Software Was Supposed to Reduce Administrative Burden. It Didn’t.

Software is supposed to reduce administrative burden.

In K–12 school districts, it has done the opposite.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), using data from the Common Core of Data, administrator staffing per student grew by approximately 118% between 1990 and 2020.

Not all of this increase can be attributed to software. Over those 30 years, school districts took on new responsibilities, compliance requirements, and expectations. Still, the comparison is important:

• In 1990, districts largely relied on paper-based tracking systems.

  
  

• By 2020, nearly all districts were using some form of digital information systems—SIS, HRIS, payroll, and finance platforms.

Despite this dramatic shift to digital tools, administrative burden did not meaningfully decline.

The State of K–12 Administrative Software

Here’s what stands out about the digital information systems most districts rely on today:

1. The Market Is Highly Concentrated

Roughly five companies dominate core K–12 administrative systems. Most are private or private-equity-backed, and largely unknown outside the education sector.

2. The Systems Are Expensive and Closed

These platforms are built around lock-in, betting—correctly—that switching costs for large public organizations are high. Once a district selects a system, it often remains in place for decades.

3. Innovation Has Lagged

Compared to similar software used in other industries, many K–12 systems are 15–20 years behind. Core workflows such as hiring, leave management, reporting, and data sharing remain cumbersome and manual.

4. Customer Sentiment Is Muted

Feedback from district leaders is often neutral to negative. Frustration is common, but so is a form of learned helplessness—the belief that “this is just how it works.”

Software Should Make Work Easier

Software should improve the end-user experience, not make it more complex. If that’s the goal, what can be done differently?

A Path Forward

1. Set Minimum Standards for Public Software

Taxpayers should expect baseline requirements for any software used by taxpayer-funded institutions. These standards could include interoperability, security, and the right to change vendors without excessive penalty.

2. Share What Can Be Shared

When software or tooling is developed with public dollars, it should be reusable wherever possible, rather than locked into individual districts or vendors.

3. Be Willing to Change Systems

Switching software is painful in the short term. But staying with systems that don’t work imposes a long-term cost on staff time, morale, and effectiveness.

Technology in education should reduce friction—not institutionalize it.