schools had adequate power supply to support the equipment. The container model also came with practical roadblocks, including transportation logistics, site clearing, and the inability to reach all schools equally, which impacted the overall accessibility and scalability of the initiative. This would have to be mitigated somehow.