Pros
I’ve seen the company evolve significantly over time, and the current version feels far more intentional than it once was. Under new leadership, there’s clearer direction, better prioritization, and a noticeable shift toward follow-through and accountability. It’s still a scrappy EdTech environment, but now with stronger systems, clearer ownership, and a leadership team that is actively learning from past missteps rather than repeating them.
The expectations are high, but support exists. People are trusted to do their jobs, and expertise is respected—especially if you’re thoughtful, prepared, and willing to take ownership. There’s real autonomy here, not just in theory. When you raise concerns or push back with rationale, it’s taken seriously. That wasn’t always the case, and the change matters.
The work itself is meaningful. The pace is fast and the workload can be heavy, but the impact is tangible, especially if you care about students, educators, and doing the work “the right way” rather than just quickly. For mid-level ICs and managers who like building, problem-solving, and shaping processes (not just maintaining them), this can be a very fulfilling place to work.
Cons
This is not a slow or easy environment. Priorities can still shift, and ambiguity comes with the territory of a growing company. You’ll need to be comfortable operating without perfect information or 'tried and true' processes, as well as managing competing demands. While things are far more structured than they used to be, there are still moments where bandwidth is stretched and timelines are ambitious, but this is also improving.
If you’re looking for a rigid 9–5 or highly siloed role, this likely isn’t the right fit. The pace may feel intense at times, but the new collaboration is great and we're doing meaningful work that is now recognized.