Systematising higher education: a typology of entrepreneurship education

Aadland, Torgeir; Aaboen, Lise

doi:10.4337/9781788972307.00014

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The learning approaches vary from classroom lectures, in which students are passive, to action-based. In these, students are self-driving and programs may help the student to become an entrepreneur ( Aadland and Aaboen, 2018 ). In this exchange of flows, companies and universities build mutual benefits, and students establish networks and learn experientially ( Guerrero and Urbano, 2012 ).…”

Section: Literature Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Threat or opportunity? A case study of digital-enabled redesign of entrepreneurship education in the COVID-19 emergency

Secundo

Mele

Vecchio

et al. 2021

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Literature Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Threat or opportunity? A case study of digital-enabled redesign of entrepreneurship education in the COVID-19 emergency

Secundo

Mele

Vecchio

et al. 2021

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In assessing entrepreneurial education, it is not uncommon to see IACP being assessed alongside VeCP, without acknowledging the substantial pedagogical and entrepreneurshipgrounded definitional differences (for a recent example, see Chatzichristou et al, 2015). Such compounding is challenging, since listening passively to a teacher will not produce the same IJEBR 26,5 effects on students as engaging them in generating business ideas and writing business plans (IACP), or letting them start a more-or-less real venture (VeCP) (Aadland and Aaboen, 2018;Nabi et al, 2017). This incommensurability between different pedagogical approaches could be one reason why meta-studies on the effects of entrepreneurial education have so far turned out to be largely inconclusive (Bae et al, 2014;Martin et al, 2013).…”

Section: Previous Work On Assessing the Effects Of Iacp Vacp And Vecpmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the impact of three different experiential approaches to entrepreneurship in education

Lackéus

2020

IJEBR

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThree different pedagogical approaches grounded in three different definitional foundations of entrepreneurship have been compared in relation to their effects on students. They are: (1) “Idea and Artefact-Creation Pedagogy” (IACP), grounded in opportunity identification and creation, (2) “Value-Creation Pedagogy” (VaCP), grounded in value creation and (3) “Venture-Creation Pedagogy” (VeCP), grounded in organisation creation.Design/methodology/approachData were collected at 35 different sites where education was deemed to be entrepreneurial and experiential. A quantitative, smartphone app-based data collection method was used alongside a qualitative interview approach. 10,953 short-survey responses were received from 1,048 participants. Responses were used to inform respondent selection and discussion topics, in 291 student and teacher interviews. Comparative analysis was then conducted.FindingsThe three approaches resulted in very different outcomes, both in magnitude and in kind. VaCP had strong effects on entrepreneurial competencies, on student motivation and on knowledge and skills acquisition. VeCP had weaker effects on knowledge and skills acquisition. IACP had weak effects on all outcomes probed for. Differences were attributed to variation in prevalence of certain emotional learning events and to variation in purpose as perceived by students.Research limitations/implicationsVaCP could serve as an escape from the potential dilemma faced by many teachers in entrepreneurial education, of being caught between two limiting courses of action; a marginal VeCP approach and a fuzzy IACP one. This could prompt policymakers to reconsider established policies. However, further research in other contexts is needed, to corroborate the extent of differences between these three approaches.Originality/valueMost impact studies in experiential entrepreneurial education focus only on organisation-creation-based education. This study contributes by investigating entrepreneurial education that is also grounded in two other definitional foundations. Allowance has been made for novel comparative conclusions.

show abstract

“…Scholars and practitioners have shifted toward more experiential and action-based entrepreneurship education, offering students the opportunity to experience entrepreneurship by being entrepreneurs, rather than just learning about the topic (Kassean et al, 2015;Neck and Corbett, 2018;Neck and Greene, 2011;Pittaway and Cope, 2007;Rasmussen and Sørheim, 2006). Prior research has identified numerous ways to design such entrepreneurship education (Aadland and Aaboen, 2018;Mwasalwiba, 2010), introducing real venture-creation activities as an approach to facilitate students' learning (Brentnall et al, 2018;Neck and Corbett, 2018;Rasmussen and Sørheim, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning from venture creation in higher education

Haneberg

Aadland

2019

Industry and Higher Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores how students learn from venture creation in higher education by using a novel empirical approach: the Zaltman metaphor elicitation technique (ZMET). This inductive research approach provides extraordinarily rich data that enable a thorough and holistic understanding of students’ learning processes. The participant selection differentiates students who pursue venturing throughout their entrepreneurship education programme and those who exit venturing halfway through, and the article is the first to pinpoint differences between how students with and without ventures in the same environment learn. The findings reveal that students who choose to exit their new ventures learn based on a community of practice – which is facilitated by other students’ venture creation – while the learning process of students who pursue venturing is in line with previous research. Thus, the present article contributes by empirically demonstrating what previous conceptual contributions have suggested: that researchers should emphasise situated and social learning as an integral element of students’ learning in action-based entrepreneurship education. For practice, the findings imply that entrepreneurship education programmes, in which students learn through venture creation, should be organised in a way that leads them to establish relationships and interact with each other on a regular basis.

show abstract

Systematising higher education: a typology of entrepreneurship education

Cited by 24 publications

References 0 publications

Threat or opportunity? A case study of digital-enabled redesign of entrepreneurship education in the COVID-19 emergency

Threat or opportunity? A case study of digital-enabled redesign of entrepreneurship education in the COVID-19 emergency

Comparing the impact of three different experiential approaches to entrepreneurship in education

Learning from venture creation in higher education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About