IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02312859.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Entrepreneurship education initiatives : does active learning really make difference?

Author

Listed:
  • Narjisse Lassas-Clerc

    (EM - EMLyon Business School)

  • Frédéric Delmar
  • Alain Fayolle

Abstract

Principal Topic: We propose and test a model of Entrepreneurship Education (EE) based on an educational evaluation research perspective (Chen, 1990, 2005; Patton, 1997) to assess the impact on the participants in terms of conative, cognitive and behavioral outcomes (Bloom's revised taxonomy of educational objectives, Krathwohl, 2002; Anderson, 2006; Kraiger et al., 1993). As we are interested in the antecedents to an individual's decision to become an entrepreneur, these dimensions are operationalized with respect to entrepreneurial cognitive literature (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994; Krueger & Brazeal, 1994; De Noble et al., 1999; Markman et al., 2002; Mitchell et al., 2007). Research has also recognized the importance of experience (Delmar & Shane, 2006) in entrepreneurship. Actual experience can link learning, thinking and doing. Field experiences will not only motivate students to learn current course materials but also increase their intrinsic interest in further learning. Thus, we pose three questions: Does active pedagogy provide greater improvement in perceived entrepreneurial competencies? How do entrepreneurial intentions vary when affected by experiential vs. cognitive learning? Is active pedagogy more efficient in terms of learning performance? Method: We applied a repeated survey design on a sample of 360 participants from two EE initiatives. We consider the first "EE1" as a cognitive learning program (focused on theory/knowledge acquisition) and the second "EE2" as experiential learning (students are asked to develop a business plan). Our key measures were extracted from the literature to the extent possible and we took into account students' performance. We used multivariate analysis of co-variance to determine if significant differences exist between the two programs on the three dimensions. We also used regression analysis to determine the impact on the students and compare regression coefficients. Results & Implications: Our preliminary results show greater improvement in perceived competencies following EE1 and more importantly after EE2. Entrepreneurial intentions decrease after EE1 and remain stable after EE2. Further refinements are being made to test our hypotheses within subgroups and also to test mediating and moderating effects. We conduct a piecewise regression to test and measure variation in the effects of the two initiatives in terms of entrepreneurial interests and intentions (conative components), perceived competencies (cognitive) and learning performance (behavioral).

Suggested Citation

  • Narjisse Lassas-Clerc & Frédéric Delmar & Alain Fayolle, 2008. "Entrepreneurship education initiatives : does active learning really make difference?," Post-Print hal-02312859, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02312859
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02312859. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.