Michael Horn argues that education savings accounts, which give public funds directly to parents, have lowered barriers for starting K-12 schools. Unlike higher education, which requires expensive accreditation, K-12 entrepreneurs can now launch diverse models without venture capital, using platforms like Time from Alpha Schools. But state regulations could kill this opportunity if they impose the same gatekeeping.
Right now may be the best moment I've ever seen to be an entrepreneur creating K12 schools in the United States. And that's a big deal. For years we've talked about system change in education. Moving away from a monolithic, one size fits all system towards something that actually optimizes learning for each student. But the hard truth is that systems, they don't really transform themselves. They change often when they're replaced and that's what disruptive innovation does. Now the biggest change at the moment, the rise of education savings accounts. I've written about this before, but ESAs in a growing number of states put public dollars directly in the hands of parents and that allows them to customize their child's education. And that single shift dramatically lowers the barriers to starting new schools and new schooling models. Now for a long time I've said hey, higher education, probably post secondary education, that's the better playground for entrepreneurs because there's real consumer choice, flexible pricing, government dollars that follow students. It's a marketplace. If you could survive accreditation. Now that market still exists. But the barriers to entry are higher in higher ed than what we're seeing in most K12 ESA states. Now let's obviously acknowledge venture funding is tight right now, but honestly most people starting schools I don't think should be taking venture capital. And with non venture funded ed platforms like Time back from Alpha schools emerging, there could be some real technology enablers to help power new disruptive schooling models that entrepreneurs help create. Now there's one risk I should mention which is that states could ruin this moment by layering on input based regulations like mandatory accreditation for example that end up protecting the existing system in instead of enabling new schools to emerge. If that happens, then I think K12 actually will start to look more like the post secondary marketplace where the barriers to entry are much higher. But if states resist that urge and let families vote with their feet, we could see an explosion of new schooling models powered by better curriculum, better platforms and better support structures than ever before.
