I’m excited to introduce Convia. The name Convia comes from converge + via — different paths coming together in one shared space. It reflects the idea behind the venture: connecting individual digital learning back into the classroom as a shared experience.
The idea grew from a disconnect I noticed in my classroom: students were using technology individually, but whole-class digital learning remained largely one-directional.
Convia is my proposed response — a wide, multi-touch classroom display that turns individual digital learning into a shared, interactive classroom experience.
See below for the full pitch:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I2ReDTkp6c3OHryNuGGBxsuxQVdnSN-X/view?usp=sharing
Hi Erin,
REVIEW:
Great job on your Venture Pitch. Both your elevator pitch and venture pitch were very engaging!
Your business model roadmap was well-detailed and extensive. But one thought I had is- who is the actual paying customer? Is it K-7 public schools? If this is so- I am wondering if it will be quite costly for public schools to integrate, I could see it being incorporated more easily with independent schools, but with BC public schools and fluctuating budget cuts, I am wondering how feasible it would be to market to them.
I think there is definitely a market for CONVIA, considering the recent research in how immersive technology leads to learning improvement, but this is still a relatively new area of research in my opinion, and since it is not heavily incorporated in BC public schools yet, I am hesitant to invest.
One final thought- I work at a public school with a lot of varying needs. I am wondering if this interactive learning experience, although it is awesome… can lead to some classroom behaviors if many people are adding to the screen. I can see some of my heavy hitter students who are less capable of focusing or controlling their impulses running up to the screen and adding silly/inappropriate things on there. As in any classroom, it is up to the teacher to enforce classroom management to manage this though- so maybe if the teacher develops a strict management system around using these devices, the issues can be resolved.
Just some food for thought. Overall it was a great presentation!
test
Sorry for responding here! I keep getting errors from wordpress when trying to submit my comment on the thread, I tried for several hours last night but this was the only thread I couldnt comment on, but somehow my test reply went through here today successfully? Sorry!
FEEDBACK: Convia seems like a very innovative idea for bringing students together instead of leaving them isolated on their own devices or as spectators on a shared screen. This presents itself as a futuristic technological ideal that could potentially appear as a standard item in the future in classrooms whom might be able to afford the hardware. Your classroom experience gives this pitch a clear focus towards the problem of disconnected digital learning and the collaborative hardware solutions you propose.
Through an EVA lens, the concept is strong because it shifts technology from an individual activity to a shared physical space. As a teacher myself, I know how hard it is to get students to collaborate meaningfully through a shared screen and how disengaging it can be for a student “who never gets a turn.” I went as far as trying to vibe-code a PvP(vP) math game of my own to experiment and find alternative methods and solutions towards engaging more than one student with just a single smart board.
While I see the potential for this to improve engagement, marketability might be my biggest question. Institutional technology budgets for hardware such as this could be a barrier to this ventures feasibility; especially since most classrooms may already have interactive whiteboards. The biggest risk here is in convincing underfunded districts to buy expensive new and innovative hardware when they already have existing legacy tools and tech in place. I worry about the physical hardware requirements of this technology in an already cluttered classroom.
Funding recommendation: I admire your pitch and conceptualization of this idea and see potential. Fund with conditions is my decision. To feel comfortable, I would require greater data and information proving measurable outcomes that this technology has the ability to be reasonable unrolled in classrooms before diving into a full investment.
Turns out I could not add my comment because I included a hyperlink and/or an emoji inside of it. Sorry for multiple responses here and the clutter!
Feedback
Strengths – I thought there were compelling images of students using Convia. I can also see you talking, with you giving off a confident and composed atmosphere, which shows me what the person behind the venture is like.
Weaknesses – In terms of what is in your elevator pitch vs venture pitch: I have unanswered questions about why this is better than what is currently in the market and what benefit is there in collaborating this way. From what I see this is all mentioned in your venture pitch, but I think that adding a small portion of this to your elevator pitch would generate more initial interest in your project.
Strengths:
I really liked how your pitch started with a classroom challenge you have actually experienced. The idea of bringing students’ individual digital learning back together into a shared classroom experience really resonated with me. Your pitch made it easy to see the potential of Convia to make classroom technology more collaborative and interactive.
Weaknesses:
One thing I was left wondering about was what would make schools choose Convia over existing interactive classroom technology. I would have liked to see a little more about what makes Convia unique and how those differences would improve the learning experience. I think this would have made the investment case even stronger.
Overall, I really enjoyed your pitch and thought Convia was a creative response to a very real classroom challenge. Great job!
FEEDBACK: Hi Erin, I really appreciated the clarity of your investment roadmap and how you framed the initial investment as an opportunity to validate the concept before scaling. From an EVA perspective, my biggest question is around the value proposition relative to the cost and complexity of developing new hardware. How would Convia demonstrate that wider, multi-touch format that creates enough educational value over existing interactive displays or combinations of existing technologies to justify the cost of adoption for schools. I would also be interested in how your pilot might measure whether the shared display meaningfully broadens participation across an entire class, rather than shifting interaction from one teacher to a small group of students at the screen.
Hi Erin,
Thank you for such valuable perspectives! I appreciate the valued information on the elevator and venture pitch. The constructive questions around public school adoption, differentiation from existing tech, and practical classroom implementation offer great insights to help strengthen CONVIA’s next iteration
Feedback
Feedback
Erin, I really like the idea behind Convia and its focus on turning individual digital engagement into meaningful classroom collaboration. The pitch did a great job showing how multiple students can interact and share their learning in the same digital space, creating a more collaborative experience for the whole class. I also thought the strong market data, number of classrooms across the country and the pecent you’re focussing on, and business plan demonstrated a clear understanding of the potential growth of Convia. The contrast with more individual technologies like VR also helped highlight how Convia brings students together rather than separating them into individual experiences.
My main concern was the elevator pitch itself. While the idea was strong, ending with a question about whether Convia can turn individual engagement into meaningful collaboration left me wanting a little more confidence in the solution. I would also like to see more evidence of why schools would choose Convia over existing interactive classroom technology. It also reminded me of the SmartBoard, which didn’t last very long in classrooms. Before investing, I would want to see a prototype tested with teachers and students, along with evidence that Convia improves collaboration and participation. Overall, I think Convia has strong potential, but I would need that classroom validation before moving forward.
FEEDBACK
Hi Erin, I like the idea of turning individual digital learning into a more collaborative classroom experience. The shared multi-touch display could create some interesting opportunities for students to interact and learn together rather than having everyone working separately on their own devices.
My biggest concern from an EVA perspective is differentiation. I would want to see more clearly what Convia can do that existing interactive displays cannot, especially given the cost of introducing new hardware into schools. A successful classroom pilot demonstrating improved participation or collaboration would make the investment case stronger.
REVIEW:
Hi Erin,
I found Convia to be one of the most compelling ventures in the class. The problem resonated immediately with me. Too often classroom technology supports individual learning but does little to bring thinking back together as a shared classroom experience. Convia reframes technology as a collaborative learning space rather than simply another screen, and I think that is a meaningful distinction.
From an EVA perspective, one opportunity to strengthen the venture is to think beyond the hardware itself. Schools are often hesitant to adopt new classroom technology because installation, ongoing support, and teacher confidence become barriers to adoption. Packaging implementation services, professional learning, and pedagogical coaching alongside the product/software could become a meaningful competitive advantage while also creating an additional recurring revenue stream.
I also wonder (like others in this thread) whether independent schools could serve as an ideal early adopter market. Many independent schools invest regularly in learning space renovations and view classroom technology as part of the overall student and family experience during admissions and community events. Successfully validating Convia in that environment could provide strong evidence of impact before pursuing larger public school systems.
Overall, I believe Convia addresses a genuine gap in classroom technology by shifting the focus from individual device use to collaborative learning. I recommend funding this venture, beginning with a pilot in the independent school sector to validate adoption, implementation, and classroom impact before scaling more broadly.
REVIEW
Convia is a really good pitch. The problem resonated with me right away because classroom technology so often isolates students on individual devices rather than bringing their thinking together as a shared experience. I like how Convia reframes the screen as a collaborative learning space rather than just another display.
I am curious about a few things, but none of them are dealbreakers. I wonder what the pilot will measure in terms of participation and collaboration outcomes to demonstrate educational value over existing classroom displays. Packaging implementation support and teacher professional learning alongside the hardware could also create a recurring revenue stream while addressing the adoption barriers that sink new classroom technology. I would recommend funding Convia to support a pilot validating classroom impact and adoption before broader scaling.
Review:
Hi Erin,
You put together a thorough presentation on this new, original product. I appreciated the breakdown of investment and roll out phases.
Before I commit to an investment, I would like to know more about how your product would compete with other technologies that provide immersive experiences, such as VR and AR technology. These are becoming more specific and fine tuned to training in fields such as medicine. I’d like to know more about how Convia could compete and perhaps offer something different in experience other than a wide touch screen that sets it apart from other similar technology. I think the fact that VR is portable makes it a convenient choice. Convia would be installed in a classroom and therefore experience would be limited to that space.
Thank you for the awesome presentation!
Edith
FEEDBACK:
Hi Erin, hardware ventures are an ambitious undertaking, and you presented a disciplined and compelling Convia pitch, so kudos! I really appreciated your vision for combining the immersive and interactive benefits of digital screens with the collaborative benefits of physical classrooms, and your classroom teaching experience makes you a credible leader of this venture. I also appreciated how you tied the multi-touch design directly to research on immersive learning outcomes, and your planning rigor in both the bottom-up market sizing, targeting a disciplined 1% of K-7 classrooms over five years, and the phased pilot roadmap outlining what you’ll be measuring at each stage.
As an EVA, two things would make this more investable for me. First, since this is a hardware venture, I’d want to see the unit economics, manufacturing and procurement costs, and the pricing plan, to assess whether the business is profitable once built, not just whether schools will pay for it. Second, I’d want to see the investment terms, including an ownership stake for the $600K ask, and any modeling on exit strategy and valuation, benchmarked against comparable seed raises or exit transactions, to get a sense of the potential return.
All in all, great pitch!
I enjoyed your project and can see value.
The elevator pitch is a good length and engaging. You leave of with a marketing line that is memorable.
The venture has some great attributes.
-The central question offered a clear scope right away.
-You mention existing devices, such as VR, with their weaknesses that show a gap in the market that supports Convia.
-You offer current and potential future research data that supports the outcomes that you products would support.
-You identified market research but did not overdo it.
-The budget, team roles, and timelines were very clearly outlined.
Thought:
The priority being the hardware leading the selection of the soft ware could make this a tougher sell in the schools due to cost. Your background makes that make sense however, the corporate side may have the budgets that are needed to bring this to market. With the right partner, you would likely find that it is an easy transition for you from the place you know to one that might offer the greatest value to get this going in. The training worlds are not so different in the two fields. Schools would then become the second sell and be more confident that they are getting value for a higher ticket item that already has buy in. You could also leverage the sales in corporate to offer lower rates in the school setting as your larger volumes would reduce the hardware costs, software would be well vetted, and you could even use it as the charitable side for a company that has the profits to offer these programs.
Overall, I could easily see this in my work as we could use more intro to hands on and VR headsets cannot be worn by everyone. We need something more inclusive. Anytime students get out of their desks, it is generally more memorable learning and you have found a way to do that.