January 27, 2009, 4:18 pm
The annual NewSchools Venture Fund Summit is the "it" conference in the education sector that has been run for 10 years in various locations across the country. This past year hundreds of prominent education leaders gathered for a day in DC to talk about the latest issues in education. But how do you make an event like this a success? We asked Julie Petersen, Communications Director at NewSchools Venture Fund, to enlighten us on the process.
What spurred NewSchools Venture Fund to start hosting this conference and what do you try to accomplish at/with the conference each year?
The original idea was to create a venue to bring together education entrepreneurs. When we first got started, we didn’t think people were really thinking about education entrepreneurship. We wanted to start the conference to introduce this concept. Our first conference had about 100 people in the audience and was designed to bring together the various stakeholders involved in transforming education – funders, entrepreneurs, and policy makers. This is one of the few places out there trying to bring these various stakeholders together to discuss entrepreneurial solutions to transforming public education so that it serves all students – particularly low-income students -- well.
How do you select the topics for discussion and subsequently, how do you select/recruit speakers/panelists for the discussion topics?
In the early days, we tried to focus on introducing the concept of entrepreneurial education, so we needed to focus on what those first questions were for people, such as for-profit vs. nonprofit structures, and how to hire the right people into a new entrepreneurial organization. Over time the entrepreneurial education movement matured and widened, and we shifted the framework for the day to consider the context in which entrepreneurs are working – states, cities and districts – and where the entrepreneurial opportunities and barriers reside. That informs the specific sessions we plan.
To plan individual sessions, we consider first the audience and the key takeaways we want them to leave with. We think about how we want the conversation to go, and then we pick the speakers who can make that happen. We also think a lot about the moderator – we want someone who is a strong leader to guide the discussion but won't dominate the discussion, and will instead bring out the other speakers and their viewpoints.
Today, we feel like education entrepreneurship is an inflection point where we have critical mass and entrepreneurs’ efforts are really starting to lead to effective and widespread change. So this year – our 10th anniversary year – we wanted our first session to tee up with the issue of what entrepreneurs have accomplished. Is entrepreneurship leading that change or are other forces at play? We wanted the later sessions to build off of that first topic to explore the role of the public sector, and the role of the private capital markets.
In the past, the agenda tended to include a large morning plenary session, followed by an array of breakout sessions to select from in the late morning and the afternoon. With all of the different choices, people got very fragmented and it was hard to feel they were having a coherent experience. This year, we narrowed it and held fewer, larger sessions to bring everyone together. Instead of having a lot of breakout sessions this year, we had “table topics” at lunchtime for people to meet and discuss a particular issue. These were not designed to be formal conversations, but rather general conversations with a knowledgeable resource who could help answer questions. We thought this setup worked really well, especially for people newer to the Summit.
How many people are on your team?
We have about 25 people on the team. When I joined in 2002, there were only 8 of us, so we have grown a lot. The vast majority of our team’s time is spent on due diligence and management assistance for our portfolio ventures throughout the year, with most of the work for the Summit and other events falling to the External Relations team, of which I am a part. Everyone on the team gets involved in making the Summit a success, though.
Is there anything you hope to change about the conference for next year?
There are two possible changes for next year. We are constantly trying to figure out what is the best session formats to use. The panel discussion seems to be easiest, and can be really effective if done well, but it can get a bit stale. We would love to try new formats, such as using audience feedback technology to get the pulse of the audience quickly. The other possible change involves continuing to work on the balance between content and networking. It’s important to have strong sessions, but the entrepreneurial education movement is also very much about relationships and networking. What are the different ways we can foster conversation among the different groups we bring together at the Summit?
How did you pick the location for this year's conference (D.C)? Have you found a location over the years that works best?
Until last year, all of our past Summits had been in Silicon Valley, near where we are headquartered (San Francisco) and the origin of our early work and support. As we have grown into a national organization, we decided to expand to new locations that reflect the important work going on in entrepreneurial education reform across the country. Last year’s Summit was in New Orleans, because it was a great opportunity to spotlight the entrepreneurial energy that has coalesced in that city’s school system, and also to build off of the New Leaders for New Schools conference. Around the same time, we decided to have the 2008 Summit in Washington, D.C., which is one of those cities where you have to plan about two years in advance. This location seemed to be a natural choice at this moment, given the traction that education entrepreneurs have had and the increasing connection to federal and state policy. Next year’s event will be in the Los Angeles area, which will have a very different flavor. Chicago and New York City are other hubs of entrepreneurial activity in education, so they are on the radar for future years.
Attendance of the conference is by invitation only; what started that policy and how does someone get invited?
The invitation-only policy has always been in place. We are really thoughtful as an organization about the people we bring together and want to make sure we are bringing the right people together for a productive conversation. When we develop our invitation list, our team thinks about the entrepreneurs we want to include, the geographies we are working with, and the other practitioners, thought leaders and funders that are important to have in the conversation. We try to keep the numbers down to keep the conversation somewhat intimate, and try not to surpass 400 participants. This invitation process is becoming more and more challenging each year as this movement has reached such a critical mass and we don’t want to leave out key people.
What was the most challenging part of planning the conference?
The biggest challenge is really meeting the needs of a very diverse audience – all of whom have an interest in and passion for public education, but who come to the Summit with different skill sets, needs, levels and areas of interest, and levels of experience. Also, trying to accomplish what we set out to do in just 8 hours (a one-day event) is getting trickier every year.
Are there any words of wisdom you can share with someone who is planning a conference for the first time?
Think first and foremost about the audience and what you want them to come away with. The most successful events are the ones that focus on what the audience wants to get out of the event first and then back up into their planning from there. A lot of conferences that we attend don’t have speakers talk to each other beforehand, but we often ask the moderator to have smaller conversations with the individual panelists so that the conversation is as rich and deep as it can be on the day of the event. We get them together for a conference call at least a month in advance, and also invite them to our annual dinner the night before the Summit to meet one other and others in our network. On the conference call, we often try to engage them in talking through how the session should go, walking them through our thought process, what we are trying to accomplish, and what their role is. Then they give us feedback on the direction or what the role they want to play. Ultimately, the success of the event is really about giving these incredible entrepreneurs and others a forum for productive discussion, so we do what we can to bring the right people together and set the stage for a healthy exchange of ideas. Our hope is that it leads to a strong, vibrant entrepreneurial education movement that, in turn, can influence positive change in public education.
Tips for Parents (21)
January 27, 2009, 4:18 pm
The annual NewSchools Venture Fund Summit is the "it" conference in the education sector that has been run for 10 years in various locations across the country. This past year hundreds of prominent education leaders gathered for a day in DC to talk about the latest issues in education. But how do you make an event like this a success? We asked Julie Petersen, Communications Director at NewSchools Venture Fund, to enlighten us on the process.
What spurred NewSchools Venture Fund to start hosting this conference and what do you try to accomplish at/with the conference each year?
The original idea was to create a venue to bring together education entrepreneurs. When we first got started, we didn’t think people were really thinking about education entrepreneurship. We wanted to start the conference to introduce this concept. Our first conference had about 100 people in the audience and was designed to bring together the various stakeholders involved in transforming education – funders, entrepreneurs, and policy makers. This is one of the few places out there trying to bring these various stakeholders together to discuss entrepreneurial solutions to transforming public education so that it serves all students – particularly low-income students -- well.
How do you select the topics for discussion and subsequently, how do you select/recruit speakers/panelists for the discussion topics?
In the early days, we tried to focus on introducing the concept of entrepreneurial education, so we needed to focus on what those first questions were for people, such as for-profit vs. nonprofit structures, and how to hire the right people into a new entrepreneurial organization. Over time the entrepreneurial education movement matured and widened, and we shifted the framework for the day to consider the context in which entrepreneurs are working – states, cities and districts – and where the entrepreneurial opportunities and barriers reside. That informs the specific sessions we plan.
To plan individual sessions, we consider first the audience and the key takeaways we want them to leave with. We think about how we want the conversation to go, and then we pick the speakers who can make that happen. We also think a lot about the moderator – we want someone who is a strong leader to guide the discussion but won't dominate the discussion, and will instead bring out the other speakers and their viewpoints.
Today, we feel like education entrepreneurship is an inflection point where we have critical mass and entrepreneurs’ efforts are really starting to lead to effective and widespread change. So this year – our 10th anniversary year – we wanted our first session to tee up with the issue of what entrepreneurs have accomplished. Is entrepreneurship leading that change or are other forces at play? We wanted the later sessions to build off of that first topic to explore the role of the public sector, and the role of the private capital markets.
In the past, the agenda tended to include a large morning plenary session, followed by an array of breakout sessions to select from in the late morning and the afternoon. With all of the different choices, people got very fragmented and it was hard to feel they were having a coherent experience. This year, we narrowed it and held fewer, larger sessions to bring everyone together. Instead of having a lot of breakout sessions this year, we had “table topics” at lunchtime for people to meet and discuss a particular issue. These were not designed to be formal conversations, but rather general conversations with a knowledgeable resource who could help answer questions. We thought this setup worked really well, especially for people newer to the Summit.
How many people are on your team?
We have about 25 people on the team. When I joined in 2002, there were only 8 of us, so we have grown a lot. The vast majority of our team’s time is spent on due diligence and management assistance for our portfolio ventures throughout the year, with most of the work for the Summit and other events falling to the External Relations team, of which I am a part. Everyone on the team gets involved in making the Summit a success, though.
Is there anything you hope to change about the conference for next year?
There are two possible changes for next year. We are constantly trying to figure out what is the best session formats to use. The panel discussion seems to be easiest, and can be really effective if done well, but it can get a bit stale. We would love to try new formats, such as using audience feedback technology to get the pulse of the audience quickly. The other possible change involves continuing to work on the balance between content and networking. It’s important to have strong sessions, but the entrepreneurial education movement is also very much about relationships and networking. What are the different ways we can foster conversation among the different groups we bring together at the Summit?
How did you pick the location for this year's conference (D.C)? Have you found a location over the years that works best?
Until last year, all of our past Summits had been in Silicon Valley, near where we are headquartered (San Francisco) and the origin of our early work and support. As we have grown into a national organization, we decided to expand to new locations that reflect the important work going on in entrepreneurial education reform across the country. Last year’s Summit was in New Orleans, because it was a great opportunity to spotlight the entrepreneurial energy that has coalesced in that city’s school system, and also to build off of the New Leaders for New Schools conference. Around the same time, we decided to have the 2008 Summit in Washington, D.C., which is one of those cities where you have to plan about two years in advance. This location seemed to be a natural choice at this moment, given the traction that education entrepreneurs have had and the increasing connection to federal and state policy. Next year’s event will be in the Los Angeles area, which will have a very different flavor. Chicago and New York City are other hubs of entrepreneurial activity in education, so they are on the radar for future years.
Attendance of the conference is by invitation only; what started that policy and how does someone get invited?
The invitation-only policy has always been in place. We are really thoughtful as an organization about the people we bring together and want to make sure we are bringing the right people together for a productive conversation. When we develop our invitation list, our team thinks about the entrepreneurs we want to include, the geographies we are working with, and the other practitioners, thought leaders and funders that are important to have in the conversation. We try to keep the numbers down to keep the conversation somewhat intimate, and try not to surpass 400 participants. This invitation process is becoming more and more challenging each year as this movement has reached such a critical mass and we don’t want to leave out key people.
What was the most challenging part of planning the conference?
The biggest challenge is really meeting the needs of a very diverse audience – all of whom have an interest in and passion for public education, but who come to the Summit with different skill sets, needs, levels and areas of interest, and levels of experience. Also, trying to accomplish what we set out to do in just 8 hours (a one-day event) is getting trickier every year.
Are there any words of wisdom you can share with someone who is planning a conference for the first time?
Think first and foremost about the audience and what you want them to come away with. The most successful events are the ones that focus on what the audience wants to get out of the event first and then back up into their planning from there. A lot of conferences that we attend don’t have speakers talk to each other beforehand, but we often ask the moderator to have smaller conversations with the individual panelists so that the conversation is as rich and deep as it can be on the day of the event. We get them together for a conference call at least a month in advance, and also invite them to our annual dinner the night before the Summit to meet one other and others in our network. On the conference call, we often try to engage them in talking through how the session should go, walking them through our thought process, what we are trying to accomplish, and what their role is. Then they give us feedback on the direction or what the role they want to play. Ultimately, the success of the event is really about giving these incredible entrepreneurs and others a forum for productive discussion, so we do what we can to bring the right people together and set the stage for a healthy exchange of ideas. Our hope is that it leads to a strong, vibrant entrepreneurial education movement that, in turn, can influence positive change in public education.