1 EVALUATION ON ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION PROJECTS Anne Gustafsson-Pesonen, [email protected], training director, PhD student Pertti Kiuru, [email protected], senior researcher Aalto University School of Economics Small Business Center Lönnrotinkatu 7, 50100 Mikkeli and Arkadiankatu 28, 00100 Helsinki, Finland Abstract The aim of the paper is to briefly describe the results of the evaluation research of entrepreneurship education projects, later YKOONTI. The idea of YKOONTI is to gather up and evaluate the partly ESF-funded projects related to the theme of entrepreneurship education carried out in 2000-2010. The research problem during the YKOONTI is to evaluate qualitative and quantitative successes and permanent regional changes related to the theme of entrepreneurship education. The contribution of the study is based on the conducting of evaluation research on entrepreneurship education. The distribution of the writers was: Anne Gustafsson-Pesonen works as the project manager and researcher and she has written the, introduction, frame of the research, analyzing the qualitative data and summary of the prepared report. She has also responsible qualitative data collecting. Pertti Kiuru has worked as the other researcher of the project and he has collected the quantitative research results presented in the paper. The most central, preliminary results of the project are presented in NCSB2012. Key words Entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship pedagogy, evaluation research, evaluation, developing evaluation
Aalto University School of Economics Small Business Center Lönnrotinkatu 7, 50100 Mikkeli and Arkadiankatu 28, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
Abstract
The aim of the paper is to briefly describe the results of the evaluation research of entrepreneurship education projects, later YKOONTI. The idea of YKOONTI is to gather up and evaluate the partly ESF-funded projects related to the theme of entrepreneurship education carried out in 2000-2010. The research problem during the YKOONTI is to evaluate qualitative and quantitative successes and permanent regional changes related to the theme of entrepreneurship education.
The contribution of the study is based on the conducting of evaluation research on entrepreneurship education. The distribution of the writers was: Anne Gustafsson-Pesonen works as the project manager and researcher and she has written the, introduction, frame of the research, analyzing the qualitative data and summary of the prepared report. She has also responsible qualitative data collecting. Pertti Kiuru has worked as the other researcher of the project and he has collected the quantitative research results presented in the paper. The most central, preliminary results of the project are presented in NCSB2012.
BIOGRAPHY Anne Gustafsson-Pesonen is working in Aalto University School of Economics, Small Business Center as a Training Director. She is responsible for continuing education in AU SE SBC and she has been worked in SBC more than 10 years. SBC is specialized for support entrepreneurship orientation, academic entrepreneurship, new business creation, growth, management and leadership continuing education programmes, incubation services, applied research for SMEs. She is also doing her PhD studies in Aalto University and her field of research is: “Evaluating entrepreneurship education programmes”. She is member of Entre -research group in Aalto University. Director of the Entre -group is professor of entrepreneurship education Paula Kyrö. Pertti Kiuru is a senior advisor and researcher at Small Business Center in Aalto University School of Economics. He has nearly 40 years of experience in executing different, wide-ranging, know-how demanding research activities. His special know-how is entrepreneurship: growth of firms, especially start-ups as well as entrepreneurship education.
3
INTRODUCTION
The aim of the paper is to briefly describe the results of the evaluation research of entrepreneurship education projects, later YKOONTI. The idea of YKOONTI is to gather up and evaluate the partly ESF-funded projects related to the theme of entrepreneurship education carried out in 2000-2010. The research problem during the YKOONTI is to evaluate qualitative and quantitative successes and permanent regional changes related to the theme of entrepreneurship education. The reason for the YKOONTI is to create a model and recommendations for the linking of entrepreneurship education to all school levels, to teacher training and to give recommendations for the future projects of entrepreneurship education. The far-reaching aim is to find new innovative entrepreneurial pedagogic for the use of teachers and educators.
The framework of questionnaire YKOONTI is based on the ideas presented by Alain Gibb (2005b) Entrepreneurial Behaviours, Attributes and Skills. Gibb has earlier (1993) said entrepreneurship education and whole term entrepreneurship should not be in schools business studies but entrepreneurship should be the ability to operate confidently in situations of uncertainty. There are several reasons for the project evaluation. For example M. Q. Patton (1982, 1997, 2002, 2004) has said, if evaluation is not done, success cannot be distinguished from failure. If success or failure is not pointed out, we cannot learn from them, either. If the results are not evaluated and monitored accurately, it is difficult to achieve more wide-ranging support for the measures. In this research we also wanted to use developing evaluation method. The defining of the concept of developing evaluation is difficult because it is so multi-faceted. At its most extensive, the concept of developing evaluation refers to evaluation multiform in its methods, emphasizing development being bonding and participatory. At its narrowest, the concept refers to the perspective on evaluation included in the development process of the activity. (Patton 1997)
The YKOONTI project is carried out from September 2010 to October 2012. The data were collected a) a survey in the webropol environment in February-May 2011(whole study group was 1160 and N=471) and b) theme interviews on the phone (N = 72) in April-June 2011. The study population consisted of project players, target- and interest groups. Developing evaluation workshops there were three on March 2010, May 2011 and December 2012.
At Commission level the briefing for the evaluation of EU projects goes like this: “The function of evaluation is to analyze how well the project answers the need it is carried out for, in other words to evaluate the results and effects of the project. The execution of the evaluation depends, among other things, at which stage evaluation is done, and who does the evaluating. The aim of evaluation is also to yield information for the planning of the project, to assist in the efficient distribution of resources and to improve the quality of the project. (European Commission 2004, 9.)
The paper is containing the four chapters. After the introduction the first chapter there is frame of the research focusing on evaluation on entrepreneurship education projects. At the chapter two there are opened the methods and results and at the end of the paper there is summary and recommendations for the continuing research.
The contribution of the study is based on the conducting of evaluation research. The distribution of the writers was: Anne Gustafsson-Pesonen works as the project manager and has written the framework, introduction, analyzing the qualitative data and summary of the prepared report. Pertti Kiuru has worked as the researcher of the project and has written the quantitative research results in the report.
4
FRAME OF THE RESEARCH: EVALUATION ON ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION PROJECTS
It has been said the meaning of evaluation it is the defining of the value of the object or activity under examination, evaluative and interpretative analysis. Aims, demands and the criterion to which the issue under evaluation is compared, are in a central position. The meaning of evaluation is to yield diverse information about the value, strengths and areas of improvement of the activity, and its aim is the development of the activity under evaluation. (New Directions in Educational Evaluation 2004-2007, p. 52-53)
Generally evaluation means the defining of the value of phenomena and activity based on the publicly expressed criteria, the proportioning of it to the grounds of evaluation (for example House 1993, 4; House & Howe 1999). As Raivola (2000a, 65-66) states, “the task of evaluation is to yield systematic information, into which value- and benefit conclusions are attached so that the information can be used to direct a social activity so that it can even better and more efficiently reach the goals set for it.” The utilization of evaluation information is a part of the effectiveness of the evaluation of a project and education. In education effectiveness usually means the positive success of the training and the fulfillment of its objectives and tasks, pursued by activity (Raivola 2000b, 12).
Evaluation research means that it is the systematic use of scientific research processes for the conceptualization of the research subject, the evaluation of planning, realization and usefulness. More extensively defined, information for decision-making is obtained by evaluation research. The first definition outlines the success of the interventions of evaluation research to evaluation and at its most typical is related to separate experiment- and development projects. The latter definition allows for more space to examine what happens in the project and its parts. As a distinction to the general concept of research, ranking on grounds of something is a part of evaluation research. (New Directions in Educational Evaluation 2004-2007, p. 52-53)
The presenting of the EU project activity and results is important for both the further development of project activity and the securing of the citizens’ information access and the transparency of the activity. Basic information is published of all the projects of the regional competitiveness and employment goal programs, funded by the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund, with the help of the EURA 2007 data system in the address http://www.rakennerahastot.fi/.
Evaluation and its effects can be examined on different time ranges, according to whether it concentrates on the ex nunc, ex ante or ex post evaluation (Evaluating EU Expenditure Programmes 1997). We could say that project evaluation is mainly analysis based on Ex post evaluation, and it is usually done some time after the project has ended. Ex post evaluation examines the project as a whole and concentrates especially on the results, effectiveness and efficiency of the project. Ex post evaluation pays attention also to the permanence of the results and to the question of which factors have led to successes and/or failures. (European Commission 2004, 13.)
Ex post evaluation examines the terminated project, but it can have a significant role also in the preparation of follow-up projects to be done in the future. (Keränen 2003, 11.) Ex post evaluation can thus be seen also as a learning- and teaching process to improve future activity. At best, the organization having carried out the project can also learn from evaluation, because it yields generally applicable information that can be utilized also by other quarters planning or carrying out similar projects. So, by ex post evaluation also the transferring of good practices to more extensive use is ensured. (Keränen 1999, 10.)
5
Evaluation can also be directed at effectiveness and we can strive to find out what kinds of effects the evaluations have had on decision-making and the continuing development process. According to Raivola (2000a, 93), the four main areas of evaluation are often considered in connection with evaluation: 1) usefulness, 2) feasibility and applicability, 3) poetic justice and 4) accuracy standards. The utilization of evaluation information can be mirrored also in relation to future needs or with what the advantage gained from the results is in relation to the amount of resources used. According to Mark, Henry & Julnes (2000, 47), instead of utilization, the examination should primarily concentrate on the following viewpoints: -How well has the evaluator been able to define what information best supports social welfare and development? -How high-quality is the information obtained? -How successfully have the results been spread to the relevant quarters, organizations, those involved in evaluation and to publicity? When opening the context of entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial pedagogy we have to almost every situation refer Alain Gibb, who is the best-known researcher of entrepreneurship education. He has done research on entrepreneurship education since 1985. Gibb (1993) said entrepreneurship education and whole term entrepreneurship should not be in schools business studies but entrepreneurship should be the ability to operate confidently in situations of uncertainty. Very often entrepreneurial pedagogy is still seen as the part of business studies and teaching entrepreneurship is often used business terminology and methods. This is one significant problem when talking entrepreneurial pedagogy as for example Kajanto, Kyrö & Saarelainen (2001), Fayolle & Gailly (2008, 569-593) have been said.
Entrepreneurial pedagogy term began to entrepreneurship education research in the 1990s (Young & Sexton 1997; Deakins & Freel 1998). After that several researchers of entrepreneurship education has been studied the entrepreneurial pedagogy and its expression (Rae & Carswell 2001; Rae 2000; Rae 2004a, Rae 2004b, Politis 2005; Harrison & Leitch 2005; Diensberg 2008; Gibb 2005a, Fayolle 2007, Kyrö & Carrier 2005). For example Rae and Carswell (2001) have been said human being is the most important instrument when talking entrepreneurship. Diensberg (2008) argues that the growth of the individualism is the best way of entrepreneurial pedagogy. He has also said it is important forget the classroom teaching. Gibb (2005a) said that entrepreneurial pedagogy grows from the essence of entrepreneurship. He argues (2005b) that entrepreneurial pedagogy is more action learning than only listening. It is experimental learning, team work and learning by doing. Fayolle (2007, 60) agrees with Gibb, learning by doing is the best practice of entrepreneurship. Kyrö and Carrier (2005, 25) argues that teachers should be able to offer for students an environment where they can try to feelings, see, communicate and learn how to organize things.
The questionnaire for YKOONTI survey has been built up according the Gibbs’ (2005b) Entrepreneurial Behaviours, Attributes and Skills frame. See picture 1, Entrepreneurial Behaviours, Attributes and Skills by Alain Gibb 2005.
6
Picture 1: Entrepreneurial Behaviours, Attributes and Skills by Alain Gibb, 2005.
We also refer the guidelines of entrepreneurship education formulated by the Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture 2009. In the publication (the Ministry of Education 2009; 7), the common will 2015 of entrepreneurship education has been entered follows. The aim of the Ministry of Education is to strengthen the entrepreneurial attitude of individuals and to increase the attractiveness of entrepreneurship as a career choice. The strengthening of entrepreneurship encompasses the whole educational system. In the sphere of authority of the Ministry of Education the aims of entrepreneurship education are related to the developing of a participating and active citizenship, the strengthening of creativity and innovation in education, the developing of nationally and regionally positive entrepreneurial culture and attitudinal atmosphere during leisure time and in working life, the starting of new entrepreneurship, the developing of working entrepreneurs and their enterprises and the supporting of owner changes.
It has been said in the guidelines (2009; 7) that the network cooperation of the different players of entrepreneurship education has been strengthened at international, national, regional and local levels. The emphasis of the activities related to the development of entrepreneurship education is regionally- and locally-based. The activity of the regional resource centers has become established and is nationally extensive. Entrepreneurship education is included in the renewing basics of the curricula more strongly than today. It is also a part of the curricula of schools and educational institutions more intensely than today. Entrepreneurship education has been included in the strategies and development plans of the school- and business system of municipalities more strongly than today.
THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY - THE YKOONTI –PROJECT EVALUATION
For the YKOONTI project survey there were the last two structural fund phases were listed. The steering group decided how the projects taken along would be chosen. 56 projects were chosen along, and their contact persons were sent a request to supply the email addresses of the employees of the project, the representatives of the target group, the representatives of the instruction group and the representatives of the interest groups. The addresses were received from 30 projects,
7
altogether 1374 addresses, 1160 of which proved functioning. Appendix 1 presents the acquisition of answers by projects. Thematic interviews were done with 72 persons. These interviews were the same people how answered the webropol survey.
The number of respondents increased after two reminder rounds to N471 and the answering percentage was over 40 %. The acquisition of answers can thus be considered rather good.
Background of the respondents of the YKOONTI project survey
In the analyzing of the results background variables were used, some of which were related to the respondent’s project and some to the respondent themselves. In appendix 2 the division of answers has been presented according to the background variables used in the survey. Also a single project was used as a background variable, in which case the projects with at least three answers were taken along.
Project- and respondent-specific background variables describe the projects in a versatile way. In addition to them, separate projects were used as background variables (projects that got more than three answers). The answers had significant differences as for both project- and respondent-specific background variables and separate projects.
Results of the project survey are presented in the following, based on the stressed medians calculated from the distribution of answers attained for each question/question group. The most significant differences discovered in the medians have been examined by project- and respondent-specific background variables and projects. Significance was tested by comparing the median of each background variable (for example “large national projects” or “representative of project staff”) or the answers of a separate project with the background variable in question or with answers not belonging to the project. The test method was the “Independent Samples T Test”. The significance levels were taken from the row with the supposition that groups that are compared with each other have different variances. The significance limits (Sig.2-tailed) were:
Extremely significant*** (0,000-0,001) Significant** (0,002-0,004) Somewhat significant* (0,005-0,009) PROPOSITION: The importance and fulfillment of the goals In the survey the respondents were presented with eight goals, the importance and fulfillment of which they were asked to evaluate in relation to the project in question.
In Appendix 3 we have examined by projects which goal has been considered the most important and which goal has been seen to have been fulfilled best. The projects were divided in relation to the goal they considered the most important so that “the development of the pedagogic operations models of entrepreneurship education” and “the development of the learning environment to guide the activity responsibly/in an entrepreneurial way” were both considered the most important by seven projects. Other objectives related to the contents of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education were considered the most important by altogether seven projects, too. Of the objectives related to the direct supporting/developing of entrepreneurship/enterprises “the starting of new business” and “the developing of the know-how of operative entrepreneurs and enterprises” were both considered the most important by one project.
Ten projects considered ”the development of the pedagogic operations models of entrepreneurship education” the best fulfilled goal. “The development of the learning environment to guide the activity responsibly/in an entrepreneurial way” was considered the best fulfilled by eight projects.
8
Other goals related to the contents of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education were considered best fulfilled by altogether four projects. Of the goals related to the direct supporting/developing of entrepreneurship/enterprises “the developing of the know-how of operative entrepreneurs and enterprises” was considered the best fulfilled by one project. Ten of the projects thought that the project they considered the most important had also been fulfilled best.
PROPOSITION: Obstacles
According to picture 2 it is quite common that respondents have met obstacles in organization or region when they have tried to do things new entrepreneurial way, more than 50% of respondents said they have met some obstacles.
Picture 2: Have you met any obstacles?
It is possible to find four main thematic obstacles which could see at picture 3, Main obstacles.
9
Picture 3: Main obstacles
When we opened the main obstacles it could be clearly found teachers do not get support an entrepreneurial approach to link these things their teaching. Rectors and directors wanted new entrepreneurial teaching methods to link on teaching but they couldn’t get to the teachers almost any kind of resources (money, time or flexibility). It is also quite common that cooperation together teachers or subjects are very difficult. Very often teachers think “I have done things before alone why I should do things together other teachers or other subjects”. Collaboration, Information sharing and learning from each other is difficult. Teachers also reported that the cooperation between different subjects does not work. Entrepreneurship is seen remains too often business studies and only to start up own business. Teachers' payroll system does not support the entrepreneurial learning. Salary should be based on overall working hours and the total remuneration based, not based on the number of teaching hours salaries.
PROPOSITION: Life after the project
The high answer medians of the propositions related to life after the project show that many important issues have still stayed strongly alive even after the project (table 1). “The representatives of project staff” thought so significantly more than average. Instead, the representatives of the target group and partly also those of the instruction group are much more careful in this respect. The female and male respondents constitute an interesting pair when we examine “new kinds of pedagogic models as part of the operational culture of the school”. We have to note that project-specific background variables did not have significant differences. Differences were found only in respondent-specific background variables and with one proposition in a separate project.
10
Table 1. Propositions related to life after the project and the extremely significant deviations by background variables and projects.
Agrees significantly more Disagrees significantly more Entrepreneurship education has been included in the curricula of my school (4,13)
Growth into entrepreneurship***
Representative of the instruction group***
The network cooperation of the actors will strengthen/has strengthened (4,07)
Representative of project staff***
Representative of the target group***
The network cooperation of the actors is still continuing (3.95)
Representative of project staff***
Representative of the target group***
New kinds of pedagogic models are a part of our school’s operational culture (3,79)
Female respondent*** Male respondent***
Entrepreneurship education is a part of the strategies and development plans of the school- and industrial and commercial activity of municipalities (3,71)
Regional entrepreneurship education activity will/has become established (3,61)
Representative of project staff***
After each proposition the emphasized answer medians are in brackets. The numbering of the optional answers has been used as the emphases:
PROPOSITION: The development of entrepreneurial readiness and skills
The fairly high answer medians of the propositions related to the development of entrepreneurial readiness and skills tell us that the respondents think the projects they have evaluated support them fairly well (appendix 4). Significant differences as for the answers merely emerged with respondent-specific background variables and separate projects. The differences between project-specific background variables remained fairly insignificant, apart from a few exceptions.
After each proposition the emphasized answer medians are in brackets. The numbering of the optional answers has been used as the emphases:
The “representatives of project staff” and female respondents and those from the projects “HOPE” and “YPEDA” usually agreed significantly more than average with these propositions. The “representatives of the instruction group”, “representatives of an interest group” and male respondents and those from the project “the measurement tool of entrepreneurship education”, in turn, disagreed significantly more than average.
11
PROPOSITION: The development of entrepreneurship pedagogic know-how
The high answer medians related to also entrepreneurship pedagogic know-how tell us that the results of the projects have been fairly successful also in this respect (Appendix 5).
After each proposition the emphasized answer medians are in brackets. The numbering of the optional answers has been used as the emphases:
Usually “the representatives of project staff, “the representatives of the target group” and female respondents agreed significantly more than average with these propositions. “The representatives of the instruction group”, “the representatives of an interest group” and male respondents, in turn, disagreed significantly more than average.
New learning methods
We could find new entrepreneurial learning methods used during the projects. And It could be said the main idea on new entrepreneurial learning methods tested in the projects were to do things new encouraging way like you could see picture 4, New entrepreneurial learning methods. It can be said that the tested methods are entrepreneurial learning methods early this paper mentioned (see the frame of reference).
Picture 4: New Entrepreneurial learning methods.
12
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
It can be already at this point raise that the Entrepreneurship Education projects valued were successful. The target group for our survey was the project staff, stage holders, teachers and students how were participated on the projects actions. The idea of YKOONTI survey was to gather up and evaluate the partly ESF-funded projects related to the theme of entrepreneurship education carried out in 2000-2010. The research problem during the YKOONTI is to evaluate qualitative and quantitative successes and permanent regional changes in entrepreneurship education. The reason for the YKOONTI is to create a model and recommendations for the linking of entrepreneurship education to all school levels, to teacher training and to give recommendations for the future projects of entrepreneurship education. The far-reaching aim is to find new innovative entrepreneurial pedagogic for the use of teachers and educators.
We found the projects were help the participants fulfill the goals which are important talking entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial learning. The common denominator in all the projects appears to be novel and unprecedented openings made, courage and encouragement. Unfortunate it is still had to far contend with the same problems as previously. The real support that teaching staff needs for their work is still remain very low and on the other hand still among the teaching staff are people who see entrepreneurship education is too complicated and too time-consuming. The reality is that the situation would be just the opposite. When we asked the target group open the life after the project time we could rise up the projects aims are quite well alive. Extremely important point in YKOONTI survey was to open if the project helped the target group develop entrepreneurial readiness and skills and also if there was during the projects time tested new entrepreneurial learning methods. Luckily for both question the answer was clearly yes. It could be confirm the entrepreneurial learning and entrepreneurial pedagogy methods opened at the beginning at the paper really works when wanted to support entrepreneurial thinking and action in school context.
Gustafsson-Pesonen & Remes (2012) have found previous studies the similar results when assessing the training of entrepreneurship education when evaluating entrepreneurship education program in one vocational school. In this is survey they found it is very common teachers thinking and action change when using entrepreneurial pedagogy and they really could use new entrepreneurial learning methods in the subjects. The project evaluation on entrepreneurship education YKOONTI situation is of course different, because it is a larger number of organizations and the evaluation of many projects while Gustafsson-Pesonen & Remes (2012) evaluate one program in one school. In any way we could assure survey YKOONTI prove it is possible change and affect on entrepreneurial learning and entrepreneurship education in school context.
The compilation and evaluation on entrepreneurship education projects still continues. In the first phase we have briefly presented the most urgent results in this paper and the analyzing of the data and the scientific examination will hence continue and deepen. We will still to gather recommendations for teacher education and for future projects as well as to open the methods used more precise level. We are also collect data about what kind of recommendations entrepreneurs have for entrepreneurship education. Question is: What kind of training and learning methods should be that it supports the view of entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial orientation.
The final paper of the project, in writing and as an internet publication, will be ready at the October 2012.
13
REFERENCES
Deakins, D. & Freel, M., 1998. Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs. The Learning Organization. Vol 5(3): 144-155.
Diensberg, C. 2008. Towards Entrepreneurial Regions: Ten propositions for succesfull Entrepreneurship Promotion and Education. Rostock Working Papers on Economic and Human Resource development. 29. Rostock: Universität Rostock, HIE-Ro, 1-8.
European Commission, Directorate‐General for the Budget (2004): Evaluating EU activities: A practical guide for the Commission services. http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/publications/financial_pub/eval_activities_en.pdf
Evaluating EU Expenditure Programmes: A Guide. 1997. Ex post and Intermediate Evaluation Directorate- General XIX – Budgets, European Commission. European Commission. First edition.
Fayolle, A., 2007. Entrepreneurship and New Venture Creation: The Dynamic of Entrepreneurial Process. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Fayolle, A. & Gailly, B., 2008. From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education. Journal of European Industrial Training. Vol. 32 Iss: 7, pp.569 – 593
Gibb, A., 1993. The Enterprise Culture and Education. International Small Business Journal. 11 (3), pp.11-34.
Gibb, A., 2005a. Towards the Entrepreneurial University. Entrepreneurship education as a lever for change. National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship. Policy paper. #3. May 22/2005, pp.1-46.
Gibb, A., 2005b. The future of entrepreneurship education – Determining the basis for coherent policy and practice. In: P. Kyrö & C. Carrier. ed. 2005. The Dynamics of Learning Entrepreneurship in cross-Cultural University Context. University of Tampere, research Center for Vocational and Professional education: Hämeenlinna, pp. 44-62.
Gustafsson-Pesonen, A. & Remes, L., 2012. Evaluation of entrepreneurial development coaching: changing the Teachers’ thinking and action on entrepreneurship. Annals of Innovation & Entrepreneurship 2012, 3: 17211 - DOI: 10.3402/aie.v3i0.17211
Harrison, R.T. & Leitch, C.M., 2005. Entrepreneurial Learning: Researching the Interface Between Learning and the Entrepreneurial Context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Vol. 29(4): pp. 351-371.
House, E. 1993. Professional evaluation. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.
House, E. & Howe, K. 1999. Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Kajanto, A., Kyrö, P. & Saarelainen, M., 2001. Yrittäjyyskoulutuksen mallintaja. Aikuiskasvatus 2/2001: pp 173-173.
Keränen, H., 2003. Itsearviointi työkirja toimintaryhmien käyttöön. http://www.tekes.fi/ohjelmat/arviointi/Itsearviointityokirja.pdf
Keränen, R., 1999. Lyhyt johdatus hankearviointiin – Sisäinen ja ulkoinen arviointi. Suomen aluetutkimus FAR, Selvityksiä: 18. http://www.aluekehityssaatio.fi/far/?Selvityksi%E4_‐julkaisusarja
14
Kyrö, P., 2005. Entrepreneurial learning in the cross-cultural context challenges previous learning paradigms. In: P. Kyrö & C. Carrier. ed. 2005. The Dynamics of Learning Entrepreneurship in cross-Cultural University Context. University of Tampere, research Center for Vocational and Professional education: Hämeenlinna, pp. 68-102.
Mark, M., Henry, G. & Julnes, G. 2000. Evaluation. An integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
New Directions in Educational Evaluation. 2004. Arviointiohjelma 2004–2007. Koulutuksen arviointineuvoston julkaisuja 1. Jyväskylä.
Opetusministeriö, (OPM). (2009). Yrittäjyyskasvatuksen suuntaviivat. Opetusministeriön julkaisuja 7:2009. Sähköinen internetlähde: http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Julkaisut/2009/Yrittajyyskasvatuksensuuntaviivat.html?lang=fi. Patton, M. Q. 1982. Practical evaluation. Beverly Hills: Sage. Patton, M. Q. 1997. Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. Third revised edition. London: Sage Publication.
Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. London: Sage Publications.
Patton, M. Q. 2004. The roots of utilization-focused evaluation. Teoksessa M. Alkin Tracing theorists ´ views and influences. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Politis, D., 2005. The Process of Entrepreneurial Learning: A Conceptual Framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Vol. 29(4) pp. 399-424.
Rae, D., 2000. Understanding entrepreneurial learning: a question of how? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 6 (3). pp. 145 – 159.
Rae. D., 2004a. Practical Theories from Entrepreneurs’ Stories: discursive approaches to entrepreneurial learning. Journal of Business and Enterprose Development. Vol. 11(2). pp. 195-202.
Rae, D., 2004b. Entrepreneurial learning: A Practical Model from the Creative Industries. Education + Training. Vol 46(8/9). pp. 492-500.
Rae, D., 2005. Entrepreneurial learning: a narrative-based conceptual model. Journal of Small Business and Eterprise Development. Vol 12(3). pp. 323-335.
Rae,D. & Carswell, M., 2001. Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurial learning. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. Vol. 8(2). pp. 150-158.
Raivola, R. 2000a. Tehoa vai laatua koulutukseen? Helsinki: WSOY.
Raivola, R. 2000b. Vaikuttavuutta koulutukseen. Suomen akatemian koulutuksen vaikuttavuusohjelman tutkimuksia. Helsinki: Edita.
Young, J. & Sexton, D., 1997. Entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework. Journal of Entreprising Culture. Vol. 5 (3).pp. 223-248.
15
Appendix 1. The acquisition of the answers of the Ykoonti project survey.
Population
Answers
Project (unofficial translation in English) Pieces %
1. KummiWiki =GodparentWiki 6 5 83,3 %
2. Kartta kouraan ja matka yrittäjyyteen =Grab a map and make a trip to entrepreneurship 15 12 80,0 %
5. Yrittävän elämisen malli =Model of entrepreneurial life 12 8 66,7 %
6. Y -love: Yrittäjyyslukioverkosto, Jyväskylän seudun yrittäjyyslukio ja Y4 –yrittäjyyslukio =Y –love: Entrepreneurship upper secondary school network, the Jyväskylä region entrepreneurship upper secondary school and Y4 –entrepreneurship upper secondary school 3 2 66,7 % 7. Ykä Yritteliäs = Ykä the Enterpreneur 44 25 56,8 % 8. Työssäoppijasta yrittäjäksi BUSINESS –TOP = From learner at work to entrepreneur BUSINESS-TOP 11 6 54,5 %
9. Lupa yrittää =License for entrepreneurship 13 7 53,8 %
10. SaTaVa = SaTaVa 28 14 50,0 %
11. Innovaatio- ja yrittäjyyskeskus, Innova = Innovation- and entrepreneurship center, Innova 18 9 50,0 % 12. YRTTI -KESKUS Hyvinvointialojen yrittäjyyden kehittämishanke = YRTTI-CENTER Development project of entrepreneurship in the fields of welfare 6 3 50,0 %
13. HOPE – yrittäjyyskasvatushanke =HOPE –entrepreneurship education project 96 45 46,9 % 14. FIRMA - yrittäjyyteen valmentaminen toisella asteella = FIRMA – training for entrepreneurship on the upper secondary level 62 28 45,2 %
15. Kasvu yrittäjyyteen = Growing into entrepreneurship 132 58 43,9 %
16. Yrittämällä eteenpäin = Forward with enterprise 61 26 42,6 %
17. Nuori Yrittäjyys: Yrittäjyyskasvatuksen polku ja Nuori yrittäjyys nousuun = Young Entrepreneurship: The path of entrepreneurship education and Young entrepreneurship up 41 17 41,5 %
18. YRITÄ = YRITA 5 2 40,0 %
19. Innoakatemia = Innoacademy 8 3 37,5 % 20. YVI -yrittäjyyskasvatuksen virtuaalinen oppimisympäristö = YVI –a virtual learning environment of entrepreneurship education 19 7 36,8 % 21. LYYTI - löydä oma yrittäjyytesi, Pohjois-Karjalan hanke = LYYTI –find your own entrepreneurship, a North Karelian project 19 7 36,8 %
22. YES yrittäjyyskasvatuskeskus = YES entrepreneurship education center 156 55 35,3 % 23. Yrittäjyyskoulutuksen uudet opetusmenetelmät (YPEDA) = The new teaching methods of entrepreneurship training (YPEDA) 23 8 34,8 %
24. Kädet 007 = Hands 007 67 23 34,3 %
25. Ammattiosaajasta yrittäjäksi = From professional to entrepreneur 59 20 33,9 % 26. Ideasta liiketoiminnaksi - aloittavan yritystoiminnan tukeminen: Wäläkky Keski-Savon Uusyrityskeskus = From idea to business – supporting beginning entrepreneurship: Wäläkky Central Savo New Business Center 10 3 30,0 % 27. Strategialähtöinen liiketoimintaosaamisen kehittäminen = Strategy-based development of business know-how 25 7 28,0 %
28. Yrittäjyyden portaat = The steps for entrepreneurship 5 1 20,0 % 29. Kulttuuriyrittäjyys, osaamisen edistäminen Keski-Pohjanmaalla = Cultural entrepreneurship, advancing know-how in Central Ostrobothnia 5 1 20,0 % 30. Oppilaitosten yrittäjyyskoulutuksen kehittämishanke (YTY) = Development project of the entrepreneurship training of educational institutions (YTY) 145 22 15,2 %
TOTAL 1160 471 40,6 %
16
Appendix 2. The division of the answers of the Ykoonti project survey according to the background variables.
Large (>500.000 euros) nationwide projects 6 215 46
Large (>500.000 euros) provincial and local projects 11 174 37
Small (<500.000 euros) provincial and local projects 13 82 17
The realization time of the project
Projects of the previous program phase 14 170 36
Terminated projects of the present program phase 5 70 15
Continuing projects of the present program phase 11 231 49
The location area of the realizer of the project
Southern Finland 9 156 33
Western Finland 8 174 37
Eastern Finland 9 128 27
Northern Finland 4 13 3
RESPONDENT-SPECIFIC BACKGROUND VARIABLES
Respondent’s sex
Female - 279 59
Male - 192 41
Respondent’s age
Under 35 - 45 10
35-44 - 146 31
45-54 - 157 33
55- - 117 25
Not known - 6 1
Respondent’s role in the project
Representative of the project staff (project manager/other employee) - 65 14
Representative of the target group (teacher/pupil) - 209 44
Representative of the instruction group - 98 21
Representative of an interest group - 99 21
17
Appendix 3. The goals considered the most important and best fulfilled by project according to the answers of the Ykoonti project survey (there are 23 projects that received more than three answers in the statistics).
The goal that was fulfilled best
The goal that was considered the most important
Dev
elop
ing
part
icip
atin
g an
d ac
tive
ci
tize
nshi
p (2
)
Str
engt
heni
ng o
f cr
eati
vity
and
in
nova
tion
(1)
Dev
eleo
ping
of
the
peda
gogi
c op
erat
ions
m
odel
s of
en
trep
rene
ushi
p ed
ucat
ion
(10)
Dev
elop
ing
of
nati
onal
ly a
nd
regi
onal
ly p
osit
ive
entr
epre
neur
ship
cul
ture
an
d at
titu
dina
l cli
mat
e (1
)
Sta
rtin
g of
new
en
trep
rene
ursh
ip (
-)
Dev
elop
ing
of k
now
-ho
w o
f pr
acti
cing
en
trep
rene
urs
and
ente
rpri
ses
(1)
Sup
port
ing
of o
wne
r ch
ange
(-)
Dev
elop
ing
of le
arni
ng
envi
ronm
ent t
o gu
ide
the
acti
vity
re
spon
sibi
lity
in a
n en
trep
rene
uria
l way
(8)
Developing participating and active citizenship (2)
LYYTI Young entrepreneurship
Strengthening of creativity and innovation (1)
From professional to entrepreneur
Developing of the pedagogic operations models of entrepreneurship education (10)
YPEDA Measurement tool YES Forward with entrepreneurship Unbroken path FIRMA
HOPE Growth into entrepreneurship License for entrepreneurship SaTaVa
Developing of nationally and regionally positive entrepreneurship culture and attitudinal climate (1)
Ykä Enterprising
Starting of new entrepreneurship (-)
Developing of the know-how of practicing entrepreneurs and enterprises (1)
Strategy-based
Supporting of owner changes (-)
Developing of the learning environment to guide the activity responsibly/in an entrepreneurial way (8)
YVI YTY Grab a map
Model for entrepreneurial living Hands 007
Innova BUSINESS TOP GodparentWiki
18
Appendix 4. Propositions related to the development of entrepreneurial readiness and skills and the extremely significant deviations by background variables and projects.
Agree significantly more Disagree significantly more My will for experimenting with new operations models has increased (3,92)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff*** HOPE*** YPEDA***
Large provincial and local projects*** Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
I am yet more eager to seize the opportunity (3,86)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff*** HOPE***
Large provincial and local projects*** Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group***
Marketing- and sales know-how are preparedness for working life (3,81)
Terminated projects of the present program phase*** Representative of project staff***
My networking skills have developed (3,76)
Representative of project staff***
I have got tools for creative problem solving (3,70)
Representative of project staff*** Representative of the target group*** HOPE*** YPEDA***
Large provincial and local projects*** Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
My skills of making proposals have developed (3,63)
Representative of project staff*** HOPE***
Representative of an interest group***
My tolerance of uncertainty has improved (3,57)
Representative of project staff*** HOPE***
Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
My comprehensive leadership know-how of projects, business and situations has developed (3,55)
Representative of project staff***
I understand the importance of the management of the entity of business (3,51)
Terminated projects of the present program phase***
Measurement tool of entrepreneurship education*** Model for entrepreneurial life***
My business know-how skills have developed (3,17)
Representative of project staff***
My skills of governing a business plan have developed (3,16)
Representative of an interest group*** Measurement tool of entrepreneurship education***
I can interpret a profit and loss account and balance (3,13)
Respondent’s age 55-*** From professional to entrepreneur***
19
Appendix 5. The propositions related to the development of entrepreneurship pedagogic know-how and the extremely significant deviations by background variables and projects.
Agrees significantly more Disagrees significantly more I let the students use their initiative (4,01)
Female respondent*** Representative of the target group***
Large provincial and local projects*** Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
I allow myself and my students to fail (3,94)
Representative of the target group***
Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
I trust the students to act responsibly (3,87)
Representative of project staff***
Representative of the instruction group***
My teaching and instruction supports the development of the social networks of the learner/student (3,83)
Representative of the target group***
Representative of the instruction group***
New learning environments supporting entrepreneurship education have been tested and taken into active use (3,83)
Representative of project staff***
I have adopted new methods into my teaching (3,79)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff*** Representative of the target group***
Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
I use methods that develop the attentiveness to perceive and create possibilities in my teaching (3,77)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff Representative of the target group***
Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group*** Representative of an interest group***
I have learnt to survive in uncertainty (3,66)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff
Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group***
My teaching material supports entrepreneurial behavior (3,66)
Representative of project staff*** YPEDA*** Representative of the instruction group***
My risk management and evaluation skills have improved (3,58)
Female respondent*** Representative of project staff
Male respondent*** Representative of the instruction group***
My teaching material has been renewed (3,52)
Projects of the previous program phase*** Female respondent*** Representative of project staff
