Teachmint began as a teaching and classroom platform and expanded into school administration, which shapes what it is strongest at. Schools evaluating alternatives should first decide which half they actually need — the teaching layer or the administrative record — because products that lead with one are rarely equally deep in the other.
We publish SchoolDeck, which is the administrative record and explicitly not a teaching platform. Verify any current capability with the vendor; these products change quickly.
The useful question here is not which product is better. It is which of two quite different jobs your school is buying for, because schools routinely shortlist a teaching-first product and an administration-first product against each other and then compare them on a single feature grid where neither looks right.
A teaching platform is centred on the class: content, live sessions, assignments, engagement. An administrative record is centred on the student: admission number, fee ledger, attendance register, result, certificate. Both are legitimate purchases. They are not substitutes.
If the answers below fall mostly in one column, shortlist products built for that column.
| If your problem is… | You are buying… |
|---|---|
| Teachers need to share content and set assignments online | A teaching platform |
| Live or recorded classes, and tracking who engaged | A teaching platform |
| Fee collection does not reconcile at year end | An administrative record |
| Report cards take three weeks and contain errors | An administrative record |
| Nobody can say who changed a mark | An administrative record |
| Parents ring the office for things they could self-serve | Either — check both do it well |
| You need both, properly | Two products, integrated. This is a normal answer |
Schools leaving a teaching-first platform are usually not looking for better teaching tools — they are looking for a system where the register, the fee ledger and the result are the product rather than a module beside it. That is the axis the table below is sorted on.
The middle column is how each vendor describes itself in its own public material, checked on 21 September 2026 — it is their claim, not our assessment of them, and products change. The right-hand column is what to ask them. We do not publish a feature matrix against named competitors because we do not track their products and an invented one would be worth less to you than a question you can put to a salesperson.
| Alternative | How they describe themselves | The question to put to them |
|---|---|---|
| Entab CampusCare | A “complete school management suite” — admissions, academics and finance in one system, cloud with mobile apps | Can we export everything ourselves today, with historical grading schemes attached? |
| MyClassboard | Cloud school ERP with a broad module set spanning ERP, finance, admissions, HR and an LMS | Which of these modules will still be in use in year two? |
| Fedena | Open-source-derived — Project Fedena is Apache-2.0. Sold two ways: Fedena SaaS on Foradian’s servers, or Fedena CDS on a server you provide, which its support site documents with hardware requirements and client-applied updates | Which of the two are we being quoted, and under CDS who applies the updates? |
| Vidyalaya | Offers a choice of deployment — its own material describes cloud-hosted, hybrid and on-premise | If we take on-premise, what do hosting, backup, patching and an owner cost on top of the licence? |
| Skolaro | Cloud-hosted and AI-assisted, “50+ modules”; claims 1,800+ institutions across India, the UAE and Oman | Which modules would actually be switched on for a school our size? |
| Edunext | Cloud-based school ERP, founded 2012; claims 1,400+ schools globally | Are definitions held centrally, so a roll-up across campuses means anything? |
| SchoolPad | Claims 350+ schools across 16+ states and positions on a dedicated success team, guided onboarding and training rather than on feature count | Who does the configuration, how long does it take, and what happens if it is wrong? |
| SchoolDeck (ours) | Hosted only, on Google Cloud in Mumbai with data resident in India. Deliberately narrower: the administrative record, with no teaching layer | Put every question above to us, and ask for the answers in writing |
Ask these of any vendor, including us. They are specific enough that a product which merely lists the module will answer them badly.
SchoolDeck carries no content library, no video classroom and no courseware, and we do not intend to build them. We are the record, not the syllabus.
If your school needs a teaching layer, you need one, and running it alongside an administrative record is the normal arrangement rather than a compromise. A product that claims to be excellent at both is worth probing with the five questions above.
Phrased the way they arrive, answered so each one stands on its own.
Yes, and many schools do. SchoolDeck holds the roll, attendance, fees and results; the teaching platform handles content and classes. The boundary to agree upfront is which system owns attendance, because both will offer to.
The administrative record, in almost every case. Teaching happened before software and will continue to; fee reconciliation and report cards will not fix themselves, and errors there compound into permanent records.
There is a page describing what we do and do not do there, and the short version is no — we integrate rather than host classes. Content delivery is a different product category and we do not claim it.
Checked by the Implementations desk on 7 September 2026. Corrections go in the page, dated, rather than quietly.
Pricing is on the page, in the open, with the counting rule written next to it. Nobody has to book a call to find out what it costs.
See pricingForty minutes with an implementation engineer — your classes, your fee heads, your grading scheme, entered as we go. No slides, no sample school.