The reality of entrepreneurship education as a force in business schools began in the early 1970s. The University of Southern California launched the first Master of Business Administration, concentration in entrepreneurship in 1971, followed by the first undergraduate concentration in 1972. From there, the field of entrepreneurship began to take root. By the early 1980s, over 300 universities were reporting courses in entrepreneurship and small business, and by the 1990s that number grew to 1,050 schools.
Therefore, the real emergence of entrepreneurship education took place in the 1980s. Studies proposed that entrepreneurial programs should be designed so that potential entrepreneurs are aware of barriers to initiating their entrepreneurial careers and can devise ways to overcome them. * A two-continuum model of curricular design for entrepreneurship education has been proposed. This “structured–unstructured” continuum addressed various methods of transferring information and expertise.
Among the methods he discussed were lectures, case studies, and feasibility plans. The second continuum included “entrepreneurial know-how/entrepreneurial know-who. ” * Several suggestions for the future of education were concluded and research in the entrepreneurship domain, which include: (1) the opportunity existed for entrepreneurship programs to evolve in a manner that is consistent with recent conceptualizations of entrepreneurship; (2) second, a direction would be research on the teaching methods commonly used in entrepreneurship programs. Surveys were conducted in universities with enrolments of at least 10,000 students to determine the extent of the growth in entrepreneurship education.
While significant growth was cited, two specific challenges were pointed out: (1) the challenge in developing existing programs and personnel, thus improving the quality of the field. There are several obstacles that need to be overcome to facilitate the development of quality in the field. 2) The lack of formal academic programs, representing a lack of commitment on the part of institutions. Entrepreneurship education had come a long way in the past 20 years, yet there were several weak points in the field that were identified through the research. Of primary concern is the lack of depth of most of the programs that were then started. Further growth would depend upon how new programs were integrated with and nurtured by the established entrepreneurship education system.
That’s why entrepreneurial programs should be designed so that potential entrepreneurs are aware of barriers to initiating their entrepreneurial careers and can devise ways to overcome them. The Current State of Entrepreneurship Education Today, entrepreneurship education in U. S. has exploded to more than 2,200 courses at over 1,600 schools; 277 endowed positions; 44 refereed academic journals, mainstream management journals devoting more issues to entrepreneurship; and over 100 established and funded centres.
A core objective of entrepreneurship education is that it differentiates from typical business education. Business entry is fundamentally a different activity than managing a business; entrepreneurial education must address the equivocal nature of business entry. Indian scenario: The entrepreneurship momentum has also gained in India has changed individual outlook toward converting their ideas into business enterprise. EDP in India was formulated as a package of training and counselling to encourage entrepreneurship.
It consisted of three stages: selection, training and follow up. Selection includes individual capability of achievement, risk taking, innovation and problem solving capabilities. The main categories of training which help business and non business background students to become entreprenuer are: behavioural input focussing on achievement motivation, guarantee of business opportunity and managerial skills. EDPs include finalization of concrete report and then establishement of an enterprise. To this end, entrepreneurial education must include skill-building courses in negotiation, leadership, new product development, creative thinking, and exposure to technological innovation.
Other areas identified as important for entrepreneurial education included awareness of entrepreneur career options , sources of venture capital , idea protection , ambiguity tolerance, the characteristics that define the entrepreneurial personality ,and the challenges associated with each stage of venture development. More specifically, they found that “experiential learning” is widespread and diverse in its application from the literature. The reported types of learning tools were: business plans, student business start-ups, consultation with practicing entrepreneurs, computer simulations, behavioural simulations, interviews with entrepreneurs, environmental scans, “live” case, field trips and the use of video and films New interdisciplinary programs use faculty teams to develop programs for the non business students, and there is a growing trend in courses specifically designed for art, engineering, and science students.
As dynamism of business environment kept changing, teaching methodologies also proposed experience learning mode followed by action learning which later developed into competencies, skills, aptitude and values. * Educators are challenged with designing effective learning opportunities for entrepreneurship students. Programs for entrepreneurship students should emphasize individual activities over group activities, be relatively unstructured, and present problems that require a novel solution under conditions of ambiguity and risk. Students must be prepared to thrive in the unstructured and uncertain nature of entrepreneurial environments.
Most of the university centers for entrepreneurship education have focused on these major areas: i) identifying and preparing potential entrepreneurs for start-ups ii) enabling participants to prepare business plans for new venture iii) focusing on issues that are critical to the implementation of entrepreneurial projects such as market research, business financing and legal issues and iv) enabling the development of autonomous and risk-taking behaviour. * It was argued that there is a distinction between the teachable and the non teachable elements of entrepreneurship.
The key to a successful entrepreneurship education is to find the most effective way to manage the teachable skills and identify the best match between student needs and teaching techniques. This concurs with the findings of an earlier study highlighted that the debate concerns not how entrepreneurship can be taught but how it can best be taught. * The teaching of entrepreneurship is both a “science” and “art” where the former relates to the functional skills required for business start-up (an area which appears to be teachable) whiles the latter refers to the creative aspects of entrepreneurship, which are not explicitly teachable.
Indeed, recent evidence in the literature indicates that entrepreneurship education has Positive impact on perceptual factors such as self-efficacy The authors compared students who had not begun an entrepreneurship course (pre-course group) with those who had completed the course (post-course group), and found that the post-course group had significantly higher self-efficacy than the pre-course group. Similarly, in a pre-test/post-test study, observed that participants reported significantly higher perceptions of both desirability and feasibility.
Entrepreneurship can be taught depends on the fundamental definition of entrepreneurship. It was discussed that it is possible to train potential entrepreneurs to identify opportunities and process to achieve success but difficult to teach them the art of creating opportunities and becoming successful. Rationality Entrepreneurship contributes income, jobs, R&D and innovations, generating economic benefits that are often larger than the private benefits reaped by the entrepreneurs themselves (see Van Praag and Versloot, 2007).
Many factors contribute to entrepreneurial success, but one easily influenced determinant of entrepreneur outcomes is education. If education leads to a higher quality of entrepreneurial performance, investment in the education of (prospective) entrepreneurs is justified. The effect of formal education on entrepreneurship selection and performance in industrialized countries is the topic of this paper. in the last decade about returns to schooling in terms of labor market performance (e. g. Psacharopoulos, 1994; Ashenfelter et al. , 1999; Card, 1999; Harmon et al. , 2003; Webbink, 2005).
Returns to schooling have been measured for many countries and years in a way that allows both international comparisons and trend analyses. Innovative methods have been developed based on the Mincer equation and applied within this strand of research to assess whether the measured correlations between schooling and income reflect a causal effect of schooling on earnings (e. g. Ashenfelter et al. , 1999; Webbink, 2005). However, the vast majority of these studies refer to the returns employees generate from their years at school As the model has been built to apply to wage employees, it centers on measurable returns such as income.
But education benefits the entrepreneur’s performance in other ways too, such as business survival, firm growth, or the firm’s return on investment. Such benefits are more difficult to quantify. Even so, the qualitative proposition resulting from this model is that the entrepreneur performance, however measured, is positively affected by education. In general, human capital theory indicates that the previously acquired knowledge plays a critical role in intellectual performance and also assists in the integration and accumulation of new knowledge as well as the integration and adaptation to new situations (Weick, 1996).
However, the model renders no proposition about the relative magnitude of the returns to education for entrepreneurs relative to their wage-employed counterparts. Structure of EDP There are four objectives of entrepreneurship programs: entrepreneurship awareness, business creation, small business development, and training of trainers. Entrepreneurship education provides three different classes of training: education “about” enterprise (i. e. entrepreneurship awareness), education “for” enterprise (i. e. preparation of aspiring entrepreneurs for business creation), and education “in” enterprise (i. e. raining for the growth and development of established entrepreneurs).
* Commentators posited that entrepreneurship education has five learning objectives in that participants of entrepreneurship programs will develop the know why (developing the right attitudes and motivation for start-up); know how (acquiring the technical abilities and skills needed to develop a business); know who (fostering networks and contacts for entrepreneurial ventures); know when (achieving the sharp intuition to act at the correct moment); and know what (attaining the knowledge base and information for new venture development) aspects of entrepreneurial learning.
Although there are no definitive objectives of entrepreneurship education, the aims of such programs and trainings are probably best summarized as i) identifying and preparing potential entrepreneurs for start-ups ii) enabling participants to prepare business plans for new venture iii) focusing on issues that are critical to the implementation of entrepreneurial projects such as market research, business financing and legal issues and iv) enabling the development of autonomous and risk-taking behavior.
Contents of entrepreneurship education It is expected that individuals are able to apply the skills and knowledge that they have acquired through entrepreneurship education and training to venture-related decision making. Some of the typical skills required for start-ups are knowledge on how to raise finance, the legal and tax framework, marketing, and recruitment, resulting in the development of more practical-based entrepreneurship programs at the expense of conceptual development. According to literature surveyed, entrepreneurship education should be structured based on the different skills needed at various stages of the firm’s development, augmented that the skills and knowledge required to understand business entry (entrepreneurship) differ from the skills and knowledge required to comprehend the operations of an ongoing business (business management).
* Entrepreneurship courses stress the equivocal elements of start-ups such as the development of new organizations, new products, and new markets while business management courses emphasize the knowledge and skills required for business. Some commentators in the field who believe that it is possible to map out a framework of entrepreneurship program that aims at developing a competent curriculum for entrepreneurship education.
Profile of participants of entrepreneurship education Researchers identified three categories of participants: first, participants who had no project idea for starting a business but who within a specified period of starting the program would find one; second, participants who had already a concrete idea of starting a business; and third, participants who had only a basic and tentative idea of starting a business. Further evidence of the value of entrepreneurship education for non-business disciplines of engineering and science is highlighted in a recent study of high-tech entrepreneurs. * It was proposed that entrepreneurship education should also be targeted at students from families with entrepreneurs as these individuals generally tend to have a more positive attitude towards this type of education.