Entrepreneurial Problem Finding: Professors’ Tech Challenges with LMS/AV (Interview Prep Notes)
Context: Entrepreneurial course setup
Type: elective/entrepreneurial course focused on problem-first thinking
Objective: identify a real problem a consumer base has, then create a product to solve it
Current stage: problem-finding for clients and customers; define the problem and how to solve it
Core problem identified
Observed issue: many professors struggle with technology (setup, transitioning between video segments, recording)
Opportunity: busy professors with heavy workloads may waste time on tech; potential to build a solution that saves time and streamlines tasks
Core question: can we validate this problem with professors and understand their experiences with LMS/AV systems?
Project approach and goals
Goal: interview favorite professors to gauge agreement/disagreement and gather thoughts on the system
Scope: not limited to Canvas or SMU; compare across universities to generalize findings
Emphasis: gather diverse experiences from higher-ed settings to inform a product idea
Notable sentiment: I love that problem, and I hate Canvas.
Interview logistics and roles
Jimmy: kick off the interview and pose the initial questions
Ali: will take notes
All three students plan to participate and share thoughts and greetings
Research design considerations
Rationale for broader scope: graduate-level professors have varied experiences beyond teaching; their main job may involve research or other duties, affecting LMS/AV use
Desired inputs: professors’ agreements, disagreements, and thoughts about the learning management system (LMS) and classroom AV components
Method: gather qualitative feedback from multiple universities to identify common pain points and potential design opportunities
Transcript findings so far (universities and LMS/AV usage)
Oxford (first teaching job): did not use Canvas; traditional/old-school approach; lack of modern LMS interface
SMU: uses Canvas
San Jose (University): uses Canvas
Emerging question: does a difference in LMS (Canvas vs. others) or in AV integration affect professor experience and needs?
Key themes and implications for the problem space
Friction point: technology use in teaching operations is a recurring pain point for professors
Time pressure: professors want to teach efficiently without getting bogged down by tech setup and maintenance
Variability across institutions: some schools use modern LMS like Canvas, others use traditional methods; differences in campus infrastructure could influence needs
Stakeholders: professors (as clients) and students (as beneficiaries) in the value chain of teaching effectiveness
Direct quotes to preserve nuance
I love that problem, and I hate Canvas.
One of the reasons we picked kinda graduate level type professors … their main job is not to teach us; it’s to do other things.
Notable lines of inquiry for future questions (based on transcript)
How does LMS choice (Canvas vs. alternative systems) impact teaching workflow and time spent on tech tasks?
How do AV components in the classroom interact with LMS usage and professor workload?
Are there differences in experience between universities (Oxford vs. SMU vs. San Jose) that could inform design priorities?
Summary of current status
The team is in the early problem-finding stage, seeking expert opinions from professors across universities
They aim to validate whether the identified pain (tech friction) is widespread and actionable for a new product
The dialogue in the transcript ends with an open question about observed differences by university, signaling ongoing data collection
Foundational ideas connected to the project goals
Problem-first entrepreneurship approach: identify a real pain point before ideating solutions
Customer discovery mindset: talk to potential clients (professors) to understand true needs, preferences, and constraints
Market signal: if multiple institutions show similar pain points with LMS/AV, there is a scalable opportunity
Practical and ethical considerations (implications to keep in mind during later work)
Accessibility and equity: ensure any solution accounts for diverse tech skill levels among professors
Data privacy and security: LMS and AV integrations involve handling course content and recordings
Change management: adoption of a new tool depends on perceived time savings and ease of use
Real-world relevance: aligning product features with busy academic schedules and institutional policies
Note on future directions (based on transcript trajectory)
Compile a short, comparative rundown of different universities’ LMS and AV setups
Gather qualitative feedback from a range of professors to identify common pain points and potential feature requests
Use findings to articulate problem-solution hypotheses and prioritize product concepts