I. Industry Risk Analysis

(1) Policy Risk

The art exam training industry is currently in a cycle of tightened policy supervision. During the policy – making stage, affected by the spill – over effect of the “Double Reduction” policy, the education department is formulating new regulations to standardize the approval of non – academic training qualifications, charging standards, and teaching syllabi. Entrepreneurs face the risk of a higher threshold for obtaining school – running permits. At the policy implementation level, local regulatory authorities are becoming stricter in fire safety inspections and verification of teachers’ qualifications for existing institutions, which may lead to a sudden increase in compliance costs. During the policy evaluation and adjustment period, there is a risk of negative public opinion caused by surprise inspections and a surge in refund disputes. In some areas, there has already been a wave of closures due to surprise inspections of institutions with incomplete qualifications during the summer vacation. The termination and replacement of policies may be accompanied by the introduction of college entrance examination reform plans. Once the admission path for art exams is adjusted, it will directly impact the market demand structure.

(2) Economic Risk

The art exam training industry currently faces significant economic cyclical risks: During an economic downturn, the consumption ability of families shrinks, and parents lower the priority of non – essential education expenditures, which directly impacts the unit price and enrollment rate. Under policy regulation, the enrollment scale for art majors has shrunk, causing the industry’s demand ceiling to decline, and the total number of students shows a long – term decreasing trend. In a period of rising interest rates and tightened industry supervision, the financing costs and compliance costs of small and medium – sized institutions increase simultaneously, and the risk of operating the funds pool under the existing pre – payment model intensifies. At the same time, the industry has obvious counter – cyclical investment characteristics. When the economy recovers, the recovery of the art employment market lags behind, and a decrease in the conversion rate of training results will trigger a new wave of refund requests.

(3) Social Risk

The art exam training industry faces the risk of a generational demand gap: Parents born in the 1970s and 1980s focus on admission results and traditional teaching methods, while Generation Z students pursue personalized experiences and digital learning. It is difficult for training institutions to balance the core demands of these two generations of consumers in curriculum design and service systems. Social criticism of “exam – taking speculation” continues to grow. Young parents’ willingness to pay for high – priced products is suppressed by the economic downturn, and post – 2000 students are more likely to be diverted by new learning models on short – video platforms. The industry is under the triple pressure of doubts about educational fairness, a generational consumption gap, and the impact of alternative learning channels.

(4) Legal Risk

Art exam training institutions need to ensure they have complete school – running qualifications (such as the license required by the “Law on the Promotion of Private Education”) to avoid penalties for operating without a license. False promises such as “pass – guarantee rate” and “contract – based admission” in the publicity stage may violate the “Advertising Law”. Contract terms need to clarify details such as class hours and refund rules; otherwise, it may trigger disputes under the “Consumer Rights Protection Law”. If teachers in the institution teach without a license or fabricate qualifications, they will face investigations by the education department. Using others’ teaching materials and lesson plans without permission in the course content may lead to intellectual property litigation. If the collection and storage of students’ personal information do not comply with the “Personal Information Protection Law”, it will result in high fines. In addition, there are regional differences in regulatory policies for art training across the country, and there is a risk of compliance misalignment when operating across regions.

II. Entrepreneurship Guide

(1) Suggestions on Entrepreneurial Opportunities

The current entrepreneurial opportunities in the art exam training industry lie in integrating niche markets and providing policy – adaptive services: As the differences in local art exam unified examination policies expand, customized “culture + art” intensive courses can be developed for specific regions (such as pilot provinces of the new college entrance examination reform). AI assessment technology can be used to conduct intelligent diagnosis of candidates’ basic skills, and personalized one – on – one teaching plans focusing on “strengthening weak points + school preferences” can be designed precisely. By expanding to third – and fourth – tier cities, a joint training mechanism with local high schools can be established. The pain point of the lack of local art resources can be solved through the teacher – sharing model. At the same time, “online mock exams + offline jury pool” can be developed to improve data – driven exam – taking services.

(2) Suggestions on Entrepreneurial Resources

Entrepreneurs in the art exam training industry should focus on integrating resources from universities and art institutions to obtain high – quality teaching staff and courses. By cooperating with middle schools, a stable source of students can be established, and the cost of venues can be reduced by sharing classrooms. Online teaching platforms and AI assessment tools can be used flexibly to reduce technology investment. Applying for cultural entrepreneurship subsidies and art funds can relieve financial pressure. Communicating with industry associations can help obtain policy compliance guidance. Attention should be paid to the dynamic combination of resources (such as short – term leasing + profit – sharing models), and the curriculum development should be iterated in sync with market demand. A “light – asset + strong – connection” model can be used to form a differentiated resource barrier in niche markets.

(3) Suggestions on Entrepreneurial Teams

Entrepreneurs in the art exam training industry should focus on building a composite team with both professional teaching abilities and market operation experience. Senior teachers with art exam teaching backgrounds (accounting for no less than 40%) should be recruited first to be responsible for curriculum development and quality control. At the same time, educational product managers should be equipped to optimize the curriculum system, and Internet operators should be arranged to build an online customer – acquisition matrix (a full – time content team is required for short – video platforms). The team needs to establish a clear equity incentive mechanism. For core teachers, a three – level binding model of “basic salary + course sharing + campus equity” is recommended. A technical partner position should be set up to meet digital requirements such as AI assessment and intelligent class scheduling. The founder should personally control the teacher recruitment process, establish a teaching staff database covering nine major art categories, and train 2 – 3 deputies with campus operation capabilities to meet the needs of regional expansion.

(4) Suggestions on Entrepreneurial Risks

Entrepreneurs in the art exam training industry need to ensure policy compliance first, closely follow the dynamics of the Ministry of Education’s art exam reform (such as the expansion of the unified examination scope and the increase in the proportion of cultural courses), and adjust the curriculum system in a timely manner. A light – asset operation model should be established, with a flexible configuration of “core teaching staff + part – time teachers” to reduce fixed costs. Focus on vertical niche markets (such as local operas and niche musical instruments) to avoid direct competition with industry giants. A visualized effect system should be built (such as tracking students’ admission data and establishing a real – time feedback channel for parents) to improve teaching quality through results – oriented evaluation. A hybrid model of “online assessment + offline small classes” should be arranged to deal with the risk of sudden class suspensions. A cash flow reserve of 3 – 6 months should be set aside, and a graded refund plan for students should be formulated.