Department of Management

Who Is Giving Feedback To Whom In Entrepreneurship Education?

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

The question we care about (objectives):When entrepreneurship is taught through the process of practicing entrepreneurship and based on experiential learning, a need arises for different forms of assessment, evaluation, and feedback procedures than those applied to traditional forms of higher education (HE). Traditionally, teachers are primarily concerned about what students learn. However, when students learn experientially “through” entrepreneurship, educators must care just as much about how students learn (Blenker 2015). This shift has widespread consequences for how, when, and what we evaluate and provide feedback on, with regard to both the teaching and the learning that takes place in these types of courses. We therefore ask: Who is giving feedback to whom in entrepreneurship education - and for what purpose?The intent of the paper is to develop and explore the system of feedback mechanisms in process-based entrepreneurship courses. In these kinds of courses, the educator needs to formulate a feedback system and to communicate this system to the students; because the project and learning outcome is created and modified through the entrepreneurial process. A two-by-two feedback model is developed that describes the purpose and outcome of feedback from 1) student-to-teacher; 2) student-to-student; 3) teacher-to-student; and 4) teacher-to-teacher. Further each of the four feed-back back elements is explored with respect to purpose, processes, and outcome.Approach:Feedback and assessment in entrepreneurship education has received limited attention from the research community (Pittaway et al. 2009). We find no contributions with a focus on process-based (“through”) entrepreneurship courses, even though “through” entrepreneurship approaches are on the rise (Gibb, 2002; Hannon 2005, Pittaway & Cope 2007; Blenker et al. 2011) and appear to pose unique assessment challenges (Pittaway & Edwards 2012). In this situation, we approach the question we ask twofold. Empirically, we map the feedback challenges the authors have faced as educators of a master’s level entrepreneurship “through” course which they taught and developed over a eight-year period. In this analysis, our educational practice appear as conversational partner, which will substantiate (but also provide reflective criticism of) the developed feedback-model. Analytically, a multi-terminology pallet on different forms of feedback (assessment feedback, feedback, feed-forward and reflective feedback) (Evans, 2013) is used to understand the feedback mechanisms that may be used in entrepreneurship “through” courses. These different kinds of feedback mechanisms are positioned in the suggested two-by-two model to discuss how different kinds of entrepreneurial learning can take place through the use of different forms of feedback.Results:Our analysis develops an initial and simple two-by-two model for mapping feedback. Further, our empirical findings challenge this model and suggest an elaborated version of the model. This process provides an overview of feedback forms, suggesting:1. that in process-based entrepreneurship courses, continuous feedback is necessary because the entrepreneurial outcome and learning is gained through the process adjustments prompted by the feedback during the course;2. that a rather complex system of feedback mechanisms is at play that involves both feedback among educators and students and between educators and students;3. that the complexity is further increased when it is acknowledged that the subject of the feedback may concern the learning, the teaching, the process, the object of the process (the entrepreneurial project), or combination thereof.Implications:This research contribution is empirically based on a process-based entrepreneurship course. The results are immediately relevant for a number of entrepreneurship courses; but the results may apply not only to entrepreneurship courses but to a wider range of HE process-based course, where feedback is considered not just to be an evaluation element but to be a part of learning outcome for both student as well as teachers.Value/Originality:The two-by-two-feedback model is valuable because it in practice 1) gives educators of process-based courses a structured feedback method that 2) makes it visible for educators as well students for what purpose feedback is given and 3) gives a educators and students a way to better understand their role in a given feedback situation.For research, the elaborated model offers a portal to further explore feedback in process-based “through” entrepreneurship courses in HE and beyond.
Original languageEnglish
Publication year12 May 2016
Number of pages19
Publication statusPublished - 12 May 2016
Event3E Conference - ECSB Entrepreneurship Education Conference Leeds 2016 - University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
Duration: 11 May 201613 May 2016
http://www.3e2016.org/

Conference

Conference3E Conference - ECSB Entrepreneurship Education Conference Leeds 2016
LocationUniversity of Leeds
CountryUnited Kingdom
CityLeeds
Period11/05/201613/05/2016
Internet address

    Research areas

  • Entrepreneurship Education, Assessment, Feedback

See relations at Aarhus University Citationformats

Activities

Projects

ID: 100363416