erinmenzies

This is a really 'revolutionary' type of product. You're looking at amalgamating an enormous number of existing services and bringing them together (sometimes direct competitors!) to collaborate on one goal: getting people meaningful work. I think that the gap you identified exists, in that sense this pitch is a success, because we know that learners and workers want to shift direction, and that they need support. Your platform really offers a holistic opportunity for learners to gain that support. The issue I see is that there is little impetus for the collaborators mentioned to participate. Why would EdX want to work with Coursera in direct competition? Why would LinkedIn want to work with Elance? Why would employers spend the time seeking people with unofficial credentials when my experience of hiring has been that we frequently have far too many qualified (on paper, with excess formalized education) already applying. I think that this product would have hooked me more meaningfully if you had directed the audience more specifically: perhaps services to the unemployed or underemployed, and working with a provincial or federal department for formalized retraining. I think a service like this would work best when there is incentive for employers to hire people trained in this manner. As an EVA, these concerns are large enough that I would not choose to invest in this venture.

Hi Aaron, I loved this concept even though I don't have experience with secondary learners. I love the idea of motivating students to participate using the devices they already have, although as Dan Boone has stated below, and as I've stated in another venture review, I am hesitant to support any venture which relies on BYOD, no matter how useful I think it is. BYOD relies so heavily on students having a smartphone that supports the app as the first step. I live in a community where I know that students, even at the post-secondary level, regularly do not have access to a smartphone, and particularly have limited access to wifi at their homes. For students without these services available this type of homework would be impossible to complete, causing potential embarrassment and frustration. So, unfortunately, as a teacher/instructor, I'd have to say no to this product. As an EVA, I see enormous potential in this product, and I think you may have more uptake in schools that already mandate some form of technology (e.g. those schools who hand out iPads, Chromebooks, etc as "school supplies") and I think that by focusing your efforts to get this product in those schools, there is good possibility of market integration and meaningful use.

Hi Stephen, I absolutely think this is an untapped market opportunity! What a cool product. I do think that the cost per item (as highlighted by @rstpierre below), particularly due to the hardware manufacturing cost, is the major barrier to your idea at this time. As an EVA, I think this product has enormous potential: it streamlines teacher's days by sharing administrative information with students (e.g. assignment due dates), attendance etc, it streamlines students experience by saving them time in tracking information directly themselves, and it allows for cool projects like geocaching. Unfortunately in spite of all these benefits I don't think I'd invest because the hardware cost to get this item into schools simply seems like an insurmountable barrier in the current funding climate. If we can barely get texts into schools, I think there is a real barrier for each student in a class to be outfitted with a $600 wearable (this appears to have most of the functions of an Apple Watch, which is where I've pulled that number from), and as such I'm not sure it's scaleable.

REVIEW: Hi Chris, really loved this thanks! In my work I haven't had a chance to try Google Classroom as their servers don't meet the standard for use in a university (e.g. servers in the US, lack of control over data, privacy). So I couch all my opinions in the understanding that I have never personally used the tool as it exists! I think that your changes and amendments to the existing service are excellent, and I think (providing the price is right) could have enormous uptake in schools. Google's strength has always been it's massive marketshare in other existing marketspaces. I believe with the changes you've proposed that Google could enter with a LMS product at a lower price point than competitors, and with a more familiar/user friendly interface for many users, which could gain them immediate attention.

Hi Cole, Thank you so much for sharing this venture! This one was particularly interesting for me as I am working with our BEd program to find resources to support the new social studies curriculum in BC (both primary and secondary) and this year has been a real challenge. I agree with you that so many teachers will feel a need for Canadian-made content on this topic, particularly newer and less experienced teachers. You have done a good job addressing an identified need, and differentiating yourself from the (non-existing!) market. I agree with others who have indicated you might have a conflict of interest with the board and your interest in being the primary developer of the content, and I believe this may be the major weakness of your pitch - having one person writing and presenting content is problematic, and likely to present a limited scope, no matter how careful one is to address breadth. All this being said, I'm not sure this is strictly an educational venture or an opportunity to contract privately with the province or a particular school division. Many instructors will be happy with their existing resources (from earlier curricula) and other schools will not have the funding to purchase such a package.

Hi Jesse, Thanks for sharing this venture, it's really neat. I need to qualify my review here by sharing the fact that I am not a classroom teacher and don't have a lot of experience with LMS beyond Connect - this is because I am both a student at UBC and a faculty member. My previous experiences at university were all "old school" pen and paper affairs. I'm really interested in your venture, in that it leverages devices that students already have. I thought your pitch was well developed, and your understanding of the market was strong! However I think your venture possibly makes an unfair assumption that students have devices that they can exclusively use to access the platform. In our community I see many students at the post-secondary level from poorer communities without smartphones, laptops and tablets. Students like this tend to borrow laptops from our library each day and return them at night. They are using public libraries to complete their homework because they do not have internet at home. Until the issue of equity in device ownership can be assured, I am fairly uncomfortable with investing in a venture like this.

Hi Michael, I think this is an interesting concept. I work in higher education where the cost of textbooks is prohibitive on an individual level. I have personally avoided purchasing textbooks for the MET program because they were extremely expensive and likely to be of limited utility to me. Luckily I'm at UBC Librarian, and I can purchase us print or e-copies of the book and simply check them out - our students frequently do not have this option. All that to say, I'm on board with the central idea of your venture! The area that I feel requires further fleshing out is the development and curation of content from other teachers. While I am sure that many teachers are excellent writers and developers of content, OER content is vulnerable to plagiarism, non-attribution, and use of questionable sources. When one isn't accessing what we in 'the biz' (libraries;) call high quality evidence (e.g. peer reviewed content whether in texts or journals) there is always the risk of personal bias, lack of personal familiarity on the particular subject, and more. I'd think that in order for a service like this to provide text content of the same quality level as a traditional text, one would have to ensure a rigorous rating service/peer review for all proposed content to ensure the reputation of the service.

The first thing I immediately thought about when watching your (beautiful, by the way!) elevator pitch video was: PokemonGo. Seeing how widely and wildly PokemonGo has swept the world with interest in proximity-based app, I can see the real utility in EduBeacons, whereas I might not have had the imagination to understand a few weeks ago! I noticed that much of your pitch appeared to focus on primary learners, but I think there might be greater utility in post-secondary markets. There aren't limits on smartphone use in post-secondary institutions, meaning more opportunity for both learner and instructor interaction with beacons, furthermore, there is likely more flexibility to 'experiment' and evaluate the use of this type of initiative in situ at a university. I might hold off in investing in this venture, as I'm not sure it's differentiated from basic beacons. If beacons exist out-of-the-box, what makes EduBeacons unique? It seems they are all code-less tools that can be bought off the shelf and simply implemented in this setting.

Hi Chris, It was supposed to illustrate the look, but not function.

REVIEW: As an EVA I would recommend investment in this product. I was blown away by the thought put into this pitch, particularly the "digital flexibility" you highlighted in your extended pitch video. As with others who have commented before me, I was very impressed with the ability to integrate not only notes, but also a related audio layer, into the note for the app. I particularly enjoyed how you linked this technical function to important meta cognitive skill sets/preferred learning styles.