IP Publishing logo IP Publishing Ltd
Industry & Higher Education cover Industry & Higher Education logo Industry & Higher Education cover

The world's leading journal for all involved in collaboration between higher education and business

ISSN 0950-4222 (print); 2043-6858 (online)


Recommend this journal to your library

Publication ethics and publication malpractice

Increase exposure of your paper

Call for papers – Innovative pedagogy in entrepreneurship education

CALL FOR PAPERS – REGIONAL DIMENSIONS OF THE TRIPLE HELIX AND ECOSYSTEM BOUNDARIES

Clockss logo

Other Sites of Interest

Editorial coverage

Industry and Higher Education, published six times per year, is dedicated to the relationships between business and industry and higher education institutions. With a strong emphasis on practical aspects, the journal covers organizational, economic, political, legal, and social issues relating to developments in education-industry collaboration.
Among the key topics are:

  • Knowledge transfer from research to commercial application
  • Educating for entrepreneurship
  • Clusters and the regional economy
  • Preparing students for the world of work
  • International and national initiatives for collaboration
  • Respective needs in the industry–education relationship
  • Lifelong learning
  • University–industry networks
  • University–industry training programmes
  • Business–education partnerships for social and economic progress
  • Skills needs and the role of higher education
  • Formation, structure and performance of academic spin-off companies
  • Personnel exchange
  • Industrial liaison in universities
  • Intellectual property in the HE sector
  • Distance education

Submissions - Notes for authors

Please send submissions by e-mail to John Edmondson, Industry and Higher Education, IP Publishing Ltd, 4th Floor, Hamilton House, Mabledon Place, Bloomsbury, London WC1H 9BB, UK.
jedmondson(a)ippublishing.com

Type and length of contributions

The major part of the journal is taken up by papers between 4,000 and 8,000 words long. These should be analytical and evaluative in approach and not simply descriptive. Other contributions include opinion or 'viewpoint' pieces (1,500-3,000 words); case studies of specific ventures or programmes (1,500-3,000 words); brief factual summaries of reports, agency programmes, educational institutions, etc (1,000-2,000 words); and letters to the editors.

Presentation

Submissions should be double-spaced. They can be sent either by e-mail to the editor or by post (in which case one hard copy and a disk or CD should be enclosed). Papers should preferably be sent in Word (please note that PDF versions are not acceptable for review purposes). The title page should contain full names of the authors, their professional status or affiliation and the address to which they wish correspondence to be sent. There should be an abstract of about 100 words at the beginning of the paper. The text should be organized under appropriate cross-headings and where possible these should not be more than 800 words apart.

Between 3 and 6 keywords should appear below the abstract, highlighting the main topics of the paper.

References should follow the Harvard system. That is, they should be shown within the text as the author's surname (or authors' surnames) followed by a comma and the year of publication, all in round brackets: for example, (Smith, 1998). For textual citations, where there are two authors please use the word 'and', not the ampersand (thus: '(Smith and Jones, 2012)'. Where there are more than two authors, please use the first-named author only, followed by 'et al' in italics (thus: Smith et al, 2012). At the end of the article a bibliographical list should be supplied, organized alphabetically by author (surnames followed by initials - all authors should be named). Bibliographic information should be given in the order indicated by the following examples:

Articles: Woollard, D. (2010), ‘Towards a theory of university entrepreneurship’, Industry and Higher Education, Vol 24, No 6, pp 413–427.

Books: Viale, R., and Etzkowitz, H., eds (2010), The Capitalization of Knowledge, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

Notes should be numbered consecutively in the text and typed in plain text at the end of the paper (not as footnotes on text pages).

Figures and tables should be presented separately on separate sheets at the end of the text. Each figure or table must be referred to in the text - the first reference will be used to locate the figure or table in the final printed version.

Prior Publication

Articles are received on the understanding that they are original contributions, and have not been published officially, either in print or electronic form, or submitted for publication elsewhere. In this respect, ‘discussion’ or ‘working’ papers, conference presentations and proceedings are not considered to be official publications, unless they have been formally deemed so by conference organizers, or presented as edited works through recognized publishing channels. If in doubt, authors are asked to draw the attention of the Editor to any prior dissemination of the paper in their letter of submission. Please note that articles should not be posted on personal Websites or social networking sites before or after submission.

Refereeing

Other than research notes, reports, and personal opinion pieces, articles will be refereed. Papers by authors who are not academics (eg submissions from industry) will also be subject to review before acceptance, but their distinct nature and aims will be fully taken into account.

Copyright

Wherever possible, authors are asked to assign copyright to IP Publishing Ltd. Relevant authors' rights are protected.

Author Checklist for Final versions

Editorial Board

Editor: John Edmondson, IP Publishing Ltd, 4th Floor, Hamilton House, Mabledon Place, Bloomsbury, London WC1H 9BB, UK. E-mail: Jedmondson(a)ippublishing.com.

Editorial Advisory Board

  • Special Adviser: Professor John Kelly, University College Dublin, Ireland
  • David E. Allnutt
    Cartesian, USA
  • Professor Graham Beaver
    Warwick Business School, UK
  • Richard A. Bendis
    Innovation America, USA
  • Professor Bruce Calway
    Swinburne University of Technology, Australia
  • Professor Elias Carayannis
    George Washington University, USA
  • Dr Mike Clements
    Staffordshire University, UK
  • Professor Manlio Del Giudice
    Second University of Naples, Italy
  • Dr E.J. Duff
    Innovation Management Consultant, UK
  • Professor D.J. Edwards
    Birmingham City University, UK
  • Professor Henry Etzkowitz
    International Triple Helix Institute, Palo Alto, CA, USA
  • Dr Brian K. Fitzgerald
    Business-Higher Education Forum, USA
  • Professor Piero Formica
    National University of Ireland
  • Dr Pat Frain
    University College Dublin, Ireland
  • Dr Thomas Gering
    Intellectual Asset Management Corp., USA
  • Dr Christiane Gebhardt
    Malik Management Institute, Switzerland
  • Keith Gilchrist
    GlaxoSmithKline Inc, Canada
  • Professor Aaron W. Hughey
    Western Kentucky University, USA
  • Dr Denise Jackson
    Edith Cowan University, Australia
  • Professor Ron Johnston
    University of Sydney, Australia
  • Professor Okyay Kaynak
    Bogaziçi University, Turkey
  • Dr John Kirkland
    Association of Commonwealth Universities, UK
  • Dr Glenda Kruss
    Human Sciences Research Council, South Africa
  • Professor Loet Leydesdorff
    University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Professor Michael J. Lynskey,
    Komazawa University, Japan
  • Professor Harry Matlay
    Global Independent Research, UK
  • Professor Gerard McElwee
    University of Huddersfield, UK
  • Professor Jay Mitra
    University of Essex, UK
  • Professor Hiromitsu Muta
    International Development Center, Japan
  • Professor George M. Papadourakis
    Technological Institute of Crete, Greece
  • Professor Andy Penaluna
    University of Wales Trinity St David, UK
  • Professor David Rae
    Cape Breton University, Canada
  • Dr Marina Ranga
    Stanford University, USA
  • Dr E. H. Robson
    Oxford, UK
  • Dr Robert Ronstadt
    former Vice President of Technology Commercialization,
    Boston University, USA
  • Professor Howard Rush
    University of Brighton, UK
  • Professor Peter van der Sijde
    Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Dr Paul J. Smith
    University of Sunderland, UK
  • Dr Emanuela Todeva
    University of Surrey, UK
  • Professor Urmas Varblane
    University of Tartu, Estonia
  • Professor Hebe Vessuri
    Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Cientificas, Venezuela
  • Dr Mary Lindenstein Walshok
    University of California at San Diego
  • Professor Andrew Webster
    University of York, UK

December 2014 ISSUE (VOL 28, NO 6)

SPECIAL ISSUE: Entrepreneurship education and learning and the real world
Guest Editors: Laura Galloway, David Higgins and Pauric McGowan

385 Introduction

387 Freedom or prescription: the case for curriculum guidance in enterprise and entrepreneurship education

David Rae, Harry Matlay, Pauric McGowan and Andrew Penaluna

399 When did you last predict a good idea? Exploring the case of assessing creativity through learning outcomes

Kathryn Penaluna, Andrew Penaluna, Colin Jones and Harry Matlay

411 Extracurricular business planning competitions: challenging the assumptions

Kayleigh Watson, Pauric McGowan and Paul Smith

417 In for the long haul – models of sustained graduate support and education

Tamara McNeill, Afia Khatun, Claire Giddens, Zuleika Beaven and Jennie Shorley

427 Using enterprise education to prepare healthcare professional graduates for the real world

Deema Refai and John Thompson

439 The application of reflexivity in small business research and implications for the business practitioner

Nigel Harrison and Janet Kirkham

449 Refocusing – building a future for entrepreneurial education and learning

David Higgins and Laura Galloway

459 Calendar

460 Index to Volume 28, 2014

Back to Top

Title: Freedom or prescription: the case for curriculum guidance in enterprise and entrepreneurship education

Author(s): David Rae, Harry Matlay, Pauric McGowan and Andrew Penaluna

Abstract: This article reviews the development of guidance and frameworks for enterprise and entrepreneurship education (EEE) in higher education institutions with reference to the international and European contexts as well as educational development in the UK and Ireland. The arguments for and the possible limitations and disadvantages of such frameworks are discussed. There has been extensive work on EEE and on the development of competence models, for example at secondary education level. This work is critically reviewed to identify its contribution to the development of educational guidance internationally and specifically in the UK and Ireland. The paper provides a critical narrative of the development of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) guidance in the UK and the Higher Education Training and Awards Council (HETAC) document in Ireland by experts involved in the design process and compares the approaches proposed. While at European level there has been greater emphasis on institutional frameworks focusing on the ‘entrepreneurial university’, there is scope for comparison with the above educational frameworks. Feedback and observations from enterprise educators at an international level are summarized to contextualize a debate on the value, contribution, possible disadvantages and future development of such frameworks. The international interest in and adoption of related approaches have been considerable and these are assessed. The paper has implications for educational policies on EEE at national and HE institutional levels, as well as for the practices of educators in designing, validating and delivering educational awards.

Back to Top

Title: When did you last predict a good idea? Exploring the case of assessing creativity through learning outcomes

Author(s): Kathryn Penaluna, Andrew Penaluna, Colin Jones and Harry Matlay

Abstract: It has been noted elsewhere that an idea is acknowledged to be creative if it is novel, or surprising and adaptive. So how does that fit with education’s desire to measure student performance against fixed, consistent and predicted learning outcomes? This study explores practical measures and theoretical constructs that address the dearth of teaching, learning and assessment strategies to enhance creative capacity in enterprise and entrepreneurship education. It is argued that inappropriate assessment strategies can be significant inhibitors of the creativity of students and teachers. Referring to the broader discipline of ‘design’, as defined by Bruce and Besant (2002) – the application of human creativity to a purpose – both broad employer satisfaction with education and fast growing economic success are found (DCMS, 2014). As predictable assessment outcomes equal predictable students, these understandings can inform educators who wish to map and develop enhanced creative endeavours such as opportunity recognition, communication and innovation.

Back to Top

Title: Extracurricular business planning competitions: challenging the assumptions

Author(s): Kayleigh Watson, Pauric McGowan and Paul Smith

Abstract: Business planning competitions [BPCs] are a commonly offered yet under-examined extracurricular activity. Given the extent of sceptical comment about business planning, this paper offers what the authors believe is a much-needed critical discussion of the assumptions that underpin the provision of such competitions. In doing so it is suggested that these competitions, being based on business plans, could be limiting the entrepreneurial activity they seek to stimulate. As a result it could be said that BPCs are in a state of flux and require an evolved approach emphasizing implementation rather than planning for implementation. The issues highlighted set the scene for further critical questioning of the competition agenda and expected to be of value to those designing and offering competitions as part of their extra-curricular entrepreneurship education portfolio.

Back to Top

Title: In for the long haul – models of sustained graduate support and education

Author(s): Tamara McNeill, Afia Khatun, Claire Giddens, Zuleika Beaven and Jennie Shorley

Abstract: This paper seeks to articulate the problem of lack of timeliness in the provision of support for graduating students. The authors demonstrate how drawing together employability and enterprise support in the period after graduation can address that problem and present a narrative of a knowledge exchange (KE), showing how KE has the potential to enhance the delivery of enterprise education. Two distinct areas of literature provide the theoretical basis for the paper: the extensive enterprise education literature and the much less extensive work on KE and knowledge transfer (KT). The authors explain their KE process and draw on external and internal evaluation evidence from graduate support programmes to highlight the importance of links between theory and practice in delivery settings. They envisage a model that does not treat entrepreneurship and employment as necessarily separate career choices, recognizes the need to align funding for both streams of support, reinforces the value of engaging with employers to develop graduate career options, and emphasizes the importance of a focus on the years after graduation. The paper contributes to the debate about models of enterprise education and provides insight into KE in this context.

Back to Top

Title: Using enterprise education to prepare healthcare professional graduates for the real world

Author(s): Deema Refai and John Thompson

Abstract: This paper reports an investigation of the extent to which enterprise education (EE) is used in professional health schools at HEIs to develop graduates’ ‘soft’ and ‘functional’ enterprise skills, and assesses the effectiveness of the process of delivering this education. A qualitative research study was carried out, using personal interviews with employers and academics, and thematic analysis was used to identify themes and codes. It was found that although experiential and interactive learning approaches are often used in pharmacy schools, the emphasis is typically on discipline-related material and therefore only ‘soft’ enterprise skills are developed. There appears to be resistance to developing ‘functional’ enterprise skills in pharmacy disciplines. Suggestions are offered for facilitating the development of healthcare graduates who are more enterprising, while highlighting the importance of raising the awareness of academics in this regard and embedding EE as part of a school’s philosophy.

Back to Top

Title: The application of reflexivity in small business research and implications for the business practitioner

Author(s): Nigel Harrison and Janet Kirkham

Abstract: This paper is based on a review of the lead author’s research, which took the form of a self- narrative from a practitioner about the perceived realities of one small business and its owner. The paper explores the practical application of auto-ethnographic reflexive research methodologies and seeks to demonstrate that structured ways can be developed to enable complexity-inspired reflexive research to take place usefully in organizations. The authors review the appropriateness of a reflexive methodology, using ideas inspired by complexity thinking in the study of small businesses and their owner–managers. They highlight the practical difficulties encountered by a practitioner/researcher when attempting to employ reflexive methodology in the small business environment as a means of illuminating and understanding the driving forces that lie behind the outwardly observable characteristics of small businesses and their owner–managers. The approach remains relatively unknown in small business research and this mirrors a lack of acceptance in wider academic circles. The authors acknowledge the criticisms and discuss the limitations of the use of these techniques, but argue for their benefits to be more widely recognized. The outcomes presented offer an insight into behaviours and motivations not often articulated in the SME business world.

Back to Top

Title: Refocusing – building a future for entrepreneurial education and learning

Author(s): David Higgins and Laura Galloway

Abstract: The field of entrepreneurship has struggled with fundamental questions concerning the subject’s nature and purpose. To whom and to what means are educational and training agendas ultimately directed? Such questions have become of central importance to policy makers, practitioners and academics alike. There are suggestions that university business schools should engage more critically with the lived experiences of practising entrepreneurs through alternative pedagogical approaches and methods, seeking to account for and highlighting the social, political and moral aspects of entrepreneurial practice. In the UK, where funding in higher education has become increasingly dependent on student fees, there are renewed pressures to educate students for entrepreneurial practice as opposed to educating them about the nature and effects of entrepreneurship. Government and EU policies are calling on business schools to develop and enhance entrepreneurial growth and skill sets, to make their education and training programmes more proactive in providing innovative educational practices which help and facilitate life experiences and experiential learning. This paper makes the case for critical frameworks to be applied so that complex social processes become a source of learning for educators and entrepreneurs and so that innovative pedagogical approaches can be developed in terms both of context (curriculum design) and process (delivery methods).

Back to Top

Copyright 2014 IP Publishing Ltd.