Fayoll, Alain, ed. (2007) Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education, Volume 1 A General Perspective. Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data, London.
![[img]](http://eprints.itn.ac.id/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
ENTREPRENEURSHIP Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education.pdf Download (1MB) |
Abstract
n my 2006 United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (USASBE) keynote address (Katz, 2006a), I made the point that the business-school based discipline of entrepreneurship was arguably the point of centrality for the new wave of growth in entrepreneurship education – a wave which is spreading out from business schools across campuses. The first wave of entrepreneurship education was a global one, spread by agri- cultural researchers through the model we have come to know as agricultural extension (Jones and Garforth, 1997; Katz, 2006b). The second wave came when the extension model was embraced by business school faculty and government business development specialists, and the business-school based approach to entrepreneurship education emerged, spreading across the United States, and then to business schools worldwide (Katz, 2006b). Today, with business schools as the center or hub, we are seeing the third wave of growth, which is across individual campuses rather than jumping from one university to another. Called cross-campus entrepreneurship (Fountain, 2004; Shaver, 2005) or acade- mic entrepreneurship (Shane, 2004), we see a renewed growth (cf. Vesper, 1985) across dis- ciplines, and this volume showcases the nature and benefits of that third wave. Part of this growth comes from the creation of new forms of entrepreneurship and aca- demic programs to teach it. Part I of this volume focuses on this process. For example, in their chapters, David Kirby, Allan Gibb, Kevin Hindle, and Zelimir Todorovic conceptu- alize what forms that broader and more inclusive model of entrepreneurship might take. Why are new models needed? In part because of the burden of the intellectual legacy of business schools, with their fixation on the managerial (versus the entrepreneurial) model, which is wonderfully described in the chapter of Hjorth and Johannisson. It is also caused in part by the social legacy of business schools, with their fixation on perpetuating his- torical networks, networks which excluded women and minorities, a problem outlined and challenged in the chapter by Betters-Reed, Moore and Hunt in Part II. The potential for redefining the nature of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education comes from the power of groups to socially construct their realities. In her chapter in Part II, Denise Fletcher points out how moving away from the social constructivist model typical of business-school-based entrepreneurship education and toward a social constructionist approach could offer enhanced intellectual freedom to academics in search of a more real- istic and inclusive paradigm. This theme of a new paradigm of entrepreneurship education gets carried over into Part II of this volume. Part of maturity of a field is seen when there is general agreement on content, with continuing discussions on process. Through the lens of the new para- digm, even the traditional content becomes the subject of reflection and revision. Perhaps the sine qua non of the contemporary business-school approach to entrepreneurship is the business plan. Camille Carrier challenges the wisdom of propagating this model as
| Item Type: | Book |
|---|---|
| Subjects: | Library Of Science |
| Divisions: | Library |
| Depositing User: | Untuk Mahasiswa itn Malang |
| Date Deposited: | 06 Nov 2023 03:57 |
| Last Modified: | 06 Nov 2023 03:57 |
| URI: | http://eprints.itn.ac.id/id/eprint/12424 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
