3 ms·

"See, when you build an education product, you’re competing against two massive institutions: the formal education system (schools, colleges, state universities

"See, when you build an education product, you’re competing against two massive institutions: the formal education system (schools, colleges, state universities, etc.), and the laws and cultural expectations around that system." Well, there's your problem. I worked for years in those markets, cooperating with their needs, not fighting them. You succeed in such markets by helping them do what they already do... just better. Disruption happens at a procedural level, not by changing what they do. So does the monetization: "We just saved you $20K per year, and only charge $10K - everyone wins."

grvdrm 2y ago
> Disruption happens at a procedural level, not by changing what they do I love everything about this statement. I've seen this from both sides, as a seller of software and buyer/user of software. All of the stickiest changes happen procedural level, usually not through full-blown change but instead moderate tweaks and improvements. One way I like to think about it is this: if my software is all of the sudden unavailable, what will users do? Can they keep working? Will they keep working? Specific to education, I would hope that many core school functions like teaching would simply revert to simpler methods or alternatives rather than grind to a halt. But I assume that the process of convincing the buyers to use your software runs headfirst into confusion over how much work it will be to learn something new rather than stick with (mostly) status quo.
skhunted 2y ago
Another way to make money in education is to make life easier for the teacher and have the students pay for the privilege. Automated grading with online quizzes and tests is an example of this phenomenon in higher education.
authorfly 2y ago
You are right, institutions dominate EdTech. The UK had a number of competitive and teacher-led EdTech AI startups delivering lesson planning, like briskteaching.com & teachematic. They have some inroads with schools and colleges now. And probably would have disrupted up into the procedural level naturally. However the government decided to give £2m without any open procedure to a new company to build similar tech from scratch, and their PR acted as if this was groundbreaking, while the tech they promised, largely already existed and was in use by many teachers: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-support-for-teachers-powered-by-artificial-intelligence https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-support-for-teachers-... Who wants to invest in teachematic or brisk teaching, when your competition can get millions from the government without process and launch the same ideas over a time frame to starve you out? With the market overcrowded, prices are forced to lower, and many companies will now go bust because of this kind of unnecessary government intervention. Brisk Teaching has already had to make most things free. You cannot really be more cooperative with the system than that, but tough luck they still won't get the £2m despite proving out the idea before those funded. Shortly we will likely see the institutions in control of education like Ofsted mandate, approve or limit the tooling used, and most startups will die out. Rather than several low cost startups bringing high amounts of value, tax payers have spent millions on salaries for people with no AI background to create duplicate products, and the net value to education for actual students is therefore lowered as a result. So you can't disrupt this procedural level very effectively when the government intervenes early on.

grvdrm 2y ago

> Disruption happens at a procedural level, not by changing what they do I love everything about this statement. I've seen this from both sides, as a seller of software and buyer/user of software. All of the stickiest changes happen procedural level, usually not through full-blown change but instead moderate tweaks and improvements. One way I like to think about it is this: if my software is all of the sudden unavailable, what will users do? Can they keep working? Will they keep working? Specific to education, I would hope that many core school functions like teaching would simply revert to simpler methods or alternatives rather than grind to a halt. But I assume that the process of convincing the buyers to use your software runs headfirst into confusion over how much work it will be to learn something new rather than stick with (mostly) status quo.

skhunted 2y ago

Another way to make money in education is to make life easier for the teacher and have the students pay for the privilege. Automated grading with online quizzes and tests is an example of this phenomenon in higher education.

authorfly 2y ago

You are right, institutions dominate EdTech. The UK had a number of competitive and teacher-led EdTech AI startups delivering lesson planning, like briskteaching.com & teachematic. They have some inroads with schools and colleges now. And probably would have disrupted up into the procedural level naturally. However the government decided to give £2m without any open procedure to a new company to build similar tech from scratch, and their PR acted as if this was groundbreaking, while the tech they promised, largely already existed and was in use by many teachers: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-support-for-teachers-powered-by-artificial-intelligence https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-support-for-teachers-... Who wants to invest in teachematic or brisk teaching, when your competition can get millions from the government without process and launch the same ideas over a time frame to starve you out? With the market overcrowded, prices are forced to lower, and many companies will now go bust because of this kind of unnecessary government intervention. Brisk Teaching has already had to make most things free. You cannot really be more cooperative with the system than that, but tough luck they still won't get the £2m despite proving out the idea before those funded. Shortly we will likely see the institutions in control of education like Ofsted mandate, approve or limit the tooling used, and most startups will die out. Rather than several low cost startups bringing high amounts of value, tax payers have spent millions on salaries for people with no AI background to create duplicate products, and the net value to education for actual students is therefore lowered as a result. So you can't disrupt this procedural level very effectively when the government intervenes early on.