Key Words Entrepreneurial, Enterprising, Learning environments, Finnish general education, Teachers understanding, Development

Transcription

1 Developing Entrepreneurial Learning Environments in Finnish General Education Lenita Hietanen University Lecturer, Faculty of Education, University of Lapland PO BOX 122, FI Rovaniemi Phone: Abstract Key Words Entrepreneurial, Enterprising, Learning environments, Finnish general education, Teachers understanding, Development Objectives This case is based on a project in which seven teachers at comprehensive and general upper secondary schools in Finland are developing methods to teach non-business subjects in entrepreneurial way. The teachers have had no entrepreneurship-related courses during their teacher studies. The aim of this paper is to describe the common understanding shared by the teachers about what entrepreneurship education entails and to consider the relationship between their understanding and previous research. Another aim is to consider whether the teachers common understanding is closer to definitions of enterprise or entrepreneurship education. Prior work Previous research has focused on the higher educational level and on business education. The concept of entrepreneurship education should be defined in each context because there are no universal definitions. This research case focuses on teachers organizational and pedagogical solutions. For example, they try to enable learners to make choices about various opportunities, to experiment with their choices and to create their own ideas about how to participate more actively in learning processes. Approach This study is defined as an action research project as the teachers and the researcher are developing school practices collaboratively. Development begins with what the teachers already know about entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behaviour. The researcher relates this common understanding to previous research about entrepreneurship education. The data for the study were collected during spring Results The teachers have found learners initiative, ideas, experimenting, and both individual and collaborative selfguided participation essential when developing learning environments more entrepreneurial. In addition, the teachers emphasize the connection between the learners life outside of school and the contents and methods to be learned at school. Value The current research presents some ideas about how to facilitate learners already in general education to become aware of their entrepreneurial mind-set and familiar with enterprising and entrepreneurial behaviour. In addition, the research contributes a practice-based frame to the issue of whether it is possible to develop enterprise education toward entrepreneurship education through entrepreneurial activities in general education without a business content. The case is carried out in the Finnish education system, but the ideas can be applied internationally. Introduction Entrepreneurship education has been examined a lot, but mostly in business education and at higher levels of education (see, e.g., Jones and Iredale, 2014, pp ). However, policy programmes have slated entrepreneurship education to be implemented throughout the educational system (European Commission, 2012, 2013; Finnish Ministry of Education, 2009). Obviously, there must be ways to include elements of entrepreneurship education elements at lower educational levels, too. One of the biggest questions is: How? This research was carried out in Finnish comprehensive schools and general upper secondary schools, where entrepreneurship is not a compulsory subject. In fact, both school systems are based on all-round educational principles stating that no special professions are to be highlighted compared with others. Other principles instruct 1

2 that each kind of learner be equally respected and facilitated on his/her educational path. These principles prevent teachers from highlighting entrepreneurialism more than working life as an employee. In addition, it is forbidden to value some kind of personality or behaviour more than others. However, both the studied school levels include guidance in their curricula about familiarizing learners with entrepreneurship (FNBE, 2003, 2004). It has been acknowledged that teachers are crucial to implementing entrepreneurship education in schools (e.g. Gibb, 2011; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). That is why this research focuses on teachers solutions when they organize learning environments and make pedagogical decisions in learning situations. This research is part of broader study in which the teachers are developing their teaching practices to enable their learners entrepreneurial orientation, or, at least, to enable enterprise activities. The current paper presents the teachers understanding about exploiting working-life orientation and entrepreneurial orientation as methods and attitudes in the learning environments where general education subjects, for example, mathematics or various languages, are to be learned. The paper considers whether the teachers interpretations and implementations are nearer to enterprise education or to entrepreneurship education. This consideration is based mostly on the definitions of Jones and Iredale (2010, 2014) and Blenker et al. (2010, 2012). In addition, the paper considers which elements to include in the rest of the development project to enable learning environments to become more entrepreneurial. This paper presents the seven teachers common definitions of working-life orientation and entrepreneurship orientation. The teachers meeting was facilitated by the author, who has been implemented entrepreneurial practices and researched entrepreneurship education implementations in general education in Finland. Usually, entrepreneurship education has been defined by experts, who present content and methods to teachers to include in their daily practices. Most often, teachers have had difficulty including the given exterior content and methods in their teaching of non-business subjects (Jones and Iredale, 2014; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). The current development project is based on teachers existing knowledge about general working-life, and it is enriched by their experimentation and by the author s knowledge and competence as a supervisor. The current development project includes two independent experiments carried out by each teacher with her or his own group of learners: one during spring 2014, and the other during autumn Between these times, the teachers perform selfassessments and a collaborative assessment based on their reflections in and on the experiments (see Schön, 1987). The author has observed and observes some lessons, and supervises teachers during the experiments. Enterprise or entrepreneurship education? In the research field of entrepreneurship education, whether a case refers to enterprise or entrepreneurship education has for example depended on on whether researchers have followed the Anglo-American or the Continental approach (Hägg and Peltonen, 2014, Kyrö, 2005). The Anglo-American approach mainly defines entrepreneurship education as education for dealing with business (e.g. Carrier, 2005). The Continental approach most often defines entrepreneurship education more widely, taking into account both education for entrepreneurship as a business and education through entrepreneurial learning processes (Hägg and Peltonen, 2014; Kyrö, 2005). Entrepreneurship can be content, or a method of learning or both (Neck and Greene, 2011). In general, the non-business education approach to entrepreneurial education refers the most naturally to learning methods, because entrepreneurialism is not within the scope of common subjects. As a method, entrepreneurship focuses, for example, on offering various opportunities (see, e.g. Rae, 2007; Sarasvathy and Venkataraman, 2011) to diverse people, which fits the task of general education. Often, entrepreneurship education has included three aims: educating about, through and for entrepreneurship (Scott et al., 1998). Jones and Iredale (2010, 2014) define entrepreneurship education as implemented only in business education, meaning education to become an entrepreneur. Without the third aim, education for entrepreneurship, they see only enterprise education, suitable also for employees and even for daily practices. According to Jones and Iredale (2014), there seems to be no place for entrepreneurship education in compulsory, general education courses. In their recent studies, Blenker et al. (2012) come to a conclusion close to that of Jones and Iredale. However, Blenker et al. (2012, p.419) want to use concept of entrepreneurship education as a general umbrella covering the wide variety of educational initiatives related to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship or enterprise education at lower educational levels has been examined to some extent. However, in many cases entrepreneurship has been implemented at schools as an exterior content into general education daily practices. Hytti and O Gorman (2004) conducted a large study in which they researched 50 enterprise education programmes from four European countries, including Finland and UK. They learned that for learners older than 13, the most typical objectives of enterprise education were connected to increasing the number of start-ups. In contrast, in most programmes at lower levels, the objectives were to improve the learners 2

3 enterprising skills without a business emphasis and to increase learners understanding of the world of work (Hytti and O Gorman, 2004). Draycott and Rae (2011) examined the meaning of the concept of enterprise to year-old learners education in England. They concluded that these young people should be able to develop their self-knowledge and self-efficacy so as to be able to develop and act on ideas and opportunities. In addition, they found that enterprising action is situational and differs when learning different subjects. They highlight practical creativity, including for learning by experimentation and dealing with risks, uncertainty and failure. They see enterprise education as filling the gap between the world of work and the real economy (Draycott and Rae, 2011, p. 139). In addition, Pepin (2012) examined enterprise education in primary and secondary schools from a Deweyian perspective, emphasizing experiential learning as an integral method. Draycott and Rae (2011) identified various subjects in general education to be learned enterprisingly. Garnett (2013) examined the development in the UK of multiple pedagogical methods in music learning environments to increase year-olds enterprise practices through active and experiential learning approaches. Among the results of this research were that learners had possibilities to strengthen their abilities in ways other than the usual, and could act independently when the teacher took the role of facilitator. In Finland, too, music has been studied in basic education. Hietanen et al. (2014) studied 13-year-old learners, finding that it is possible to strengthen learners entrepreneurial thinking through their supported reflections and assessments. The learning environment was based on various opportunities: to make choices among given music tasks and to interpret the given music tasks individually or collaboratively with peer-learners. In this study, the teacher talked about the behaviours of small-sized entrepreneurs, which the learners mimicked when making the decisions and solving problems creatively. That is why Hietanen defined the learning environment and the learners actions as entrepreneurial. Furthermore, Hietanen and Järvi (2014) researched how learners can develop their entrepreneurial activities as entrepreneurial learning paths, from general education to and through vocational education, in which learners in Finland begin to study dealing with business. Leffler and Svedberg (2005) studied comprehensive and upper secondary schools in Sweden and found that at these levels, enterprise practices are based on learners cooperation, power of initiative, creativity and activity. This paper defines entrepreneurial as both thinking and acting as small-sized entrepreneurs do (see Kuratko, 2005). This includes the attributes, skills and behaviour characteristic of small-sized entrepreneurs (Gibb, 2005). The behaviour of small-sized entrepreneurs is important to realize and mimick already in general education, because first firms normally are small-sized enterprises. According to Gibb (2005), entrepreneurial attributes include self-confidence, self-belief, perseverance, action-orientation, preference for learning by doing, determination, and creativity. He defines entrepreneurial skills for example as creative problem solving, persuading, negotiating, strategic thinking, and networking. Gibb (2005) states that an individual behaves entrepreneurially when he or she seeks and grasps opportunities, takes initiative to make things happen, solves problems creatively, networks effectively to manage interdependence, takes calculated risks, and takes responsibility for and ownership of things. This paper will categorize as part of enterprise education or enterprising education those activities that the teachers emphasized that also are most often defined as general working-life activities (Blenker et al.2012; Jones and Iredale, 2010, 2014). Entrepreneurship education in general education curricula in Finland In the Finnish national curricula for both basic education and for general upper secondary schools, entrepreneurship education is guided somewhat. Both educational levels highlight learners abilities to participate creatively already in planning learning processes and setting their own goals. Other highly recommended abilities are activity in learning processes, self-assessment based on reflective practices, and cooperation with all members in school societies. Teacher s work is to enable these types of activities in learning environments. In basic education the only guidance for addressing entrepreneurship is defined in the Participatory citizenship and entrepreneurship cross-curricular theme. In both comprehensive and upper secondary schools, crosscurricular themes are instructed to be implemented in all subjects and in the school s operational culture in appropriate ways. Common instruction in the curriculum for basic education includes for example following information: The goals of the "Participatory citizenship and Entrepreneurship" cross-curricular theme are to help the pupil perceive society from the viewpoints of different players, to develop the capabilities needed for civic involvement, and to create a foundation for entrepreneurial methods. The school's methods and culture of learning must support the pupils' development as independent, initiative-taking, goal-conscious, cooperative, engaged citizens, and help the pupils form a realistic picture of their own possibilities for influence. (FNBE, 2004, p. 38). Some of the objectives for learners are defined as follows: 3

4 The pupils will come to understand the importance, workings, and needs of the school community, the public sector, the business world and organizations, from the perspective of the functionality of society learn to form their own critical opinions, making use of various types of expertise learn to participate appropriately and to take responsibility for the care of shared concerns in their local and school communities learn to confront and deal with changes, uncertainty, and conflicts, and to act with a sense of enterprise and initiative learn to act innovatively and perseveringly in achieving a goal, and to assess their own persona! actions and their impacts come to know working life and entrepreneurial activity, and come to understand their importance to the individual and society. (FNBE, 2004, p. 38.) In upper secondary schools, entrepreneurship education is described as familiarizing learners with entrepreneurship, its various forms and its importance in society. However, there are no compulsory courses that include entrepreneurship as content. General objectives state: Upper secondary school instruction must provide students with abilities to plan their own future, further and higher education and future career. Students will become familiar with working and economic life and entrepreneurship. The aim is that, upon completion of general upper secondary education, students will be capable of facing the challenges presented by the changing world in a flexible manner, be familiar with means of influence and possess the will and courage to take action. They must be provided with the prerequisites for diverse and full life in different roles of being human. (FNBE, 2003, p. 26.) In addition, entrepreneurship is addressed in the Active citizenship and entrepreneurship cross-curricular theme, the aim of which is to educate learners to become participating, responsible and critical citizens at the local, national, European and global levels. Some of the learner objectives are as follows: Be able to form their own justified opinions and discuss these with respect for other people s opinions Be familiar with various participation systems in society and their procedures Be ready to participate in the creation of common good for their local community, municipality of residence, society and living environment as individuals and in groups and to influence decision-making in society Adopt proactiveness and enterprise as their own operating methods Be familiar with the different forms, opportunities and operating principles of entrepreneurship Understand the significance of work to individuals and society. (FNBE, 2003, p. 27.) In Finnish schools, teachers blame the curricula if they cannot find ways to let learners participate more effectively in different phases of the learning processes. However, in this case, it seems that the curricula address learners participation and activity. So, any weak learner participation must be caused by something else. This paper describes the first part of a development project whose on goal is to identify what is to blame. Methodology and data description This study takes an action research approach, because teachers, with the author as their supervisor, are reflecting on, defining and developing their teaching practices (see Carr, 2006; Elliott, 1991; Shulman and Shulman, 2004). The seven participating teachers include three class teachers in lower levels at comprehensive schools, two subject teachers in upper grades at a comprehensive school and two guidance counsellors at upper secondary schools. These teachers had no working-life or entrepreneurship-education courses during their teacher education. They are very experienced and have taught in various schools. Their understanding of Finnish teaching practices is quite reliable. In addition, before 2009, the author had been a teacher in Finnish basic education and upper secondary schools for 20 years. This paper describes the first two parts of the action research cycle. First, the seven participating teachers together defined their understanding and knowledge about behaviours in both general working life and enterprises. Second, each teacher planned her or his own experiment based on this common understanding. The aim of the experiments is to develop processes to organize learning environments that enable learners to act in ways more oriented toward working life and enterprises. Later in this paper, general working-life orientation is seen as enterprise activity (Draycott and Rae, 2011; Jones and Iredale, 2010). Second, the action research cycle continues with descriptions of and self-assessments and collaborative assessments of the first experiments. The next steps will be each teacher s plan for another experiment, and descriptions, reflections and assessments of those experiments. As the last activity in the project, the teachers and the supervisor will write a guidebook describing the experiments, which will include a common model of what is crucial when organizing learning 4

5 environments to enable learner s enterprising or entrepreneurial activities at the lower levels of general education. The research questions are as follows. How do teachers define learners enterprise and entrepreneurial activities at the lower levels of general education in Finland? How do teachers develop their learning environments to enable learners to practice enterprise and entrepreneurial activities as learning methods? Data for this paper were collected in spring The common definition was agreed upon after discussion by the teachers and supervisor. Data include the teachers definitions and the essential foci of their first experiments. In addition, data include both recorded discussion and each teacher s written notes of the experiment plans. Analysis was based on theory-guided content analysis. The most crucial concepts to consider were those that teachers used to define how they wanted learners to act and how they would enable them to act that way. Relationship with the teachers definitions and previous research in entrepreneurship education There are many essential enterprising and entrepreneurial features considered crucial to entrepreneurship. Features differ depending on scholarly approaches. Van Gelderen (2010) states that learner s autonomy may be a guiding aim in entrepreneurship education. According to him, autonomy includes, e.g., decisional freedom, selfawareness, knowing one s dreams and aims, and acting on those dreams and aims. The van Gelderen s definition about the inner endorsement is near to psychological ownership, which van Dyne and Pierce (2004) define as essential, along with work attitudes and work behaviours. In the current development project, the teachers defined learners autonomy as one of the first steps in their entrepreneurial education. However, the teachers emphasized that although each learner should be able to be autonomous, interactive teamwork in some learning situations is essential to becoming enterprising or entrepreneurial. Van Dyne and Pierce (2004) emphasize psychological ownership in both individual performance and organizational citizenship as an organizational commitment. According to Gapp and Fisher (2007) and Bjornali and Stören (2012) engaging oneself in teamworking and other social participatory practices for common benefit in organizations may be interpreted as intrapreneurial approach. Intrapreneurship is an essential form of entrepreneurship (e.g. Kyrö, 2005) which according to Hietanen (2013) represents an integral phase in becoming an entrepreneur. Table 1 shows what kinds of behaviours the teachers found crucial to both enterprise and entrepreneurial behaviour and to learners daily practices in general education. Table 1. Teachers definitions of learners enterprise and entrepreneurial behaviours. Learners autonomy In their communities, should be built on learners should be - Own ideas - Confronting others non-prejudiciously - Previous experiences - Responsible for others - Initiative - Influential - Own strengths - Interactive - Self-responsibility - Individually and collaboratively self-guided, - Having influence e.g. in searching for knowledge - Setting own goals - Supported by peer-learners - Self-guided knowledge searching, - Able and willing to networking e.g. by exploiting information - Able to relate their individual goals to common ones technology - Willing to act for the common benefit - Creativity (i.e., intrapreneurial activity) - Appearance - Creative As supervisor, first, the author encouraged the teachers to discuss their understanding of enterprise and entrepreneurship behaviours and education based on their previous knowledge. At the end of the day, she gave them some existing definitions of entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial concepts, for example, some of Gibb s (2005) definitions. Comparing the teachers definitions of learners entrepreneurial or enterprising behavior in Table 1 with Gibb s (2005) definitions shows clear similarities. For example, initiative, responsibility, creativity, autonomy, and networking are common to both. Self-guidance can be seen as including action-orientation, determination, managing autonomously, self-belief, creative problem-solving and strategic thinking, all of which Gibb (2005) defined as entrepreneurial skills, attributes or behaviours. It is remarkable that teachers, without any entrepreneurship education courses, emphasized some very basic ethical aspects of education, such as listening to others, treating everyone equally and respecting each other s personal lives. In their recent studies, Hägg and 5

6 Peltonen (2014) noted that ethical and educational philosophical roots are missing in many pedagogical entrepreneurial solutions. The aim of the entire development project is to identify the elements in teachers learning-environment arrangements that promote learners enterprise or entrepreneurial activities. Table 2 shows the teachers first thoughts about these elements. They recognized both supporting and hindering practices when teachers are usually planning their learning-environment arrangements and in implementing them in learning situations in general education. Table 2. Teachers activities that hinder or enable learners enterprise and entrepreneurial behaviours. Teachers as hinderers Teachers as enablers - Decide independently about the - Confront each learner as valuable contents, methods, materials and - Listen and notice learners ideas, vehicles concerning their lessons experiences and knowledge - Plan strictly detailed lessons - Connect learning situations with learners - Plan lessons according to ready-made life through both ideas and benefit materials and guides - Organize space in learning situations for - Are afraid of risks and avoid them learners parents, grandparents or other relatives as experts - Widen learning environments toward nearby informal environment - Exploit visitors inside school and visiting outside school - plan and enact learning together with learners: everyone may learn - Plan learners days appropriate harmonious collaboratively with colleagues - Promote themes and phenomena as content instead of little details When developing learning environments to be more enterprising, the close connection between learners real lives and the nearby environment seems to be a clear principle in teachers objectives. In previous research, Rae (2007) has emphasized combining formal and informal elements in enterprising learning environments. Neither in definitions of learners enterprising activities nor in the objectives of the first experiments did teachers mention enterprise or entrepreneurship by name. According to the data, these learning environments could be described as enterprising, but not entrepreneurial (e.g. Jones and Iredale, 2014). Another question is whether the teachers are aware enough of entrepreneurs behaviours and, despite not mentioning it aloud during lessons, try to encourage learner to practice the behaviours of small-sized entrepreneurs when studying non-business subjects. Obviously, this is an issue to discuss and clarify during future phases of the development project. We must keep in mind that the major aim of the project is to enable learners working-life orientation, especially entrepreneurship orientation, during their non-business studies in comprehensive and upper secondary school. In next page, Table 3 shows each teacher s school level, subject, and self-determined aim for the first experiment. Despite working in different schools, the two guidance counsellors designed a common plan and enacted it individually, meaning that there are a total of six plans. It seems obvious from teachers definitions of their learners activities and their own learning-environment arrangements that learners autonomy is a first step in enterprise or entrepreneurial activity (see van Gelderen, 2010). In addition, they seek to connect the learner s entire life, including their ideas, experiments, parents, grandparents and the nearby environment, as part of their enterprise environment. Many of the plans propose that learners experiment and make decisions among various opportunities, both given and discovered. Learners cooperation seems to be important, too. 6

7 Table 3. Teachers aims in the first learning-environment experiments Teacher School level Subject Aim for the first experiment A Class teacher, 2 nd grade Mathematics To offer three methods to practice and learn mathematical tasks, enabling learners to make facilitated but self-guided decisions and B C D E F Class teacher, 4 th grade Class teacher, 6 th grade Subject teacher, 9 th grade Subject teacher, 9 th grade Guidance counsellors, (two independent) upper secondary schools Environment and nature studies Many subjects Swedish language English language Guiding learners learning paths during general education, and for professional studies after general education experiments. To enable more learning-by-doing. To connect content with learners real lives through their hobbies, parents professions and know-how, and grandparents know-how. To enable and facilitate learners work-related activities implemented in practical projects outside school, to be exploited as methods in learning situations in the classrooms. To enable and facilitate learners to evaluate which parts of the Swedish program in basic education they need to strengthen before the national exam and how they want to go about it. To consider with learners the ways in which they can work with subjects before the English national exam, to encourage each to act with other peer-learners and to encourage each to share knowledge democratically. To encourage learners to participate more actively in their learning processes and paths and in planning for life and a career after general education. To connect a learners life by including hobbies as a more essential part of both their learning methods and future plans. To give more space to learners ideas and thoughts in guiding materials and interactive guiding sessions. Discussion and conclusions In this study, seven teachers in Finnish comprehensive and upper secondary schools are developing their learning environments to be more enterprising or entrepreneurial for learners. The teachers took no entrepreneurship-education courses during their teacher studies. They see enterprise activity as important to daily practices and working-life practices, but they respect entrepreneurship as a special type of working life, too. These initial experiments focused on the teachers own understanding about enterprise and entrepreneurial activities. According to the data, it seems they plan to enable learners enterprise activity during the first experimentation period. However, we do not know what happened in practice during that first period. Nevertheless, this development project and this paper have identified one essential question about enterprise and entrepreneurship education in general education. The question is: What learning environments and practices are crucial to defining non-business subjects as part of entrepreneurship education? In basic education and in general upper secondary schools in Finland, there are no compulsory entrepreneurship courses. Despite this, the Finnish Ministry of Education (2009) has recommended entrepreneurship education and practices as part of the educational path. It does not seem appropriate that each teacher of a non-business subject must include something about real enterprises in his or her lessons. However, every teacher can enable learners to practice skills and activities that small-scale entrepreneurs need. In addition, teachers can enhance entrepreneurial attitudes, encourage new things and enable learners to be autonomous while also being collaborative. The larger question still remains: When is it time to begin talking about entrepreneurial activities instead of enterprising activities? Should teachers talk about enterprises and entrepreneurs and their importance to society and enable learners to study through entrepreneurial learning processes so as to prepare for entrepreneurship as one career opportunity (see Scott, 1998)? Acknowledgements The paper focuses on one essential issue concerning both the theoretical and practical basis of and judgments for teachers experiments in the YriTy Project. In this project, seven teachers in comprehensive schools and general upper secondary schools in Northern Finland are developing by means of research-based experiments their teaching practices regarding entrepreneurship and working life. The author is the designer and leader of the project, which will last through Project funding comes from the European Social Fund and, locally, from the 7

8 North Ostrobothnia Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment, which comes under the administrative branch of the Ministry of Employment and the Economy. References Bjornali, E. and Stören, L. A. (2012), Examining competence factors that encourage innovative behaviour by European higher education graduate professionals, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp Blenker, P. & Christensen, P. R. (2010), Hunting the entrepreneurial expertise: entrepreneurs in education, in A. Fayolle (Ed.) Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education, Volume 3. International perspectives. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham. Blenker, P., Frederiksen, S. H., Korsgaard, S., Moller, S., Neergaard, H. & Thrane, C. (2012), "Entrepreneurship as everyday practice: towards a personalized pedagogy of enterprise education", I ndustry & Higher Education, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp Carr, W. (2006), Philosophy, Methodology and Action Research, Journal of Philosophy of Education, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp Carrier, C. (2005), Pedagogical challenges in entrepreneurship education. In P. Kyrö and C. Carrier. The dynamics of learning entrepreneurship in a cross-cultural university context. Entrepreneurship Education Series 2/2005, Hämeenlinna: University of Tampere, Research Centre for Vocational and Professional Education, Draycott, M., & Rae, D. (2011). Enterprise education in schools and the role of competency frameworks. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp Elliott, J Action research for educational change. Buckingham: Open University Press. European Commission. (2012), Entrepreneurship Education at School in Europe. National Strategies, Curricula and Learning Outcomes. Available online: (accessed 8 September 2013). Finnish Ministry of Education (2009), Guidelines of entrepreneurship education, Publications of the Ministry of Education 2009:9, available at: (accessed 7 August 2012). FNBE (2003), National Core Curriculum for Upper Secondary Schools Finnish National Board of Education. Available online: accessed 18 June FNBE (2004), national Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2004, pp Finnish National Board of Education. Available online: accessed 18 June Gapp, R. and Fisher, R. (2007), Developing an intrapreneur-led three-phase model of innovation, International Journal of Behaviour and Research, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp Garnett, J. (2013). Enterprise pedagogy in music: an exploration of multiple pedagogies. Music Education Research, Vol.15 No.1, pp Gibb, A. (2005). The future of entrepreneurship education Determining the basis for coherent policy and practice? In P. Kyrö & C. Carrier (Eds.), The dynamics of learning entrepreneurship in a cross-cultural university context (pp ). Hämeenlinna: Research Centre for Vocational and Professional Education. Gibb, A. (2011), Concepts into practice: Meeting the challenge of development of entrepreneurship educators around an innovative paradigm. The case of the International Entrepreneurship Educators Programme (IEEP), International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp Hietanen, L. (2013), From Employee to Entrepreneur through Reflecting Intrapreneurial and Entrepreneurial Activity? Conference paper in 3EC Conference. Inaugural ECSB (European Council for Small Business and Entrepreneurship) Entrepreneurship Education Conference, May 2013, Århus, Denmark. Hietanen, L. and Järvi, T. (accepted), Contextualizing entrepreneurial learning in basic and vocational education, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. X No. X, Hietanen, L., Uusiautti, S. and Määttä, K. (2014), Enhancing Entrepreneurship in Learners an Implementation and Evaluation of Entrepreneurship Education through Music Education, Problems of Education in the 21 st Century, Vol. 59, pp ICID:

9 Hytti, U. and O Gorman, C. (2004), What is enterprise education? An analysis of the objectives and methods of enterprise education programmes in four European countries, Education and Training, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp Hägg, O. and Peltonen, K. (2014), Towards a Conceptual Understanding of Entrepreneurial Pedagogy. In Kyrö, P. (Ed.) Yrittäjyyskasvatuksen aikakauskirja 1/2014. Yrittäjyyskasvatuksen tutkimusseura ry, Helsinki. Jones, B. and Iredale, N. (2010), Viewpoint: Enterprise education as pedagogy, Education + Training, Vol. 52 No. 1, Jones, B. and Iredale, N. (2014), Enterprise and entrepreneurship education: towards a comparative analysis, Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 8, No.1., pp Kuratko, D. F. (2005), The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 29 No.5, pp Kyrö, P. (2005), Entrepreneurial learning in a cross-cultural context challenges previous learning paradigms. In Kyrö, P. & Carrier, C. (Eds.) The Dynamics of Learning Entrepreneurship in a Cross-Cultural University Context. University of Tampere Research Centre for Vocational and Professional Education, pp Leffler, E. & Svedberg, G. (2005). Enterprise Learning: a challenge to education? European Educational Research Journal, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp Neck, H. M. and Greene, P. G. (2011), Entrepreneurship Education: Known Worlds and New Frontiers, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 49 No.1, pp Pepin, M. (2012), Enterprise education: a Deweyan perspective, Education + Training, Vol. 54 No. 8/9, pp Rae, D. (2007), Entrepreneurship. From Opportunity to Action, Palgrave MacMillan, New York. Sarasvathy, S. D. & Venkataraman, S. (2011), Entrepreneurship as Method. Open Questions for an Entrepreneurial Future, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp Schön, D. (1987), Educating the Reflective Practioner, Jossey-Bass, London. Scott, M. G., Rosa, P. and Klandt, H. (1998). Educating entrepreneurs for wealth creation. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, pp Seikkula-Leino, J., Ruskovaara, E., Ikävalko, M., Mattila, J., & Rytkölä, T. (2010). Promoting entrepreneurship education: the role of the teacher? Education + Training, Vol. 52 No.2, pp Shulman, L.S. and Shulman, J.H. (2004), How and what teachers learn: a shifting perspective, Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp Van Dyne, L. and Pierce, J. L. (2004), Psychological ownership and feelings of possessions: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25, pp DOI: /job.249. Van Gelderen, M. (2010), Autonomy as the guiding aim of entrepreneurship education, Education + Training, Vol. 52 No.8/9, pp