Entrepreneurial Pedagogy

1?

E ntrepreneurial Pe da$o$yby Barry Cotton and Jean-Charles Cachon

Laurentian University of Sudbury, Ontatio, Canada

This article is concerned with the educational needs of would-be entrepreneurs. First we

review the current status of entrepreneurial education and the teaching methodologyemployed. Inasmuch as entrepreneurship is a creative and risk-taking activity perhapsclassroom case studies should be replaced by venture creation projects. We report theinitial results of a longitudinal study at Laurentian University which includes assess-

ment of the effectiveness of such projects.

Entrepreneurial Education: Current StatusThe evidence set out in recent literature indicates that there are a number of inconsis-tencies in the structure and teaching of entrepreneurial courses. Indeed, the very titlegiven to university courses in the discipline indicate the absence of a clear distinctionbetween "entrepreneur(ship)" courses and "small business"-oriented courses - a

necessary distinction resulting from the significant differences between creative entre-preneurial "activity" on the one hand and the 'loperational functionalism" of smallbusiness management on the other. This argument is supported by Loucks[] who notedthat, "Innovation and management are fundamentally different activities that requirefundamentally different tools and techniques . . . ". Easton[2] underlines the differen-tiation in stating that, ". . . entrepreneurship in business is concerned with puttingtogether something new . . ". Conversely, small business management is concernedwith keeping the business afloat. The two fields are dichotomous to the extent that manyentrepreneurs lack the necessary attributes for successful business management. At thesame time, few successful small business managers are true entrepreneurs. The issue is

exacerbated by a lack of understanding of entrepreneurs, or any consensus as to what an

entrepreneur is, and diverse viewpoints on entrepreneurial educational needs[3, 4].Further problematic areas resulting in inconsistencies in entrepreneurial education

exist. Loucks [5] in his study of 93 courses offered by Canadian universities and colleges,

reports a very wide distribution of emphasis. The generation of a business idea, centralto the concept of entrepreneurship, was not specifically addressed in most courses. Thissituation arises, in part at least, from a wide variance between stated course objectivesacross courses resulting from differences in instructor intent and interest, and ininstructor perceptions of what entrepreneurship is.

18 BE 8,3

The variance in emphasis also results from the variety of disciplines offering coursesacross institutions. In a number of institutions entrepreneur courses are of fered by suchdiverse schools as Business, Mechanical Engineering, Industrial Engineering andAgriculture, amongst others. This is a situation which has grown, at least in part, fromthe rapid and erratic proliferation of courses in the 1960s and early 1970s[61. Falk andtæssem[7] point to the fact that business schools (often) play a minor role as a result oftheir orientation towards the needs of large organisations. This observation is supportedby Rice[S] who points out that business schools were set up to train employees with aresulting growth in (functional) specialisation. Extensively used as a schedule filler,often taught by inappropriate faculty and treated as an offshoot of small businessmanagement courses[3], Entrepreneurship is an undeveloped discipline.

Teaching Methodology in Entrepreneurship CoursesThe question arises as to how best entrepreneurship can be developed in a student. Theissue in entrepreneurship pedagogy centres on the development of the psychologicalcharacteristics comprising the complex make-up of the entrepreneur, notwithstandingthe definitional dilemma. While the teaching of the tools and techniques of manage-ment are well developed, they cannot replace or replicate the individualcreative innovat-iveness[9] of the entrepreneur.

Rice[8], arguing that the development of creativity and an-"intuiting" approach todecision making remain as areas of instruction for which acceptable techniques have yet

to be developed, identifies two requisite dimensions in entrepreneur education. Firstly,the need for the development of appropriate psychological set,/personality traits suchthat students would be willing to take risks and make the personal commitments of timeand the emotional energy required.

To an extent, experiential processes can be taught by the development and use ofprojects outside the regular instructional setting[0, ll]. In the same way, students canbe exposed to factors dealing with the conditions that often lead to an entrepreneurialchoice, for example, dissatisfaction with present job[2] or opportunity identificationby friends, business contacts or the entrepreneur himself/herself[3]. The caserstudymethod goes some way in addressing the problem. There has been and continues to be

discussion across numerous disciplines on the appropriateness and the effectiveness ofthe case method. Evidence strongly indicates that, as a business subject teachingmedium, cases can be of significant pedagogical benefit[4-18], linking theoreticalknowledge with real-world problems and examples.

There are, nevertheless, major weaknesses in the use of cases, particularly when used

in entrepreneurial pedagogy. Firstly, the nature of the usage of cases varies from totalreliance on cases with minimal instructor input to an occasional case-supported lecturewith almost 100 per cent instructor input[5]. This is a situation which aggravates theinconsistency problem.

A second and more fundamental problem arises out of the definitional issue. Whilstthe "entrepreneur" paradigm has not yet fully emerged, some unique and intangibleaspects of the entrepreneurial make-up are identified. T'hese aspects cannot be "taught"in the traditional academic setting with (or without) the use of the case method. Cases

are simulations of historic events while at the same time being an excellent medium for

Entrepreneurial Fedadiogy 1S)

developing evaluative techniques. While some degree of uncertainty is introduced,students are not in a position to observe and develop decision-making skills whilstexperiencing the varied emotions of anxiety or exhilaration induced by involvement inan actual event. In dealing with a case in the classroom setting, all that is at risk for thestudent is the level of a grade and the judgement of student peers.-The inexperiencedstudent will have nothing but a passing appreciation of the realities of being anentrepreneur.

Venture Development ProjectsOne answer to the problems posed here is to incorporate into entrepreneurship coursesan element in the form of a project which would require students to generate a businessconcept. Students would be required to conduct all the necessary investigation andevaluation involved in generating a realistic venture concept and taking the conceptthrough to the point of commencement of operations.

A number of difficulties associated with the conduct of such projects are apparent.Firstly, as an aid to effectiveness, the project should, following the suggestion of Sextonand Bowman [3], "pose problems which require novel solutions under conditions of veryreal ambiguity and risk". To facilitate the atmosphere of ambiguity and risk, the projectshould take place completelyoutside the instructional settingI l] and in as unstructuredan environment as possible.

Secondly, the completion of such plojects should ideally be on an individual studentbasis. On the assumption that in the majority of institutions resources, particularlytime, are very limited a somewhat less than ideal situation has to be accepted. That is,projects are assigned to groups of students. Gassefl9] maintains that to be effective,controlled entrepreneurial experiences must be limited to small groups. Even here a validassessment of effectiveness is difficult.

The Laurentian ExperimentThe Laurentian venture creation project experiment required subjects:

(l) to generate an innovativg commercially realistic business concept;

(2) to establish the feasibility of the concept through appropriate market research;

(3) having established feasibility, to investigate and develop plans embracing allaspects of the start-up and operation of the business venture to the point where,should venture capital funding be made available, operations could be com-menced virtually immediately.

StructureThe project was imposed as a required component of a non-elective third year MarketingManagement côurse in a four-year Hohours Bachelor of Commerce programme. At thisstage of the programme, students are acquiring substantial conceptual knowledge andstrategic decision-making skills in the functional areas of management. Resource con-siderations dictated that the projects be developed by groups of students. These were,however, restricted in size to a maximum of four or five students.

?o BE 8,5

In order to maximise the exposure to risk and uncertainty all work on the projects tookplace outside the classroom setting. Instructor input was constrained to a short "rule-setting" session at the commencement of the project and commentary during the finalgrading process.

"Rule-setting" was kept to the minimum. The students were required:

(l) to generate within the group a business concept for which there was an identifiedneed with no restriction with respect to geographical location;

(2) to submit to their supervisor five weeks later a detailed Business Plan at the sametime making a formal presentation of their case to the supervisor and a studentpanel acting as a venture capital source assessment board.

Only two constraints were imposed on subjects: the first involved the time constraintsresulting from semester lengths; the second constraint involved the level of venturecapital funding potentially available. A maximum of C$5,000 (f2,500) was availablefrom the source to whom subjects were required to present their projects. However, thisamount was not to be regarded as inflexible. Secondary financing to a levelequal to thelevel of first stage financing was permitted provided it was specified and allowed for inplanning.

Some direction was provided in terms of structuring a business plan. No otherconstraints or input were involved. Subjects were on their own and free to pursue theproject in any manner they chosg having regard for the requirements of other coursesthey were required to take at the same time.

Crading and FeedbackGrades were awarded and extensive feedback given on the basis of performance inseveral key areas of the project:

(l) originality/innovativeness/workability of the concept;

(2) contents of the proposal in terms of

(a) validity and extent of feasibility assessment,

(b) assessment of start-up and operational financial and other resource andlegal requirements,

(c) comprehensiveness/appropriateness of marketing plan,

(d\ pro forma operating statements including cash-flow projections,

(e) process layouts/production,/work scheduling, supply sourcing;

(3) quality/professionalism of report structure;

(4) quality,/professionalism of presentation.

The use of projects such as this is not a new teaching concept. They are not, however,widely used and the observation and measurement of their effectiveness is a criticalpedagogical factor on which very little has been reported.

E ntrepreneu.rial Fed"a4fogy e1

ParticipantsThese were 88 third-year Honours Bachelor of Commerce students representing thesecond-semester third-year population for the 1985-1986 academic year at LaurentianUniversity. The mean age was 22years with a range of 20 to 30 years, 48 (54.5 per cent)were male and 40 (45.5 per cent) were female.

Validating the Effectiveness of Experiential Venture Creation ProjectsIn addition to the objective measure obtained by the grading of various aspects of eachstudent's final course grade, an instrument to facilitate the measurement of partic-ipants' perceptions of the project usefulness was developed. In developing the instru-ment, an underlying assumption was that the students taking part would not besufficiently qualified or objective enough to assess effectiveness through directquestions; a set of scales measuring their perception of various components involved inthe activity was developed.

Four components, a dependent variable and three independent variables, wereidentified as being relevant.

Dependent VariableThe effectiveness of the project, the dependent variable, represents the perception byeach subject of his/her personal commitment to the project and his/her perceivedinterest in entrepreneurial-type activities.

The rationale behind the use of perceived success and personal commitment as proxymeasures of learning effectiveness is that subjects feeling negatively about the exper-ience would tend to answer very negatively to questions pertaining to their individualcommitment towards the project. This argument also applies to attitudes towards thechances of success of the proposed venture.

Independent VariablesThree independent variables were identified as relevant in representing constructsassociated in the literature with entrepreneurial success.

The individual's personal objectives.' the first independent variable to be measuredinvolves the influence of the individual's personal objectives on his/her dedication to atask. In particular, the variable includes:

a perceived personal achievement;

o perceptions of the form of interaction with the subject's group;

o perceived influence in generating the idea and preparing the final report.

Group support, structure and inleractions: the second independent variable included themeasurement of perceived group support, group structure and interactions whilstaccomplishing the necessary tasks within severe time constraints and the pressures ofother course requirements. More specifically, this variable included the followingelements:

az BE 8,5

a measurement of the effectiveness of perceived objectives pursued by the group;

a the individual's perception of internal group pressure;

-o the task versus people orientation of the group members;

a the mechanism by which the group reached different stages of progress (genera-

tion of business iàeas, group planning, etc.) and how each group member viewed

his/her own tasks and responsibilities towards the group.

Degree programme "System": the third variable relates to the perceived impact ofthe- degree progru-*L "system". If the students perceive the classroom learning

situatiàn as having playeâ a determinant role in their achieving the successful

completion of the pioje.t ttt.y will tend to project that attitude in their responses to that

scale. However, they will tend to perceive the learning setting as less important if they

otherwise consider ihut group relations or personal objectives have been the strongest

motivators for them.In addition to the three independent variables, the possible existence of mediating

factors, such as the mark a student expected to receive, was considered as having a

potential effect on the results.

HypothesesOn ttre basis of the discussion presented above, the following hypotheses were estab-

lished.

(l) Among a group of participants in a venture creation project a significant

relationship should be found between personal objectives, perceptions of group

interaction and academic support, on the one hand, and the perceived effective-

ness of the project as an educational experience, on the other hand'

(2) (a) Subjects displayi ng a higher-than-mean rating in their perception of effec-

tiveness should diiplaylignificant relationships with their perception ofhaving a higher-than-mean level of personal commitment to the project.

(b) Subjects displayin galower-than-mean ratingintheir perception of effective-

ness should display significant relationships between group interaction and

need for academic support.

(3) (a) Subjecrs expecrin ga higher-than-median mark for the course should display

a significant relationthip b.t*.en the effectiveness of the project and the

three independent variables. The underlying assumption here is that these

subjects hâve both a strong commitment to and interest in the course and the

proj..t. Such subjects *ould tend to spread their enthusiasm to every facet

of the learning exPerience-

(b) Students expectin ga lower-than-medianfinol mark for the course should not

display any significant pattern of relationships between the dependent and

independent variables-

e4 BE 8,5

Table II. Statistical Summary

Sample

E f fectiveness(EF)

Personal(PERSON)

Support(PSUPP)

Group Expected(GROUP) Crade

Total(n - 88)

Low EF(n - 40)

High EF(n - 48)

Signilicance*

Low expectedgrade(n - 44)

H igh expectedgrade(n - 44)Significance*

*One-tailed /-test; n.s. = not significant.

Pearson CorrelationsThe analysis detecting whether the Effectiveness variable and the three independent

variables were correlated (Pearson product-moment method) with each other through

their corresponding scale s'core correlations is given in Thble III. Only the PERSON and

GROUP scores showed a significant correlation with the EF score. No relationship

between the Support variable and the Effectiveness variable was established. The

significant correlation between the Personal and Group variables suggests possible

overlap between those two dimensions.

As a second step, similar correlations were computed for high vs low scoring subjects

on the Effectiveness variable, as well as for subjects expecting an above-median mark vs

those expecting a lower-than-median mark. The discriminating value was chosen as

equal to ihe rounded mean total for the EF scale (862.0), while the median, equal to 69,

wâs used to distinguish higher- versus lower-expected-mark students. This analysis is

illustrated in Tâbles IV and V.

Table III. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations of the EffectivenessVariable with the Personal, Support and Group Variables

(n : 88)

Personal Support Group

tvteanSD

MeanSD

MeanSD

MeanSTD

MeanSD

861 .08229.52

668. I 2144.95

021 .87| 48 .21

p<0.001

863 .t 1t71 .t5

858.39214.20

n. s.

515.47163.49

455.6217 I .00

565 .3 3

I 40.08p<0.01

516.07I 46.87

5 l 4.86I 80.30

n.s.

2s9.64109.65

272.4489.49

249.00t23.92

n.s.

21 L .25r 05.35

248.42t 11.80

n.s.

622.61160.26

578.55138.39

659.44169.15p<0.05

57 3 .23

r 39. l0

672"t I

166.17p<0.01

68.826.36

69.657.13

68.155.62n.s.

64.203 .19

73.454.8 5

p<a.001

E lfectivenessPersonalSupport*p<0.05

*a.r2

-0.08

a.29*0.32*0.06

4.57*

Entrepreneurial Feda€ogy es

Table IY. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations ofwith the Personal, Support and Group

the E,ffectiveness VariableYariables

Pe rso na I Support Group

Low perceived effectiveness (n -40):E f fectivenessPersonalSupport

High perceived effectiveness (n -48):EffectivenessPersonalSupport

*p(0.05

0.43 *

0.43 +

-0.3 I *

-0.030.000.r80.06

0.27*0.33*0. l0

0.09

-0.06

Forty subjects were classified as having a lower-than-average score on the EF scale, theremaining 48 being categorised as above average. In the case of the first group (Table IV)the significant positive correlation between the PERSON and EF scales remains.However, thecorrelation betweenthe latter and the GROUP scale has disappeared whilea negative correlation is found as significant between the EF scale and the PSUPP scale.Subjects with strong EF scores tended to show a pattern closer to the one observed onall subjects: the EF scale is again significantly correlated to the PERSON and GROUPscales only.

Table V. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations of the Effectiveness Variablewith the Personal, Support and Group Variables and Expected Grade

Personal Support Group Grade

Low expected grade (n - 44):

Ef fectivenessPersonalSupportGroup

High expected grade (n -44):E f fectivenessPersonalSupportGroup

*p<0.05

0.35*

0.61*

-0.04-0.01

-0 .17

-0. r 3

4.37 *

0.29*0.07

0.28*a 37*0.t2

0. l5

-0. 37 *

0.07

-0.1 I

-0. r90.070.39*0. l0

The separation according to the expected grade for the course (Tâble V) yielded a setof different observations: lower-grade subjects showed a stronger correlation betweenthe EF scale and the GROUP scale than with any other variable, while the PERSON

E6 BE 8,5

scale remained significantly positively correlated with the EF scale. This group also

Alrpi"V.a a significant negitive correlation between the expected mark and the

pgnSbN scalelhus suggesring that, while having the feeling of having worked very hard

aJ hauing put a lot oiihemrélu.r into the project, they were nonetheless expecting to

Ë.iu io*.î mark for the course. Those students *6o expected a higher-than-median

ilart< displayed a very strong correlation between their personal objectives and interests

tpÈnSON iale) unà th. EF scale. The correlation between the EF and GROUP scale

àlro upp.ured as positive and significant. The correlation table (Tâble V) concerning this

group àf suUjecis also indicates a significant positive correlation between the mark

6Utain.a by the student and the PSUPP scale, suggesting a link between the perception

,hi, group has of the educational constraints and support mechanisms and the mark

they expected to obtain for the course.

Forward Inclusion Muttiple Regression AnalysisBased on the preceding analyses, further multivariate analyses using forward inclusion

reggession *.thodt *.r. .onaucted. The bulk of analyses were done on all subjects as

well as on the same subgroupings used for the Pearson correlation analyses. All the

regressions were perfor-ia with the EF scale total scores as the dependent vector and the

,.6.., for the thrèe other scales as the independent matrix. ln all cases the residuals rvere

unutvr.o in order to ensure that the multiple regression model's assumptions were not

violated.The analysis of the data showed that the only factor influencing the perceived

effectiveness of the experiment is the Personal variable (lJ =A.52; R-square =0.27;

,:0.ôOf ; correlation with dependent variable:0.52), thus confirming the hypothesis

inly in part. This would suggèst that the more the subject puts into the project in terms

Àijeaication and personal interest, rhe more likely helshe would be to have a higher level

"' ff ï ff i ::l' :?il""îrgXf*i i*" li :.ff :iïIT 0., o* t h e m ea n s u b - s a m p r e s,

according to their ,.or. on the EF scale. Higher scorers again related the Personal

variable ù effectiveness (/3 = 0'50i R :0'25; p:0'001; r with dependent variable:0'50)'

thus confirming hypothesis 2(a). Lower scorers entered both the Personal and Support

variables as faCtori predicting effectiveness, the latter being an inverse relationship,

confirming hypothesis 2(b) only in part-- -it.,.ruttr

inOicate that.the perceived support received from the instructor becomes

u rignlfi.unt predictor of effectiveness of the class experiment when a group of lower

,.oi.r, is selècted, implying in the case of a negative rel4tionship that the support

mechanism, prouid.d'in tfri learning environment were stronger than the possible

, .if..tiu.n.rt àf the project. This group of subjects is suggesting that they have a lower

p.r..ptlon of the .if.itiu.n.ss of thè project: first in relation with their own self-

, i.i..ptions as reflected by the presencé ol the PERSON scale in the equation, and,

i..onOty, in relation with the perception they have of the support received from the

instructors.Two analyses were performed on the lower- and higher-than-median expected mark

groups of càses (Tabl; vI). Contrary to hypothesis 3(b) for the group including lower-+L^- -oâian crrlrienrc rhe Grorrn variable was related tO perCeived effeCtiveneSS

Entrepreneu.rial kdadio$Y 27

Table VI. Forward Inclusion Multiple Regression Analysis of læarning Variables onPerceived Effectiveness for Lower-than-Median Scorers on the Effectiveness Scale

EnteredVariable

R-sq uare

r withDependent

Variable

Perso nalSupport

0. l90.28

0.43

-0.300.0050.002

0.43

-4.32

(/J:0.51, R-square:0.26, p:0.001, r with dependent variable :0.51). However, thePersonal variable was the only predictor of effectiveness among the higher-than-medianmarksub-sample(f :0.61,R-square:0.37,p:0.00l,rwithdependentvariable:0.61),thereby partially confirming hypothesis 3(a). Therefore it appears that students whohave a better image of their performance in the course tend to be more self-oriented as

they consider the effectiveness of the experience as more related to their owncontribution than anything else. Conversely, those who display a lesser perception oftheir performance view the effectiveness of the project as depending upon groupattributes such as its structure and internal dynamics. Tâble VII summarises the results

discussed above.

Table VII. Summary of Hypotheses and Results

Su bject s

Hypothesis(Relationship

to Effectiveness)Explanatory Variables Conclusion

All (n - 88)

Strong EF (n - 48)

Low EF (n - 40)

High mark (n - 44)

Low mark (n - 44)

l. Personal commitmentGroup interactionSchool support

7(a). Personal commitment2(b). Group interaction

School support

3(a). Personal commitmentGroup interactionSchool support

3(b). No relationshipexpected

Personal commitment

Personal commitmentPersonal commitmentSchool support

Personal commitment

Croup interaction

Partial confirmation

ConfirmedPartial confirmation

Partial confirmation

Not confirmed

DiscussionTo the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first attempt to measure the

effectiveness of a project designed to expose students to the realities of entrepreneurialactivity and thus enhance their learning and development in the discipline.

With regard to the stated hypotheses, the results of the study show that:

(l) students perceptions of their personal involvement and commitment appeared

to be positively correlated with their perception of the effectiveness of theproject, thus confirming the first hypothesis in part;

E8 BE 8,5

(Z) there was indication that the perceived level of required support from the learn-

ing environment was related to effectiveness in the case of students who displayed

a below-average score on the EF scale;

(3) group structure and internal inter_action and decision-mlking processes were

i*portant to students expecting a Ëelow-median final grade for the course. This

latter result suggests thaf the expected mark plays a role as a mediating factor, in

the case of this analysis by eliminating the effect of personal factors.

Research ImplicationsThe effectiveness of this form of project in entrepreneurial education is partially est-

ablished in this experiment. However, the relatively modest population size, and the

exploratory nature of this, a pilot experiment, does not permit validity analysis.

îh. t.rting of this exploratory model should be replicated in further research. Expan-

sion is also r-equired to include the measurement of the impact of other variables and

potential mediators such as gender. In many areas of attribute development the impact

àf tn. learning experience may not become apparent for some considerable time. More

specifically, further research should concentrate on the following areas:

a extended longitudinal research is required to assess the effectiveness/impact ofsuch projects at varying stages of the subjects' career-life;

O investigation of patterns of learning and development of entrepreneurial skills

and attributes;

o development of instruments to be utilised in screening potential trainees and

testing the results of training programmes[20];

a development of general models and paradigms for the description and develop-

ment of entrepreneurial education methods.

Poticy ImplicationsIn teims of tn. implications for policy in entrepreneurial education the study highlights

the following points:

o In order to achieve the levels of learning outcome specified here, a strong individ-ual commitment on the part of students will enhance the projects' effectiveness.

a Support from instructors, as well as from peers, plays a significant role in terms

of liainees who, for different reasons, display a lower level of interest in the

development process; this is supported by the earlier observations of Beesley and

Birley[211.

Thus, on a preliminary basis, it can be concluded that entrepreneurial training pro-

grammes wôuld increase their chances of being effective, that is of providing trainees

îitn u strong positive perception of the realities of venture creation, by pre-selecting

those candidates who display an auerage to stronger than average personal interest in the

subject.Secondly, while entrepreneurship is generally viewed as an "individual sport", team-

work in the form experienced by students in the Laurentian project appears to play a very

supportive role in developing a stronger interest in entrepreneurial activities.

Entrepreneltrial Peda,€ogy e9

Referenccs

l. Lotrcks. K.E., "Elaboration on Education in Entrepreneurship" in Kent, C.A. el a/. (Eds.),En<'yclopaedia of Entrepreneurship, Prentice-Hall, Englervood Clifis, N.J., 1982, p. 345.

2. Easton, 8.E., "Entrepreneurship: Undergraduate Option, Conccrrtration Or Whal'1". Journal o.l'Smsll Business Managernenî, Yol.l5 No. 3, l97l, pp. 4l-45.

-1. Serton, D.L. and Bowman, N.B., "Entrepreneurship Education: Srrggcstions lor lncrcasingEllcctivcness",Journal of Small BusinessManagernenl,Vol.22No.tl, l9ll.1,pp. l8-2-s.

-1. Daiuorr', R., "Trainingand Education of Entrepreneurs; TheCurrcnt Statc ot'thc [.itcraturc". .lottrnalo.[ Sntull Business & Entrepreneurship, Spring I986, pp. l0-23.

5. Loucks, K.8.,'A Survey on Research on Small Business Managcrncnt and [inrrcprcrrcrrrship irrCarradal' paper presented to Babso n Invitational Cotlfen'tt<'t, ort Ent rcltrt,tr<'ttrshiJt Rc.çe ur<'lt, [Jatrstrrr('ollcgc. Wcllesley, Mass., l3-14 April, 1981.

(r. Vcspcr. K.H., 1'Research on Education for Entrcprcncurship", irr Kcrrt. (-.4. cl r.r/. (t:tls.).Etr<'r'cl<tytuediu otr Entrepreneurship,Prentice-Hall, Englgvortd ('lil'l's, N..l ., l9l't2, pp. -lll--l.ll.

1. I;irlk. N. and Lessem, R., "Training Entrepreneursl'Brr.rlnessGruduutr'. Vol.8. l97ti. pp. l9-21.

It. Ricc, (i.H., Jr., "Education for Entrepreneurship in Arlerican llrrsincss Sclrrltlls". lt4anagetttetttEduc'ation & Developntent,Yol.l6 No. l, 1985, pp.48-53.

(). (iillingharn, D.W. and Loucks, K.E., "Forming New Entrepreneurial Vcnturcs T-lrrouglr thc tJsc ol'Vcrtturc (irclup Scssions", Journal of Small Business Managernent, 1982, Vol. 20, pp. 5-12.

10. Korrrilskv, M. and Kcislcr, Il., "The Eflect ol the Success Oriented Tèacher on Pupil's PcrccivcclI)crstlnal Control and Attitudc toward Learning", Conlemporary Educ'ational P5S,çfiç1ogy, Vol. ltNo. 2, 4, 1983, pp. l5ti-167.

ll. Root, .1.R. and Call, M.D., "lntcractions Bctwccn Studcnt Achicvcrnen(, Locus ol Control and J'woMethodsof'Collcgclnstruction", EducqtionalCommunic'atictnancl kcltnology:AJournulofTheory,Research and Development,Yol.29 No. 3, 1981, pp. 139-146.

12. Levinson, D.J., The Seasons of a Man's Life, Ballantine's Books, Ncw York, 1978.

13. Powell, J.D. and Bimmerle, C.F.,'A Model of Entreprencurship: Moving'Ioward Precision andComplexity" , Journalof Small Business Managernenl, Vol. l8 No. l, l9tt0, pp. 33-36.

14. Kclly,H.,"CaseMethodTraining:Whatitis,HowitWorks",Training/lIRl), I;cbruaryl9tt3,pp.46.15. Dooley, A.R. and Wickham Skinner, C., "Casing Casemethod Methods", Ac'udenry oJ'Manugctttent

Review, April 1977, p. 283.

16. Martin, T.8., "The Case Problem in Professional Business Education", Journal of IlusinessEducation, Vol.52 No.3, 1976, pp. ll8-119.

17. Watson, C.E., "The Case Study Method and Learning Ellectiveness", College Student Journol,Vol.9 No. 2,1975, pp. 109-116.

18. Schlacter, J.L. and Ostram, L.L., "Use of the Case Method", Journal of Business Education, Vol. 50No. 4, 1975, pp. 163-164.

19. Casse Y.,'A Study of'Entreprencurial Characteristics and Practices in Differcnt Industrial and,Cult ural Environmen ls", Proceedings, I It h I n le rna I ionul Srnall Busines.s Congre.ss, A rnstcrdam, 19U4,

pp. t22-150.,

20. Cibb, A., Kirkwood, C., Parkinson, C. and Scott, M., "Craduate Carccr Aspirations, [iducation andEntreprencurship: Some Rcsearch Findings", Seventh Nationul Stnull I:irrns Policy & Resear<'h

Conference,'1984.

21. tleesley,M.E.and Birley,S..l ., "DcvclopingEducation lbrSmall Ilusincss:-lbwardsa National l'olicv".Munutr4enrent ['.rlucation & DeveloJttnent,Vol. T No. 3, 1976, pp. ltlT-2(X).