According to the analysis of the stage of economic development of the countries reflected in “The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011” and conducted within the framework of the World Economic Forum, the EU countries have either innovation-driven economies or are in the transition stage from efficiency-driven to innovation-driven economies. Focusing on the educational aspects and human capital for further economic development of EU countries, quality higher education and training, business sophistication and innovation are what should be developed. These three competitiveness aspects are not independent: they tend to reinforce each other, and a weakness in one area often has a negative impact on other areas (World Economic Forum, 2010). Moreover, all of them are tightly related to entrepreneurship and their development concerns the promotion of students’ entrepreneurship in the study process at higher educational institutions. Being recognized as one of the lifelong learning key competences, in the European documents entrepreneurship is defined as a combination of entrepreneurial knowledge, skills and attitude (Commission of the European Communities, 2005). However, the PhD research “The development of students’ enterprise in study process” conducted by Karine Oganisjana under the scientific supervision of Tatjana Koke in the University of Latvia (Oganisjana & Koke, 2008; Oganisjana, 2010 a,b) revealed that the concept of entrepreneurship is broader than just a mechanical combination of entrepreneurial knowledge, skills and attitude. Entrepreneurship is defined as a dynamic system of individual's causally interrelated personality traits, motivation, cognition, needs, emotions, abilities, learning, skills and behaviour, on the basis of which an individual or a group of individuals interact with the context (environment) for identifying, generating and realizing opportunities into new values (Oganisjana, 2010b). Therefore, if higher education (HE) is oriented towards the development of students’ competence only, which is acknowledged as a combination of knowledge, skills and attitudes, the development of the other components of entrepreneurship are not taken care of and the creation of new economic values which then makes the key determinant of entrepreneurship not to be in the focus of such HE. The paper presents the main findings of the research and raises a question about the reconsideration of the capacity of competence-oriented higher education for promoting students’ entrepreneurship and as a result for increasing their competitiveness.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.23.1.1228

This paper discusses the use of a problem-focused approach to nurture creativity and entrepreneurship among students in a school setting. The study sample consisted of three groups of students (age 16 years old) from three secondary schools in Malaysia. The participants consist of 25-35 students from each school (n=95). The data collection took place during three workshops, which were conducted using a problem-focused approach, with participants from each school. At the end of each workshop, participants were asked to fill in an electronic diary about their experience. The participants' reflections after the first workshop were analysed to identify the use of a problem-focused approach in the development of students' creativity and entrepreneurship. The findings were reduced into thematic categories representing the participants' awareness of aspects of creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship. The results of the study highlight the participants' positive attitude towards the use of problem focused approach. As a whole, the participants reported that the activities in the workshop were beneficial and made them aware of the opportunity to innovate using the problems encountered in everyday life. The findings suggest that exposing students to a creative and entrepreneurship-friendly environment through the use of a problem-focused approach nurtures the development of students' creativity and entrepreneurship.

The aim of the research is to emphasize the practical implementation of the formative assessment. The research leads to the conclusion that lecturers implement the findings of different theories and researches on formative assessment rather slowly in their daily work and practice. This article shows the way from theory to practice in the study course Human molecular biology at Rīga Stradiņš University. Quantitative and qualitative data collection methods are used to research the influence of formative assessment both on individual and institutional levels. The results show the importance of feedback information both for lecturer and student. It is concluded that immediate feedback is important for the improvement of student's achievements. The road towards initiating formative assessment on institutional level has been outlined.

The idea for this article proceeds from personal, practical, and emotional experience and reflections on holding the position of the Minister for Education and Science during the period of the economic crisis in Latvia (2007Latvia ( -2010. The article consists of three parts. The first part outlines the potential of a position in power with a particular focus on developments in education policy. The second part gives an overview of the most important initiatives in the education sector undertaken by ministers for education during the first period of independence of the Republic of Latvia . Analyses of developments in the content of education in line with alterations in organisation of studies and professionalisation of teaching are provided. Regardless of the fact that the majority of changes were implemented with the intention to contribute to the awakening of people, nation and state, most of the initiatives induced resistance and rejection. In line with success and positive results, severe criticism of opponents and even peers had to be faced by those in a position of power. The third part raises the questions: "Is it possible to be an independent intellectual and a politician at the same time?" and "What are the benefits and difficulties in preserving two identities: an academic and/or a politician?"

No abstract