Search results

The purpose of this paper is to address the recent development of heutagogy in the domain of enterprise and entrepreneurship education (EE). Responding to recent thinking within our domain of education, this paper discusses the origins of heutagogy, its adoption within enterprise and EE and offers suggestions as to the further development of such thinking in this domain.

This conceptual paper revisits the original thinking that developed the process of heutagogy, or self-determined learning. Revisiting the conceptual foundations of heutagogy, comparing it to andragogy and to the idea of academagogy enables the process of academagogical process knowledge (APK) to be outlined. Through this process, the authors argue it is possible to envisage the real potential value of heutagogy to enterprise and EE.

In advocating for the development of APK, the authors highlight the importance of six specific knowledge bases; knowledge of self, knowledge of entrepreneurship theories, knowledge of transformational learning approaches, knowledge of authentic assessment processes, knowledge of student engagement and knowledge of how to scholarly lead. The authors argue that the development of scholarship of teaching and learning for enterprise and EE can be advanced through these six knowledge bases.

There are important implications that arise for all enterprise and entrepreneurship educators in the discussions presented here, especially if we consider entrepreneurial approaches within disciplines and interests that anchor the studies, as opposed to more generic approaches found in entrepreneurship courses. Most importantly, that heutagogy must be evaluated alongside the blended contributions of pedagogy, andragogy and academagogy.

This paper advances the readers’ understanding of the potential role of heutagogy in enterprise and EE. In doing so, differing opinions related to the use of heutagogy in the domain have been addressed, and a developmental pathway outlined.

This paper aims to propose a unified framework for understanding the development and distribution of value within and from enterprise and entrepreneurship education. In doing so, the authors trace the origins of value creation pedagogy back 100 years and reconnect this lost literature to contemporary thinking as to what constitutes value creation pedagogy.

This conceptual paper identifies specific temporal-specific problems with current thinking in enterprise and entrepreneurship education vis-à-vis who gains the value from value creation pedagogies. To address this identified anomaly, the authors seek to develop a spectrum of value-creating activities/processes applicable to enterprise and entrepreneurship education. The underlying aim of this approach is to provide clarity around who specifically benefits from value creation pedagogies, how and when.

In developing a spectrum of value-creating activities/processes applicable to enterprise and entrepreneurship education, the authors have successfully located all major forms of value creation pedagogies in an iterative manner that caters to the authentic development of value for oneself and others. The proposed model assumes that the creation of authentic value for others should be preceded by the development of specific capabilities in the value creators.

There are important implications that arise for all enterprise and entrepreneurship educators in the discussions presented here. Most importantly, value creation pedagogies should be fueled by the ongoing development of purpose, agency and capability via cultivated reflection.

This paper broadens the notion of what constitutes value creation pedagogy in enterprise and entrepreneurship education. In doing so, the authors elevate the importance of student creative competency development over value creation.

Enabling entrepreneurial creativity is a key aim of UK Government; however, there is a dearth of constructively aligned models of teaching and assessment. This paper aims to introduce design‐based pedagogies and to highlight cognitive approaches that develop innovative mindsets; it seeks to indicate their propensity for adoption in entrepreneurship education.

A literature review plus empirical evidence from pedagogical approaches developed through the extended collaboration of specialists in creative design, financial management and brain‐related occupational therapy inform this paper.

Neuroimaging studies challenge the thesis that learning for creative output is entirely algorithmic; diverse ideas occur when the brain's right cortex has opportunity to bring its findings to the fore, usually via “relaxed cognition”. Design‐based entrepreneurship pedagogies embed these concepts.

The paper offers initial insights into how these understandings can be applied in transdisciplinary entrepreneurship‐education contexts.

Predicable assessment outcomes equal predictable students; which needs more working practices, behaviours and cultural environments that encourage innovation. Any educational environment that excludes these understandings is inherently flawed.

The case study/project “Free time is thinking time” implies that traditional 9‐5 working practices are inappropriate for creative mindsets.

This paper links emerging bodies of evidence; it provides a first response to calls for a more creative enterprise curriculum and offers constructively aligned assessment.

The aim of this paper is to respond to the acknowledged dearth of academic discourse on assessment strategies for entrepreneurship education. Using established approaches from design education as its fulcrum, it proposes a generic framework for assessment of “creativity” in an entrepreneurial context.

This primarily constructivist investigation is considered in the context of recent UK discussions, empirical evidence, literature reviews and government policies. It includes the UK's Quality Assurance Agency – Benchmark Statement for the UK's creative industries and maps the approaches onto entrepreneurship education.

As assessment of ideas generation, innovation and opportunity recognition are, “Central to developing and learning entrepreneurial behaviours”. There are clear parallels between the pedagogic approaches from “design” disciplines and the learning outcomes advocated in generic curriculum development “for” entrepreneurship.

Business school approaches and their associated challenges dominate the entrepreneurship research agenda. Interdisciplinary research, in particular collaborations between the Business and the Creative disciplines, offers opportunities for constructive alignment.

With no intention of “reinventing the wheel”, more adapting and refining it, the paper's primary intention is to offer a springboard of thought from which creative capacity in enterprise education might be enhanced and assessed.

This paper contributes to the ongoing debate surrounding issues of assessment and offers insights into established approaches that have evolved beyond the traditional enterprise education environment, one where credit‐bearing curricula have managed and assessed the creative process effectively.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the process that underpinned and informed the development and delivery of a “creativity-led” credit-bearing teacher training provision and to illuminate key factors of influence for the approaches to teaching and learning.

Based on the assumption that sustaining enterprise education involves developing educator capacity, networks of collaborating educators from different institutions and subject disciplines developed transdisciplinary pedagogical strategies. These were delivered to two pilot programmes, with a cohort of 18 in each.

Feedback from the pilots suggest that creativity-based pedagogies are effective triggers. They motivate educators and enable specialists to develop subject-related content.

The paper highlights the need for a more developed understanding of creativity, innovation and opportunity recognition, so that enterprise education starts with ideas generation, not merely ideas evaluation.

Understanding creativity and innovation is emergent and there is a dearth of understanding, especially in teaching and learning for enterprise. The paper illuminates a developmental process that has responded to this shortfall.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance of enterprise educators working collectively to develop a unique scholarship of teaching. The authors argue that the time is right for educators in this domain to secure the future of enterprise education. Acknowledging the debate between “entrepreneurship education” and “enterprise education,” the authors set out to develop a unification model through which educators can act collectively to demonstrate the leadership required to secure the autonomy of the domain.

The authors bring several pertinent ideas (pedagogical content knowledge, heutagogy and academagogy) to the attention of academics/researchers involved in the design, development and delivery of enterprise education. The innovative approach to combine these ideas with prevailing thinking in this domain has facilitated a model for collective action.

It is at the level of the shared philosophical positions that the authors can best cooperate to shape the future direction of enterprise education. The authors argue against dwelling upon how the authors differ in terms of context and process issues. Such matters can only fragment the theory and practice of enterprise education. The authors need to develop greater appreciation of shared philosophical positions and leverage this understanding into a unique scholarship of teaching, specific to enterprise education.

As enterprise education becomes more global, it is also likely to become more attractive to business schools that long for a new positioning tool in the increasingly overcrowded markets that they compete in.

This paper encourages enterprise educators to reflect upon the knowledge they hold of their own practice, and that of other enterprise educators.

This chapter presents the findings of an extracurricular online beta test of a competition between students of the University of Wales Trinity Saint David and the International University of Malaya-Wales. The competition is intended to promote the concept of harmonious entrepreneurship and the creation of student-led harmonious enterprises that address the global sustainability challenge and deliver a triple bottom line in which profit, people, and planet are in harmony. It reveals that extracurricular learning can attract students from disciplines other than business and can educate the participants, both staff and students, not just about harmonious entrepreneurship but also how to identify and launch an innovative harmonious enterprise that addresses a sustainability challenge. The test identifies how the competition may be improved prior to its global launch and makes recommendations for students, educators, mentors, providers, and universities as to how it might best be implemented. Once revised and launched the competition will be further tested to better understand how extracurricular learning can help advance the delivery of both entrepreneurship and sustainability education in universities and colleges around the globe.

Little is known about how experiential entrepreneurship education approaches contribute toward enhancing the engagement of students in the learning process. Using a purposive and convenience sample of individual student reflective journals, the purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate how the process of constructive misalignment enhances the level of student engagement through a team-based experiential entrepreneurship education assessment.

Data were gathered from a purposive and convenience sample of reflective journals, an individual “performance assessment” element of three Masters-level courses (courses 1, 2 and 3) that included an “active” group business ideas generation presentation and a report. These texts were analyzed through content analysis that critically evaluates and summarizes the content of data and their messages.

While expected learning outcomes included teamwork and communication, the higher levels of active learning and student engagement related to innovation and generating a business idea was much more modest. Rather, the study finds that significant learning opportunities were apparent when students experienced unexpected aspects of constructive misalignment, such as linguistic–cultural challenges, nonparticipation and freeriding.

Building on Biggs’ (2003) model of constructive alignment in course design and delivery/assessment, this paper elucidates various unexpected and surprising aspects. It suggests that constructive misalignment could provide major learning opportunities for students and is thus more likely in these team contexts where entrepreneurship students experience constructive misalignment. Educators should, therefore, continue to design experiential entrepreneurship courses and their performance assessments through team-based approaches that achieve higher levels of engagement as well as more active learning.

This study aims to develop an entrepreneurial business model capable of addressing and preventing the exploitation and inequality that traditionally have resulted from entrepreneurship, particularly in emerging economies.

The research uses systems thinking, the first law of cybernetics, and the principles of harmony to formulate a systemic solution to the problem, which it exemplifies via six purposefully selected short cases drawn from diverse industry sectors and economies.

This paper demonstrates how the conventional model of entrepreneurship, often associated with colonial exploitation and resultant inequalities, can be transformed into a triple bottom line model—harmonious entrepreneurship – that integrates the traditional economic, eco-, humane, and social approaches and creates a synergy where profit, planet, and people are in harmony. The model challenges the profit maximisation/shareholder value doctrine of business success.

Only six cases are presented here, and there is a need for further research in different political-economic contexts and industry sectors. Also, the way entrepreneurship is taught needs to change so that it addresses the sustainability challenge in general and the problem of inequality in particular.

There needs to be a change in the entrepreneurial mindset and the way entrepreneurship is taught and potential entrepreneurs are trained if entrepreneurship is to address the sustainability challenge in general and the problem of inequality in particular.

This is a novel approach to the study of entrepreneurship and its impact on inequality that shows how it can ameliorate and/or prevent inequality, particularly in emerging economies, by adopting a more holistic approach to business success and supplanting “having and needing” with “being and caring”.