First, it is at the state level that economies of scale can best be realized. Second, state governments are well positioned to ensure that the costs of implementing school technology plans are borne, at least in part, by all the beneficiaries of those plans. By establishing guidelines and goals for what school technology plans should contain, states can help districts realize economies of scale and ensure that the technology plans being implemented across the state are reasonably comparable. Coordination between states and districts is not sufficient, however, to bring about a funding strategy that works. In addition, school districts must change the way in which they budget for and fund their school technology plans.
Educational technology is unlike any other expenditure budgeted by school districts.
It is neither a labor expense nor a capital expense nor a recurring material expense, but rather a hybrid. Technology resembles capital expenditures in that it usually requires significant start-up costs followed by maintenance costs, but it generally should not be funded through the same types of mechanisms available to school districts for capital expenditures. Neither do expenditures on educational technology closely resemble expenditures on other educational materials, for the start-up costs are greater, and the extent of professional development required to support the program is far greater. By distinguishing technology from other categories of expenditures, the various components that make up a school technology plan will become more distinct. This effect has the advantages of facilitating the projection of future funding needs, and providing information needed for revision of the school technology plan.