Pitch Critique: Open RRU
No, I would not invest in this venture.
The Content:
While there are many (obvious) benefits to providing OpenCourseware through RRU, the main one that stuck out for me (because I am an Administrator) was the issue of marketing – if the prospective students could just try the course before they enroll in university as a paying student, they will experience the education first-hand.
The pitch outlined, very clearly what would be involved with OpenCOurseware and identified concerns and issues that come with it. It was outlined that they are modeling this venture after MIT’s OpenCourseware system, so it really is not an original venture. The pitch didn’t mention anything about the cost of the OpenCourseware, which I would assume would be large, unless faculty are willing to teach for no cost and administrators are willing to set everything up at no charge. By not identifying the cost of the implementation of this OpenCourseware I think the Venture Designers have missed the mark on making this a complete and informative pitch. Cost is a large factor to any venture and with no cost provided, the investor is not aware of the next step that is needed to proceed with this project.
The Message:
The pitch is a very well-told story, and is compelling because it strikes at the foundation of education – that it’s not about the credentials, it’s about the learning and the experience. This pitch has credibility because RRU is a credible institution and has a track record of venturing in innovative educational pedagogy with their curriculum.
However, as outlined in the pitch, this OpenCourseware is not an original concept, it is taken from MIT’s open courses, which they began offering in 2002. However, this concept is still very edgy within the post-secondary realm – free university education is almost unheard of here in Canada. Therefore, it is very marketable.
I would not invest in this venture based on this pitch. While it is an admirable idea and concept, nothing was mentioned about costs and I fear that the cost may be incredibly high. While the pitch noted that MIT’s open courses have been successful, there is nothing that states that the Canadian market is ready for this type of post-secondary education. Additionally, no exit strategy was mentioned. For these reasons, I would not invest in this venture.
Posted in: Week 03: Analyst Bootcamp
Dennis Pratt 4:02 pm on May 27, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Lisa;
I really liked the RRU model of open courseware but did not think too much about the economics of it. I would like to know more about that before “investing”. I wonder what the instructors think about the opening up their work, as well. I know, as a public school teacher, any work that I create for work is property of the school board, and I don’t mind sharing whatever I create. If I was writing a textbook, either hardcopy or online, I don’t know how I would feel about the potential monetary loss. I would imagine that some people would buy in but others would oppose the concept.
Dennis