CC BY-NC-ND
0CrossMark
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 115 (2014) 332 - 345
The 5th Indonesia International Conference on Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and Small Business (HCIES 2013)
Effectiveness ofEntrepreneurship Education in Higher Education Institutions
Astri Ghina*
School ofBusiness and Management (SBM), Bandung institute ofTechnology (ITB), Indonesia
Abstract
Entrepreneurship is a worldwide phenomenon with economic growth across the globe positively impacted by the emergence of new and innovative business start-ups. These new small businesses play a significant role injob creation, influencing politicians to recognize and support entrepreneurial start-up activity due to its positive contribution to the economy. Indonesia concerns promoting entrepreneurship to all people in order to develop successful entrepreneurs. Despite several entrepreneurship programs are developed by government and Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to support this entrepreneurship movement, very little is known about effectiveness of entrepreneurship programs' implementation. Therefore this study will evaluate to what extent the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education in Indonesia. This research uses case study methods and will be carried out in two stages. The first stage is descriptive and evaluative phase. Here the research will focus on mapping of existing learning and institutional supports within HEIs. Data exploration regarding learning process within HEIs will be evaluate from internal perspective and external perspectives in order to get better understanding of learning experiences that support to become successful entrepreneurs. The second stage is explanatory phase, this stage lead to discover, develop the concepts, categories, and propositions from the phenomena to develop entrepreneurial learning theory.
©2013The Authors.PublishedbyElsevierLtd.
Selectionandpeer-reviewunderresponsibilityofThe5th IndonesiaInternationalConferenceonInnovation,Entrepreneurship, andSmallBusiness.
Keywords, entrepreneurship; entrepreneurship education; effectiveness of entrepreneurship education; entrepreneurial learning
1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +0-000-000-0000 ; fax: +0-000-000-0000 . E-mail address: astri.ghina@sbm-itb.ac.id
1877-0428 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of The 5th Indonesia International Conference on Innovation, Entrepreneurship,
and Small Business.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.440
Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) has been well regarded as a major contributor in economic development of most nations including Indonesia. This is because MSMEs are able to adsorb large number of labors. In 2006 the number of SMEs is 49,021,803 units with 99.90% of the total proportion of business units in Indonesia; they can absorb 97.30% of total workforce in Indonesia. The MSMEs growth 2.4% per year, therefore in 2011 the number of MSMEs increased to as many as 55,206,444 units which can absorb 97.24% of total workforce in Indonesia. It means that the MSMEs is not growth significantly because their absorption of labor is decrease, it is not comparable with the growth of workforce in Indonesia which is about 3% per year (Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs, 2012).
The majority of entrepreneurs who run MSMEs are elementary school graduates in the amount of 33.75% (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2006). Their lack of education will lead to lack of management skills, marketing skills, and innovation skills to run their business sustainable. The current condition show that the growth rate of micro business is 2.4% per year; the small business is 5.0% per year, whereas medium and large business growth rate have decrease by 3.8% and 2.6% per year. It means that the numbers of MSMEs are high but they are difficult in developing to larger business. The data shows that Necessity-Driven Entrepreneurial Activity in Indonesia is 14%, relatively high compare to Malaysia which is 5% and Singapore (13%). (www.gemconsotium.org, 2006).
Higher Education Institution (HEI) has low participation toward entrepreneurship for MSMEs; it means Indonesia has low number of educated entrepreneurs who able to run their business successfully. Meanwhile according to results survey of 549 company founders in Unites State is 70% said that university education was important to support their success (Wadhwa et al., 2009:5). The current condition in Indonesia education is positioned as a means to increase welfare through utilization of existing job opportunities; the ultimate goal of education programs is the expected attainment of job opportunities.The data shows that intention to become entrepreneur of undergraduate students are 6,14% which is lower than intention to become entrepreneur of elementary school graduates (32,46%) (www.tempo.co, 2012). In other words, they are prefer to become job seeker in prestigious company than become job creator. It means that most people in Indonesia who decide become entrepreneur as desirable career choice is lower (64%) than Malaysia (70%) and Thailand (84%). Besides the status as entrepreneurs in Indonesia is perceived low (54%) compared to Malaysia (77%) and Thailand (76%) (www.gemconsotium.org, 2006). The other side, limitations ofjob opportunities will potentially lead to inability of labor market to absorb educated workers that continues to accumulate. Fact shows that Indonesia face the serious problem of educated unemployment which is 47.81% (www.republika.co.id, 2012), most are dominated by college graduates as many as 12.78%.
In the last 5 years, to deal with low growth rate of micro and small business in developing to larger business, Entrepreneurship Education Program (EEP) was introduced in Indonesia. Entrepreneurship education is one of the programs from government especially the Ministry of Education that aims to build and develop creative people, innovative, sportive and create entrepreneurs. The government has issued Presidential Instruction No. 4 of 1995 on the National Movement in Promoting and Cultivating Entrepreneurship. This instruction encourages to all Indonesian people to develop entrepreneurial programs. It is hope that these programs could enhance Opportunity-Driven Entrepreneurial Activity in Indonesia which is 61%, it means to create more educated entrepreneurs in Indonesia.
Some of universities already develop entrepreneurial programs, such as School of Business and Management Institut Teknologi Bandung (SBM-ITB) has Integrative Business Experience (IBE) which is intended to provide students the opportunity to create, plan, and manage a real business. Through this course, students will also gain experience in managing and deepening the sense of belonging their company (making a profit) and ethical responsibility (using the profits to fund a non-profit project). Ciputra University develops the spirit of entrepreneurship through online tutorials that can reach all of Indonesia; it is hope that each district will have an incubator center, where the new entrepreneurs are born. Ciputra University also has a culinary laboratory that can be used as facilities to enrich the knowledge, skills, and experiment in the food business sector. Universitas Indonesia Studentpreneurs is an entrepreneurship program that aims to foster entrepreneurial spirit within students so the students can give a great effect to increase the movement of entrepreneurship in Indonesia. Institut Manajemen Telkom (IMT) has Entrepreneurship Event which is part of one semester course that encourage students to run their real business with lecturer as their tutor.
Implementation of entrepreneurship education within universities is aim to infuse the entrepreneurial culture and spirit of the students; create new educated entrepreneurs and new businesses based on science and technology. In
other words, the expected outcome is to produce well-educated entrepreneurs to create jobs. But the implementation of entrepreneurship education is still ineffective because low intention to become entrepreneurs in Indonesia, because there is no definite guarantee when choosing entrepreneur as a career option, so graduates tend to become job seeker in government or private companies that have been establish. In addition, it was also caused by the lack of entrepreneurial activity to develop entrepreneurship within higher education institution; moreover there are many obstacles in its implementation. Some evidences to support those statements are: entrepreneurship curriculum within universities in Indonesia does not have a standard, lack of lecturer skills to provide a new paradigm on the importance of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship centers within higher education institution are not operating effectively, lack of cooperation between institutional education with business owner and community, cooperation with financial and non-financial institution are still limited.
However those indicators have shown that many factors behind ineffectiveness of entrepreneurship education within higher education institution, so it needs to evaluate to what extent the effectiveness of existing entrepreneurship education at several universities in Indonesia to produce a successful entrepreneur. According to indicators behind ineffectiveness of entrepreneurship education, thus the following research questions are formulated. RQ-1:
What are current situation of entrepreneurship learning programs and institutional supports within higher education institutions in Indonesia?
How the effectiveness of entrepreneurship programs and institutional supports be measured? RQ-3:
How the effectiveness of existing entrepreneurship learning programs and institutional supports could encourage students to become successful entrepreneurs?
What kind of theory which explains entrepreneurial learning in Indonesia? The objectives of this research are:
a. To provide "State of The Art" from mapping of learning practice within higher education institutions.
b. To provide effectiveness criteria of entrepreneurship learning in order to create more successful entrepreneurs
c. To determine factors that effective to support entrepreneurship learning practice in order to meet its criteria of effectiveness.
d. To develop theory which explain entrepreneurial learning in order to become successful entrepreneur
2. Entrepreneurship Learning and Institutional Supports in Developing Successful Entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurship education is assuming extraordinary relevance within academic programs all over the world (Alberti et al., 2004), there seem to be widespread recognition that entrepreneurship can contribute to economic development (Szirmai et al., 2011: 26).
Despite the literature of entrepreneurship education has led to numerous literature reviews in the past 15 years, there is very little known about the literature has focus on all elements of learning within Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Most of literature reviews are discuss about curriculum, certain pedagogy, institutional supports, and assessment partially, there is limited review to discuss about theoretical foundations of entrepreneurial learning within HEIs to support graduates become successful entrepreneurs.
The methodology adopted for the purpose of providing a comprehensive and critical literature review of empirical research in entrepreneurship education. A schematic representation of literature review methodology adopted in this study is given in the following figure. The issues of database selection, articles selection, articles classification, and analysis of classified articles will be discussed under literature reviews schematic.
Fig. l.Literature Review Methodology Adopted in This Study
Step 1: Selection of Database
The articles were (http://search.proquest.com)
collected
from Emerald (www.emeraldinsight.com) and ProQuest
Step 2: Articles Selection
Database ofEmerald
Exact phrase "Entrepreneurship Education" (the total result is 5714) or "Learning of Entrepreneurship Education" (the total result is 3687) or "Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education" (the total result is 2572) was
searched in article title of journals. From the first 100 articles display of each keyword, articles were selected by reading its titles. The searching was limited to the first 100 articles of each key word because it was already saturated.
The result from keyword "Entrepreneurship Education" is 42 articles. The result from keyword "Learning of Entrepreneurship Education" is 2 articles. The result from keyword "Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education" is 7 articles. Then, articles selected by reading abstract related to "business process" or "main activities" of entrepreneurship education such as curriculum, pedagogy, institutional supports, assessment of entrepreneurship education, and theory of entrepreneurship education. The result from keyword "Entrepreneurship Education" is 28 articles; The result from keyword "Learning of Entrepreneurship Education" is 1 article; The result from keyword "Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education" is 5 articles.
The total articles from all keywords are 34 articles. The illustration of article selection can be seen in the following table.
Database of ProQuest
Exact phrase "Entrepreneurship Education" or "Learning of Entrepreneurship Education" or "Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education" was searched in "Basic Search" for full text only, the total result is 4235. From the first display of 150 articles, articles were selected by reading its titles. The searching was limited to the first 150 articles of those key words because it was already saturated. The result is 15 articles, then articles selected by reading abstract related to "business process" or "main activities" of entrepreneurship education such as curriculum, pedagogy, institutional supports, assessment of entrepreneurship education, and theory of entrepreneurship education. The final result is 6 articles. The illustration of article selection can be seen in the following table.
Step 3: Classification of Articles
In this step, the selected 40 articles are critically analyzing to be classified into several classes. Initial attempts to analyze this collection of articles start from the goal of this research which is about "theory which explains entrepreneurial learning". There seemed to be a number of enduring educational issues to which these long-lasting concepts relate - those concerning Learning Input; Learning Process; Learning Assessment and Evaluation, Theory of Entrepreneurship Education.
This framework of categorization is based on analytical review of program evaluation to judge its performance. According to The International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE, 2001: 2), assessment tries to collect data, information and evidence of the quality of the HEIs as a whole (institutional assessment) or its core activities (education, research and community service) separately (program assessment). It goes beyond quality procedures (although it will be included) and tries to judge the quality of input, process and output. Similarly Harvey (2002, p. 14-15), noted that assessment thus may focus on inputs (such as teaching staff, learning resources) or process (such as teaching, learning, support services) or outcomes, (such as students academic standards of achievement or professional competence, employment rates, student perception of their learning). Assessment evidence includes statistical indicators, direct observation, direct evaluation of research outputs, student and graduate views, employer views, student performance, self-assessment and other documentation, discussion and interviews with teachers, students and managers, and perceptions of other agencies, such as professional bodies (Harvey, 2004). The characteristics of those classes can show in the following table.
Table 1 Characteristics of Articles Classification
NO CLASSES CHARACTERISTICS
1 Learning Input The purpose of the program, target audiences, the kinds of
knowledge, skill, and attitude that students are expected to
acquire.
2 Learning Process The process of learning in order to fulfill learners cognitive
needs, affective needs, psychomotoric need, and social needs
through different teaching methods such as discussion, guest
speaker, case studies, lecturing, video presentation, computer
simulation, and role play, research projects, real venture
setting up, internship, company visit, workshop, games and
competition, feasibility studies, small business consulting,
community development, as web-based assignment,
entrepreneurship course on the web, offering information on
the web, offering management and technical assistance; Other
institutional facilities that support the learning process such as
lecturer, tutor, administrative, entrepreneurship budget, and
role to community and outreach activities.
3 Learning Assessment Indicators for impact assessment such as examinations score,
and Evaluation start-ups by graduates, business performance, attitude and
intention to act, students" or alumnae satisfaction ;
Assessment methods such as test / examination, making
business plan, making research paper; The quality of
Program' s performance.
4 Theory of Framework or concepts concerning entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship education; A set of principles on which the practice of an
Education entrepreneurial activity is based; A set of principles about how
Entrepreneurs should behave.
Step 4: Analysis of Classified Articles
Identify the similarities and differences of classified articles to find research gaps of entrepreneurship education in empirical research as well as to present significant findings from the existing literatures. As stated in numerous studies, entrepreneurship education is becoming more and more important everywhere in the world. Despite at the same time research works in entrepreneurship are growing and gaining increasing legitimacy within the scientific community, it is lack of comprehensive elements of entrepreneurship learning within HEIs. Thus, it can be said that the research in entrepreneurship still at an exploratory stage. This is probably due to the fact that most of study focus on specific program or course. Few of the studies present developed hypotheses and even fewer build on theory to elaborate the hypotheses.
There are four classifications of articles with six main attributes of related issues in entrepreneurship education, there are coverage of background factors, curriculum, pedagogy, institutional supports, assessment, and theory of entrepreneurial learning within HEIs. The most authors did the empirical or non-empirical studies with main scopes of curriculum, pedagogy, institutional supports, and assessment.
The study conducted by Varblane and Mets (2010) focused on mapping entrepreneurship education in 774 higher education institutions in 22 European transition countries. Analysis of information obtained from the web-based sources and a questionnaire identified 332 institutions in the region offering entrepreneurship-oriented
courses, modules or curricula. They were explore about entrepreneurship course, curriculum of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship centers, teaching methods; they provide the results by descriptive statistics.
Similarly, the study conducted by Solomon (2007) was explored to conduct mapping of course offering, teaching methods, periodicals used in class, technology supports from institution. In this study, the sixth survey conducted by the author since 1979, provides an analytical overview of entrepreneurship education in the USA for the years 2004 to 2005 in 270 institutions. They also provide the results by descriptive statistics.
According to Co and Mitchell (2006), The most popular courses were focuses on Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management as an overview of the knowledge and skills needed for the identification, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities. The findings show that teaching of entrepreneurship focuses on traditional classroom delivery, such as lectures, while research in entrepreneurship in South Africa is considered less rigorous than other management disciplines.
Another study from Indonesia was measure the effectiveness of entrepreneurship course within Bengkulu University; but they were concern to learning and teaching resources, common teaching methods used, and students" satisfaction toward learning outcomes by using questionnaires (Abduh, 2012). They provide the results by descriptive statistics.
The study conducted by Fayolle et al. (2006) was doing experimental research, but their focus only on evaluation of certain program using entrepreneurial intention (Theory of Planned Behavior) as a tool to measure the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education. They provide the results with statistical tool to examine the relationship between variables in the study.
The viewpoint conducted by Gelderen (2010) present the importance of autonomy as the guiding aim of entrepreneurship education. The primary aim is to allow students to work from their own inner motivational resource base. The review conducted by Dhliwayo (2008) present the important of students" selection. They stated that only the students with the "right entrepreneurial attitude" that will be successfully processed or graduate into an entrepreneur. Another review was conducted by Ibrahim and Soufani (2002), present the model of entrepreneurship training, they discuss the importance of entrepreneurial traits, competences, and managerial skills to produce successful entrepreneurs. Henry et al. (2005: 106) has reviewed learning process in different situations, which is in classroom and real world, they were mentioned about criteria of success within both situations. An important review conducted by Mwasalwiba (2010), it was assessed the alignment existing between generic objectives, target audience, teaching methods used, and impact indicators used to measure the effective learning in entrepreneurship education. The contribution of this review is provide "state of the art" in entrepreneurship education within HEIs regarding input, process, output, and outcomes of programs. The gap finding from literature reviews is lack of alignment existing elements of entrepreneurship learning within HEIs to develop theory of entrepreneurial learning which effective to produce successful entrepreneurs.
According to the findings, still little attention has been dedicated to how measuring the overall effectiveness of entrepreneurship education, there are not well defined, neither any standardized means for measuring the results generally accepted (Alberti, 2004). Most of studies which present the evaluation are limited to a certain impact from internal perspective such as intention, participants" satisfaction, and also limited to certain impact from external perspective such as graduate careers after graduation. There is lack of comprehensive evaluation from internal regarding program planning and monitoring, and there is also lack of external evaluation from alumni regarding new start-ups (composition of successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurs, time factor, cause and effect, quality of company, focus of company, job offering and quality, revenue, profitability). Most of the research is descriptive study, few studies present developed hypotheses and moreover there is lack of models and theories of entrepreneurship education (explanatory study).
As in the field of business education, the growing entrepreneurship education discipline was developed around concepts such as the efficacy of different teaching techniques, the appropriateness of course content, the selection and usefulness of concepts, the difference between countries and so on. On the whole research findings seem limited in generalizability. Thus we can say that research on entrepreneurship education is still at an exploratory stage. Only studies dealing with the learning process via different teaching methods or the teaching in a particular content area are contributing to the construction of the body ofknowledge in this field (Alberti et al., 2004).
The future study is still open, descriptive and explanatory study to assess and evaluate the entrepreneurship learning comprehensively that focus on inputs (such as curriculum, students), process (such as teaching methods, institutional supports), output or outcomes (such as students academic standards of achievement, alumni achievement, student / alumni perception of their learning) to establish entrepreneurial learning in order to create successful entrepreneur. It also challenges the academics to conduct evaluation both from internal (faculty member of HEIs) and external perspective (alumni) to get better improvement of entrepreneurship learning within HEIs.
3. Research Design and Methods
Paradigm is a set of assumptions and perceptual orientations shared by members of a research community (Donmoyer, 2008). Paradigms determine how members of research communities view both the phenomena their particular community studies and the research methodology that should be employed to study those phenomena.
The research paradigm chosen by individual researchers appears to be dependent on their perceptions of "what real world truth is" (ontology) and "how they know it to be real truth" (epistemology) (Tuli, 2010:103). The research paradigm of this study is post-positivism, because of this following considerations:
* This research emphasize meaning and the creation of new knowledge, and are able to support committed social movements, that is, movements that aspire to change the world and contribute towards social justice (Ryan, 2006: 12).
* To pursue objectivity of this research, theory and practice cannot be kept separate. We cannot afford to ignore theory for the sake of just the facts (Ryan, 2006: 12).
* In this research, we regard ourselves as people who conduct research among other people, learning with them, rather than conducting research on them (Ryan, 2006: 18).
* This research starts with problem setting-coming up with the right questions (these may themselves lead to empirical research). This does not mean that we go off conducting research without an idea of what is to be investigated (Ryan, 2006: 19).
* The process of this research is directed toward the development of testable propositions and theory which are generalizable across settings (Eisenhardt, 1989: 546).
The research approach of this study is inductive direction, because this study begin with specific observations and measures then begin to detect patterns and regularities, formulate some tentative propositions that we can explore and finally this study end up with developing some general conclusions or theories.
A methodology assumes there is a logical order the researcher needs to follow in order to achieve a certain predetermined result (e.g., knowledge, insight, design, intervention, or change). Shortly, methodology is "a way" to conduct the research that is tailored to the research paradigm. Basically there are two types of methodology: Quantitative and Qualitative approach. Nevertheless, there are many researcher also combine this two approaches because each approach has a distinctive weaknesses (Wahyuni, 2012: 18). This study is using qualitative approach, it is hopefully can have better explanations of phenomena.
The method of this study use a case study with multiple case design that allowed a replication logic, that is, a series of cases is treated as a series of experiments, each case serving to confirm or disconfirm the inferences drawn from the others (Yin, 1984). To clarify the research methods, it can be illustrated as follow:
r----------1
Fig.2. Research Methods
First Research Stage: Descriptive and Evaluative Study
The first stage of research is intended to describe, explore, and evaluate the existing learning and institutional supports at several HEIs in Indonesia from internal and external perspectives; it will answer the research questions 1, 2, and 3. The first research stage is using a qualitative research approach of case study to investigate phenomena within its real life context.
Second Research Stage: Explanatory Study
According to case study to gain the insights from internal and external perspectives about to what extent the learning and institutional supports are effective to create students become entrepreneurs, then it will guide to know the effective learning which can produce successful entrepreneurs. This study generate and develop of concepts, categories and propositions, and verified through systematic data collection and analysis of data pertaining to that phenomenon. Based on the case study results, we can develop the theory which explains entrepreneurial learning that effective to produce successful entrepreneurs, it will answer the Research Question 4.
The unit of analysis incorporate in this research is Program Study, the considerations of selecting this unit of
analysis are:
• To create graduates become entrepreneur cannot be formed by only one subject, but the results of integrating multiple discipline during college.
• To create graduates become entrepreneur not only rely on the subjects or material but also environmental factors, so we have to see it in a holistic way.
• To create graduates become entrepreneur, there should be interaction between personal factors, behavior, and environment in the learning process to achieve its effectiveness.
• This study will evaluate from alumni perspectives, thus the unit analysis must be program study, cannot certain course or certain incubator program.
• The ultimate objective of this study is to build theory that can explain entrepreneurial learning, it cannot build only from learning one subject or learning within incubation program, because it must be evaluate from input-process-output of program study in a holistic way to get better understanding of phenomena to construct concept or theory.
A purposive sampling strategy was incorporated, where samples are selected based on their potential contribution to the model and the demands of the research objectives. The use of multiple samples is preferred to help overcome potential response bias and gain multiple perspectives (triangulation) (Yin, 2003).
The criteria to choose HEIs as the objects of this case study are: focus on undergraduate level, focus on Kopertis Region III (DKI Jakarta) and Kopertis Region IV (Jabar and Banten), the institution has very good accreditation (A), the institution has vision/mission to create entrepreneurial graduates or entrepreneurs, the institution at least has 3 years generation of alumni, the institution has good reputation level that assess from International Scientific Community such as eduniversal or webometrics. Thus, based on those criteria the results are School of Business and Management Institut Teknologi Bandung, Prasetya Mulya Business School, Telkom Institute of Management, and PPM Business School.
A key approach to select the respondents from each case is using numerous and highly knowledgeable informants who view the focal phenomena from diverse perspectives. These informants can include organizational actors from different hierarchical levels, functional areas, and groups. The study also employed an embedded design, that is, multiple levels of analysis, focusing on each case at three levels: (1) top management of program study such as Dean, Vice Dean, Head of Study Program (4 respondents), (2) Staff such as lecturer, tutor, and administration (4 respondents), (3) Students (4 respondents) and alumni (6 respondents).
There are six data sources: (1) initial interview with key actors of institution such as the founders or the owners, (2) semi structured interview with top management of program study such as Dean, Vice Dean, Head of Study Program, (3) semi structured interview with lecturers or tutors, (4) Open and close-ended questionnaires completed by each level of management, (5) observation and (6) secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, letters and emails, reports and physical artifacts such as computer downloads of employees' work).
In the descriptive, evaluative, and explanatory phase the results will be qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative data of interview from the respondents in related to the topic will be tape recorded, transcribed, coded and analyzed using NVIVO Software. The quantitative data of respondents" answer from questionnaires are input to Microsoft Excel 2010 then analyzed.
One key step is within-case analysis. The importance of within-case analysis is driven by one of the realities of case study research: a staggering volume of data. Within-case analysis typically involves detailed case study write-ups for each site. These write-ups are often simply pure descriptions, but they are central to the generation of insight (Eisenhardt, 1989) because they help researchers to cope early in the analysis process with the often enormous volume of data. However, there is no standard format for such analysis. However, the overall idea is to become intimately familiar with each case as a stand-alone entity. This process allows the unique patterns of each case to emerge before investigators push to generalize patterns across cases. In addition, it gives investigators a rich familiarity with each case which, in turn, accelerates cross-case comparison (Eisenhardt, 1989: 539-540).
Coupled with within-case analysis is cross-case search for patterns. The key to good cross-case comparison is counteracting these tendencies by looking at the data in many divergent ways.
Various ways to judge the quality of the research beside validity and reliability measurement are discussed below:
• Triangulation
Triangulation arose from an ethical need to confirm the validity of the processes and, in case studies it can be
achieved by using multiple sources of data (Yin, 2003). It is an approach that utilizes multiple data sources, multiple informants, and multiple methods in order to gather multiple perspectives on the same issues so as to gain a more complete understanding of the phenomena. Expert Validation
Lecturer, curriculum developer, and entrepreneurship education experts are selected to engage in some interactive interview or focus group discussion to evaluate or validate the research findings.
4. Conceptual Model
The project partners made by Herrmann et al. (2008: 11) have addressed entrepreneurship education in their earlier work. In „Towards the Entrepreneurial University" they developed an „Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes Framework" which clarifies what students should learn from entrepreneurial educational experiences and aims to influence curriculum design and delivery in UK Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The Implementation Framework should help to configure a more detailed campus-wide strategy for entrepreneurship education. It is underpinned by a set of guiding principles informed by the experiences and views of the international expert panel members (Herrmann et al., 2008: 14):
a. The need for an enabling institutional environment.
b. The engagement of key stakeholders within and outside the institution.
c. The development of entrepreneurial pedagogic approaches in teaching, learning and support practices.
According model for identifying key issues in the management of education (Piper, 1978), there were 3 key
actors namely students, staff, and the institution. The model was illustrated the main issues, there were ability, opportunity, and incentive to learn / teach. The main issues that make learning is effective for students are having the ability, the opportunity, and incentive to learn. The main issues that make teaching is effective for staff are improving ability, improving opportunity, and improving incentive to learn. The main issues that make a teaching organization effective are improving ability, improving opportunity, and improving incentive to teach (see Figure 4). This model give the valuable insight for developing model regarding to "Research Question 1, 2, and 3". In order to conduct mapping of entrepreneurship learning and institutional supports, this study propose conceptual model as follows.
ABILITY TO LEAEN:
PiaeeniKit test. Characteristics. CompetKicies
OmjKlUMIli lOlhAK-N: Programe & Contents provided by Institution
INCENTIVE TO LEARN: Learning objectives & outcomes from Institution
OUTPUT OUTCOMES
(GRADUATES) (ENTREPRENEURS)
OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN: ABILITY TO TEACH: ABILITY. OPPORTUNITY.
Sdetíiun of Students Trt.ini.is & Development INCENTIVE TO TEACH:
Strategie networking with
OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH: OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH: aiuirai & industry
Selection oflesturer Suppotina Facilities. Enviroment
INCENTIVE TO TEACH: INCENTIVE TO TEACH:
Job Curilia.fl Reward Programmes
Career Development
Fig. 3.Conceptual Model ofEntrepreneurship Learning and Institutional Support
According to Russ-Eft and Preskill (2001), there are variables that affect the outcomes of learning, performance, and change initiatives, namely trainee (students), trainer, manager / leader (staff), organization (institution),
program design (input), and program implementation (process). This theory together with Piper Model (1978) gives valuable insights for developing model regarding to "Research Question 2 and 3".
In order to evaluate of existing entrepreneurship learning and institutional supports from internal perspectives, this study propose conceptual model as follows.
Fig. 4..Conceptual Model ofEvaluation from Internal Perspective
The challenge after proposing the conceptual model of mapping and evaluation of entrepreneurship learning within HEIs is to adapt them in the entrepreneurial process with a logical sense that could be empirically researched.
Regarding to "Research Question 4, this study propose the conceptual model as follows. (See Fig 5)
This conceptual model is attempt to link all variables in the descriptive and evaluative study, such as learning input, learning process, internal environment of HEIs, and external environment ofHEIs. In the center of the model is an important factors that cannot be ignored because individual characteristics and competences have been researched extensively in the past to try explaining their different effects to entrepreneurs. For example personality dimensions, or in other words, personal traits, are essential factors in determining whether a person could become an entrepreneur (Cheng et al., 2009: 557). Obschonka et al. (2011: 121) found that early entrepreneurial competence in adolescence had a positive effect on making progress in the venture creation process. Chandler and Jansen (1992 in Ramirez, 2013: 7) research showed significant correlations between the founder's self-assessed entrepreneurial and managerial competences and the performance of start-up firms. Further studies continued under the same line as Chandler and Hanks (1994 in Ramirez, 2013: 7) who examined the influence of the founder competences on venture performance. The different between characteristic and competence: the characteristic is about one's being, it makes people less or more capable for entrepreneurship whereas the competence is about collection of knowledge, capabilities, characteristic, and attitude in relation with or necessary for a good performance (Driessen and Zwart, 2007).
OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH:
INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT & FACILITIES OF HEIs ■ Institutionalculture & Regulation Financial support Start-up infrastructure Business incubator Entrepreneurship centers Strategic networking Technology Library
Students' club
OPPORTUNITY, & INCENTIVE TO LEARN:
LEARNING PROCESS WITHIN HEIs Programme Curriculum Lecturer / Tutor Pedagogy
Assurance of Learning (AoL) (Direct & Indirect Assessment)
ABILITY TO LEARN:
■ ENTREPRENEUR'S CHARACTERISTICS:
Need for achievement, Tolerance for ambiguity, Internal locus of control, Need for independence , Self Confidence, Risk taking propensity (Bezzma, 2010)
■ ENTREPRENEUR'S COMPETENCES:
Identifying & evaluating business opportunities, Identifying & solving problem, Decision making, networking, Oral communication abilities, Innovative thinking (Izquierdo et al., 2005)
INCENTIVE TO LEARN:
SUCCESSFUL
ENTREPRENEURS
■ (Hytti & Kuopusjarvi, 2004):
Jobs offering and its quality
■ Gorgievski et al. (2011):
Profitability, Growth, Innovation, Firm Survival, Contributing back to society, Personal satisfaction, Satisfied stakeholders, Good balance between work and private life, Public recognition. Usefulness
OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN:
EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT OF HEIs
■ Family background
■ Ethnicity
■ Informal experiences
■ Social class
Fig. 5 The Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurial Learning Theory to Create Successful Entrepreneurs
5. Conclusions
According to case study results, it will generate knowledge about qualifications of learning that effective to produce successful entrepreneurs. This study generates and develops of concepts, categories and propositions, and verified through systematic data collection and analysis of data pertaining to that phenomenon.
References
Abduh, M., Maritz, A., and Rushworth, S. (2012). An Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education in Indonesia: A Case Study of Bengkulu
University. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 4 (4), 42-43. Alberti, F., Sciascia, S., Poli, A. (2004). Entrepreneurship Education: Notes on An Ongoing Debate. 14th Annual IntEnt Conference. Italy:
University ofNapoli Federico II. Biro Pusat Statistik. (2006). Perusahaan Mikro dan Kecil. Jakarta: Biro Pusat Statistik.
Cheng, M. Y., Chan, W. S., Mahmood, A. (2009). The Effectiveness of Entrepreneurship Education in Malaysia. Journal of Education + Training, 51 (7), 555-566.
Co,M. J., Mitchell, B. (2006).Entrepreneurship Education in SouthAfrica: A Nationwide Survey. Education andTraining, 48 (5),
357-358. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Donmoyer, Robert. (2008). The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Sage Publication, Inc. (www.sagepub.com, access: February, 16th, 2013)
Dhliwayo, Shepherd. (2008). Experiential Learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A Prospective Model for South African Tertiary Institutions.
Education and Training, 50 (4), 329-332. Emerald Group Publishing Limited Driessen M. P. and Zwart, P. S. (2007). The Entrepreneur Scan Measuring Characteristics and Traits of Entrepreneurs. (Availabe Online:
http://www.entrepreneurscan.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/E-Scan-MAB-Article-UK.pdf, access: May, 9th, 2013) Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989). Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, 14 (4), 532-550. Fayolle, A., Gailly, B., Clerc, N. L. (2006). Assessing The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education Programmes: A New Methodology. Journal
ofEuropean Industrial Training, 30 (9), 701-720. Gelderen, M. V. (2010). Autonomy as The Guiding Aim of Entrepreneurship Education. Journal of Education + Training,
52 (8/9), 710-721.
Henry, C., Hill F., and Leitch C. (2005). Entrepreneurship Education and Training: Can Entrepreneurship be Taught? Part I. Education and
Training, 47 (2), 98-107. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Herrmann, K, Hannon, P., Cox, J., Ternouth, P., and Crowley, T. (2008). Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates: Putting Entrepreneurship at
The Centre ofHigher Education. The Report made by CIHE, NCGE, and NESTA, Pg. 1-40. Ibrahim, A. B., Soufani, K. (2002). Entrepreneurship Education and Training in Canada: A Critical Assessment. Journal of Education + Training, 44 (8), 421-430.
Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship Education: A Review of Its Objectives, Teaching Methods, and Impact
Indicators. Journal ofEducation + Training, 52 (1), 20-47 Obschonka, M. Silbereisen, R. K, Rodermund, E. S. Stuetzer, M. (2010). Nascent Entrepreneurship and The Developing Individual: Early Entrepreneurial Competence in Adolescence and Venture Creation Success During The Career. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(1), 121133
Ramirez, A. (2013). Project Manager's Characteristics Influence in The Entrepreneurial Process: A Project-Based Entrepreneurship Model.
Paper to be presented at the DRUID Academy 2013at Comwell Rebild Bakker, Rebild/Aalborg, 1-24. Russ-Eft, D. and Preskill, H. (2001). Evaluation in organizations: A systematic approach to learning, performance, and change. Boston: Perseus. Ryan, Anne B. (2006). Post-Positivist Approaches to Research, (http://eprints.nuim.ie, accessed: May, 17th, 2013).
Solomon, G. (2007). An Examination of Entrepreneurship Education in the United States. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise
Development, 14 (2), 168. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Szirmai, A., Naude, W., Goedhuys, M. (2011). Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Economic Development: An Overview. Oxford University Press.
Tuli, F. (2010). The Basis of Distinction between Qualitative and Quantitative Research in Social Science: Reflection on Ontological,
Epistemological and Methodological Perspectives. Ethiopian Journal ofEducation and Science, 6 (1), 102-103 Varblane, U. and Mets, T. (2010). Entrepreneurship Education in The Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) of Post-Communist European
Countries. Journal ofEnterprising Communities: People and Place in The Global Economy, 4 (3), 204-219. Wadhwa, V., Aggarwal, L., Holly, K. Z., Salkever, A. (2009). The Anatomy of An Entrepreneur: Making of A Successful Entrepreneur.
Kauffman: The Foundation of Entrepreneurship, pg. 5. Wahyuni, Sri. (2012). QualitativeResearch Methods: Theory and Practice.Jakarta:SalembaEmpat.
Yin, R. K. 1984. Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills. California: Sage Publications. Yin, R. K. (2003): Case study research: Design and Methods, Third Edition, 5. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Internet source:
Harvey, L. (2004). Analytic Quality Glossary. Quality Research International, (http://www.qualityresearchinternational.co
m/glossary/assessment.htm, access: March, 19th, 2013) www.gemconsotium.org www.republica.co .id www.tempo.co.id
