New Methods in University Entrepreneurship Education: A Multidisciplinary Teams Approach

doi:10.4236/ce.2012.326132

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education

2012. Vol.3, Special Issue, 878-883

Published Online October 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce) DOI:10.4236/ce.2012.326132

New Methods in University Entrepreneurship Education:

A Multidisciplinary Teams Approach

Francisco J. Ga r cía- Ro dríguez1, Esperanza Gil-Soto1, Inés Ruiz-Rosa2

1Department of Economi cs and Busi ness Administration, University of La Laguna,

San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Spain

2Department of Financial Economics and Accounting, University of La Laguna, San Cristóbal de L a Lagu na, S p ai n

Email: [email protected]

Received September 6th, 2012; revised October 4th, 2012; accepted October 20th, 2012

There is currently much debate about what methodological innovations are necessary for entrepreneurship

education in universities in the new competitive context. The current work describes the methodology,

process of implementation and main results from the evaluation of the first year of a project to test an in-

novative teaching methodology involving the elaboration of business plans by multidisciplinary teams of

university students studying degrees in chemical engineering, industrial engineering, computer engineer-

ing, and business management in the University of La Laguna (Spain). The results suggest that the meth-

odology has the potential to boost entrepreneurial spirit among the students, and that it is a model of

learning that is closer to reality than more traditional methodologies.

Keywords: Entrepreneurship Education; Multidisciplinary Teams; Innovative Teaching Methodology;

Business Plans; Higher Education

The University Role in Entrepreneurship

Education

Since Myles Mace taught the first entrepreneurship course at

Harvard Business School in 1947, the number of education

programs designed to instill entrepreneurial spirit and ulti-

mately boost new firm creation has continued to grow, leading

one author to claim that “the younger generation of the 21st

century is becoming the most entrepreneurial generation since

the Industrial Revolution” (Kuratko, 2005: p. 578).

This proliferation of entrepreneurship education programs is

a consequence of the positive effects that entrepreneurship has

in terms of economic growth and job creation (Audretsch,

2003), as well as the recognition that entrepreneurship educa-

tion has now reached full maturity (Katz, 2008) and is close to

gaining full legitimacy (Kuratko, 2005) as a scientific and aca-

demic discipline. According to Kuratko (2005), the question is

not whether entrepreneurship can be taught, but what should be

taught and how it should be taught (Honig, 2004; Fiet, 2000).

However, despite this huge growth in entrepreneurship edu-

cation, particularly in the universities, researchers have shown

relatively little interest in identifying the benefits that students

gain from participating in these programs (Peterman & Ken-

nedy, 2003; Athayde, 2009).

On the other hand, the profound changes affecting the

economy, the technological revolution and the social and envi-

ronmental crisis, among other aspects, are generating increas-

ingly greater levels of uncertainty and even “unknowability”.

Thus educators need to profoundly rethink the methods and

approaches they use in the University (Neck & Greene, 2011;

Béchard & Grégoire, 2005; Fiet, 2000). In the same line, “en-

trepreneurship within a formal education structure requires a

new approach based on action and practice” (Neck & Greene,

2011: p. 68).

Educational institutions should adopt 21st century methods

and tools to develop the appropriate learning environment for

encouraging creativity (Zhou & Luo, 2012), innovation and the

ability to “think out of the box” to solve problems (World

Economic Forum, 2009). Indeed, the weakest aspects of exist-

ing models of business planning education is that the process

supports thinking “inside the box”, which may serve to reduce

rather than expand the range of activities and potential solutions

pursued by nascent entrepreneurs (Honig, 2004).

The above is particularly important in the context of higher

education in Europe, given the conclusions of a study from The

Commission of The European Communities (2008) among 664

higher-education institutions:

 Less than half of university students have access to some

type of initiative related to the development of entrepreneu-

rial spirit

 European universities are trailing far behind US and Cana-

dian universities in this area

 Very little cooperation takes place between institutions to

exchange good practices

 Most institutions allocate less than €50 per student per year

to promoting entrepreneurial spirit

 It is necessary to agree on a more inclusive definition of

what is understood by entrepreneurial education.

These findings contrast with the situation in the US, symbol-

ized by the paradigmatic case of the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology (MIT). MIT’s success seems to be due to its sci-

ence and engineering resources, the quality of its research, its

organizational mechanisms and policies in support of entrepre-

neurship (such as its Technology Licensing Office) and its cul-

ture, which strongly encourages entrepreneurship (O’Shea et al.,

2007). This reflects the fact that “[t]he image of entrepreneurs as

positive role models ha s never been as stro ng in Europe as in t he

US” (Commission of The European Communities, 2003: p. 5).

In this context, a group of professors at the University of La

878

F. J. GARCÍA-RODRÍGUEZ ET AL.

Laguna (Spain) conducted a project to test an innovative meth-

odology for teaching entrepreneurship. The project involved the

drawing up of business plans by multidisciplinary teams of

students studying for degrees in chemical engineering, Indus-

trial engineering, computer engineering and business manage-

ment. In the current work, the authors present the methodology

they followed and the main results from the evaluation of the

impact of participating in the project among the students. They

offer their main conclusions from the experiment and suggest

possible improvements for the future.

A Practical Initiative: Multidisciplinary Teams

of University Students

Description of Project

A group of professors at the University of La Laguna (Spain)

who teach four courses from four different degree programs in

business management and the engineering sciences carried out

a project to test an innovative methodology for teaching entre-

preneurship and inculcating entrepreneurial spirit among the

students. The project involved setting up multidisciplinary

teams of students to draw up business projects on the basis of

an idea. The starting point for the project was the following

ideas about the role and potential of entrepreneurship education

in the University:

 Entrepreneurship education could offer a broad, integrative,

pragmatic, and rational approach to business, avoiding the

problem of the continued increasing fragmentation of busi-

ness education into narrow specializations (Kuratko, 2005;

Zeithaml & Rice, 1987).

 On the other hand, teaching entrepreneurship requires a

multidimensional and cross-disciplinary approach with an

emphasis on dynamic processes (Fayolle, 2007). In this re-

spect, Kuratko (2005: p. 584) notes the trend in “new inter-

disciplinary programs that use faculty teams to develop

programs for the nonbusiness students”. For this, universi-

ties need to change their structures with regard to their en-

trepreneurship classes, be cause they only offer these classes

to students from one or sometimes two disciplines (Fayolle,

2007).

According to the above considerations, the professors formed

multidisciplinary teams consisting of two distinct sets of stu-

dents: first, students studying one, and not more than one, of

computer, chemical or industrial engineering; and second, busi-

ness management students. The idea was that they work to-

gether to develop a business idea and draw up a business plan.

The students coming from the scientific-technical areas would

conceivably contribute a more technical and operational per-

spective to the project, while the business management students

would offer the vision and conceptualization of the business,

support in the market research, and above all the economic-

financial analysis. The business management students would be

acting as “business consultants”, advising the scientific-tech-

nical students in the development of the business plan.

The four professors teaching the courses involved partici-

pated in the project. Of the 217 students registered on the four

courses, a little over half (109) were studying one of the engi-

neering degrees and the rest were studying business manage-

ment. A total of 12 interdisciplinary teams of students were

established. The teams ranged in size from 11 to 20 members,

with a mean of 16.

After four months the results of the project were evaluated.

For this, the professors drew up a questionnaire to measure

participating students’ satisfaction with and evaluation of the

project. The next section describes this evaluation process and

the main results obtained.

Methodol og y of Ev al ua ti on

For the evaluation process a questionnaire was drawn up.

The questionnaire had its basis, on the one hand, on the dimen-

sions for assessing the quality of a project for testing an inno-

vative teaching methodology for entrepreneurship, and on the

other, on the attributes defining entrepreneurial activity ac-

cording to the Annual Report of the GEM Spain project (De la

Vega et al., 2009).

With regard to the quality of the project, and following

Mauri, Coll and Onrubia (2007), the questionnaire considered

four dimensions: implementation of the project; results of learn-

ing; fundamental elements of the innovative methodology; and

degree of satisfaction. The next step involved establishing a set

of indicators to define each dimension of the construct. These

variables made up the questionnaire sent to the students par-

ticipating in the project. Table 1 presents the items grouped

into the four main dimensions.

The population object of study consisted of all students offi-

cially registered, in January 2011, on one of the following

courses as part of their degrees: Management Accounting (MA);

Computer Systems Management (CSM); Business Administra-

tion and Organization of Production (BAOP); or Economics

and Industrial Organization (EIO). According to data from the

Office for Analysis and Planning at the University of La La-

guna, the total number of students officially registered on these

courses at that time was 217.

For the data collection the professors of these courses up-

loaded the questionnaire onto the corresponding Virtual Class-

room at the end of the first four-month term of the academic

year 2010-2011, after the students took their exams but before

they learned their grades in order to encourage greater homo-

geneity and objectivity in the responses.

The professors received 126 validly completed question-

naires, which represents a response rate of 63%. Table 2 shows

the response rate in each course.

The information collected was codified and stored in a data-

base for subsequent treatment (preliminary analysis of data

quality and replacement of absent data by the mean of the series

using the statistics program SPSS 19.0). The statistical analysis

of the data followed, and the following subsections look at the

results.

The SPSS 19.0 program was used to analyze the va lidity and

reliability of the measurement scale used to measure the quality

of the project to test the innovative methodology in entrepre-

neurship education. After confirming the normality and linear-

ity, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was calculated to evaluate

the internal consistency of the indicators of each latent variable.

The results show that each set of observed variables is repre-

sentative of its corresponding factor, since values close to or

exceeding 0.6 are considered acceptable in exploratory analyses

(Hair et al., 1999). Thus for Implementation of project and

Degree of satisfaction this statistic is lower than 0.6 but remains

acceptable because it exceeds the minimum of 0.5 (0.504 and

0.545, respectively). For the other two dimensions—Results of

learning and Fundamental elements of innovative methodol-

ogy—the statistic gives higher values (0.654 and 0.756, respec-

F. J. GARCÍA-RODRÍGUEZ ET AL.

880

Table 1.

Items in Quality of project to test innovative teaching methodology.

Implementation of project

I1. The professor informed us at the beginning of the course how the project was going to proceed (objectives, content, methodolog y, evaluation,

duration…)

I2. The initially esta bli shed deadlines for the project were met

I3. The professor resolved any doubts we had during the project clearly and quickly

Results of learni ng

I4. Participating in the project has helped improve my understanding of the contents of this course

I5. After pa r ti cipating in this project I n ow understa nd the business environment better

I6. Participating in this project has allowed me to apply what I have learnt in this course to the business reality, orienting my knowledge to th e solution

of real problems

I7. After participa ting in this project I am m ore likely to start a business at some time in the future

I8. This project has enabled cooperation with student s from other degrees, which has given me a ne w perspecti v e in the solving of real problems

Fundamental elements of innovative methodology

I9. The structure of the project was clear, logical and organized

I10. The prof essor gav e a clear e xp lanation of the concepts involved in the implementation of the project

I11. Working on the project has provided us with motivation and interest in the course

I12. The te a mwork with classmates from my degree was fruitful and stimulating

I13. The te a mwork with classmates from o t h er degrees was fruitful and stimulating

I14. The material recommended (bibliography, documentation, transparencies, etc.) helped us carry out the work and was easily accessible

I15. The virt u al classro om and the inf ormation and commu ni cation technologies were adequate and use fu l in doing the work

I16. I think the evaluation criteria and the weight of the proje ct in the total gr ade for the course are about right

Degree of satisfaction

I17. In general, I am satisfied with how the practical work went

I18. In general, I am satisfied with the profe s sor’s support of the p r actical work

I19. I think I l earnt a lo t f r om doing this work and i t will be useful for my education

I20. Doing this work meant that thi s course required m ore effort than the othe r courses

Table 2.

Composition of population and sample size.

COURSE Degree No. students registeredNo. questionnaires Response rate

Management Accounting (MA) Business Management 104 48 46%

Computer S ystems Management ( CSM) Computer Engineeri ng 30 15 50%

Business Administrat io n and Organization of

Production (B A OP) Industrial Engineering 62 46 74%

Economics and Indust ri al Organization (EIO) Chemical Engineering 21 17 81%

Total 217 126 63%

tively). The Cronbach alpha for the whole scale is 0.858, which

means that the questionnaire is reliable as a whole. Finally, with

regard to the discriminant validity, for a 95% confidence inter-

val the correlation between each pair of latent variables does

not contain the value 1. The variables are not perfectly corre-

lated, so they each represent a distinct concept.

Results

The authors now look at the main results. They first analyze

the four dimensions defining the quality of the teaching innova-

tion in entrepreneurship, using the questionnaire described and

validated previously. They then evaluate the predisposition to

engage in entrepreneurship among the students participating in

the project in comparison to the population in general according

to data from GEM.

Implementation of Project

The results in Table 3 show that the students thought highly

about the aspects relating to the implementation of the project.

F. J. GARCÍA-RODRÍGUEZ ET AL.

More than 90% select the most favorable responses (agree or

strongly agree) in the case of items I1 (The professor informed

us at the beginning of the course how the project was going to

proceed) and I3 (The professor resolved any doubts we had

during the project clearly and quickly). The students are less

positive about item I2 (The initially established deadlines for

the project were met): 27% opt for the least favorable responses

(strongly disagree or disagree). Looking at the results by degree,

these students are studying the courses MA and BAOP, their

work teams have the most members and they provide the most

questionnaires (see Table 2).

With regard to this latter item, the authors should note that

the limitations due to the time available and the number of par-

ticipating students were an enormous obstacle to the organiza-

tion of the work groups, so that in some cases (MA and BAOP)

the professors had to establish big groups (average of 16 stu-

dents per group). This led to some loss of control on the part of

the professors and a reduced capacity of interaction or feedback

between professors and students and between students.

Results of Learning

Table 4 shows the proportions of students selecting each of

the five options in the questionnaire from strongly disagree to

strongly agree. In general, the students participating in the pro-

ject have a very positive opinion about the results of their

learning. This is particularly the case in the aspects to do with

understanding of contents (I4), knowledge of the business en-

vironment (I5), and application of learning to solving real

business problems (I6). At the same time, with regard to the

promotion of entrepreneurial spirit (I7), 44% of the students

manifest a clear predisposition toward entrepreneurship in the

future, with 28.8% and 15.2% responding agree and strongly

agree, respectively.

In contrast, it is striking to see that 23.8% of the students

have a very unfavorable opinion about the interdisciplinary

nature of the project (item I8: This project has enabled coopera-

tion with students from other degrees, which has given me a

new perspective in the solving of real problems). The large

group sizes and the separation between education centers (the

students participating in the project came from two different

university campuses) put enormous difficulties in the way of

the normal development of the work. The authors consider that

they are the main reasons for this result.

Fundamental Elements of Innovative Methodology

This dimension consists of aspects to do with: the organization

and methodology of the work; the team work; the teaching

materials; the use of ICT; and the evaluation of the learning. In

general, the respondents have a very favorable opinion about

the elements of the innovative methodology. Table 5 shows

that nearly 80% respond agree or strongly agree in all but two

cases. The respondents have a slightly less favorable opinion

about item I14 (The material recommended helped us carry out

the work and was easily accessible).

In addition, 32.8% of the students have a very unfavorable

opinion about item I13 (The teamwork with classmates from

other degrees was fruitful and stimulating). Looking at this

result, a connection exists with that of item I8 (This project has

enabled cooperation with students from other degrees, which

has given me a new perspective in the solving of real problems).

These two results point to potential improvements to the project

in future years.

Degree of Satisfaction

The students participating in the project are very satisfied

with the development of the business plan (I17), the support of

Table 3.

Evaluation of implementation of project (%).

Implementation of project Strongly

disagree Disagree Neither disagree

nor agree Agree Strongly

agree

I1. The professor informed us at the beginning of the course how the project was

going to proceed (objectives, content, methodology, evaluation, duration…) - 2.4 2.4 50.444.8

I2. The initially esta bli shed deadlines for the project were met 5.6 21.8 12.1 41.918.5

I3. The professor resolved any doubts we had during the project clearly and quickly - 3.2 6.4 40.849.6

Table 4.

Evaluation of results of learning ( % ).

Results of learni ng Strongly disagreeDisagreeNeither disagree

nor agree Agree Strongly

agree

I4. Participating in the project has helped improve my understandi n g of the

contents of this course 0.8 3.2 9.6 55.231.2

I5. After pa r t icipating in this project I n ow understa nd the business

environment better 0.8 3.2 12.0 56.028.0

I6. Participati ng in this project has allowed me to apply what I have learnt in this

course to t he business reality, orienting my knowledg e to the solution of real

problems - 4.8 20.0 51.224.0

I7. After participating in this project I am more likely to start a business at some

time in the future 5.6 12.8 37.6 28.815.2

I8. This project has enabled cooperation with student s from other degrees, which

has given m e a new perspe ctive in the solving of real problems 23.8 12.7 24.6 30.28.7

F. J. GARCÍA-RODRÍGUEZ ET AL.

Table 5.

Evaluation of Fundamental elements of innovative methodology (%).

Fundamental elements of innovative methodology Strongly disagreeDisagreeNeither disagree

nor agree Agree Strongly

agree

I9. The structure of the project was clear, logical and organized 0.8 6.4 14.4 61.6 16.8

I10. The professor gave a clear explanation of the concepts involved in the

development of the project - 6.5 13 56.9 23.6

I11. Working on the project has provided us with motivation and interest in the

course 1.6 2.5 13.1 64.8 18

I12. The tea mwork with classmates from my degree was fruitful and st imulating 1.6 5.6 12.9 44.4 35.5

I13. The tea mwork with classmates from ot her degrees was fruitful and

stimulating 32.8 19.7 30.3 13.9 3.3

I14. The material recomme nded (bibliogra phy, documentation, transparencies,

etc.) helped us carry out the work and was easily accessible 1.6 8.0 24.0 52.0 14.4

I15. The vir t u al classroom and the informa ti o n and communication technologies

were adequate and useful in doing the work 0.8 2.4 9.6 52.8 34.4

I16. I think the evaluation criteria and the weight of the proje ct in the total gr ade

for the course are ab o ut right 1.6 8.9 12.2 53.7 23.6

the professor (I18), and the utility of the knowledge acquired

(I19). This in spite of the fact that the majority consider that

carrying out the project meant that the course demanded more

effort then the rest of the courses (I20). Table 6 shows the main

results for the degree of satisfaction.

Aspect to Improve

The questionnaire included an open question asking the par-

ticipants for their opinion about how the project had gone and

for their suggestions for improvement. A large majority express

a very positive opinion about their participation in this project,

mainly because it has provided them with a new perspective on

the course, and brought the academic content closer to the pro-

fessional reality. But at the same time they mention a number of

difficulties and offer some suggestions for improvement:

1) Interaction between group members. The students stress

that the excessive group size made the teamwork more difficult;

some students did not get particularly involved because they

did not consider the course to be fundamental; different learn-

ing rhythms in the four courses involved; incompatibility of

class times between group members based in centers on differ-

ent university campuses.

2) Duration of project. The students argue that they had

barely enough time to do the work considering the objectives.

3) Weight of project. Students stress the need to increase the

weight of the project in the total grade for the course, given its

importance.

Participants’ Attitudes toward Entrepreneurship after

Finishing Project

The authors evaluated the students’ attitude and pre-disposi-

tion toward entrepreneurship and compared the results with

data from the Annual Report of the GEM on entrepreneurial

activity in Spain in 2009 (De la Vega et al., 2009). They con-

sidered two fundamental dimensions: the entrepreneurial activ-

ity and dynamic; and the motivation and capacity to engage in

entrepreneurial activity.

According to De la Vega et al. (2009), 5.7% of the Spanish

adult population is considering starting a new business in the

next three years, compared to 24% of the university students

participating in this project. In addition, 5.1% of the Spanish

active population have started or tried to start a new business in

the past 3.5 years, compared to 9% of the students in this study.

Consequently, the intention and the attitude toward entrepre-

neurship is significantly superior among the university students

participating in this study than in the active Spanish population

in general.

On the other hand, 51% of the Spanish adult population say

that they have the knowledge, skills and experience necessary

to start a new business venture, compared to 50% of the stu-

dents. But almost 17% of the general population perceive op-

portunities to start a business, compared to only 6% of the stu-

dents.

Conclusion, Limitations and Implications

The current work has described the methodology and the

main results of a project to test an innovative methodology for

teaching entrepreneurship. The methodology involves the

elaboration of business plans by multidisciplinary teams of

students studying for scientific-technical or business manage-

ment degrees at the University of La Laguna (Spain).

The authors can conclude from the results that the interdisci-

plinary elaboration of business plans is an excellent pedagogi-

cal tool in economics/business and scientific-technical degrees

in response to some of the challenges higher education is cur-

rently facing in the international context in general and in

Europe in particular. The authors would stress the potential of

such projects to promote entrepreneurial spirit among stu-

dents—a key element in the University’s progress toward ful-

filling its “third mission” on top of its traditional teaching and

research roles. In this respect, after participating in the project

the students manifest a greater long-term intention to start a

business than the general Spanish population.

At the same time, the methodology described seems to be

offering the students learning closer to the real world, a closer

contact with the business reality, and a greater involvement in

the solution of real problems.

In order to exploit the potential of this interdisciplinary ap-

proach it is essential to give the students the most individual-

ized attention possible. In this respect, the size of each group

882

F. J. GARCÍA-RODRÍGUEZ ET AL.

Table 6.

Evaluation of degree of satisfaction (%).

Degree of satisfaction Strongly disagreeDisagreeNeither disagree

nor agree Agree Strongly

agree

I17. In general, I am satisfied with how the practical work went - 3.2 11.2 61.6 24

I18. In general, I am satisfied with the profe s sor’s support of the p r actical work 0.8 2.4 4 56.5 36.3

I19. I think I l earnt a lo t f ro m doing this work and it will be useful for my

education 1.7 1.7 14.9 62.0 19.8

I20. Doing this work meant that this course requ i red more effort than the othe r

courses 2.4 4.8 30.4 33.6 28.8

and the number of groups that the professors must coordinate

are key variables, since the students’ motivation and their per-

ception of the quality of the process decline considerably as

group size or the number of groups grows. The process of

forming the interdisciplinary work teams must be done care-

fully, and the students of the different degrees must be offered

efficient tools, spaces and methods of contact, coordination and

communication. Otherwise much of the potential of the inter-

disciplinary work process may be lost.

It would be very interesting to deepen the analysis of the im-

pacts among the students of entrepreneurship teaching method-

ologies via the creation of interdisciplinary teams, like the one

described in the current work, and compare them with more

classical teaching methodologies.

It would also be useful to isolate the specific effect on the

students of participating in the project. One limitation of the

current work is that it cannot determine the consequences in

terms of entrepreneurial motivation that are attributable exclu-

sively to the project. The differences between the participating

students and the general population in terms of entrepreneurial

motivation could in part be due to the socio-economic context

or sociodemographic characteristics such as age or labor situa-

tion. Thus it would be interesting to carry out a longitudinal

analysis to compare the situation before and after the students’

participation in the project. This research project has been fo-

cused in students coming from specific universitary courses.

Therefore the methodology should be tested in the future with

students coming from other pedagogical contexts in order to

test the universal validation of the results.

REFERENCES

Athayde, R. (2009). Measuring enterprise potential in young people.

Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 33, 481-500.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00300.x

Audretsch, D. B. (2002). Entrepreneurship: A survey of the literature

for the European Commission, Enterprise Directorate General.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/library/enterprise-papers/pdf/ent

erprise _paper_14 _ 2 003.pdf

Béchard, J. P., & Grégoire, D. (2005). Entrepreneurship education

research revisited: The case of higher education. Academy of Man-

agement Learning & Education, 4, 22-43.

doi:10.5465/AMLE.2005.16132536

Commission of the European Communities (2003). Green paper: En-

trepreneurship in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

http://www.smallbusiness.outreach.ou.edu/teleconference/green_pap

er_final_en.pdf

Commission of the European Communities (2008). Survey of entrepre-

neurship in higher education. Brussels: European Comm ission .

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/files/support_measures/tra

ining_education/highedsurvey_en.pdf

Fayolle, A. (2007). Handbook of research in entrepreneurship educa-

tion: A general perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing,

Ltd.

Fiet, J. O. (2001). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory.

Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 101-117.

doi:10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00042-7

Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of con-

tingency-based business planning. Academy of Management Learn-

ing & Education, 3, 258-273. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2004.14242112

Katz, J. A. (2008). Fully mature but not fully legitimate: A different

perspective on the state of entrepreneurship education. Journal of

Small Business Management, 46, 550-566.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-627X.2008.00256.x

Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education:

Development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 29, 577-598. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00099.x

Mauri, T., Coll, C., & Onrubia, J. (2007). The evaluation of the quality

of university innovation processes. A constructivist perspective. Red

U. Revista De Docencia Universitaria, 1, 5-17.

Neck, H. M., & Greene, P. G. (2011). Entrepreneurship education:

Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Man-

agement, 49, 55-70. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627X.2010.00314.x

O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Morse, K. P., O’Gorman, C., & Roche, F.

(2007). Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university:

The Massachusetts institute of technology experience. R&D Man-

agement, 37, 1-16.

Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influenc-

ing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship:

Theory & Practice, 28, 129-144.

doi:10.1046/j.1540-6520.2003.00035.x

World Economic Forum (WEF) (2009). Educating the next wave of

entrepreneur. Geneva: WEF.

Zeithaml, C. P., & Rice, G. (1987). Entrepreneurship/small business

education in American universities. Journal of Small Business Man-

agement, 25, 44-50.

Zhou, C., & Luo, L. (2012). Group creativity in learning context: Under-

standing in a social-cultural framework and methodology. Creative

Education, 3, 392-399.