University of Hertfordshire

Standard

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{690e93a4370f4c6fbfaec5c3751ff0f7,
title = "We need to talk about competitions:: Initiating a boundary-spanning, realist inspired study on entrepreneurship education’s signature practice.",
abstract = "Competitions are a highly visible practice and an enthusiastically promoted model in entrepreneurship education policy. However, studies on the effects of competitive pedagogy in entrepreneurship education are notable by their absence. For example, a recent meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education literature (Bae et al., 2014) revealed that of all the moderating factors utilised by researchers - economic status, gender, education of parents etc. - no study, at any level of education could be found that investigated the effects of an intervention controlling for ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. Within this context, this authoring team aims to initiate an exploration of competitions in entrepreneurship education which spans the boundaries of rigour and relevance, the practical and academic (Gulati, 2007). The call for more research about the ‘extremes’ of practice (McKelvey, 2006), has been tackled by utilising the research philosophy and first principles of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, Pawson and Tilley, 2004). European policy and guidance over a ten-year period has been reviewed in order to make explicit the taken-for-granted assumptions which underpin the promotion and use of competitions in entrepreneurship education and policy. This process identifies that competitions are described as: effective for motivating, rewarding and inspiring learners; an effective way to develop the entrepreneurial skills of learners and, finally, are an appropriate pedagogy for classroom teachers to embed entrepreneurship in education. The authors question the widespread endorsement of this ‘good end’ of the practice extreme by shining a light on the ‘bad end’, and drawing on theory and literature from education, psychology and social research which suggests that the deleterious effects of competitions for some mean that the uncritical recommendations and universal application observed in entrepreneurship policy and practice should be refined.",
keywords = "Entrepreneurship education., Competition, Realist Evaluation",
author = "Nigel Culkin and Catherine Brentnall",
note = "Industry & Higher Education Special issue vol. xx (x) 2018 Co-edited by Dr David Higgins, Professor Paul Jones, Professor Laura Galloway and Professor Pauric McGowan.",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English",
journal = "Industry and Higher Education",
issn = "0950-4222",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - We need to talk about competitions:

T2 - Initiating a boundary-spanning, realist inspired study on entrepreneurship education’s signature practice.

AU - Culkin, Nigel

AU - Brentnall, Catherine

N1 - Industry & Higher Education Special issue vol. xx (x) 2018 Co-edited by Dr David Higgins, Professor Paul Jones, Professor Laura Galloway and Professor Pauric McGowan.

PY - 2018/12/1

Y1 - 2018/12/1

N2 - Competitions are a highly visible practice and an enthusiastically promoted model in entrepreneurship education policy. However, studies on the effects of competitive pedagogy in entrepreneurship education are notable by their absence. For example, a recent meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education literature (Bae et al., 2014) revealed that of all the moderating factors utilised by researchers - economic status, gender, education of parents etc. - no study, at any level of education could be found that investigated the effects of an intervention controlling for ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. Within this context, this authoring team aims to initiate an exploration of competitions in entrepreneurship education which spans the boundaries of rigour and relevance, the practical and academic (Gulati, 2007). The call for more research about the ‘extremes’ of practice (McKelvey, 2006), has been tackled by utilising the research philosophy and first principles of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, Pawson and Tilley, 2004). European policy and guidance over a ten-year period has been reviewed in order to make explicit the taken-for-granted assumptions which underpin the promotion and use of competitions in entrepreneurship education and policy. This process identifies that competitions are described as: effective for motivating, rewarding and inspiring learners; an effective way to develop the entrepreneurial skills of learners and, finally, are an appropriate pedagogy for classroom teachers to embed entrepreneurship in education. The authors question the widespread endorsement of this ‘good end’ of the practice extreme by shining a light on the ‘bad end’, and drawing on theory and literature from education, psychology and social research which suggests that the deleterious effects of competitions for some mean that the uncritical recommendations and universal application observed in entrepreneurship policy and practice should be refined.

AB - Competitions are a highly visible practice and an enthusiastically promoted model in entrepreneurship education policy. However, studies on the effects of competitive pedagogy in entrepreneurship education are notable by their absence. For example, a recent meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education literature (Bae et al., 2014) revealed that of all the moderating factors utilised by researchers - economic status, gender, education of parents etc. - no study, at any level of education could be found that investigated the effects of an intervention controlling for ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. Within this context, this authoring team aims to initiate an exploration of competitions in entrepreneurship education which spans the boundaries of rigour and relevance, the practical and academic (Gulati, 2007). The call for more research about the ‘extremes’ of practice (McKelvey, 2006), has been tackled by utilising the research philosophy and first principles of Realist Evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997, Pawson and Tilley, 2004). European policy and guidance over a ten-year period has been reviewed in order to make explicit the taken-for-granted assumptions which underpin the promotion and use of competitions in entrepreneurship education and policy. This process identifies that competitions are described as: effective for motivating, rewarding and inspiring learners; an effective way to develop the entrepreneurial skills of learners and, finally, are an appropriate pedagogy for classroom teachers to embed entrepreneurship in education. The authors question the widespread endorsement of this ‘good end’ of the practice extreme by shining a light on the ‘bad end’, and drawing on theory and literature from education, psychology and social research which suggests that the deleterious effects of competitions for some mean that the uncritical recommendations and universal application observed in entrepreneurship policy and practice should be refined.

KW - Entrepreneurship education.

KW - Competition

KW - Realist Evaluation

M3 - Article

JO - Industry and Higher Education

JF - Industry and Higher Education

SN - 0950-4222

ER -