The Education Market Researcher's Intermediate Playbook for Sizing a New EdTech Market Using ChatGPT When Primary Data Does Not Exist Yet

You are a senior education market research analyst with 11 years of experience building market sizing analyses, competitive intelligence systems, and new market entry research for EdTech companies and education investors where the total addressable market estimate is the most scrutinized number in any investor conversation and the competitive intelligence gaps are the most likely source of strategic errors in new market decisions. Help me write a market sizing analysis so I can build a research team capability and produce market size estimates that an EdTech executive team and their investors trust even when primary market data does not exist for the specific sub-segment being sized. My situation: - EdTech market being sized and entry context: [e.g., "AI-powered formative assessment tools for K-8 mathematics in US public schools — company is deciding whether to expand from a current high school product into the K-8 segment"] - Competitive intelligence gap causing the most risk: [e.g., "three well-funded competitors are known to be developing K-8 products — the team does not know their development stage, their go-to-market timing, or whether they have existing district relationships in the target segment"] - Primary data availability: [e.g., "no primary surveys or interviews completed yet — sizing must be built from public data sources, NCES enrollment data, state education budget reports, and competitor public disclosures"] - Market sizing audience: [e.g., "the executive team and a Series B investor conducting due diligence — investor has seen 40 EdTech market sizing analyses and immediately asks for the methodology when a TAM number is presented"] - Team capability gap: [e.g., "two junior analysts who can collect data but have not previously built a market sizing model from public sources — the senior researcher wants to build a framework they can replicate for future market entry analyses"] - Confidence level required: [e.g., "the investor expects a range with stated confidence, not a single TAM number — the executive team wants to know the scenario under which the market is too small to justify the product development investment"] - Comparable market data available: [e.g., "US high school formative assessment market is sized at $1.8B by three independent analysts — K-8 market is 3.2x larger by enrollment but the technology adoption rate is unknown"] Deliver: 1. A market sizing analysis structure — a seven-section format covering the market definition with explicit sub-segment boundaries, the total enrollment data from NCES with the addressable subset calculation, the technology adoption rate assumption with the three data points that support it, the per-district average revenue estimate with the methodology, the TAM and SAM calculation with three scenario ranges (conservative, base, optimistic), the competitive displacement assumption that determines how much of the SAM is realistically capturable, and the investor-ready confidence disclosure 2. A competitive intelligence gathering protocol for the three known competitors — a public source monitoring process covering competitor job postings (which reveal product development stage and go-to-market hiring), press release and conference presentation databases, and state procurement award databases, producing a competitive timing estimate for each competitor without requiring primary research 3. A technology adoption rate estimation method — a process for estimating the K-8 formative assessment technology adoption rate from the high school comparable, the NCES technology access data, and the EdTech procurement patterns visible in two state education budget reports, producing a range rather than a single assumption 4. A junior analyst training brief for market sizing — a step-by-step instruction document the two junior analysts follow to collect and structure the public data sources, with the decision rule for when to proceed with an assumption versus flag it for senior review, and the quality check applied before the data feeds into the model 5. A scenario analysis framework for the minimum viable market threshold — a structured calculation that shows the market size at which the K-8 expansion generates a positive NPV for the product development investment at three discount rate assumptions, giving the executive team the specific market size number below which expansion is not financially justified 6. A methodology disclosure slide — a single presentation slide that presents the market sizing methodology, the three key assumptions, the confidence range, and the two data points that would most change the TAM estimate if they were different from assumed, formatted for an investor who will ask for the methodology immediately after seeing the headline number 7. A competitive displacement analysis — a structured estimate of the realistic market share capturable in years one through three given the three known competitor development timelines, the company's existing district relationships, and the go-to-market lead time from product launch to first district contract 8. A replicable market sizing framework document — a one-page process guide the research team keeps for future new market entry analyses, covering the eight data source categories, the scenario range methodology, the competitive intelligence protocol, and the investor confidence disclosure format, reducing the time to produce the next market sizing analysis from the current 3 weeks to a target of 8 days **Write every framework component assuming the junior analysts are diligent at data collection and uncertain about when an assumption is too speculative to include in an investor-facing document — every decision rule and quality check must give the junior researcher a specific threshold for when to use an assumption and when to disclose the data gap rather than fill it with a speculative figure.**