Tag Archives: Edtech

AI and Learning: There’s a Fraction too Little Friction

I’ve been thinking quite a lot recently about what happens to learning when we introduce generative AI.

My concern is that if AI makes it easier to complete a task, are we also making it easier to avoid the thinking that gets us there?

That’s why I was interested in a recent paper looking at human-AI collaboration at scale.

AI, Claudius

The researchers analysed almost 250,000 real-world conversations with Claude. Rather than looking at what AI could do in a controlled experiment, they looked at what people were actually doing with it.

There’s quite a lot of learning going on.

In 67% of learning and upskilling conversations, Claude engaged in some form of teaching. This wasn’t just school or university work. Software development, health and lifestyle, and business were among the most common areas.

The most common approach was combining conceptual explanation with step-by-step guidance.

So far, so good. But teaching and learning are not the same thing. I can ask AI to explain how something works. I can also ask it to do the work for me. The two interactions might look superficially similar, but the consequences for learning are very different.

Then I read that almost half of the conversations involved some form of friction. The AI misunderstood the question, made a mistake, couldn’t do what the user wanted, or perhaps the user’s instructions weren’t clear enough.

Normally, we think of this as something technology should get better at eliminating. However, in 78.7% of these cases, users tried to recover from the problem, and when people challenged the AI’s reasoning, those attempts were successful 81.5% of the time.

This is much more interesting than the headline that AI can teach.

Resistance is not futile

Use of AI in learning often looks like this: Ask a question. Get an answer. Move on.

There is a more productive version: Ask a question. Get an answer. Notice something doesn’t make sense. Challenge it. Work through the disagreement. Correct the answer.

The second interaction looks rather like learning. There is effort, uncertainty, feedback. There is the possibility of being wrong. The learner still has to think.

Are we using AI to make learning more effective, or to make tasks more efficient?

A student who uses AI to produce a better piece of homework may well get a better piece of homework. But that doesn’t tell us whether the student has become better at the underlying task.

On the other hand, an AI system that helps a student formulate a question, tests their understanding, gives them feedback and challenges their reasoning could potentially be a very powerful learning tool.

The difference is what the human is doing.

The answer isn’t to keep AI away from learning. Quite the opposite. The potential is enormous. But we should be careful about celebrating every reduction in effort.

Effort is the point. Productive effort drives learning.

If AI removes all of it, we may discover that we have superficially made learning “easier” but also thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

The interesting question isn’t whether AI can teach: it can.

The question is whether we can use AI to make learning easier without taking the learning out of it.

Coaching and Mentoring

Today was my last day as Chairman of Infinitas Learning — and the end of an important chapter for me in educational publishing, following my earlier years as CEO of Sanoma Learning.

Those who know me well know how passionate I am about learning, and about the role organisations like Infinitas and Sanoma play in supporting learner outcomes and helping teachers in their vitally important work.

Following its acquisition by NPM Capital as lead investor, we have doubled the size of the business, including expanding into Portugal and Poland. Working on that growth — alongside the company’s digital and, more recently, its AI transformations — has been especially rewarding. There are enormous opportunities ahead to better support both teachers and students.

Most of all, I’ve valued the people. My colleagues at Infinitas and NPM Capital have been outstanding, and I’m genuinely grateful to have been part of the journey. I wish them every success for the future.

Over the past 15 years leading and chairing organisations in edtech and learning, I’ve accumulated hard-won experience in leadership, transformation, and what it takes to grow — both as an organisation and as a person. And I’m still very much learning. What continues to fascinate me is how much of leadership ultimately comes down to learning.

In the next phase, I want to put that experience to work more directly through coaching and mentoring, alongside my ongoing board commitments in edtech, including as Chairman of Ovivio.

Where I’d most like to help:
Executive transition coaching — supporting leaders stepping into C-suite or senior roles for the first time.
Strategic leadership — working through the real complexity of leading organisations through change.
Personal effectiveness — helping leaders perform at their best.

For mentoring, my focus will naturally remain close to education and edtech (while avoiding conflicts with Infinitas or Ovivio). For coaching, the methodology is different, and I am keen to work more broadly across sectors — including healthtech and business services.

If any of this resonates, or if you simply want to catch up, feel free to reach out here or directly at: johnmartin@contentconnected.com

Looking forward to what comes next.

#learning #education #edtech #coaching #mentoring

Is the teacher still the ‘killer app’ in the age of AI?

AI in education is often framed as a battle between humans and machines. Based on conversations with teachers, founders and investors over the past year, I believe the real opportunities lie in partnership, not replacement.

The OECD’s Digital Education Outlook 2026 frames AI’s role in relation to teachers across three paradigms: replacement, complementarity and augmentation. But there’s a second often overlooked dimension: institutional embedding.  Moats in education aren’t built on technology or data alone, but on alignment with pedagogical goals, curricula, regulations & governance, procurement processes and professional practice.

1. Replacement — The Productivity Play

In replacement, AI automates tasks historically done by teachers. For example, grading, summarising texts, preparing lessons, generating worksheets and providing basic feedback loops.

This is where much of today’s AI attention is focused. Tasks that were once labour-intensive can now be executed quickly using general-purpose large language models.

However,  technology that replaces discrete tasks can be easy to replicate.  Application-layer companies that don’t control workflow, data or distribution potentially become interchangeable.

2. Complementarity — Enhancing the Teacher

Complementarity is where AI does not replace teachers but meaningfully enhances their capacity. For example:

  • turning classroom data into real-time insights
  • tracking student progress against goals
  • flagging risks and opportunities
  • designing targeted interventions

Here, teachers retain judgement while AI expands insights and  sharpens execution. The result? More impactful and stickier solutions because:

  • the solution integrates with daily workflows
  • the value is tied to teacher judgement, not automation
  • switching costs rise as the technology adapts to context
  • integration with existing systems (LMS, assessment frameworks, schedules) deepens.

In Europe especially, where education systems are fragmented by language, standards and national curriculum requirements, this tailored integration is the key to durability.

3. Augmentation — Supercharging the Teacher

Augmentation involves human–AI co‑evolution: AI learns from teacher feedback over time, adapts to their pedagogical style, and augments their professional practice in ways that produce outcomes neither could achieve alone.

In theory, this is the next frontier.

But the evidence suggests caution. Recent cross‑sector analyses have found that human–AI teams often underperform the better solo performer — not because AI is weak, but because synergy is hard to design and requires:

  • structured feedback loops
  • task‑specific modelling
  • data that is pedagogically meaningful
  • long‑term usage and refinement.

These conditions are relatively rare — and do not emerge automatically from generic chatbots. Consequently, many augmentation efforts risk failing before a few succeed spectacularly.

This layer will be hard to build, slow to monetise, but potentially transformative if it materialises. The Holy Grail, but not for the faint-hearted investor.

But even the most advanced augmentation tools will fail if they don’t address a deeper challenge: institutional embedding.

The Overlooked Dimension: Institutional Embedding

If replacement, complementarity and augmentation describe how AI interacts with the teacher, the moat is arguably how deeply a solution embeds in the system.

Edtech solutions thrive where:

  • curriculum alignment exists
  • pedagogical norms reinforce its use
  • there are many rules and regulations
  • procurement frameworks are understood and effective go-to-market capabilities are developed and in place
  • teacher support boosts adoption
  • governance structures (schools, districts, ministries) endorse and fund it

Know-how about working with institutions and alignment with standards determine durability.

This is particularly true in Europe, where:

  • education is governed nationally and regionally
  • language and curriculum diversity creates product differentiation challenges
  • procurement cycles are long and complex
  • teacher autonomy is the norm.

A solution that is embedded institutionally — even if technically less advanced — will often outlive and outperform one that is technically stronger but misses the expertise around the institutions it is designed to serve.

This is where real moats are built.

The next edtech winners won’t rely on algorithms alone.  They’ll succeed by understanding that the best AI doesn’t replace teachers or even just work for them. It works with them.

Where do you see the biggest opportunities?

Looking forward >>

It’s time to scale up European edtech

Last week, Brighteye Ventures, a leading European investor in education technology, published the fifth edition of its European Edtech Funding Report. It looks like 2023 might be the trough of the cycle that peaked with the pandemic in 2021, and there are increasingly strong signals of a resurgence in investor appetite in 2024.

Reasons to be Cheerful

  1. After a period of decline, overall new venture funding for European edtech in 2023 surpassed the levels reached in 2020 ($1.2B vs $951M) and the number of deals increased on 2022 (288 vs 256).
  2. About 1/3 of all global edtech deals took place in Europe in 2023 (a record high proportion, up from 21% in 2019), indicating a high level of investor interest in the European market.
  3. International private equity and venture capital investors are currently holding a record amount of dry power, with $2586B ready for deployment at the top 25 PE investors globally.

Resilience?

From a European perspective, “resilience in the volume of deals” was driven by a rising number of deals under $4M, with over half of the completed deals being done at $1M or less. 

On the micro level of individual businesses, this thinly spread funding might make some sense, yet on the macro level of the industry and the customer, it also highlights part of the European challenge, namely lack of scale. You have to wonder if something substantial and world-class will be built out of some of these tiny deals. Usually “recessions” (possibly a relative term in tech) are a good opportunity for industries to restructure, with strong firms building on their strengths and weaker firms going out of business in what is typically a healthy evolutionary process.

Enable and simplify the work of the teacher

According to some estimates there are currently about 27,500 edtech companies in the K-12 sector, obviously not all deployed in all schools, but it’s not uncommon for schools to use hundreds of digital products. Imagine the life of a teacher. Her first concern is leading a classroom of 25-30 children, which is no mean feat in itself. When she deploys a digital solution it needs to:

a) positively impact learner outcomes

b) be easy to use and

c) ideally save time that she can use for interacting with students.

A teacher is best served by a smaller number of well-performing and frequently-used solutions than a huge toolbox of occasionally-used options.

Build a European Champion

In my view, investors in European edtech should focus on increasing scale and building a handful of segment-specific European/International Champions. At scale, a European Champion has the resources in terms of talent, know-how and money to develop and deploy top-notch learning solutions, yielding excellent learning impact and delivering good financial returns. It’s my hope (and expectation) that a group of investors will take the opportunity at this early stage in the new economic cycle to take our industry and the services we provide to schools to the next level.

How will AI impact teachers?

Super-charger

ChatGPT has recently triggered tremendous excitement about AI and its potential impact on education. Much interest has focused on the learner experience, including the ability to personalise learning. There have of course also been concerns around cheating and plagiarism.

However, AI also has the potential to super-charge teachers.

According to McKinsey, 20-40% of current teacher time comprises tasks that could be automated. They estimate that teachers could re-direct approximately 13 hours per week towards activities that raise student outcomes and increase teacher satisfaction.  The tasks of preparing lessons, administration, evaluation and feedback are flagged as high potential for AI.

Love’s Labour’s Lost

These results echo those of Sanoma’s Learning Impact Survey, in which teachers indicate a desire to go digital in those areas which were most labour intensive, flagging essentially the same areas.  This suggests both that the opportunity is in these tasks and that the profession is looking for solutions.

present_vs_ideal

Teaching profession under pressure

The teacher is arguably the most positive intervention in education.  However the teaching profession faces significant challenges.  UNESCO estimates an additional 69m teachers need to enter the profession by 2030 to fulfil global demand.  In some parts of the world, teacher turnover is high, for example in parts of the USA annual teacher turnover exceeds 15%.  In the UK more than 80% of teachers are considering leaving the profession due to dis-satisfaction.

Higher impact & happier teachers needed!

Furthermore, on average teachers spend only half of their time actually teaching.  This represents not only lost productivity from the core task but is also demotivating for many teachers whose passion is to teach rather than the ancillary tasks around it.  Enabling teacher workflow could therefore not only increase productivity but also make the profession more attractive.

SVGZ-AI-boon-Ex1.svgz

$400bn impact & opportunity

The opportunity to solve this productivity gap is huge.  Measured in terms of financials, assuming global spending on education to be some $6trn, of which 45% is on K-12 education,  and of which 75% is spent on staff salaries, this implies a global spend on teaching/staff salaries of some $2trn per year.  A 20-40% uplift in productivity through AI could arguably be worth some $400-800bn per year in terms of paid and unpaid output!  Which is not to say that this is a saving governments could make or a revenue that education companies could earn, because a significant slice of that value should rightfully return to teachers through higher salaries and quality of life, and another part would rightfully get re-directed to teacher-student interaction to increase outcomes and professional satisfaction.

20%

Help the teacher to focus on teaching!

It’s my belief that the teacher will continue to be the killer app in education, and that the biggest opportunity to make not only a positive impact on learning and teaching in K-12 but also to build a successful business, is to enable the workflow of the teacher.  Probably by combining it with the other side of the same coin: the learn-flow (learning experience) of the student.  

Looking forward >>

It will be exciting to see how we deploy AI in the coming years for a positive impact on learning. Looking forward >>.

Attention edtech champions! 

EdTechX Awards 2022

EdTechX is currently running the 10th edition of the All Stars Awards. They’re a fantastic opportunity to see who’s shaping the future of edtech, with previous winners including the heroes at Kahoot!, Kognity, Busuu, OpenClassrooms and FutureLearn.

Learning, Earning and Yearning

They say there are three ingredients to the good life, learning, earning and yearning, which seems to have inspired the three categories this year:

  • Startup, for ventures with annual revenues of less than €5M, who have demonstrated stellar innovation and growth over the last year Apply here >>
  • Scale-Up for ventures with annual revenues over €5M who have delivered outstanding revenue growth momentum over the last 3 years Apply here >>
  • ESG & Impact for companies who can demonstrate positive ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) policies and impact strategiesApply here >>

Summit Up

EdTechX is accepting applications right now – don’t miss the deadline of 30th April.  

Winners and finalists will be announced at the EdTechX Awards Ceremony during the EdTechX Summit on 23 June in London.

Looking forward >>

I’ve joined all of the EdtechX meetings to date and they’re a great place to network with the movers and shakers in the industry.  It’s also a perfect opportunity to visit London again 😊.

Paper – where efficacy meets equity

I was excited to read about this $270M Series D round for Canadian-based ubiquitous tutoring solution Paper – where efficacy meets equity.

A thousand blossoms blooming

Bloom’s seminal work on the 2 Sigma Problem, carried out in the early 1980’s is a classic must-read for edtech ventures today. The outcomes of the research are startling, showing that an average student under tutoring performs about two standard deviations above the average performance of a conventional class. 

Or put another way, an average student following a tutoring program outperforms 98% of students in a conventional classroom!

Since then, the private tutoring market has grown significantly, although new regulations in China last year driven by concerns around equity and student well-being did have a significant negative impact on that market. 

Efficacy AND equity

The good thing about the private tutoring market is its efficacy – it raises learner outcomes.  The disadvantage however is that the rich tend to benefit disproportionately, because they can afford it. The resulting inequity can’t be a good design principle for the provision of education.

Since Bloom, the search has been on to provide solutions that yield similar efficacy at scale.  Paper is potentially such a solution.  For a fixed price, Paper sells licenses to schools and districts to make its online tutoring support available to every student, around the clock, with no cap on usage. Students can connect with a trained tutor for homework help, writing feedback and study support across all K-12 subject areas. Teachers at schools can access these sessions, see which students need support, and adjust their instruction accordingly.

I’m enthusiastic about this approach because it enables both efficacy and equity in education. The risk of inequity isn’t completed removed of course because richer schools might be more likely to adopt the solution than poorer.  Yet with most K-12 education systems funded publicly, that risk could be mitigated by policy. A second risk could be increased competition between schools and tutoring companies for teachers.  Yet the deployment of university students and new/re-entrants into the profession could also work to increase the overall talent pool of teachers available.

Looking forward >>

I’m very interested to see how Paper will grow in the coming years and believe there could be international potential for this type of solution.

BETTer Future

I’ll be visiting London and BETT at the end of March (probably 22nd -24th).  As for so many of us this will be my first trade fair since the pandemic and I’m really looking forward to joining in real life again (never expected to be this enthusiastic about a trade fair, not even BETT 😊). It does feel like we are now emerging from the restrictions of the last couple of years and I’m excited to get out there again.

I’m especially interested to meet people from companies with strong market positions, from scale-ups and from investors in the education, edtech, science and healthtech spaces during my trip to London.

As of March I have some availability for advisory and interim work and have extensive skills and experience in leadership/leading change, digital/transformation and commercial/strategy work.  I have deep knowledge and networks across the European education sector.

I’m also open to become a Non-Executive Director of such an organisation, as long as this doesn’t conflict with existing work. Very flexible in terms of location.

Feel free to send me a message at johnmartin@contentconnected.com or DM me on social media if you would like to meet up in London!

Looking forward >>

#OpenForWork #Leadership #Education #Edtech #Science #Digital #Transformation

European edtech & the emergence of supplementary education

The Brighteye Ventures Edtech Funding Report released last week evidenced a positive and increasingly broad-based development of the European edtech sector:

Venture capital funding tripled over the previous year, reaching some $2.5B.

Average deal size also tripled to $8.4M, indicating increasing maturity of the sector.

Corporate Learning attracted the most funding ($926M), followed by K-12 ($659M) and Life-long/Consumer Learning ($652M), with Higher Education ($289M) and Pre-K ($136M) trailing. One possible reason being that B2C and B2B segments are sometimes seen as easier to sell into than B2G.

Six European markets raised more than $100M, up from just one market previous year.

There were six deals in excess of $80M in 2021, up from one in the previous year

Go GoStudent!

The biggest round in Europe last year was in K-12 at Vienna-based tutoring company GoStudent which is currently driving a very rapid international expansion.

(Online) tutoring has long been well represented amongst global edtech unicorns, with the heavy Chinese contingent prospering until the local market crash last year due to regulatory reforms. However, until recently online tutoring had not really taken off at scale in Europe, arguably because the European landscape is fragmented and both the quality of state-provided education and the cultural preference for equity, high.

Market for supplementary education likely to grow

I believe it’s likely that the global market for supplementary education (leaving China aside for now) will continue to grow strongly in the coming years, because:

a) It works

+ Positive impact on learner outcomes*
+ Potential to support teacher retention by reducing after-hours work for existing teachers hence making the profession more attractive
+ Potential to enable recruitment as teachers of university students, former teachers and other professionals, by first (re)-igniting their interest as a tutor,

and

b) There is growing demand for it:


+ More children attend schools than ever before, expanding the addressable market
+ There is increasing competition for top universities and jobs
+ Lower fertility rates boost spending per child
+ Growth in the number of families where both parents work, reducing the time available to help children with homework.

Beware pernicious effects


However, there are some potential pernicious effects should be mitigated:
Rising inequality, since the rich can better afford it than the poor
– Unreasonable pressure on students
Competition with schools for teachers, potentially undermining public education systems.

Public-private-partnerships?

In some European countries including the UK and The Netherlands, additional public funding was made available for supplementary education during the pandemic. I am interested to learn what impact these interventions have made and whether the combination of core and supplementary educational provision in the future might be a path to raising average learner outcomes and supporting disadvantaged students?

I’m interested to learn any insights you might have on this subject. Feel free to drop me a line.

*The outcomes of the research are startling: an average student under tutoring performs about two standard deviations above the average performance of a conventional class. Or put another way, an average student following a tutoring program outperforms 98% of students in a conventional classroom! 
https://lnkd.in/gDYHazw

What’s the impact of the coronavirus outbreak on the edtech industry?

 

Earlier today we had an online meeting of edtech entrepreneurs mainly from Northern Europe, organised by Heikki Rusama, CEO & Co-Founder of the teacher platform Freeed.com.  He interviewed me to share views on the possible impact of the corona-crisis on the education industry in general and edtech in particular.  It was great to see these entrepreneurs, albeit at a distance. I made an abbreviated transcript below for those who couldn’t join.

Heikki: Schools have been closed in Finland and we are now planning to open them again. ​What is the impact of the coronavirus outbreak for the education industry and edtech industry specifically?      

“One billion children in lockdown”

John: There are about 1.5bn school-aged kids globally and about 1bn of them are currently in lockdown-type situations. Some places, especially in Northern Europe are about to start experimenting with coming out of it.

We’ve seen massive disruption to the operating model, impacting the learnflow of pupils, the workflow of teachers, and the communication channels and the wellbeing of everybody.

This is a very sorry situation for society as a whole, it’s probably mixed news for education depending on the role in the value chain and the time frame, but overall this is probably quite positive for parts of the edtech industry, arguably a once-in-a-lifetime triggering event for deploying edtech.

“Once in a lifetime triggering event for edtech”

Short term, from an education industry perspective, there’s good news and bad news:

  • The short term winners are likely to be the big platforms and digital or blended incumbents. Probably Microsoft and Google will benefit most of all. Some incumbents might benefit if they’re well invested in digital and also because they’re known and trusted and have existing customers and established channels. People tend to choose for safety in a crisis
  • The hardest short-term pain is likely to be felt by universities (especially those with a heavy enrolment of international students) and private school chains, as social distancing significantly disrupts their operating and earnings models.

Medium term, it’s possible that education might benefit, because we’re likely to have a fierce recession or depression; although this is negative for society as whole, it normally gives a boost to education as people seek to acquire skills, upskill and re-skill and use their time usefully between jobs.

Long term, the impact is harder to predict and arguably depends on whether we have a rapid “V-shaped” recovery, or if we will have a more protracted “W” or even an “L-shaped” recovery (hopefully not!).

If it’s a V-shaped recovery, then probably the most likely outcome is a step change towards digital and an acceleration of the current direction of change to an ever-higher penetration of digital in the mix.  In other words, learning and teaching become incrementally more digital within a blended model.

However, my personal view is that we’re likely to go into an extended period, maybe 1-4 years, of the “1.5 metre society”.  This being a period of social distancing and intermittent lockdowns, until either a vaccine is deployed, or medications found, or group immunity has been established.  With current immunity at about 3-4% of the population, we are currently far away from the 60-70% required to achieve group immunity, so opening-up society will likely lead to rapid increases in new infections and new lockdowns.

“New operating model for schools?”

What does a “1.5 metre school” look like? There are probably lots of variations, but this will probably mean smaller classes, more learning from home, basically a new operating model, with a very significant digital element.

This scenario is likely to be quite bullish for the edtech industry. Here I think the bigger school-level platforms are likely to prosper in K12, and the big brand universities with a strong online presence will win in Higher Education.

However, in this scenario, state funded education systems and privately funded schools are likely to come under significant financial strain as costs rise and public spending and private wallets come under pressure. It might therefore be the case that some digital-first-institutions and -companies might prosper within an overall less healthy market than it would have been without the corona-crisis.

“New opportunities for new ventures”

So you are all leading start-ups and I think your advantage might come through agility.  I would expect the winners in the start-up space compared with the pre-corona situation to be

  • data-driven business, which will get even hotter than they already were, as it has now been shown that customers might be a bit less squeamish about data than was earlier the case,
  • companies enabling teacher workflow, since the time of teachers will become an increasingly scarce and precious resource,
  • well-being and social emotional learning approaches are likely to get a boost.

Heikki: Many edtech companies have reported exceptional usage and even sales numbers during the crisis. Do you think that the impact will last beyond the pandemic era?

“Digital usage likely to drop back somewhat from current peaks”

John: I reckon current usage levels are probably exceptional because

  1. The model is now predominantly pure-play distance
  2. Usage is nearly always highest around the time of a triggering event

When the norm is once again face-to-face, use of digital will probably fall back somewhat, and when the triggering event is behind us, the novelty effect will also fall away.  I do expect there will be a structural increase, but usage will fall back as schools open.

Heikki: Many companies have opened their offering for free during the crisis. Do you think this is a good strategy?  

Do “good” business

John: The way I see this is that we lead “missionary businesses”. Morally I think it is in many cases the right thing to do at this time.  Our societies are going through the biggest crisis of our lifetimes and we can help. It’s our duty to do the right thing and help.  Whether it makes sense from the perspective of the long-term business strategy, I don’t know, but would be inclined to be positive:

  • Is a freemium model in any case the right thing for your business?
  • If not, schools might be more inclined to feel goodwill towards you when you eventually ask a price, if you were generous and not profiteering from them in their darkest hour
  • For the long term, I tend to think that quality and reliability are more important factors in education than price (free), and charging a fair price for a good service according to competitive market practices is a sustainable approach
  • Overall, depending on the business you’re in, I can see that offering some months for free, maybe till the summer, might be most helpful to teachers and pupils, and might create goodwill for the future.

Heikki: Over the years you have consistently spoken about the importance of technology, but also advocated the blended learning model, combining the physical and digital. Has something changed during the corona-crisis in your thinking? Have you changed your mind about edtech in some ways during the crisis? 

“Blended learning with a stronger digital element has great prospects”

John: I remain a big believer in the blended model. This model is also working well in the crisis. You know, books also work very effectively in homes as well as schools, it’s not just about digital.  I do think physical proximity of teachers and pupils is essential to good K-12 education and distance learning is essentially a poor alternative for this age group. But I’m happy to see digital boosted in the mix.  What has surprised me has been the relative ease of transition to online models, and particularly the deep penetration of Google and Microsoft.  It feels like a journey that was taking 10 years, got accelerated into two weeks!

Heikki: It seems that this pandemic provides a massive exposure for edtech companies. However, some fundamental issues remain. One of those is the question of sales & distribution channels. There are several national and international initiatives, trying to solve this. The key question is, I think, how to make the “edtech ecosystem” stronger and less fragmented, together?

John: the pandemic doesn’t in any way solve the go-to-market problem. It’s good to have open marketplaces with easy procurement processes and it’s helpful to have start-up networks and so on, these initiatives are worthy. In edtech I don’t think there’s a shortage of ideas or talent.  I don’t think there’s a shortage of money for good businesses.  Sparkmind.vc in Helsinki should bring a nice boost!

However, and I realise this might not be a very popular view to this audience, I believe the fundamental problem of European edtech is that it’s sub-scale and fragmented. It will be very hard for us to compete with the Chinese, Indians and Americans on the tech part of edtech in the long term. We can compete on local market approaches and pedagogy however. We have to solve the problem of fragmentation and lack of scale.

“Imagine your life as a teacher”

Also think about it from the customer perspective. Think about a teacher. She is mainly concerned about leading what is often an unruly classroom, effectively. There are vocal parents and there’s lots of administration to do. Teachers simply don’t have time to listen to sales pitches from 3000 edtech companies nor use 3000 different solutions.

So it’s my belief that we need to enter the next stage of maturity as an industry, to move from fragmentation and to start to consolidate around a smaller number of national and regional, maybe even global champions with strong and maybe rather broad portfolios and deep networks. And we need to inter-operate across the ecosystem.

Edtech ventures might typically want to experiment with three alternative go-to-market approaches: direct, via distributors, and with partners. In addition, it might also make sense in many cases to integrate with Microsoft and Google, they have good experience in interoperating their networks.

“Go local!”

I do have a bit of a hobby horse with education which goes against a major dogma in digital markets.  In digital everyone says you need to “go global”.  You know, K-12 education is really a local market.  My view is that you need to become a “system player” in a local market to succeed. “Go local” is my credo in education 😊.

Heikki: Who should take lead in this? Global tech giants, Big educational publishers, countries or individual companies?

John: It varies per country and segment.  Who are the bigger companies serving the customers you want to serve?  Can you partner with them?  Can you learn how they do it?  Take the initiative and go and speak with them.

Heikki: Does this time make you a more or less enthusiastic edtech investor?

John: I’ve always been an edtech enthusiast.  Broadly speaking, the corona-crisis is probably bullish for the edtech sector. From an investment perspective, alongside investing in attractive edtech assets directly,  I’m also thinking in a contrarian way.  Might it as an investor also make sense to buy out-of favour “legacy assets” and transform them to digital using edtech?

Heikki: What technologies or concepts are you the most interested in at the moment?

John: I always think you have to look at what the problems are that need to be solved, and what’s scarce: Two areas particularly interest me:

  • Supporting teacher workflow (globally a major shortage of teachers and growing pressure on their time)
  • Data driven approaches – insights are currently barely being used in education and market has just proven itself to be a bit less squeamish than it was about data

Heikki: Finally, what are the 3 things that every edtech entrepreneur should care about? 

John:

  1. Building a winning team is key to everything. Hire the very best people you can get.
  2. Put the user-experience first in your offering. Make it really easy to use. Teachers have complicated lives. Make it easy enough that a teacher leading 25 unruly kids all at the same time, can use it with ease.
  3. Work out your go-to-market approach and especially which markets to be in. Go local!
  4. I will add a fourth bonus point if I may. We’re going into an uncertain future, ranging from a rapid recovery to a depression. People are generally bullish on edtech right now, there is money in the market.  Make sure you have your funding in shape, and you have a good runway ahead of you.

After the interview we had interesting updates from Sari Hurme-Mehtälä, CEO at Kide Science about recent successes in China, Kristo Lehtonen CEO at 3D Bear about the great exposure they have had with Apple and Google, and Heini Karppinen, Chair of Edtech Finland, encouraging everyone to stay connected.  Very helpful!

Thanks for participating.  Keep the faith and stay safe!

Looking forward>>