Purpose -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. Design/methodology/approach -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. Findings -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. Practical implications -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. Originality/value -This paper encourages enterprise educators to reflect upon the knowledge they hold of their own practice, and that of other enterprise educators.
Purpose 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. Design/methodology/approach 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. Findings 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. Practical implications 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. Originality/value 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.
PurposeThe 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.Design/methodology/approachThis 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.FindingsAs 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.Research limitations/implicationsBusiness 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.Practical implicationsWith 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.Originality/valueThis 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.
Purpose-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. Design/methodology/approach-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. Findings-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. Research limitations/implications-The paper offers initial insights into how these understandings can be applied in transdisciplinary entrepreneurship-education contexts. Practical implications-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. Social implications-The case study/project "Free time is thinking time" implies that traditional 9-5 working practices are inappropriate for creative mindsets. Originality/value-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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.