ABSTRACT
The state of Indiana is experiencing massive structural changes in
the manufacturing environment. This same trend has been seen nationwide
as high wage manufacturing moves offshore and communities are left to
struggle with the impact on their economic base. Indiana, in fact, has
indicated that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education is now
one of the top 10 priorities in the state (Indiana Office of Community
and Rural Affairs). As a result, many states are focusing on
entrepreneurship education in their K-12 classroom and have now included
entrepreneurship in their content standards. But many K-12 teachers are
underprepared for this new challenge.
To better prepare Indiana teachers, a new entrepreneurship course
was offered in spring 2007. Results show that our KACE Model, which
connects teacher knowledge, comfort and applications, does enhance
teachers' efficacy in K-12 student understanding of
entrepreneurship. Our KACE Model, the structure of the course and its
outcomes are described in this paper.
INTRODUCTION
The state of Indiana is experiencing massive structural changes in
the manufacturing environment. This same trend has been seen nationwide
as high wage manufacturing moves offshore and communities are left to
struggle with the impact on their economic base. Indiana, in fact, has
indicated that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education is now
one of the top 10 priorities in the state (Indiana Office of Community
and Rural Affairs). As a result, many states are focusing on
entrepreneurship education in their K-12 classroom and have now included
entrepreneurship in their content standards. But many K-12 teachers are
underprepared for this new challenge.
Indiana University Kokomo has an accredited Center for Economic
Education that is affiliated with the National Council for Economic
Education (NCEE) and the Indiana Council for Economic Education (ICEE).
As a result of this partnership, the Center offers economic education
courses, workshops, and economic education research. Both nationwide,
and in Indiana, Centers for Economic Education have found themselves in
the midst of a new push for entrepreneurship education in addition to
their mission in economic education. This holds true for our Center at
IU Kokomo.
We have developed a successful model, the KACE Model (see Diagram 1
in the Appendix), which enhances the economic efficiency of teachers in
K-12 classrooms. This model focuses on the three dimensions of teacher
effectiveness: the economic knowledge (K); their comfort in teaching
economics to K-12 students (C); and their effectiveness (E) in K-12
classrooms as measured by their applications (A). These three elements,
essential for teacher competency and K-12 student learning outcomes, are
central to INTASC (Interstate New Teachers Assessment and Support
Consortium) Principles which guide teacher education accreditation
processes.
This model has lead to successful graduate courses. Our first
course was a survey of micro and macroeconomics; the second course was a
research course in which teachers with background knowledge in economics
were given the assessment tools to design action research studies. The
focus of this paper is our newly developed third course for classroom
teachers--a course in entrepreneurship. Given the economic situation of
many states and the pressure to teach entrepreneurship standards,
teachers have to be literate in entrepreneurship concepts, comfortable
with the entrepreneurship content and standards, and capable of
developing applications in entrepreneurship for their K-12 students.
All of our courses have been team-taught by faculty members in
economics and education and are praxis-based. This means that content is
presented, followed by applications. These applications are interactive
opportunities for teachers to apply their knowledge through content
simulations, role-plays, collaborative design of products, and
simulations of classroom elements. These applications have resulted in
strong teacher testimonials.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP MODELS
Entrepreneurship as a content discipline is a fast growing field.
There are a number of entrepreneurship models discussing the
characteristics, skills, and knowledge needed for entrepreneurial
activities as well as the personal characteristics of the entrepreneur.
For example, Powell and Bimmerle (1980) noted the three sets of
entrepreneurial attributes; entrepreneurial descriptors including
knowledge and skills; precipitating factors such as dissatisfaction with
current job or recognition of opportunities; and venture specific
factors that would include valuations of the ideas and valuation of the
resources. Hornsby, Naffziger, Kuratko, and Montagno (1993) highlight
the need for an outside event that launches the entrepreneurial
activity. Covin and Slevin (1991) examine sets of variables, including
external, strategic and internal. They also examine the entrepreneurial
firm from the inside.
These models, however interesting, are primarily from either the
firm's perspective or from an outside evaluation of how well the
entrepreneurial firm is operating. They do not speak to the development
of the entrepreneurial spirit in K-12 students. For teachers to
successfully inculcate and develop the entrepreneurial spirit, they need
to be trained in entrepreneurship content and given the teaching skills
needed to effectively teach that content to their K-12 students.
This need for entrepreneurship education for K-12 students has been
recognized by many universities and nonprofits. There are a number of
K-12 classroom resources available that offer teachers preset programs,
curriculums, worksheets and lesson plans as Brown (2000) noted in her
review of K-12 entrepreneurship curriculum materials available. She
included The New Youth Entrepreneur; the National Foundation for
Teaching of Entrepreneurship (NFTE); the Kaufman Foundation; the Program
for Acquiring Competence in Entrepreneurship (PACE); Own the Place; Open
for Business, and so on. These curriculum resources, while impressive,
are helpful in establishing the baseline for teachers in content and
instructional strategies. However, the reality for most teachers is the
need to develop curriculums appropriate for their own classrooms. In
fact, our goal was to turn teachers into entrepreneurs in their own
classrooms. Our KACE model, while successful in economic education, is a
generic model and was able to be successfully adapted to this new course
and our development of these teacher entrepreneurs. The KACE model is
shown in Diagram 1.
COURSE STRUCTURE: INTEGRATING KNOWLEDGE, COMFORT, AND APPLICATIONS
This new course contains our traditional elements in that it was
intensively taught on campus, had a field application, faculty served as
mentors, and teachers formed a cohort of educators to dialogue and
enhance their efficiency. The overall entrepreneurship content came out
of a textbook that focused on entrepreneurship as a process, rather than
focusing on the singular event of founding a firm. As the authors note,
"We believe that recently the field has come to view
entrepreneurship as an ongoing process rather than as a single event ...
We reflect this growing consensus by focusing on the entrepreneurial
process as it unfolds through several distinct phases." (Baron
& Shane, 2005).
In this new course, some of the entrepreneurship content was
delivered online. The online content modules were in the areas of
accounting, legal forms of business ownership, human resource
management, marketing, intellectual property, financing the new
operation, and strategic planning. The entrepreneurship content was
front loaded so that teachers had the maximum application development
time. The online content was followed several weeks later by on-campus
applications.
The course was divided into two major parts. The first part was to
develop baseline knowledge in entrepreneurship (including both in-class
and on-line sessions) so that the teachers would become literate in
entrepreneurship before beginning their curriculum development. We moved
quickly through the entire textbook (Baron & Shane, 2005) in the
early portion of the semester. This knowledge was tested in an online
midterm exam. After the first four weeks of in-class meetings and direct
praxis applications, the course shifted to the on-line modules in
entrepreneurship. After the entrepreneurship content portion of the
semester, the course focused on educational best practices. As these are
practicing teachers, they were assumed to have a good working knowledge
of best practice scholarship, so this online pedagogical portion
required them to apply these practices to their curriculum.
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
The teachers in this course taught a wide variety of K-12
classrooms, ranging from kindergarten special education to high school
economics. This provided an additional level of challenge for the
faculty members to make sure the entrepreneurship content modules would
be applicable to each and every classroom. One additional challenge was
to guide these teachers into taking these generic entrepreneurship and
pedagogical modules and refine them into developmentally-appropriate
classroom curriculums.
DATA AND ANALYSIS
Knowledge
Classroom knowledge was developed through the use of the textbook,
guest speakers, in-class simulations, and outside readings. The course
learning outcomes included developing knowledge of the personal
attributes of entrepreneurs, analyzing scenarios of various
entrepreneurship projects and their likelihood of success, and examining
the institutional structures that help or hinder entrepreneurial
success. As part of the course, teachers linked the content to their
specific grade level standards in entrepreneurship. The online modules
supplemented these topics so that teachers developed baseline knowledge
in entrepreneurship for curriculum development, implementation, and
assessment.
The online setting included faculty developed PowerPoint slides
that supplemented and complemented the textbook readings. After reading
the online entrepreneurship content slides, teachers were asked to
answer four prompts for each module. The first content prompt asked the
teachers to reflect on the implications of this content for their
developing curriculum in entrepreneurship. The second prompt asked them
to reflect on the content in terms of any organizational or structural
changes that they might make in their classrooms. The third prompt asked
the teachers to tie the entrepreneurship content back to different
standards, in come cases to language arts, and others to mathematics, or
social studies, or sciences. The last prompt asked the teachers to
reflect on what three questions this content raised for them in terms of
developmental appropriateness and how this applies to their existing
curriculum. The teachers' grade levels or content specialization
seemed to influence the degree of difficulty that teachers encountered
with the material, as discussed in below.
The first content module was Human Resources, including the common
theories of motivation. Teachers were able to make very clear
connections back into their curriculums and into their classroom
management structures. For example, teachers used the theories of
motivation to look at how they motivate their students. Structurally,
teachers explored the ideas of using students as employees including the
ideas of students taking ownership for their own learning and organizing
the class via a business model. The questions they reflected on dealt
with how to integrate entrepreneurship content into their curriculum,
the importance of motivating students via strategies that create
student-ownership of the learning experience, and how to structure
activities where students were managers and employees.
The second content module dealt with the Legal and Financial issues
in a new business. This was the most challenging module for teachers, in
that it was the most specific content in terms of business and some
teachers did not see the relevance as clearly at first. They commented
that content seemed too specific for their classrooms. However, one
teacher expressed that he could indirectly incorporate this content into
his classroom through the lens of legal and regulatory environments.
Using the legal framework in their classrooms struck many teachers as
appropriate and as a way to make students more accountable. Another
teacher saw this content as an "important piece of growing up,
becoming an adult and becoming more responsible." One teacher was
able to see the connection between cheating in his school and the need
for intellectual property rights. While teachers found this module
difficult to incorporate into their classrooms, their reflection lead to
the realization that this content was basic to their students being
successful adults.
The third content module was on Managing Your Property and
Strategic Planning. Teachers quickly focused in on the importance of
mission statements for their businesses and for education in general.
They could easily relate this back to the skills that students need for
the grades ahead and adult life. Some commented that instead of telling
students what they will be learning, the teacher would abdicate some
authority and let students assume the roles of manager of knowledge. The
teachers' grade levels or content specialization seemed to
influence the degree of difficulty that teachers encountered with the
material.
The fourth content module was on Marketing. Since K-12 students are
avid consumers of goods and services and are exposed to many marketing
messages each day, this module was one of the easiest for teachers to
teach. They had many creative ideas for teaching marketing principles
such as advertising and creation of commercials, sales of classroom
produced products, and helping students to become wiser consumers in
terms of their analysis of marketing materials. There was still some
backlash against the content as some teachers could not believe that
their third grade students could handle the content, while other third
grader teachers could easily see the relevance to their classrooms.
The online pedagogical content modules also supplemented the campus
sessions by dealing with the major research findings on teacher
efficacy. The fifth module dealt with the key Best Practices Principles
of Teaching and Learning. The sixth module dealt with research-based
Best Practices in Social Studies. The final module focused on Authentic
Assessment, which aims at performance-based outcomes in K-12 student
learning. Each of these modules had individual prompts and assignments
specific, to the module. For example, in the Best Practice Module, the
teacher had to develop a matrix analyzing their curriculum lessons for
alignment with these best practices. For the sixth module, teachers had
to analyze their lessons in light of the best practices in social
studies education. In the final module, teachers had to describe three
authentic assessment measures in their emergent curriculum.
Comfort
For many of these teachers, entrepreneurship content was outside of
their comfort zone at the beginning of the course. They may have been
attracted to the class by the time slot, tuition stipends, or the need
to fulfill a course for licensure. Therefore, it was gratifying to see
the incorporation of entrepreneurship content into mathematics, science,
language arts, and other areas of the K-12 curriculum as these teachers
learned and applied the subject material. Part of the online module
requirements was that teachers apply the specific knowledge to their
classroom and their lessons. Many teachers commented that this
stretching process made them think and grow as an instructor. One noted,
"Having taken this class, I will also be able to incorporate more
of a business sense in that I have a better grasp of the business
world."
One team of third grade teachers showed the greatest changes in
their dispositions over the course of the project. These teachers began
the class with the attitudes that standards were "stupid"
which changed to wishing that the project could continue for a longer
period of time. While they found that profits were a stretch
academically for their students, these teachers were impressed with the
gains that their students had made and are planning on doing the project
again next year.
Applications
Teachers designed a wide variety of applications appropriate to
their grade levels and grade level standards. These included both
original and adapted existing lesson plans to infuse entrepreneurship.
In addition they assessed entrepreneurship learning throughout their
curriculums. Periodic campus meetings, online postings, and final
presentation sessions created a learning community among these teachers
to enhance their efficacy. One teacher commented, "I believe
application is the highest level of learning, and then we as educators
can celebrate that our students understand what we have taught."
Several examples of the developed curriculums are listed below.
One teacher designed a curriculum for special education students.
Prior to this course her instructional methodologies either
individualized the instruction or grouped students according to areas of
exceptionality, such as emotionally handicapped, autistic, etc. As a
result of this course, for the first time her classroom was,
"unified around a curriculum project with all the children engaged
in a series of entrepreneurship activities around ice cream." She
noted that she would no longer underestimate the ability of her students
to learn abstract concepts and she commented, "One thing I know for
sure is that my students are having a great time learning the concepts.
They think they're brilliant because they're able to identify
a good and a service without any help." Entrepreneurship gave her a
lens to view her classroom in a new way.
A fourth grade teacher designed an entrepreneurship activity with
jewelry making as its focus. Some teams concentrated on mass production,
while others developed unique styles and products. One group custom
designed items by recognizing that some of their customers (a group of
kindergarten girls) were asking for specific items. Profits and costs
became an important part of the curriculum. This was challenged when
students had to decide whether or not they should offer a refund when a
customer complained. They decided that long term customer good will was
worth the short term loss in profits.
A fifth and six grade team of teachers approached entrepreneurship
through science/mathematics and bridge building projects. These students
learned that there were absolute minimums required for their final
projects due to safety considerations. They also learned the multitude
of skills needed to successfully design, purchase, hire the appropriate
workers, build, and test their bridge. One teacher noted, "The
students will walk away knowing more about the responsibilities of
running a corporation and achieving the goals that they have set for
their company."
Overall Measures--Survey
A pre and post survey was designed and administered to determine
the overall impact of the entrepreneurship course on teachers'
knowledge of entrepreneurship, pedagogy (how to teach entrepreneurship)
and higher level thinking about classroom applications. This survey
identified 26 elements of teacher efficacy. The most important results
are show below in Table 2. (See Table 3 for a copy of the complete
survey instrument).
The survey was designed prior to the start of class to meet campus
human subject review processes, and therefore like many survey
instruments, could have been better designed. The difference in means
tests showed that several important attributes were significant at the
99% level. These include the importance of the knowledge of economic and
entrepreneurship content, the knowledge of instructional strategies for
teaching economic/entrepreneurship content, and the applications of the
knowledge in the classroom. This was the KACE Model in action. Other
items were interesting but not statistically significant. The scores
were high on these items to begin with and the course did not
significantly increase the scores.
CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
The KACE Model of teacher instruction was found to enhance
teachers' efficacy in entrepreneurship. Teachers showed their
entrepreneurship knowledge through their exams, and the module postings,
as well as their self-reported data on the survey. Their comfort levels
were increased as shown by the fact all the teachers involved in this
project plan on redoing this curriculum next year. One teacher summed up
this consensus, "this was a unique experience; I would do it again
and revise it." The quality of their curriculum projects showed
that the teachers had learned to apply entrepreneurship content into
their K-12 classrooms.
Overall, this was a very successful class. Entrepreneurship is not
a subject area that teachers are comfortable teaching due to their lack
of experience and training. But the Indiana standards clearly require
instruction in entrepreneurship and this leads to teacher anxiety. This
class gave teachers the tools that they need to understand the material,
develop grade appropriate curriculum and assess their students'
learning. One teacher may have put it best, "The curriculum we have
written is an in-depth study of entrepreneurship where the students are
fully engaged." These are important skills to develop as Indiana
continues the move from manufacturing to a more entrepreneurial
environment.
We believe this type of pedagogical model of developing
teachers' efficacy in teaching entrepreneurship was successful. We
will be offering a revised version of this course in spring 2008 using
the same format of textbook knowledge, on-line modules, increasing
teacher comfort and entrepreneurship activities. A new component of the
spring 2008 course will be beta testing of new entrepreneurship content
tests for K-2, 3-6, 7-8, and high school grades, in conjunction with
ICEE and NCEE. This additional component will enable us to determine the
impact of these teacher developed projects on their K-12 students'
knowledge, skills and attitudes in entrepreneurship. In doing so, we
will be able to assess the entrepreneurial spirit in K-12 students who
are the entrepreneurs of the future.
REFERENCES
Baron, R.A. & S.A. Scott (2005). Entrepreneurship: A Process
Perspective; Cincinnati, OH, Thomson South-Western Publishing.
Brown, C. (2007) Curriculum for Education; A Review. CELCEE
Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership Clearinghouse on
Entrepreneurship Education, Retrieved July 12, 2007 from
http://www.celcee.edu/publications/digest/Dig00-8.html.
Covin, J.G. & D.P. Slevin (1991). A Conceptual Model of
Entrepreneurship as Firm Behavior, Entrepreneurship; Theory and
Practice, 16 (1), 7-25.
Factors that Affect the Effective Use of Technology for Teaching
and Learning: Lessons Learned from the SEIR*TEC Intensive Site Schools.
Retrieved on June 28, 2006 from
www.serve.org/seir-tec/publications/lessondoc.html.
Hornsby, J.S., D.W., Naffziger, D.F. Kuratko, & R.V. Montagno
(1993). An Interactive Model of the Corporate Entrepreneurship Process,
Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 17 (2), 29-37.
Hutchings, H.M. (2006) Instructional Immediacy and the Seven
Principles: Strategies for Facilitating Online Courses." Retrieved
on June 29, 2006 from
www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/huntchins/63.html.
INTASC Principles--Interstate New Teachers Assessment and Support
Consortium (2006). Retrieved on June 12, 2006 from
http://cte.jhu.edu/pds/Resources/INTASC_Principles.htm
Nicholl, J.M., & N.C. Laudato (2006). Assessing the Impact on
Students of Online Materials in University Courses. Retrieved on June
29, 2006 from www.educause.edu/ir/library/html/edu9952/edu9952.html.
Parkison, K. & M. Sorgman (2005). If You Build It, They Will
Come: Conceiving a Saturday Class in Economic Education to Link Content,
Applications, Implementation, and Assessment, Mountain Rise Journal, 2
(2), http://mountainrise.wcu.edu/archive/vol2no2/issue.html
Parkison, K., M. Sorgman, M. & C. Miller (2004). Intersection
of Teachers' Perceptions and State Economic Standards, Journal of
Economics and Economic Education Research, 5 (2), 37-49.
Parkison, K. & M. Sorgman (forthcoming). A Comparative Study of
Area Professionals and Undergraduate Education Majors' Economic
Literacy and Curriculum Applications. Economics and Economic Education
Research Journal.
Parkison, K. & M. Sorgman. (2000). "Basic Business and
Economics--Internationalizing an Economics Curriculum for
Teachers," Business Education Forum, 55 (2), 35-37.
Parkison, K. & M. Sorgman (1999). The Impact of a Survey Course
in Economics on Teacher's Curriculum and Personal Economic
Decisions: A Follow-up Survey, Indiana Academy of Social Sciences
Journal, III, 50-56.
Parkison, K. & M. Sorgman (1998). Enhancing Economic Literacy
of Classroom Teachers, International Advances in Economic Research, 4
(4), 418-427.
Powell, J.D. & C.F. Bimmerle (1980). A Model of
Entrepreneurship: Moving Toward Precision and Complexity, Journal of
Small Business Management, 18 (1), 33-36.
Sorgman, M. & K. Parkison (2006). The Transformation of
Classroom Teachers from Practitioners to Researchers: Building Research
Skills in Classroom Teachers, Teaching Forum. Retrieved on Friday March
26, 2006 from http://www.uwosh.edu/programs/teachingforum/public_html/
?module=displaystory&story_id=682&format=html.
Sorgman, M. & K. Parkison (2003). Economics in Action: A SIFE,
University, and Classroom Partnership, Journal of Entrepreneurship
Education, 6, 77-85.
Top Ten Priorities, RISE 2020 Congress, Indiana Office of Community
and Rural Affairs. Retrieved on July 12, 2007 from www.ocra.IN.gov.
Margo Sorgman, Indiana University Kokomo
Kathy Parkison, Indiana University Kokomo
Table 1: The KACE Model in Entrepreneurship
Knowledge Applications
PowerPoint Center Library Resources from NCEE, and
Presentations ICEE but there are limited entrepreneurship
resources
On-line Praxis-applications following campus content
Exams/Quizzes presentations only
Textbook Readings Textbook Readings supplement on-line content
modules (6/semester)
Community Guest Applications done on-line with prompts
Speakers
Content and Off campus-based applications
Pedagogical
Modules & Analyses
Curriculum Teachers present their curriculum to their
Presentations that colleagues
demonstrate literacy
Knowledge Comfort
PowerPoint Design of campus classroom climate-
Presentations hands-on interactive activities for 6
sessions
On-line Direct and immediate campus
Exams/Quizzes applications of content for 6 sessions
Textbook Readings Seminar format and 8 meetings on
campus
Community Guest Regular update of curriculum
Speakers development progress mainly online
Content and Socialization via email pre/post off
Pedagogical campus sessions
Modules & Analyses
Curriculum Group interactions within a learning
Presentations that community
demonstrate literacy
Table 2: Results of the Pre/Post Survey
Pre- Post-
Question Average Average
1 2 4.125 **
7 3.75 3.63
9 3.5 3.88
10 1.88 4 **
11 2.5 4 **
12 2.63 4.25 **
14 2.88 3.88
17 1.63 3.88 **
18 3 4
20 3.75 4.43
23 2.5 4 **
24 2 4.14 **
26 3.13 4
** Difference in means is statistically
significant at the 99% level
Table 3: Please rate yourself on the following
statements (1 low to 5 high)
Statements Rating
1. Knowledge of economic/entrepreneurship concepts.
2. View the important goal of education as
development of subject matter knowledge.
3. Importance of understanding economic/
entrepreneurship concepts.
4. Importance of understanding economic/
entrepreneurship facts.
5. Importance of understanding economic/
entrepreneurship theories.
6. Importance of understanding beliefs held by
people in the field of economics/
entrepreneurship.
7. Knowing what your students' ideas are about
economic/entrepreneurship.
8. Know how to anticipate and interpret what your
students think about or do in an activity.
9. Have economic/entrepreneurship objectives to
meet economic mandate.
10. Knowledge of instructional strategies to teach
economics/entrepreneurship.
11. Ability to apply your knowledge about economics/
entrepreneurship in the classroom.
12. Ability to teach economic/entrepreneurship content.
13. Importance of changing your practice.
14. Ability to develop authentic activities in
economics/entrepreneurship.
15. Use personal resources embedded in curriculum
materials to teach economics/entrepreneurship.
16. Engage students in the use of data.
17. Have material in economics/entrepreneurship
that are of high quality content and pedagogy.
18. View yourself as a reflective practitioner.
19. Importance of understanding structures in
economics/entrepreneurship.
20. Importance of opportunity to discuss teaching.
21. Importance of being in a culture where a range
of teaching practices is available.
22. View teaching as a way to promote your
own learning.
23. Your ability to think like an economist/
entrepreneur.
24. Know how the discipline of economics/
entrepreneurship works.
25. Use rationales for the approaches you take
in the classroom.
26. Integrate knowledge and theory (Praxis).