Edtech Startup Ups and Download: Launching a product in the United States of America
We brought a unique coding platform and a regiment -based model to the American market. He did not go as planned. Here is the reason, and how we fix it.
The launch of the Edtech product in a competitive and foreign market is difficult – but exciting. You never know if it will work. Even after studying the failures of other startups and their successes, analyzing competitors, and tracking market trends, there is always an unexpected thing to prepare. In this article, let’s explore the status of a real Edtech product: how we changed one of the basic features of our products to a new market – and how it turns out.
Coding platform and the organized regiment -based learning model
At the time of the launch of a product, our team was small, and we saw how successful of the structured interactive learning system in the online learning system. It seemed to make sense to experience the same preparation: interactive coding platform, a dust -based program with strict final dates, active support from mentors and teachers, and strong organized curricula.
The team made the homework – we analyzed the market, looked at the competitors, and we prepared a plan – and yes, some of the main competitors already offer similar models, with guidance or dust elements. Not everyone had a custom educational platform, so we thought we had a technical feature there.
Therefore, we launched classic Edtech format: students start a group in a fixed history, progress together, and if they are very backward, they take an “academic break” and join a later group. It was logical to us. I have worked well with many markets and users. In the United States? It turns out that it is not much.
What is the mistake that happened
American users did not really click on the form. Although the comments in the beginning were great and positive, there were really some strong dust as students were linked and made it throughout the way – there was more than 75 % even after a year. In general, however, financial standards and learning analyzes clearly showed that there are issues of motivation, retaining and adherence to the final dates.
Various time areas for students and teachers, the need for more flexibility, and expected the ability to balance between part -time learning and real life – everything has not done well with our initial structure. Coding projects were a technical challenge and time intensity. The final dates were difficult. Students are emphasized. And stress led to the installation.
The academic rest system did not help as planned – in fact, hurting it badly. It seemed to have failed for students, even if this was not the intention. Therefore, we had to rethink everything as soon as possible before it was too late. One of the challenges was the implementation of something new from the zero point in the middle of the learning process on the platform online and the destruction of the progress of users and our promises. It was also completely specified for the legal aspect of educational services, and this is something that must be taken into account from the first place.
Rebuilding the learning model and turning into something new from scratch
We ran a complete discovery. We talked to the difference, independent experts, advisors, students, competitors and learning designers in the United States. We move in best practices via Global Edtech. Based on what we learned, there was a complete redesign of our learning model and technical opportunities.
We have turned from strict learning based on regiment into a flexible model, as we have provided the recommended deadlines as landmarks, which reduces the emotional pressure of failure. We redesigned the logic of the basic system, the tone of our communications, the way we put the product, and the student support structure.
Instead of linking it to one teacher, students were able to reach several guides at one time – this expands their network and let them learn from various industry specialists by attending the workshops conducted by different experts. We removed the “academic breaks” and replaced them with a limited number of students “additional weeks” can order if they need more time.
Until we started notifying them early: “This stage may be difficult – save” peace “at a later time.” As in the game, it helped. The experience has made more personal, more flexible and more compatible with the American learning culture. The pursuit was prosperous, and we got a lot of positive comments and enhancing financial standards as well as learning analyzes. However, it was not anything we had to stop – EDTECH is constantly changing, and yet, we have implemented many changes on this structure, however, continued to provide our users with personal flexibility, but it was better managed.
How to listen to mysterious reactions and create a hypothesis
Speaking to users is known as one of the most important parts of the product development. We have done this constantly through counter -feeding polls, customer development interviews, UX research, etc., but the issue was that the comments were sometimes polite but mysterious. Especially in early interviews, we will get general answers that did not really help us to verify specific hypotheses.
For example, when users leave, they may say “financial reasons”. But … what does this really mean?
Did we not provide appropriate payment plans? Are they not enthusiastic? Or maybe they actually did not like the course – but they did not want to say that?
What always helped him when we were in the dark is that we reviewed the learning experience trips in detail before conducting an UX interview. Sometimes, we can see early predictors of defense or drop the motivation. Or it may be a completely different position – the presence of very excited students and unexpected recovery requests with mysterious answers. It was difficult when comments lacking privacy.
Compared to students from the other markets we worked with – who were often more directly – I felt attempted to read between lines at times.
Even exit interviews were not always useful. Therefore, we had to learn how to listen better. Here when the active listening proved itself as a real deal. In calls, we started ejaculation in hypotheses such as: “So, was the advantage like this that helped you stay on the right track?” Suddenly, they opened more details. Another example is to provide students with the participation of their comments with the team members related to the problem – if it is financial, the sales manager or product is responsible for payment options.
In the event of technical problems or in the curricula, we sometimes invited many team members in an UX interview – from development and curricula teams. In addition to the interviews, we have completely changed our note polls and re -formulation questions – I made a team as well as an initial step before interviewing the exit. We have also confirmed that the people participating in the interviews know the product from the inside and completed at least a small part of it as if they were students until they spoke with them using the same language.
It was not an attractive free content as we thought
Another thing that did not fall? Allow users to dismantle the statute and our products.
We were hoping that students would find the training course, to have a free experience, check the extent of splendor and interaction, and reserve a call with sales if they were interested, and registration. But this path was rarely working, especially since the idea was “an experience of something without commitment.”
It was actually successful when the sales representative – admission advisor or job advisor – first, and their secret through job tracks, comparing programs, helped them think about their goals and motives, discussed financial plans, and saw whether there was a match.
This human relationship created clarity and confidence, and self -service did not match it. What also succeeded was to introduce users to users to start any program early with very reasonable fees (about $ 100) with an expert platform and guidance, professional advice, and support on our part. There was no commitment to prolong these drawings and convert them to push the program – only to explore the platform with all features – not alone, but with personal support from the beginning. In this way, both the company and the user committed and interested in the result, and we directed students all the way.
Some final ideas
Not only can you copy a model from model to country and expect to fit perfectly. Even when coordination is strong, the platform is solid, and the behavior of culture and user behavior forms everything – from how people learn how to make notes and what they expect from technology.
We have made many assumptions. We have made a lot of things. But we listened, repeatedly, and rebuked the main parts of the experiment – and we were not afraid to do so. In the end, I succeeded. Students responded. Improvement. The learning journey felt more natural, empowering and more attractive.
