Entrepreneurship Education in Basic and Upper Secondary Education – Measurement and Empirical Evidence
Ruskovaara, Elena (2014-11-14)
Väitöskirja
Ruskovaara, Elena
14.11.2014
Lappeenranta University of Technology
Acta Universitatis Lappeenrantaensis
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-265-657-5
https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-265-657-5
Tiivistelmä
The starting point of this study is to direct more attention to the teacher and those
entrepreneurship education practices taking place in formal school to find out solutions for
more effective promotion of entrepreneurship education. For this objective, the strategy-level
aims of entrepreneurship education need to be operationalised into measurable and
understandable teacher-level practices. Furthermore, to enable the effective development of
entrepreneurship education in basic and upper secondary level education, more knowledge is
needed of the state of affairs of entrepreneurship education in teaching. The purpose of the
study is to increase the level of understanding of teachers’ entrepreneurship education
practices, and through this to develop entrepreneurship education.
This study builds on the literature on entrepreneurship education and especially those
elements referring to the aims, resources, benefits, methods, and practises of entrepreneurship
education. The study comprises five articles highlighting teachers’ role in entrepreneurship
education. In the first article the concept of entrepreneurship and the teachers role in reflection
upon his/hers approaches to entrepreneurship education are considered. The second article
provides a detailed analysis of the process of developing a measurement tool to depict the
teachers’ activities in entrepreneurship education. The next three articles highlight the
teachers’ role in directing the entrepreneurship education in basic and upper secondary level
education. Furthermore, they analyse the relationship between the entrepreneurship education
practises and the teachers’ background characteristics.
The results of the study suggest a wide range of conclusions and implications. First, in spite of
many outspoken aims connected to entrepreneurship education, teachers have not set any
aims for themselves. Additionally, aims and results seem to mix. However, it is possible to
develop teachers’ target orientation by supporting their reflection skills, and through
measurement and evaluation increase their understanding of their own practices. Second,
applying a participatory action process it is possible to operationalise teachers’entrepreneurship education practices. It is central to include the practitioners’ perspective in
the development of measures to make sure that the concepts and aims of entrepreneurship
education are understood. Third, teachers’ demographic or tenure-related background
characteristics do not affect their entrepreneurship education practices, but their training
related to entrepreneurship education, participation in different school-level or regional
planning, and their own capabilities support entrepreneurship education. Fourth, a large
number of methods are applied to entrepreneurship education, and the most often used
methods were different kinds of discussions, which seem to be an easy, low-threshold way for
teachers to include entrepreneurship education regularly in their teaching. Field trips to
business enterprises or inviting entrepreneurs to present their work in schools are used fairly
seldom. Interestingly, visits outside the school are more common than visitors invited to the
school. In line, most of the entrepreneurship education practices take place in a classroom.
Therefore it seems to be useful to create and encourage teachers towards more in-depth
cooperation with companies (e.g. via joint projects) and to network systematically. Finally,
there are plenty of resources available for entrepreneurship education, such as ready-made
materials, external stakeholders, support organisations, and learning games, but teachers have
utilized them only marginally.
entrepreneurship education practices taking place in formal school to find out solutions for
more effective promotion of entrepreneurship education. For this objective, the strategy-level
aims of entrepreneurship education need to be operationalised into measurable and
understandable teacher-level practices. Furthermore, to enable the effective development of
entrepreneurship education in basic and upper secondary level education, more knowledge is
needed of the state of affairs of entrepreneurship education in teaching. The purpose of the
study is to increase the level of understanding of teachers’ entrepreneurship education
practices, and through this to develop entrepreneurship education.
This study builds on the literature on entrepreneurship education and especially those
elements referring to the aims, resources, benefits, methods, and practises of entrepreneurship
education. The study comprises five articles highlighting teachers’ role in entrepreneurship
education. In the first article the concept of entrepreneurship and the teachers role in reflection
upon his/hers approaches to entrepreneurship education are considered. The second article
provides a detailed analysis of the process of developing a measurement tool to depict the
teachers’ activities in entrepreneurship education. The next three articles highlight the
teachers’ role in directing the entrepreneurship education in basic and upper secondary level
education. Furthermore, they analyse the relationship between the entrepreneurship education
practises and the teachers’ background characteristics.
The results of the study suggest a wide range of conclusions and implications. First, in spite of
many outspoken aims connected to entrepreneurship education, teachers have not set any
aims for themselves. Additionally, aims and results seem to mix. However, it is possible to
develop teachers’ target orientation by supporting their reflection skills, and through
measurement and evaluation increase their understanding of their own practices. Second,
applying a participatory action process it is possible to operationalise teachers’entrepreneurship education practices. It is central to include the practitioners’ perspective in
the development of measures to make sure that the concepts and aims of entrepreneurship
education are understood. Third, teachers’ demographic or tenure-related background
characteristics do not affect their entrepreneurship education practices, but their training
related to entrepreneurship education, participation in different school-level or regional
planning, and their own capabilities support entrepreneurship education. Fourth, a large
number of methods are applied to entrepreneurship education, and the most often used
methods were different kinds of discussions, which seem to be an easy, low-threshold way for
teachers to include entrepreneurship education regularly in their teaching. Field trips to
business enterprises or inviting entrepreneurs to present their work in schools are used fairly
seldom. Interestingly, visits outside the school are more common than visitors invited to the
school. In line, most of the entrepreneurship education practices take place in a classroom.
Therefore it seems to be useful to create and encourage teachers towards more in-depth
cooperation with companies (e.g. via joint projects) and to network systematically. Finally,
there are plenty of resources available for entrepreneurship education, such as ready-made
materials, external stakeholders, support organisations, and learning games, but teachers have
utilized them only marginally.
Kokoelmat
- Väitöskirjat [1072]