There's a giant industry devoted to supplying the education market with new materials, techniques, and other gadgets to improve student learning. Almost none of it is actually properly validated and what little empirical evidence does exist shows that none of it does a damn thing. There is no silver bullet that will magically enhance student cognition.
Spending all of that money on better nutrition or ensuring students have a good home life would likely do far more to improve academic performance than whatever piece of shit is going to get foisted upon the school system and bought up by the fools who control the purchasing.
As someone that has served on a school board, I completely agree, parental involvement and a stable home life is key to allow kids to learn. We can keep throwing money at virtual, in-school, whatever, but kids who's parents are not providing food, are incarcerated, are doing drugs in the home, are doomed. There are exceptions, but with our current culture, it can be tough for kids to break out of whatever stereotype they are in.
I would also say that curriculum adopted by our school district went through a rigorous vetting process. For math, we started with 12 commercial-published curriculum packages. Each was scrutinized by a team of teachers/educators until two stood out. Test schools adopted one of the two and we monitored standardized test results for the test group for an entire school year. Only then was the curriculum adopted for the entire district. The process took around two years.I am not sure how a start-up, unless they are buying their curriculum from a publisher, can pump out an effective learning environment in such a short time.