Edtech Insiders
Edtech Insiders
Why EdTech Success Depends on Evidence and Usability: Tal Havivi of ASCD & ISTE Explains
Tal Havivi is the Managing Director of R&D at ASCD + ISTE, focusing on initiatives to improve the health and effectiveness of the EdTech market. He leads research around high-quality EdTech design, programs focused on improving evaluation processes in school systems, and supports EdTech providers. Previously, he led Education Strategy at Amazon Business focused on improving education procurement. He also has experience working at edtech startups and in K-12 administration.
💡 5 Things You’ll Learn in This Episode:
- How the role of evidence in EdTech has evolved over the last decade and why it’s more critical than ever.
- The importance of teacher usability in EdTech tools and how it impacts learning outcomes.
- What ISTE and ASCD’s initiatives are doing to create a more rigorous evaluation framework for EdTech products.
- The five quality indicators used to assess EdTech solutions: Usability, Interoperability, Accessibility, Data Privacy, and Research Basis.
- How EdTech providers can bridge the gap between research and practical application in schools.
✨ Episode Highlights:
[00:00:00] Introduction to Tal Havivi and his role at ASCD & ISTE.
[00:02:59] The coalition behind EdTech’s five quality indicators.
[00:05:41] How evidence-based EdTech has evolved post-pandemic
[00:09:11] Why teacher usability is crucial for EdTech success.
[00:15:55] ISTE’s 2025 plan to prioritize validated EdTech vendors.
[00:19:37] Challenges in bridging research and practical EdTech solutions.
[00:29:38] The future of EdTech evaluation and quality standards.
😎 Stay updated with Edtech Insiders!
- Follow our Podcast on:
- Sign up for the Edtech Insiders newsletter.
- Follow Edtech Insiders on LinkedIn!
🎉 Presenting Sponsor:
This season of Edtech Insiders is once again brought to you by Tuck Advisors, the M&A firm for EdTech companies. Run by serial entrepreneurs with over 25 years of experience founding, investing in, and selling companies, Tuck believes you deserve M&A advisors who work as hard as you do.
[00:00:00] Tal Havivi: One of the challenges in ed tech that I've seen is a lot of times educators will use technology. in whatever way it's easiest to be used. And if the way that it's easiest to be used just reinforces lower quality instruction, then it doesn't matter how engaging it is if it's not actually helping students learn.
So the key with pedagogical usability is figuring out how do you make the path with least resistance to learning? Also the path that drives effective instruction. And that's really what we get to with pedagogical usability. Our research team built this framework. It's called the teacher ready framework.
And that informs our SDCO, which is. It's these product certifications, so it's throwing its weight behind the product and saying this is high quality, and we evaluate that based on the teacher ready framework and the ISTE standards to say, hey, look, this product is high quality, it's ready for a teacher, it's designed in ways that teachers deliver instruction.
[00:00:56] Alex Sarlin: Welcome to EdTech Insiders, the top podcast covering the education technology industry. From funding rounds to impact to AI developments across early childhood, K 12, higher ed, and work. You'll find it all here at EdTech Insiders. Remember to subscribe to the pod, check out our newsletter, and also our event calendar.
And to go deeper, check out EdTech Insiders Plus, where you can get premium content. Access to our WhatsApp channel, early access to events and back channel insights from Alex and Ben. Hope you enjoyed today's pod. In this conversation, we're excited to talk to Tal Habibi. He's the Managing Director of R& D at ASCD plus ISTE, focusing on initiatives to improve the health and effectiveness of the ed tech market.
Tal leads research around high quality ed tech design, programs focused on improving evaluation processes in school systems, and he supports ed tech providers. Previously, Tal led education strategy at Amazon Business, focused on improving educational procurement, and he also has experience working At EdTech startups and in K 12 administration.
Join me in talking to Tal Havivy from ASCD and ISTE. Tal Havivy, welcome to EdTech Insiders.
[00:02:25] Tal Havivi: It's a pleasure to be here. Honestly, I am quite honored to be here too. Thanks for having me out.
[00:02:30] Alex Sarlin: Oh, yeah. And absolutely. We've talked a couple of times over the last year, including at the ISTE conference. You are the managing director of R& D at ASCD and ISTE.
And you know, there's so many things going on in the ed tech space right now, but one of the ones that we've really kept an eye on is this coalition that's been forming between ISTE and a number of different organizations to try to define quality. Give us a little bit of an overview of that initiative, and then we can talk about some of the specific elements of it.
[00:02:59] Tal Havivi: Yeah, absolutely. So overall, the initiative is focused on sort of creating coherence in the market around what are the key areas that are worth evaluating in ed tech. So it's the NAACP, along with six other partners, Kosen, One Ed Tech, Digital Promise, Project Unicorn, SIDA, and I know you had Lindsay Jones from Cast on the show a couple months ago.
We really just. Got together and said, we all have slightly different versions of things that are important to start. We need to come up with a common vocabulary. And so we landed on these 5 quality indicators, which are from an I. T. perspective, really the interoperability and the data privacy piece.
Those are the 1st 2. Usability, accessibility, and then research basis and saying, look, this is just the beginning, but those are the five areas that when evaluating ed tech, every decision maker, every buyer, everyone who's going through the evaluation selection, procurement process should just have a mental model of those are the five things that are table stakes.
Now, on top of that, it's worth saying just like everything else is not a silver bullet, this too. Is not a silver bullet solution, right? It doesn't mean that people, ed tech specialists or educators or decision makers don't have to evaluate ed tech anymore. It's more so just raising the floor. It's enabling schools to rely on validators for the table stakes and then focusing their energy on.
The areas they need to, that they know are specific to their state or their district or their school, because the procurement landscape is really complicated and really heterogeneous. And from a vendor perspective, it's really hard to navigate. Because just every school system seems to have slightly different processes.
[00:04:52] Alex Sarlin: Yeah. When I hear that list of organizations and then the list of quality indicators, you know, I do this sort of mental mapping and it's like accessibility is, is something cast has been about for many, many years. Interoperability is project unicorn and, you know, not that it's one to one, but there are sort of issues that particular organizations have really been championing in this world.
Privacy, one ed tech has been thinking about privacy a lot. So. When I think about ASCD and ISTE, two of these five jump out a lot, and I'd love to ask you about each of them. You know, one is, you mentioned the research basis, having evidence for efficacy for an edtech product. That has been a real bugaboo in the field.
It's expensive to get. There's been a lot of changes of what it means to have valid evidence. Tell us a little bit about how you think about evidence base at ISTE, and how you think buyers should think about it.
[00:05:41] Tal Havivi: Yeah, you know, I think evidence is Oftentimes ill defined. A lot of people think of evidence in the research field as even something like an RCT has to be completed.
And if a tech provider hears something like that, you know, it's no wonder that they sort of shy away from conversations around evidence. Now there's a lot of different forms of evidence. And I'll say, you know, school systems rely on evidence all the time. Just unfortunately, a lot of times it's around word of mouth, which is a form of evidence, but isn't always a valid and reliable form of evidence.
Maybe I'll just take a step back and talk a little bit about how I view the role of evidence in edtech over the last six or seven years. Pre pandemic, I think edtech was viewed in schools as sort of an uphill battle, right? The battle to fight was getting educators to adopt edtech. And for a lot of instructional leaders, edtech was still viewed as a tool.
Something that was secondary to instructional strategy. It wasn't a core part of supporting educators and supporting learning. Then the pandemic hit and there was an influx of ed tech. There was an influx of funding for ed tech. And then even on top of that, there was an influx of free ed tech. And we're now at this interesting point where that funding is.
You know, going away, these ESSA evidence levels have sort of propagated at the state level and are trickling down at the district level, too. And we're at this unique moment where learning loss is persisting, school systems are demanding stronger partnerships with vendors and stronger tools, and there's a question of, all right, like, how, you know, the actual Buyers are saying we need to make smarter decisions and before school systems were left to evaluate ed tech top to bottom all by themselves and in part this contributes to the really arduous processes that school systems put in place.
With varying successes to evaluate ed tech. Now there's a lot more support available through trusted third party validators. So I mentioned the five quality indicators. We have something called the ed tech index, which we recently rebranded from the ed search product index to the ed tech index. The idea being it should be a shared resource across a lot of different associations.
And what we do is we aggregate trusted validators from across the ecosystem. Into one place so that when an educator wants to look up a product, they will see all of the various validators within these five quality indicators in one place to help them evaluate a check
[00:08:12] Alex Sarlin: as one stop shop to really understand how these, you know, as you say, they're table stakes, but they're very important, and it's not often clear or obvious where to find that kind of information.
So that is a major concern. Asset for the field and for procurement and for buyers to be able to look at a tool through all of those lenses in the same place. You know, evidence is such a core one. Another one that I know that you particularly are passionate about you personally, but also several of these organizations is this concept of usability and how usable is a particular ed tech tool, especially usable for educators and what the impact of that usability is, right?
We all. No, about the whole implementation fidelity world where if you're using a tool wrong, then it's on you like that's how people like to talk about it. But really, we know that usability is usually a function of the tool itself, not a person. So I know you think a lot about this. I'd love to hear you talk about usability and its role in this entire process.
[00:09:11] Tal Havivi: Yeah, yeah, absolutely. And I think there is just one comment around the, you know, it's your problem that it's not working right. You know, there's definitely a growing tide. Led by Lawrence Holt and Dan Myers. We're really talking about the 5 percent and how do we make. I'd tech usable to the 95 percent of students, one area that we focus on was around teacher usability.
So one of the things that we noticed in the market is, you know, in the ed tech selection, evaluation and procurement process, a lot of times the educators voice was being left. And that's the person who actually has to use the tech and is left to make it work in the classroom and with students. And the procurement processes are often compliance driven, they're not necessarily user driven or, you know, end user driven.
And there, there are several challenges with ed tech implementation, and among them is the fact that educators don't have a lot to say. So what we focused on was understanding, we posed the research question, what does it mean for an ed tech product to be usable by a teacher? And we had a grant funded by the Gates Foundation, and we essentially broke this out into the question of what makes products technically usable, meaning even if an EdTech product has really robust and rigorous and coherent content, if the UX and UI Bye.
Bye. It's so clunky and a teacher is, you know, maybe it's 24 years old and is used to a world where everything is iPhone s in terms of their seamlessness, they don't pick it up and say, this does not work for me and I'll just put it back down. So that's technical usability, right? How usable is a product in the classroom in that way?
And then the second part, which I think is actually a more interesting and more education focus, is this idea of pedagogical usability. So what makes an EdTech product, how does it support, guide, and enable educators to facilitate high quality evidence based instruction? So there's a lot of ways to look at that.
One of the challenges in EdTech that I've seen is a lot of times educators will use technology. In whatever way, it's easiest to be used. And if the way that it's easiest to be used just reinforces lower quality instruction, then it doesn't matter how engaging it is if it's not actually helping students learn.
So the key with pedagogical usability is figuring out how do you make the path with least resistance. Also, the path that drives effective instruction, and that's really what we get to with pedagogical usability. So, our research team built this framework. It's called the Teacher Ready Framework, and that informs our ISTE seal, which is ISTE's product certification, right?
So, ISTE's throwing its weight behind the product and saying, this is high quality. And we evaluate that based on the teacher ready framework and the ISTE standards to say, Hey, look, this product is high quality. It's ready for a teacher, you know, it's designed in ways that teachers deliver instruction.
And we're actually starting to see more and more uptake, not just at an educator level who, you know, look at the ISTE seal and say, yes, we trust that. But even at a district level back in December of last year. L. A. Unified included in R. F. P. For supplemental and tech tools is that look as part of the criteria is to seal.
If you have the seal, you get more bonus points, which sort of was a nod to look. We care about what makes these products usable for teachers. And here's a clear and concrete way of indicating that to the vendor community.
[00:12:46] Alex Sarlin: Yeah. And, you know, adding that kind of bonus on the demand side can have huge effects on the supply side.
If you have the SD seal and the concept of teacher usability continues to raise in importance on the buyer side, then the vendors and creators will have no choice but to adopt it. But it's also happens to be something that is something we should all be thinking about anyway. I think your, your phrase about making the easy thing to do the pedagogically easy thing Best thing to do is a really strong tagline for this concept of usability.
And I sometimes like to think about how ed tech relates to other kinds of tech. And with that particular line, what makes me think of is transportation makes me think of aviation or car design. And it's like, you have to assume that the users are going to do the thing that's nearest at hand, that they're not going to pull out the manual and do something really complicated.
And so. For safety features, things that are like the core of what you need the car to do, it's got to be really easy to find and easy to use and also be the right thing to do at the right time, right? So I just think that in EdTech, we don't often think about it that way. Sometimes we try not to be opinionated in our product design and say, Hey, this would be certainly better for the students if you gave better feedback.
After this quiz question, we try to be like, well, whatever you want, you know, teacher, whatever you want to do. But this idea of, you know, making it usable and also making it pedagogically sound, I think is really fundamentally a smart direction for the field.
[00:14:16] Tal Havivi: I would add to that, like going back to the five quality indicators comment, I think historically a lot of associations would say, like, look, who are we to say what's good at tech and what's not good at tech.
And I think folks are starting, especially with these five quality indicators, are drawing lines in the sand and saying, this actually is. This is our criteria in which we evaluate what good edtech looks like. And so some of the work that's happening out of these, you know, this coalition is developing programming, you know, at various conferences, co presenting and making sure there's like a procurement education piece and edtech evaluation education piece to it.
We're making sure that, you know, on various edtech catalogs, these quality indicators are available. You know, so whether you look at EdTech, you know, and wherever you get your EdTech, whether that's the EdTech index or elsewhere, we're working to get those validators there in this format. And then at ISTE, one of the things we're doing is sort of a lever that's unique to us in some ways, maybe not unique to us.
Is, you know, we have a huge expo hall every year. I remember listening to the podcast. It can be overwhelming. It is really like a lot of light, a lot of noise, and it's really sought after, you know, hundreds of educators line up to go into the expo hall and thousands of vendors apply to join. And one of the things starting in 2025 that we're doing is we're starting to prioritize vendor space, which is highly coveted, right?
Whether you're in the back corner or in the middle or wherever that might be. Based on validations, so we're saying look if you are a validated product by one of these trusted third parties You have higher priority in this waiting process.
[00:15:55] Alex Sarlin: That's really interesting I had never heard of anything like that, but it makes a ton of sense in this particular space, especially because ASCD plus ISTE sort of has its hand in both of these areas.
It's trying to be increasingly, as you say, a validator of quality and of certain and usability and of these quality indicators. And it is also this incredible showcase. And yeah, being at the ISTE this year, you know, I talked about this on the podcast with Ben, but like, You know, some of the biggest booths were actually big tech booths or ones that, you know, you know, they have deep, deep pockets, the Lego booth, the Google booth and nothing against those companies.
They're great companies, but it sometimes can feel like, you know, the deepest pockets get the biggest visibility. And I love that sort of counterbalance that you're presenting here, where if you're a tool that. Is validated that we know works that has a research basis that is usable, then you deserve to be seen by more educators.
You deserve to be more visible in the space, maybe even, you know, outsized to your company's traction or how much marketing budget you have or that kind of thing. So I think that's a very noble cause.
[00:17:01] Tal Havivi: I will say, like, I think the key lever is getting the demand side more demanding. You know, that's something that a mutual friend and colleague, Carl Rectanus, who by the way has done a lot for the EdTech evidence movement over the last decade, told me.
And I think that is the first and foremost and most important thing to do to increase evidence in this space and increase quality in the EdTech sector. Secondarily, you know, we as ISTE and ACD, who are a convener of so many Educators. We have 16, 000 plus educators who come to our conference every year.
There's other levers we can pull, one of which is the expo hall and, you know, saying EdTechVendor, we know that this is a really important space for you and we're changing the criteria so that we prioritize validators as well.
[00:17:53] Alex Sarlin: It makes a lot of sense. I have heard Carl say that as well. And I make it's a dynamic that you see in a lot of different industries, right?
It's if you have a more informed, more demanding, as you say, more sort of carefully evaluative buyer, it forces the vendor side, it forces the sellers to raise the bar and to get more certifications and to think more about how to, you know, you know, Prove that they are passing that bar if buyers are uninformed or if they're just sort of saying we need something to fill the gap Then there's no pressure on anyone else to sort of to continually improve So it makes a lot of sense, you know One of the things that I think underlies this discussion and I know you have lots of opinions on this as well You know, we're talking about evidence in ed tech the evidence movement.
We're talking about usability One of the things that has been a frustration for me over my ed tech career at times is that there are these schools of education, there are these education researchers, there are foundations funding research or the NSF. At any given time, there's a pretty good amount of research happening around education and best practices and what works.
And it's somehow feels very divorced at times from the actual goings on inside an ed tech company. In my career, I'm always trying to sort of. Highlight research articles and say, Hey, did you hear about this? Or this is the new thing happening in the research. We should really try to incorporate it into our product.
Even as somebody who tries to bridge the gap, it can be hard to do. Even if you care, even if you're actually reading the research, it can still be hard to do, let alone all the people who are not, I know you care a lot about this. And I know he cares a lot about this. How do you see that research to practice gap or, you know, we could, you know, the pipeline from research to practice and how we can make it wider and more effective.
[00:19:37] Tal Havivi: Yeah, I mean, this gap has plagued the ed tech sector since the beginning of the ed tech sector. You know, in some ways, I think ed tech research has historically been done on, you know, undergraduates who need money. So, you know, that sort of translates to like, a lot of times it translated to white guys who needed pizza money.
And, you know, as things have sort of trend, you know, as times moved on, I think it's even become more common where there's very little structured research and a lot of, you know, quote unquote research is based on the founders or the software developers, the product managers lived experience in schools.
And that could be either just in their experience as a student or, you know, there's a lot of educator founders who are really well meaning and they're basing it off of their experience, which by the way, it's like more data points, more authentic data points than a lot of folks have. The other thing that I'll mention is for, School systems, research isn't typically a school district goal, right?
Most school systems don't have the capacity to run research projects. Most school systems aren't incentivized to engage in research. That said, educators want to participate in research. At STLab this year, we had an event called Ed Confluence, where we partnered with LeanLab, which is another great edtech co design shop, at an event where we essentially had Several roundtables were at each one.
There was a research facilitator. There was with the head specific discussion protocols on a given topic that educators and providers shared ahead of time that they're mutually interested in, and we then we had to vendors and the rest for educators and the event filled up in no time and sort of educators wanted to participate it.
They want the value of their lived experience. Recognized and acted on by those who are designed to support them, but we need to incentivize school systems, you know, at the system level to support it as well. One of the other challenges, I'll say the barriers of EdTech R& D have historically been really big.
We mentioned, you know, RCTs and sort of like the most, the highest barrier in a lot of, I think when a lot of tech providers think of. Research, they think of that level of research, and there's a long road to make R and D, especially inquisitive R and D accessible and scalable in the sector. There's a couple areas of focus that I think are worth noting.
1 is the value to the districts. So I think as a sector, we need to do more to communicate and demonstrate the value to school systems of engaging in research. And I think a lot of it has to do with what's in it for them. What are the results? What's the impact? How are those school systems going to be supported after the research project finishes?
The second part is around the readiness for research. So determining what elements, what conditions must be in place for school systems to effectively participate in research and for providers to participate in research. Like what capacity is needed? The third thing I'll mention is R& D is super wide ranging and it can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people.
Some R& D requires deep alignment and engagement and planning and money. There's also types of R and D like the Ed Confluence event that we had. It's a lot lighter touch, you know, activities like concept validation, surveys, things like that. And we're seeing a number of research networks pop up to support this sort of, you know, both very deeply aligned R and D and lighter touch R and D.
So it's the ASCD at. It's the live this past year. We announced Colab, which is essentially our take at a research network. You know, so it's the NASD have about 80, 000 member educators and district leaders between the 2 organizations that have not merged and a subset of those who are interested in participating in R& D.
So we're beginning to organize a network for our own research and to support research partners and providers in conducting research that's good for the sector with our subset, essentially asking the question, who's interested in participating in this and trying to both evangelize R& D and get more engaged in the field.
The topic as well.
[00:23:54] Alex Sarlin: It's really noble endeavors. And I think this is like a direction the field absolutely needs to go in. As I hear you talk about this ability to do research, the readiness for research, the incentives, you know, why should a school district or why should. A teacher, they might want to be involved in ed tech research and in that kind of collaborative work that you were doing at Confluence, but they, the school and the system basically is not designed to give them the space to do that.
And, you know, it strikes me that like in higher ed. There's the ability, especially for business school professors, but I think for many professors, to take these sort of sabbaticals in which they can sort of step away from their regular day to day research and teaching work and do something different, and I wonder if there's, you know, someday K 12 might give educators some kind of Sabbatical or sort of a, you know, time away from the busyness and the craziness of the classroom, which is, you know, nonstop to actually step away and do this kind of, you know, dedicated research working with partners.
I know I'm dreaming here. I know I'm like my head's way in the cloud, but
[00:24:58] Tal Havivi: I love that. Right. Right. I mean, it's giving essentially a time to reflect in some sort of structured way that could then result in probably research questions that need to be asked, but no one. Who is not familiar, has a pulse on how education actually works on a day to day basis.
Knows how to, I don't know how we would get there, but I love the dream, the idea of
[00:25:22] Alex Sarlin: it, the ed tech insiders plus WhatsApp community was having this sort of, you know, back and forth debate based on a LinkedIn post that somebody had made that went a little viral, basically about how ed tech companies try to request time from teachers to give them feedback, but it's often unpaid time they ask for an hour when the teacher only has, you know, 15 minutes for a lunch break.
It was sort of like. Parodying the fact that the edtech companies and the teachers were on such different pages and they really couldn't see each other and frankly, sort of lampooning the edtech companies for not knowing how to work with teachers and not incentivizing it correctly. And we had a big debate about it because it was like, we know this is true and it's sort of an embarrassment for the field at the same time.
At least my take is. You know, ed tech companies want teacher feedback. They want to co design with educators. And if the only way is to try to get them on the phone during their lunch break, I mean, that's not good for anybody, but it's their attempt to try to do something in connection with their core users.
It's just a tricky situation. And I think, you know, the system itself is just not designed to give teachers that ability to connect. I think of like medicine, doctors. are given by design doctors and hospitals have enough space to go, you know, go to conferences or go talk to pharmaceutical reps or, you know, some of the things that are a little more out of their world and in the field.
And I just don't think we do enough of that in education. I'm probably off script here, but I mean, off, off the SD stands, but I don't know.
[00:26:50] Tal Havivi: It is so far from being institutionalized, though. I think there are ways that it could like one, I think, as a principal, certainly educators should be compensated for their time and for their experience.
And it should be compensated as professionals. And 2nd, like, I wonder about, you know, there's a lot of venture capital organizations who are increasingly. Looking at evidence as part of their evaluation, how they evaluate the value, there are texts and how they support their, their portfolio. And I do wonder about if there are ways that they could design monies that are specifically dedicated for research and specifically dedicated for compensation.
[00:27:30] Alex Sarlin: If I were in a big foundation right now, I think it's something I would definitely look at because I mean, what a way to dedicate your money to the actual educators, the, you know, the people who are doing the work, but at the same time, use it towards improving the field and making sure that a tech tools are co designed with educators and that you have experts in the room.
Seems like a win win for everybody. But I know you and I both like to imagine possible scenarios and futures that we all want to work towards. And this is one, one of many. So tell last question for you here. You know, you have such an interesting vantage point. You think about R and D a lot. You mentioned 80, 000 educators are members of combined ASCD and ISTE.
That's a huge number of educators. When you look at that population and you look at the state of evidence, the state of these quality educators. Where do you think, what is the next page of the edtech story? You know, is evidence going to continue to rise? Is there going to be a new element that sort of comes out of nowhere?
Like, what do you expect to be talking about if we had this conversation a year from now?
[00:28:35] Tal Havivi: One of the things that I like about these five quality indicators. They feel durable, they feel like they're here to stay. They have been true for a while, and they will continue to be true. One thing that I'm very proud of for this podcast interview is that we did not talk about AI a single time.
And I love talking about AI. But I think that, like, my point is, there will be, there will continue to be new and evolving technology. And these five things will remain true. I believe that. And so I think like the future will, my hope is to become something like, I can't believe there was ever a time where we didn't have some sort of basis to evaluate a tech, you know, this will look very simple and very elementary.
And the evaluations will get increasingly sophisticated and specific and, you know, I think as the procurement landscape evolves, the evaluation landscape will evolve with it and. The ed tech and education procurement landscape is well overdue for evolving into something that's more human centered.
[00:29:38] Alex Sarlin: I love that.
You know, we'll see different layers and phases and fads of technology as they come. AI being one of those. I think it's going to be transformative, but it's going to be one of those. The underlying principles by which we should be thinking about procuring and getting tech for our students. Aren't going to change.
I think that's a terrific answer and a terrific note to end on. This is a Tal Habibi, managing director of research and development at ASCD and ISTE, 80, 000 educator organization. You've got to check out the ed tech index, the ISTE certifications, and all of the different projects that they do. He mentioned Confluence, the CoLab that, you know, ISTE is very busy.
There's a lot of things going on. So. Thanks so much for being here. Tell where can people find the newest and best about ASCD and ISTE online?
[00:30:25] Tal Havivi: Yeah, Alex, thanks so much for having me. This was a lot of fun. Um, you can go to ISTE. org. There's a whole product selection page. There's an edtech provider page with a lot of information and people can reach out to me directly as well.
[00:30:37] Alex Sarlin: Fantastic. Thanks for being here with us on EdTech Insiders. Thanks for listening to this episode of EdTech Insiders. If you liked the podcast, remember to rate it and share it with others in the EdTech community. For those who want even more EdTech Insider, subscribe to the free EdTech Insiders newsletter on Substack.
