A Master Class in the Difference Between Education and Edutainment and Entertainment
What do I mean by the title above? Look no further than this intriguing analysis of the company MasterClass. The author says it well himself:
In fact, one of the few success stories in edtech is a company that doesn’t really sell education at all: MasterClass.
Instead of competing with universities at their own game, MasterClass took a different route. They hired experts and celebrities — practitioners who are at the very top of their field — and made beautiful, highly-produced videos of them explaining their craft. MasterClass might claim to be selling education, but don’t be fooled: they are selling credibility and inspiration.
Don't be an EdTech company.
If you want to make venture returns or an enjoy a business model like this one, don't do it.
Why? Said another way, MasterClass is an entertainment company. Not education. Users aren't looking to transform their lives. Users aren't going to follow the career path of the person they are following. I'm not saying it's not good, but it is a different purpose.
My wonder on MasterClass is how big the market is to pay for access. You can compare masterclass with say Netflix and you wonder how much room it has to run. Why? Look at the fees: $180 a year is on par with the most expensive Netflix subscription ($192/yr or $16/month), and you get much less content.
How hard is it to start a viable education company?
MUCH harder than it is to start a viable Edutainment company. Take the company Outlier as a juxtaposition with MasterClass. Outlier is a startup the produced high quality, all online course in college basics like Psychology 101 and Intro to Calculus in partnership with the University of Pittsburgh: New online ed start-up aims at community college market -- with University of Pittsburgh's backing. It was founded by the former founder of MasterClass who 'wanted to give back'.
In some ways, Outlier is a potentially brilliant and impactful company if they can get it to work at scale. Teach the basics. Teach them well. Teach them once. Charge a reasonable price ($400 a course). Partner with a University for accreditation. Let people count the credits, particularly if they take exams that can assess skills. Show competency.
Why would the cost to create a course for Outlier be much more expensive than the cost to create a course with Neil deGrasse Tyson? I'm not sure it would.
But here comes the hardest, most expensive part: Entrenched interests fight back: Op-ed | A word of caution to students about Outlier courses. Many of these points are valid, of course. But the education market does not like competition. Its entities do not like new entrants. These people - instructors, administrators, lay-people - will devote incredible time and energy to tarnish these new, cost-saving models before they have a chance to be successful. (No, not all of them, but enough to stymie these efforts in a meaningful way).
Every step of the way, education companies - ones that actually try to help students make meaningful progress in improving their skills - are more complicated than edutainment ones. Have more added costs. Have greater side-shows to handle. That distracts from building products and experiences that help learners. That dynamic is a real shame.
From w.50 of Declarative Statements ‘This Land Is Your Land’