Fluent Essays

please follow the requirement to finish apa format due in 24 h 6 pages 1 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATOR Robert J. Brown Jeffrey R. Cornwall 2 SCARECROW PRESS, INC. P b i hed i he U i ed S a e f A e ica b Sca ec P e , I c. 4720 B Wa , La ha , Ma a d 20706 . ca ec e .c 4 P e de Ga de , F ke e Ke CT20 2DN, E g a d C igh 2000 b R be J. B a d Jeff e R. C a All rights reserved. N a f hi b ica i a be e d ced, ed i a e ie a e , a i ed i a f b a ea , e ec ic, echa ica , h c i g, ec di g, he i e, i h he i e i i f he b i he . B i i h Lib a Ca a g i g i P b ica i I f a i A ai ab e Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data B , R be J. The e e e e ia ed ca / R be J. B , Jeff e R. C a . . c . I c de bib i g a hica efe e ce a d i de . ISBN: 978-0-8108-3899-4 ISBN: 0-8108-3899-0 a k. a e ) 1. Ed ca i U i ed S a e Fi a ce. 2. Ed ca i a eade hi U i ed S a e . 3. E e e e hi U i ed S a e . I. C a , Jeff e R. II. Ti e. LB2825 .B72 2000 371.2'06 dc21 00-045022 The a e ed i hi b ica i ee he i i e i e e f A e ica Na i a S a da d f I f a i Scie ce Pe a e ce f Pa e f P i ed Lib a Ma e ia , ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992. Ma fac ed i he U i ed S a e f A e ica. 3 CONTENTS F e d PART I THE NEW REALITIES OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 1 H We G He e 2 The R e f E e e e hi i Ed ca i 3 The T adi i a e he E e e e ia Ed ca i a O ga i a i 4 C ea i g a E e e e ia C e 5 The Ed ca i a I a e e 6 P a i g a d I e e a i f he E e e e ia C i PART II TOOLS AND TACTICS 7 Ma ke i g 8 Te i g Y S : Pe ce i Is Rea i 9 C ea i g Ed ca i a O i ie h gh Pa e hi 4 10 Seeki g a d Sec i g G a 11 L ca M e S ce 12 U e f I e ec a P e I de Ab he A h 5 FOREWORD E e e e c ea e e b i e e . Ca ee fe i a a age he ed ca i e ac A e ica. The cha ac e i ic a ib ed each f he e fe i a e a ked diffe e a d he e i cha ce ha e d i ake abe a ca ee fe i a a e e e e . A ea he e i cha ce ha i di id a i b i e d ake hi i ake beca e b i e d e c ide ed ca i a b i e . B b B a d Jeff C a begi hi b k b gge i g ha b i e a be f ced ec ide i i i ed ca i if he e d a d i a i i g b ic ch ake a d e a d a a ici a ed. Thi e d i d i e b e e e e b e ed i h he i de a e hei abi i be e ed ca e he c chi d e . Thi b e i f b i e e c e ed ca i ha bee f e ed b Nation at Risk, a U.S. De a e f Ed ca i e b i hed i he ea 1980 , hich ca f b d ac i a d he a i fai i g ch e . Ch i Whi e, a cce f b i he , i a g d e a e f e e ed ake ac i b acce i g he cha e ge d ce a b d e e. He a ched Cha e O e, b hi eff a bi e ed b a i a ed ca i ga i a i . The e c i ic , h e e , fai ed a e Whi e c i e , de e i a i , c ea i i , e f- e ia ce, a d i a i e ce . I he e d, e a i e ed ca ed ca i eade ig i g he a i a ga i a i a d e b aci g Whi e, he i g hi c ea e a cce f e ed ca i b i e . Whi e cce a ed he a f he ide f ed ca i , ch a S e e Wi , J h Ki , a d D g Becke , e hei b i e idea i ed ca i . The e 6 e c e a ac e e ca i a ed ca i , a d a he cceed he e e he a e a, c ea i g a e a ge ig e. I i he e f he e b i e - ie ed e c e a d ha ca be ea ed f he ha a ea be he ea he a h ack ed hi bjec . The de i g e i e f B a d C a b k ee be ha he bad deci i i deci i . The a h c ec i ha he b ic de a d f g ea e acc abi i ega di g e f a ce a da d ca f b d e . If h e i ide he e ca , i , a e ac , he i be ef behi d b he g i g be f ide h a e e ci ed b he cha e ge a d i i g i k e a i a d e a f e hei abi i de a d a d add e i a b e i ed ca i . A f hi i a c e a f a e k he a h e a a ba i f ide if i g e idea a d ac ice h f i i a i . I i hi e i i a i ha he h e i i a e e e e c ea i f i hi he ed ca i e ab i h e . O e ef e hi g a ec f hi b k i ha he di c i f gge ed idea a d ac ice a id he f da e a a ib i e f aci g ch e ha i he cha ac e i ic f i di id a . I ha i does a d ha i is ha i i a . Pe e ch a Ch i Whi e a e e i a ha he i a i ha c ea e he . B b B a d Jeff C a igh f f c he i a i a d e e a f ce ha ca e beha i , a d e hi f c a a ba i f idi g he f gge i ed ca . The c c de ha he i a i dic a e he eed f e e e e e ia beha i . Wha e a e h gh hi b k i he a h ac ica e e ie ce, di ec a ach b e i g, a d c ce f he ed ca i e ab i h e . The k d e g if e a e e e e e . I i gge ha e beha i a e h e a i i g a d ib de i g if e a e cceed i b i di g effec i e ca ea i g c i ie . D . J e h J. Sche e , ice e ide f Hif i , he fi ig ifica I e e e ice ide gea ed de , a e , a d eache Dr. Scherer has also been the associate executive director of The American Association of School Administrators, the executive director of the National School Public Relations Association, and director of Government Relations for the National PTA 7 Pa I THE NEW REALITIES OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 8 HOW WE GOT HERE Ed ca i i cha gi g a id , b ed ca i a eade hi ha ke ace. I he c ia e a a d i he ea ea f he U i ed S a e , ed ca i a ee a a fa i a d ch ch e ibi i . P i a ed ca i a ided i he h e i a ch , ica i h a i g e eache . A he a i e a ded e a d, c ch e e i a ed b he N h e O di a ce f 1787 a d cceedi g fede a a ha ided a d g a f he f b ic ed ca i . Th gh he eff f H ace Ma a d he , he e c ch e e e ged i ch e b he id- i e ee h ce . E ce f he e i e fe h d be g i g highe ed ca i , ec da ed ca i a a i f A e ica i af e he Kalamazoo c ca e i 1876. Tha Michiga S e e C deci i c a ified ha i a ega i e a e b ic ec da ch . B he begi i g f he e ie h ce , b ic ed ca i a i e a ffe ed, a h gh c e i f ec da ed ca i did bec e he i af e W d Wa II. A ch e g e , did hei g e i g a d ad i i a i e e ibi i ie . C ch e e g e ed b ca b a d ha hi ed he eache eache a d he ided he ge e a e igh f he ch . Wi h he de e e f a ge ch a d i e b i di g di ic , he e i e de c a e ab i hed ide ge e a a age e a d eade hi f ch e . Beca e he f e e e 9 he e i a ch e i h a c ege deg ee, ea e i e de e e ee a hi he h ga e di ec i he e b i e f hei g ea ed ca i a backg d. Whe A e ica b i e e e ed ha beca e k a he e a f efficie c , ch e i e de e e e ec ed ake he ch a i i a c . Wi h he d a a ic g h f ch d i g he W d Wa II bab b e a, he e i e de c e ed i he e f a b a d chief e ec i e, i h e ibi i ie f i g ic i i ia i e a d a agi g he e e i e. G h i he i e f ch b i di g ed he eed f de ig a ed eade hi i e. I i ia hi ea he a i e f a eache i cha ge i ci a eache . E e a , a ad i i a i e d ie e a ded, he e f he b i di g i ci a a c ea ed. Thi ade i ci a idd e a age i b ea c a ic ga i a i . Whi e he e be ed ca i a eade , e a d c e e i i b ce a ffice e e i i ed he i ci a abi i i i ia e ac i . I ece ea e e ha e g a ch ad i i a . Pa e , ed b ad cac g , a e de a di g e c e he ed ca i f hei chi d e . Si ce he 1970 he fede a a d a e g e e ha e e i ed ha ch dea i h he g- eg ec ed eed f ecia ed ca i de . I addi i , ch ide ecia acc da i f a ch a ge g f de de Sec i 504 f he Rehabi i a i Ac f 1973. L -i c e a d i i g fee ha hei ed ca i a eed a e bei g e . A a id g i g a i f i i ed E g i h- eaki g de a eed be e ed. E ec ed fficia e e f a i i h e cei ed b e i de achie e e de i e g- e i c ea e i ed ca i a e e di e ha ace he a e f i f a i . Q e i a e ai ed ab he ack f acc abi i e ha e a e de cce . Ta a e g a ha ch ecei e i c ea i g a e e e he he de ea e e c e e hei ed ca i a g a . Teache ga i a i de a d be e a a d c e ki g c di i . Re di g he e e e , ic ake a d c ha e bee aki g cha ge i he ed ca i e . S e f he e ac i a e d a a ica cha gi g he face f A e ica ed ca i a d i c de he f i g: 1. L f d e e e e a a f ed ca e a e e . Begi i g i h he high i ib e P i i 13 i Ca if ia, a e ha e i ed ic i i he e f e 10 a e ch . The c , egi a e , a d ci i e efe e da ha e a a ed a e i i i i g he e f e a e . The e i i ed ce he a h i a d i f he ch b a d a d ad i i a . 2. C ec e ba a f b c e ee . A he a e i e a i c e ce a e bei g c ai ed, ad i i a i e a h i e e e di e i bei g i i ed b ba gai i g ag ee e . Ma e c ac a ed ce ad i i a i e c e aff i i a i a d a ig e . 3. Ma e c b d a e a e d c e f acc ab . The Ke ck Ed ca i Ref Ac f 1990 a he fi f a ea e a ed b a e egi a e ha he d he b i di g aff acc ab e f he cce f de . The e ac ed ce he a h i f he ch di ic ce a ffice a d i c ea e he e ibi i ie f he b i di g ad i i a . 4. C ea c e e b c c d c . Mag e ch , igi a ee a a f de eg ega i , a e bec i g e a a ea f cha e gi g ch be e ee he eed f hei c ie . Sch di ic a e c ea i g a e a i e ch , a ic a a he ec da e e , a a acce e a i g ace. I Mi e a, f e a e, he be f de e ed i a e a i e ch i c ea ed f 4,000 80,000 (ab 10 e ce f he b ic ch e e i he a e) i e ea . 5. E a d a e a . I di id a a e ca a a ig ifica e i he ed ca i a ace e f he chi d. Ad ca e ha e ake he e a e a igh , hich e e c a ified b ecia ed ca i c deci i a d a i he 1970 , a d ed he a he ba i f a ch ice g a . 6. C e f de e ca c d c . D i g he 1990 , h ee ef ha e c ea ed e c e i i f he adi i a b ic a d i a e ch . Postsecondary educational options a de e i c ege hi e c e i g high ch , he c ege c e bei g aid b a e aid ha d ha e g e he ch di ic (a h gh e a e a f a e b h he c ege a d he ch di ic ). Open enrollment a de a e d a b ic ch di ic i he a e ega d e f he e he i e. Charter schools a e b ic ch ha a e f eed f a f he e g e i g he b ic ch . S e f he e e d a e c adic . The e hi g he ha e i c i i c ea ed e e he ed ca i a eade d e i h 11 fe e e ce a d ed ced a h i . The e d a d g ea e acc abi i c i e g . The de a d f c e i i i i c ea i g i h e e egi a i e e i a d e e ce e f ed ca i a di . De a d f che a d a c edi , he g h f h e ch i g, he e a i f i a e ed ca i , a d he de e e f f - fi ch a e c ea i g e c e i i f b ic ch . Beca e f he e cha ge a d e d , he e f ed ca i a eade cha ge if he a e g i g f c i effec i e . C ic a d i c i i c i e be he i a f c . H e e , effec i e eade dea i h ec i i g de , ac i i g e ce , b i di g i e a a d e e a c i , ge i g e ba g f he b ck, a d e hi ki g he e defi i i f a ch . M di i c i be ee he e f b ic ch , i a e ch , a d ie a ch eade i di a ea . The e f hi b k i he he ed ca i a eade e hi k, edefi e, a d e a d hi he e ee he cha e ge f he ed ca i a a ke ace. The e fi e cha e i a 1 ake he eade h gh he e eeded b i d a e e e e ia ed ca i c i . Thi i be d e b defi i g e e e e hi i ed ca i , c a i g he e f he adi i a eade i h he ed ca i a e e e e , gge i g h c ea e a e e e e ia c e a d f e e e e e ia hi ki g, a d a i g he i e e a i f he e e e e ia ed ca i c i . Pa 2 i e f a ki f he e e e e ia ed ca . I ide ecific i f a i , ki de e e idea , e a e , a d e i ha i g ide ch i c e i g i he ed ca i a ke ace. A he e d f each cha e i a i f gge ed ac i i ie ha igh be ied a d a i f e ce f h e h a a e i - de h k edge f he bjec . Re e be , hi b k i not a e c ic he i e a a age e f he ch i e e . I i a ed ha he eade , ike a e be f he ch eade hi ea , ha he a ia e backg d a d k edge i h e a ea . Wi h ha de a di g, hi b k ca be ed i a a . A e e e e a i g a e ch aki g e a he eade f a e i i g i i i ca e he b k a a check i f begi i g he c a e a i . The ac ici g ad i i a h eed he i h a ecific b e i dea i g i h he c e i i e e i e f de ed ca i ca e he b k a a efe e ce f a ic a c ce a he a i e. C ege ca e he b k 12 a a e i a i ci a hi c a i a e i a ed ca i a cha ge a c a ecifica e e e e ia ed ca i . 13 THE ROLE OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN EDUCATION T a , he i f a i g e e e e ia i ci e ch i ci a i a a ge idea i deed. Sch ad i i a ha e bee , a d c i e be, ai ed a age i a e a i e cha gi g d. The a age b dge , i e e ic a d ced e, a d a age c ic a. Cha ge, if i e i , i i c e e a . A a di c ed i he cha e 1, he ad i i a d i ge ab e b , a he , i f f a id a d b e cha ge. T ada , he ch ad i i a f da bec e a eade h ca a iga e h gh cha ge ha a i e he e c e f h ed ca i i be de i e ed i he f e. The e -k b i e a age e g Pe e D cke ha c a ed he d f ed ca i da i h ha f hea h ca e i he ea 1980 . A ha i e, hea h ca e a i g f a e ab e e i d e f f da e a cha ge. Ma aged ca e, e e e gi g a i a f - fi c a ie , a d a id i i g c f e e cha ged hea h ca e. The ica hea h ca e ad i i a f ha da a ai ed i a a i i a da ch ad i i a . H e e , a he cha ge f he 1980 bega ake ace, hea h ca e ad i i a had ea a h e e e f ki dea i h ch e e gi g fac a e c e i i , cha gi g c e e ec a i , e f di g echa i , a d cha gi g de f hea h ca e de i e . The a a e ed ca i da a e i deed e a kab e. Whe e de c ibed he 14 c e f hi b k a e i ed ch ad i i a , hi e e a , I g ad I e i ed he I did. Ye hea h ca e ha i ed, a d a f he ad i i a i hea h ca e ea ed ada hei e e i e . Sch eade e ha e a ked a ha he de a d ha hei e eed f da e a cha ge effec i e add e he cha ge i ed ca i . H e e , a a e a a a h acc i h ch a a i i a d ecifica h i i i ac h he d hei j b . A c he e a f he hea e a d e i ha he ha e bec e e e e e e ia . B j ha d e ha ea ? WHAT IS ENTREPRENEURSHIP? Hi ica , e e e e e e h gh be b , ade. The d entrepreneur a ed b a de c ibe a e a i e. E e e e e e ie ed a high e h d i k e e hi g a hi . E e e e e e ee a aki g a d i g f e e a d e i h each e dea . The h i ha cce f e e e e a e de i k ake h e e i e i ie i h a c ea a . Ma f c b i di g g- e ec ic ec i f hei fa i ie a d hei e ee . E e e e ha e a bee ie ed a e a ge . E e e e e e h gh be ab e a d i i g de ega e a c a h i . The e e ee a he a i he i a ea a e . The h i ha cce f e e e e a e h e h de a d he i a ce f de e i g a g ea . M ch ai i g f e e e e i de ed he i g he ea h e a a e ha eed be fi ed b hei ea a d h b i d ha ea . The ica e e e e ha a bee a ed a a e e e e e a d j a i e bi c a . The h i ha e e e e c e i a e a i e , a d e ha e be e cce f ha a he . E e e e a ge f i e e e , f cia ki ed cia - h bic , f age j ai di a . The e a ic d f e e e e hi ha de a ed ha e e e e hi i a a f a agi g ha ca be ea ed b a age a d ad i i a . Tha i , e e e e hi i ha e e d e , ha he a e ike ba ed e edi ed e f e a i cha ac e i ic . E e e e hi i he ce f cce f aki g ad a age f i ie f he be efi f he akeh de f a 15 ga i a i . The e ce e ca be ea ed b a a e e ie ced a age ad i i a . S cce f e e e e a e a ba ic e f ki ha i c de he f i g: 1. Rec c a e a d e e a d ea c ea e . S cce f e e e e kee a ha e e hei e i e . The k f e d , di i i he a , i a i ha ca c ea e e i ie . Sch eade h d a c e a e i b ade e d , i c di g h e e a ed i a e ch , I e e ed ca i , h e ch i g, cha e ch , ed ca i egi a i , a d cha ge i a e a e ec a i . The h d a a a e i cha ge i hei i edia e e i e i he e a e a ea . We di c hi f he i he e h ee cha e . 2. Reac ac e a e a eac e . E e e e ea eac ac i e a he ha eac i e cha ge i hei e i e . E e e e ea e cha ge a he ea ha cha ge i he e gi e f e idea a d i ie . F e a e, a he ha a i e ai f he e a i f h e ch i g e e a ha e a ig ifica ega i e i ac e e a d f di g, a e e e e ia ch eade d he e d ea a d fi d a c ea e a ad a age f hi he ch f hi e e gi g e d. We e e hi ki i e de ai i he e cha e . 3. Ha e e c ea e e a . Reac i g cha ge i he d a d e i e c ea i e i . A f ha e c ea i e e ia , b a f d e e ci e i e gh. Thi i a ic a e f h e i adi i a ad i i a i e e h e ca ee a e b i hei abi i a age ede e i ed b dge a d e e ha icie a d ced e a e adhe ed . H e e , cha ge c ea e i a i ha e i e ch eade ad i i a e e a d c ea i e b e e e. Sch eade ea effec i e ec g i e a d c ea defi e e b e a d e ech i e ch a b ai i g ge e a e e ia i . The ea hi k ide he adi i a b da ie f hei ad i i a i e e. 4. U de a d e d ffe e ce be ee a dea a d a . E e e e ake ad a age f cha ge i hei e i e . Th gh he cce f a ica i f he e i h ee ki , a idea i begi face. A hi i , i bec e c i ica ea de a d he diffe e ce be ee ha a face a e ee be a g d idea a d ha i a g d i . I he e a market f he idea he ha e de e ed? I he e a margin i hei idea? Tha i , i i fi a cia ib e a d ai ab e? Fi a , i i c i e i h he i i f he 16 ga i a i ? Effec i e fea ibi i a a i , hich e a ica a e he e e i , i he i c ea e he babi i f cce f a e e dea b fi di g e i b e a d f a before ig ifica e ce a e e e ded. Faced i h he e i e a e f e a di g h e ch i g, he ch eade a c e i h a i e e i g idea add e he e d. O e f he e a be iab e a egie f a gi e ch di ic . Thi ic i e a i ed f he i cha e 5. 5. De e effec e ac a . E e e e a e e a a e f he i a ce f a e -c c ed b i e a . Sch eade i i e a i i a a ach h gh he de e e f ac i a f e i i ia i e . Thi i a aj ic f cha e 6. 6. U de a d e d ffe e ce be ee f eca a d b d e . B dge a e fi a cia ha a e ba ed ha i k f he a . F eca e i e a diffe e e f fi a cia ki , a he a e c c ed f e idea ha ike ha e hi d a . The e ki e a e a e a i ed i e de ai i cha e 6. FORMS OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP A individual entrepreneur i e h a a e e e, be i a f - fi b i e a fi e. The e i di id a fi d a eed i he a ke ace, de e a a h ake ad a age f ha eed, ge he he ece a e ce , a d a a e i de e de e e. F e a e, i ed ca i he i di id a e e e e c d be he ie f a f - fi ed ca i a age e c a . I c d a be he f de f a fi cha e ch . The i di id a e e e e i ha e e hi k f he he hea he e entrepreneurship. H e e , he ce f e e e e hi a ake ace i hi e i i g ga i a i , a d i i e e e e hi i hi e i i g ed ca i a ga i a i , ch a b ic ch e adi i a i a e ch , ha hi b k f c e . E e e e hi ca ake f i e i i g ga i a i : i a e e hi a d e e e e ia ga i a i . Giff d Pi ch III (1985) defi e a intrapreneur i a i di id a i hi a a ge ga i a i h ac ike a i di id a e e e e . The i a e e i d ce e d c e ice ha e ab e a ga i a i ada cha ge a d g . F e a e, he i a e e c d be he 17 e e i g ad ca e i hi a b ic ch e ha ie gai f he de e e f a i a i e a e a i e ch f de i h e e e beha i a di de ha a ha e bee adi i a e ed i hi he ch di ic . T i a i ab i a e e eed be ade a hi i . Fi , he ce ha he i a e e f i i e diffe e ha he e f ed b he adi i a i di id a e e e e di c ed e i . Pi ch de c ibe he i a e e a a he ic i di id a h , de i e a dd , i ab e figh he a a d b ea c ac f he a ge ga i a i a d cha i he e d c e ice h gh he c a e ga e . The i di id a e e e e e a e i he b ade a d e f e ib e ec ic a ke ace. Each c e c ea e i e ad a age a d di ad a age . Sec d, i a e e hi f e ake ace i ga i a i ha if e e e e e ia ac i i . The e ga i a i fai c ea e a e i e ha e e e e ia beha i . I a e e fi d a cceed a g e e h a e ab e e e i i g he he cceed; , a i f e he ca e, he decide ea e he ga i a i i f a i a d de e hei idea e he e e e. I he e i e a e, he i a e e igh eek a fi f - fi e i ha i i i g he i he ide ified e e beha i a di de ed chi d e . H e e , ga i a i ca c ea e e i e ha a e e a i e i e f e e e e hi i a a . A g i g b d f he a d e ea ch h ha a ge ga i a i , e c age, a d f e e e e e hi be cce f e he g e i ada i g a cha gi g e i e . A ga i a i ha c ea e ch a i e a e i e i ha C a a d Pe a (1990) defi e a a entrepreneurial organization. I i i a ake c ea ha he e e ce f i a e e i a ga i a i a be a ef ec i f h e e e e ia he ga i a i i a a h e. Wi h , i a e e i , e i e, ea e f ga i a i ha ffe a e e e e ia c e i hich he ca e ea i a d effec i e e i ie ha he ide if i he a ke . The e e e e ia ga i a i i ead , i i g, a d ab e ada a cha gi g e i e . C ea i g a e e e e ia ga i a i , e ecia i hi he ed ca i a a e a, i a i e ce . I e i e a e i he e i e ga i a i , g a d ea i hi he ga i a i , a d he i a e e he e e . I e i e a i g e a e i he f e ha he a . I agi e i g d i e a ca 18 hi e ki g i he ea - ie i . The fi c e i he ad d ce ai e di a e . Ye ha i e ac ha e d he e ake deci i he f e f ed ca i a e ba ed e h e ha e adi i a d e hi g i he a . ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND RISK E e e e hi i a cia ed i h aki g i k, a d aki g i k i a a f a deci i aki g d e i ch . The deci i b i d e faci i ie , ffe e c e , cha ge he ca e da c e f he ch da i e aki g i k. The e f i k ha hi b k f c e i ha i k i he e i he e e e e ia ce . The ag i de f hi e f i k aki g ca be ch g ea e i e f b h gai a d e . I a b ic ch e , i i diffic e ec ad i i a ake e e e e ia i k i h ig ifica cha ge i h he e e a e . T adi i a , he e i i e e a d f aki g e e e e ia i k a d cceedi g, hi e he e i ig ifica e a a d fe i a c a cia ed i h aki g ch i k a d fai i g. A , ad i i a fee i - e a ed f i g i k e dea . H e e , i i e f b e a d a id cha ge, i i c i ica e e be ha he e a e e f e e e e ia i k. The fi e f i k i e i g a e d c e ice a d ha i g i fai . Dick a d Gig ie a (1986) efe hi a sinking-the-boat risk. Thi i he e f i k ha ge e a c e i d he hi ki g ab e e e e hi . The i -fa ed ag ee e be ee Ed ca i A e a i e , I c., a d he Ba i e Ci P b ic Sch i a e a e f a i a i e i i ia i e ha fai ed. Fai e i hi ca e e ed e f he a i f he i a d e f i i e e a i a d e ec i . H e e , ch a fai e ca c ea e a chi e he ch e ha a e c ide i g ei he i e e i g i a i e i e i g b e i g i ie c ea ed b cha ge. Sch e , a ic a b ic ch , ha e be e i i e i ki g- he-b a i k. Fai ed i k aki g ca b i g i e e c i b a a e a d he edia. E e h gh i k aki g i ece a f a ch e ada cha ge, edia e e ca bec e i e e. U f a e he e a d e e e he a e age a a e a ha e a h - e ie ha d e e c a he eed ake i k i 19 he face f aj cha ge a d c e i i c ea ed b e ed ca i a e i ie . Si ki g he b a i a aj i k f ch e c ide . H e e , i i ha f he ic e he ki g a a ed ca i a ga i a i a d he e e e e ia i k ha i a e . Missing-the-boat i k i he ec d e f i k. Thi i he i k ha defi e a ac i e i ie ha ha e bee e ked, di i ed, f d a e. F e a e, e e a ea ag he S a e f Mi e a f ded he Mi e a Ed ca i C i g C i de e ed ca i a f a e. Mi e a decided i hi jec ff beca e i did ee fi i h he a e adi i a ed ca i a i i a d beca e he a e a i i g i e he e i eeded g a d de e e d c . The c i e bec e he igi a ide f f a e f A e c e , hich i e d i a e ch a i ide. C ea he Mi e a De a e f Ed ca i i ed hi b a . O ga i a i f a e e d i he b a f ea . Fi , he fai ide if e i ie . Sca i g he e i e f i ie i f e e ec ed f a age a d ad i i a i hei j b . I i a a ki i hich he ha e bee ai ed. Sec d, i ie a e i ed beca e a h gh he e e ide ified b he ga i a i , i did ha e ce e i ace e he i . E e e e ia i k h d be ie ed a a ba a ce f b h i ki g- he-b a a d i i g- he-b a i k . Ig i g ei he e f i k ca e i he he e f i k c ea i g di a e f a ga i a i . Sch e ha eek ed ce he i k f i g e i ie ( i ki g he b a ) i c ea e he i k f i ie ( i i g he b a ). Ed ca i a ga i a i ha a ea be c e a i e i k a ide ea i e ig ifica i k b i i g e ia i a i ie . I i e f a id cha ge i h ed ca i i bei g de i e ed, hi c d ha e a ig ifica ega i e i ac he fi a cia e -bei g f h e ga i a i . C e e , ga i a i ha ig e he i ki g- he-b a i k e i e bec e ca e e a d i k fi a cia i . The e i a c a ade- ff be ee he e f i k. Si ki g- he-b a i k i ef ec ed i a i i h - e e f a ce. B dge a e ec ed, a d e ake d e fe i a i k. H e e , b i c ea i g he i i g- he-b a i k, ed ca i a ga i a i a ega i e i ac hei i e edia e a d g- e e f a ce. The i k bei g ab e ada cha ge a ha d a d a 20 e e i k i i g e he g e . F e a e, a i i i f highe ed ca i a e i e i g i I e e -ba ed di a ce ea i g, hi e e a e . I e e i ech g ha a ee e e b dge i he h ike i e e e dic a e i a e he g f he e i i i . INDIVIDUAL RISK AND CAREER ISSUES I a i a i , he i di id a ad i i a i ed i e e e e ia ac i i ie i ake ig ifica i k he e e . Of c e, hi i he i k f ca i a i e e ha a i di id a e e e e face . I he ca e f he ga i a i a e e e e , ed ca i a ad i i a i k hei e a i a d, i e ca e , hei ca ee he e i i ia i e he a e a e i g de e . I ch e ha ffe i e , hi e a i k i e e e ha ad i i a a e ge e a i i g de ake e e e e ia i k. The babi i f d ide i k f he e ad i i a i g ea (i.e., ca ee a h dead e d) a d he babi i f ide i k a (i.e., ec g i i f cce , e a d , a d i ). Thi i a i ead e e h ha e i a i e idea f ig ifica e i i ia i e e ice ei he f ge he e he hei ide he ed ca i a e ha e he . J a a e a e ade ed ce he ce ai f a ed ca i a ga i a i , ad i i a a e ed ce hei e a ce ai a d a e he i k f bei g e e e e i hi he ga i a i . The ga i a i ca ed ce he ce ai f ad i i a b idi g a gib e a d b a i g i ake . The c e f ad i i a aki g ch i k a cia ed i h bei g e e e e ia ca be e f . O e f he c c i g echa i f hi e f i a i i a ida ce. Si , ad i i a a id e jec a d i i ia i e a id he e he igh e c e . H e e , ad i i a h ca ake ea ab e i k i h a c a fea f hei ca ee ( e ed e ) i d ce a d e e e idea f hei ga i a i . If ad i i a face ch e a ce ai b bei g e e e e ia , he e e f i i g- he-b a i k i g ig ifica f he ch e a fe e e i i ia i e a d i a i e jec a e ed. Of c e, a ch e ca a e i i a e he i k faced b a i di id a ad i i a , a d ad i i a be he d acc ab e 21 f hei e f a ce i e i i ia i e . A h gh e egg be b ke ake a e e , c ea i e e be e ab i hed e a a e g e , a d he deg ee f fai e ha i c ide ed ea ab e a d e ab e f a gi e e i i ia i e be c ea de d. E e e e ia i i ia i e h d be e e ed f ad i i a h a ea e i c i ed i k aki g. S die f e e e e ia ac i i i f - fi c a i ha e f d diffe e ce i he e i f i k aki g be ee e e e e ia a age a d a age i ed i e e e e ia e e . Gi e he igh i a d he igh ci c a ce , ad i i a ca bec e i ed i e e e e ia ac i i ie i hi hei ed ca i a e . I d e ake a i di id a h i e i i g ake cha ce . I fac , a ad i i a h i i i g ake cha ce a d i c ea e i ki g- he-b a i k f hi he e e . The e f cha e e e he e e e e ia ed ca i ga i a i i e de ai . Cha e 3 c a e he e i e i a adi i a ch e ha f a e e e e ia e . Cha e 4 di c e he cha ac e i ic f a e e e e ia c e i a ga i a i a d he ce eeded c ea e ha c e. Cha e 5 di c e e e e e ia hi ki g, a d cha e 6 e a i e he ce f i g e e e e ia i e i i ac i . REFERENCES C a , J., a d Pe a , B. (1990). Organizational entrepreneurship. H e d, I .: I i . Dick , P., a d Gig ie a , J. (1986). Mi i g he b a a d i ki g he b a : A c ce a de f e e e e ia i k. Journal of Marketing 50:58 70. Pi ch , G., III. (1985). Intrapreneuring. Ne Y k: Ha e & R . Ti , J. (1994). New venture creation. 4 h ed. B : I i McG a -Hi . 22 THE TRADITIONAL VERSUS THE ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION The e i cha e e ed h he c ce f e e e e hi a ie ed ca i a ga i a i . Thi cha e e a i e hi f he b e e i g a c a i f he adi i a ed ca i a ga i a i a d he e e e e ia ed ca i a ga i a i . Thi c a i i ifie ha i i ea i a ch e c e e f i e . H e e , i i ea ide a e ie f he ge e a cha ge ha ed ca i a ga i a i c ide if he a e cce f f e e e e e ia ac i i b hei ad i i a a d a age e e e ha hei ed ca i a e i ada he a id cha gi g e i e faci g ed ca i da . I i i a e i if he dich ha ab e 3.1 ee gge . I ead, he cha ac e i ic i he ab e e e e e d i f c i . Each ed ca i a e i faci g a i e e f ci c a ce ha e i e ca ef c ide a i f he a ia e a ach f a gi e e i e . F e a e, e egi a d c i ie ha e e ac i e de e e f cha e ch , i a e ch , h e ch i g, a d f h. Sch a d ch di ic i he e ge g a hic a ea d be efi f bec i g e ike he e e e e e ia ga i a i . I e egi , de e e i e i i ed, a d e cha ge i he e ga i a i a cha ac e i ic a be ece a . 23 Table 3.1 Comparison of Traditional and Entrepreneurial Educational Organi ation EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTAL SCANNING Ed ca i a ga i a i faced i h he a e e i e f e eac he a e i f a i i e diffe e . Ad i i a i diffe e ga i a i ca hei e e a e i e f i f a i i diffe e a . Sch eade hi i faced i h a e he i g a a f i f a i . A deci i ake de e ac ic f e ec i g ha i f a i eed be a e ded . Deci i ake i diffe i g ch e i e ec diffe e i f a i f aki g deci i a d ca f e i e e he a e i f a i i diffe e a . O e ch e a ie he e d a d h e ch i g a a a a ce, 24 hi e he e a ee i a a ce f i ada i e i ab e cha ge. T adi i a ed ca i a ga i a i e d be b e f c ed. The ie hei ch e f a e a a d adi i … Running head: ENTREPRENEURSHIP 1 ENTREPRENEURSHIP 2 Title Student’s name Instructor Course Date ENTREPRENEURSHIP Introduction Entrepreneurship is very important in every society. Entrepreneurship is a style of management that most managers and administrators can manage. This is a process where business people will take advantage of opportunities to benefit the stakeholders of an organization (Brown, & Cornwall, 2000). The owners of enterprises must possess some of the characters that will help them in their business. Different theories explain the entrepreneurship phenomena and help explain in detail why these entrepreneurs decide to do business the way they do. THEORIES AND QUALITIES OF AN ENTREPRENEURSHIP Economic entrepreneurship theory This theory states that economic growth and entrepreneurship can only occur where there are specific conditions of the economy that favor the business environment. This is to means that economic incentives play a very significant role in the enhancement of entrepreneurship activities. Many different factors are capable of either promoting or demoting the entrepreneurship of a country. Some of these factors include the availability of a country having productive resources, has increased demand for goods and services (Brown, & Cornwall, 2000). These loans are offered at a low interest rate, easy access to credit from banks, and suitable monetary and fiscal policies, among many others. The Business environment is very important for any entrepreneur to be successful. Resource-based entrepreneurship theory According to this theory, an entrepreneur's success depends on leverage on the available resources of different types. This theory was created with the main aim of explaining the reason why some businesses will perform better than others through focusing on an organization's resources. This theory's main idea is that competitive advantage comes from an organization's ability to use tangible and intangible resources. While the organization's tangible assets include the human resources, tools and equipment, and the business itself, the intangible assets include business secrets and reputation (Anderson, & Ronteau, 2017). Organizations that have resources that cannot be easily imitated and rare are at an added advantage. These are some of the ways that can help in improving the strength of an organization. Psychological theories These theories look at the emotional and mental characteristics of entrepreneurial people. According to these theories, the most successful entrepreneurs need to achieve, which is one of the most important aspects driving them towards their activities. According to David McClelland, who developed the theory, an entrepreneur can do things much better and make critical decisions uncertainly (Anderson, & Ronteau, 2017). These people have a drive to grow, advance, and excel in their business ventures. The entrepreneurs will have a clear path by which they will be used to meet their goals and their objectives. These people will always set challenging goals and more demanding goals every time they accomplish the earlier set goals. They always have a positive mindset and desist from surrounding themselves with negative-minded people. Locus of control entrepreneurship theory This theory looks at an individual's perception about the causes of their different living conditions. There are two main loci. The external control locus is a better description of an individual believing that the conditions in their life are due to the external forces beyond their control, such as power structures of the government, luck, fate, etc. On the other hand, the internal locus is used in describing an individual who believes that they are the masters of their own life. This means that these people believe that they can act and change any condition that they are experiencing in life. An entrepreneur characterized with the external locus believes that their chances of survival rely on institutional and market forces beyond their control. The other lots of the entrepreneurs who possess the internal control locus believe that their efforts and beliefs determine the success of their business. Sociological theory According to this theory, an entrepreneur is supposed to consider social factors when designing their business plans. The people who consider this theory when setting their business plan are better positioned to provide better goods and services than their competitors. This is because society's perception is fundamental to the success of any business, and therefore it is important to consider society. A business capable of providing better value to society stands a better chance of succeeding and having few challenges, if any. One of the essential parts of every business in any global business understands the other cultures and their dynamics. With the number of businesses venturing in multinational operations worldwide being on the rise, any business that needs to expand its operations beyond the borders must be well conversant with that environment (Ferreira, Fernandes,& Kraus, 2019). For instance, this can help segment the consumers based on various aspects to give every market a different experience depending on their needs. A competitive advantage is gained when one offers goods or services of more excellent value than the competitors. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT Through the entrepreneurial self-assessment, there are various things that I learned about myself. Below is a list of the assessment results: A good team player Team spirit is very important in any business. I am a very good team player and always work with my teammates to achieve goals and objectives. My capability of effectively utilizing both verbal and non-verbal communication skills helps promote good interpersonal and professional relationships with all the stakeholders. The nature and the quality of relationships are central to any business. The entire team must work together in any business by sharing ideas and supporting each other, which will help an organization achieve the set goals and objectives. Honesty I have always maintained honesty as one of my most critical pillar in the business world. In business, honesty is very critical in the business world whether it is big or small. Without honesty, a merchant will lose trust from the customers. Honesty is a must for any entrepreneur. Integrity in entrepreneurship is a very critical benchmark of every field. However, it is very shameful that many people engage in various cases of dishonesty Perseverance Perseverance is the quality that allows a person to keep trying to do something even though it is difficult. I am always the kind of person who does not need motivation from other people as I am self-motivated. I have an outstanding capability of creating a vision persuasively and excitingly for my subjects. The main theme in perseverance is not to give up. I keep fighting hard, and I am focused on achieving a good result. Hope I always have faith that I will be going to achieve my goals and objectives. I always keep hope that I am going to achieve my goals. I am always optimistic even the circumstances are against me. Most people feel they have to take advantage of people to get what they want in work situations. Hope is a very important aspect of the success of an entrepreneur. High hope organizations are led by entrepreneurs who are involved with employees in a formal goal-setting process. Hope plays a dual role in working positively before the appearance of a problem and after a problem. Communicator Being able to communicate effectively is probably the most important life skill. Whenever I am involved in communication, especially in the workplace, I have to apply to ensure a good communication climate between me, the consumers, or the other employees. Having a good communication environment helps create trust between the two parties, and thus it is easier to do any business. As a team player, good communicator, optimist, and honest person, these results did not surprise me. This is because it reinstates my belief in always being optimistic. I am always the kind of person who does not need motivation from other people as I am self-motivated. This was an excellent score indicating that I am a good entrepreneur (Dobina et al., 2019). There is, however, nobody who is perfect when it comes to business. We always have areas that we must work on. We can still work on the places that we do not score well after assessing ourselves. This is very important in helping ease the communication between and amongst the workers; thus, it is easier to communicate effortlessly, passing skills, knowledge, and ideas. This cheers the employees to have good relationships amongst and between each other, bringing confidence in the subordinates and making them trust in the leadership, making it easier to achieve an excellent organizational culture. SELF-SWOT ANALYSIS Strengths I am very creative, adventurous, and intellectual. I am always self-motivated and will always work towards my set goals and objectives no matter what. Over time, this has helped me in cultivating my working method towards becoming a more productive person. No matter how much I feel that I need some time to rest, I always feel extraordinarily dissatisfied if a day ends without some achievement, no matter how small it could be. One of my greatest assets is that I have very great stamina and works typically very hard to meet my objectives and take great satisfaction from being always busy and productive. I like setting goals and creating a list of what I have to do to accomplish my goals. This seems to explain how I work and go through my daily schedule to produce the most effective results by working according to my strengths. My weakness My major weakness is that I am always nervous about the results when I tend to juggle multiple tasks. I am also poor when it comes to time management, something that I am continuously working on. Opportunity My opportunities for change include using effective communication strategies to recognize the emotions that may hinder one from delivering and then working out on them to ensure that the business is not negatively impacted. An entrepreneur is supposed to be innovative, empathetic, calm, creative, and mature. They are always supposed to understand the pain and grief of other individuals and understand that these people need someone who can show them empathy and not sympathy. Threats My biggest threat is competition. The competition today is very high in all fields. It is therefore very critical that one's is up to speed with the changing environment. Therefore, I am doing everything that I can to increase my knowledge and skills by advancing my education and learning from other successful entrepreneurs. SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSION During the assessment, I learned that I could work productively and efficiently and anxiously move through the SMART goals. Once I started something, I realized that I had a different pace to get the work I had started. Creating a list of things I need to accomplish my set goals was a huge contributor to my success. An entrepreneur is required to creatively and innovatively be capable of responding to the environment and becoming successful in anything that one wants to venture in. I believe the cognitive skills are very critical in any business as they help one in increasing the probability of achieving desired outcomes in business this will help an entrepreneur to be able to easily deal with contradictions and problems of a turbulent business environment in a way that is rational, determined, and industrious (Dobina, et al., 2019). References Anderson, A., & Ronteau, S. (2017). Towards an entrepreneurial theory of practice; emerging ideas for emerging economies. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies. Brown, R. J., & Cornwall, J. R. (2000). The entrepreneurial educator. R&L Education. Dobina, T., Haidukevych, K., Panchenko, S., Petrova, I., & Sabadash, J. (2019). Effectiveness analysis of entrepreneurship model of development qualities of future managers. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 22(3), 1-6. Ferreira, J. J., Fernandes, C. I., & Kraus, S. (2019). Entrepreneurship research: mapping intellectual structures and research trends. Review of Managerial Science, 13(1), 181-205. FALL 2018 1 FALL 2018 Advances in Engineering Education Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset RUSSELL KORTE The George Washington University Washington, DC ABSTRACT An entrepreneurial mindset helps innovators find, interpret, evaluate, and pursue opportunities for their innovations. It is a concept having multiple definitions and contradictions variously focused on individual traits, behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. Robinson claimed that across the various definitions of an entrepreneurial mindset there was little theoretical grounding to be found. To address this shortcoming, this essay describes Social Identity Theory, and its close cousin, Self-Categorization Theory, which have gained significant traction in psychology and sociology, as theoretical founda- tions for understanding and developing an entrepreneurial mindset. Social identity is a psychological construct describing individuals’ perceptions and values of belonging to a particular social group—in this case, affiliating with those identifying themselves as entrepreneurs. The argument put forth here is that a crucial aspect of developing an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students involves helping them identify as entrepreneurs. Key words: Engineering Profession, Identity, Entrepreneurship INTRODUCTION “When engineering is charged with identifying unmet needs in the marketplace and leveraging disruptive or high-technology-based designs to fill those unmet needs, then engineering becomes the crux of new market creation, and developing benefit-providing, customer-driven products and processes moves into the fore of the new tools students need to add to their toolboxes” (Kriewall and Mekemson 2010). One of the new tools needed by engineering students for meeting the new engineering charge described above is an entrepreneurial mindset. An entrepreneurial engineer is expected to have perceptions and values of belonging to a particular group 2 FALL 2018 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset deep expertise in technology, combined with the ability to decipher market needs for creativity, innovation, and problem-solving—and build a business (Bilen, Kisenwether, Rzasa and Wise 2005; Kriewall and Mekemson 2010; National Academy of Engineering 2004; Taks, Tynjala, Toding, Kuke- melk, and Venesaar 2014). An entrepreneurial mindset is a concept having multiple definitions and contradictions variously focused on individual traits, behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. Robinson (2010) claimed that across the various definitions of an entrepreneurial mindset there was little theoretical grounding to be found. To address this shortcoming, this essay describes Social Identity Theory, and its close cousin, Self-Categorization Theory, which have gained significant traction in psychology and sociology. Together these complementary theories provide an insightful look at the concept of an entrepre- neurial mindset for two reasons: First, a key factor in developing entrepreneurs is the level to which individuals come to identify and categorize themselves as entrepreneurs. Second, successfully becoming an entrepreneur is not just an individual effort, but also dependent on the interactions between individuals and their social contexts. This essay begins with a brief review of the literature on the concepts of mindset and social identity. The next two sections continue to review the literature focused on an entrepreneurial mindset and its relation to entrepreneurship. This also includes a few examples of statements made by partici- pants in an entrepreneurial workshop as they grapple with the idea of adopting an entrepreneurial mindset. Finally, there is a section providing an overall strategy for addressing the inherent resistance to adopting new identities based on social identity theory. People generally act in accordance with the social norms of the groups with which they iden- tify (Hogg, Abrams, Otten and Hinkle 2004). Therefore, the goal of increasing entrepreneurial behaviors in engineering requires that engineers, at least partially, identify themselves as en- trepreneurs. This essay focuses on the nature of an entrepreneurial mindset as a social identity in the context of engineering education and the broader contexts of engineering practice and entrepreneurship. PERCEIVING A MINDSET AS A SOCIAL IDENTITY Even though the mind appears to be the property of an individual, it is formed and brought about by society (Bucholtz and Hall 2005; Turner and Oakes 1999). While the common idea of a mind focuses on the individual, there is a large body of research, theory, and philosophy expanding this singular view of human identity to a broader view of the individual embedded in and constituted by the social realm (Doise 1997; Gergen 2008; Smith and Mackie 1997). People develop various FALL 2018 3 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset facets of their identity out of their interactions with others in an ongoing process of development and change (Glaeser 2005). As a subset of social cognition, social identity theory and self-categorization explain how an individual makes sense of oneself and other people (Hogg et al. 2004; Korte 2007). One’s mind (or mindset) is a cognitive or knowledge construct that makes sense (i.e., meaning) of one’s self and one’s interactions with the social world (Burke and Stets 2009). Thus, an entrepreneurial mindset and identity are similar constructs, comprised of the knowledge, beliefs, values, and attitudes that refer to an entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship is inherently a social endeavor, dependent on the interactions and beliefs of a diverse ecosystem of innovators, financial backers, customers, suppliers, policy makers, and so on (Bucholtz and Hall 2005; Davidsson and Honig 2003; Zachary and Mishra 2010). Therefore, the formation of an entrepreneurial mindset is similar to the construction of a social identity and the categorization of oneself within a group of similar others as entrepreneurs. “An identity is the set of meanings that define who one is when one is an occupant of a par- ticular role in society, a member of a particular group, or claims particular characteristics that identify him or her as a unique person” (Burke and Stets 2009, 3). Identity is conceptualized as a cognitive construct of the self that answers the question, Who am I? Burke and Stets (2009) described three domains of identity as personality, role, and social group. In their view of identity, there is a core identity that sustains a relatively stable set of personality traits. Surrounding the core identity is a role identity, which includes a set of social expectations and behaviors of how one is to think and behave in a particular social position, and a social identity, which includes what it means to be part of a group (e.g., organization, occupation, profession, family, community, and so on). Essentially, one’s social identity answers the question of, Who are we?, which can change depending on the salience of the group—engineer, manager, entrepreneur, spouse, parent, sibling (Turner and Onorato 1999). At any particular time, one’s identity (personal, role, and social) is the outcome of the dynamic interactions between one’s personality and the social context. Jenkins (2008) described identity as a process more than as an entity, emphasizing the ongoing flux of one’s interactions over time. This view of identity fits well with the multi-faceted nature of entrepreneurship, whereby an entrepre- neur is a creator, innovator, market researcher, business modeler, or financial negotiator interacting with various players in the entrepreneurial process. If one does not identify oneself as a capable or legitimate player in any of these interactions, it is likely one will find it more difficult to achieve the expectations of the role. The attributes that describe the ideal member of a group make up the profile or prototype of the group. This is the key referent for those in the group, as well as those aspiring to become members 4 FALL 2018 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset of the group (Hogg, et al. 2004). One cannot join any group at any time; there are limitations based on one’s fit and readiness, as well as how accessible the group is at the time (Turner and Onorato 1999). In the act of categorizing oneself, one evaluates the fit of the group to one’s personal identity, and conversely, the group evaluates the individual’s fit and readiness to join. Becoming a member of a group requires the individual to take on the norms, beliefs and values of the group, which might conflict with one’s personal norms, beliefs, and values (Ashforth and Mael 1989). Working out these tensions is part of developing a new identity and is an important process in developing entrepreneurial engineers. THE ENTREPRENEURIAL MINDSET How one uses and responds to information is determined by one’s mindset (Dweck 2008; Noble 2015; Robinson 2010). Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering means motivating en- gineers to develop the attributes of entrepreneurial thinking and behaviors in their work. A typical definition of entrepreneurship at the individual level is the ability to identify and exploit business opportunities (Frese and Gielnik 2014; Shane and Venkataraman 2000). Other attributes of an entrepreneurial mindset include: self-efficacy, proactivity, achievement motivation, autonomy, in- novativeness, risk-taking, competitiveness (Frese and Gielnik 2014); boundary-spanning (Burt 1997); risk-tolerance, taking initiative, perseverance, creativity, leadership, communication skills, planning and organizing, collaboration, and reflection (Schelfhout, Bruggerman and DeMayaer 2016); and an opportunistic orientation (Sarasvathy 2001). This expansive range of attributes makes it difficult to articulate and operationalize precisely what an entrepreneur is, how to educate students in entrepreneurship, and assess their learning and behavior. Furthermore, seemingly positive attributes of entrepreneurship can turn into liabilities at excessive levels; for example, over-confidence (inordinately high self-efficacy) and inflated beliefs in one’s power to control tend to curtail information gathering, blind one to the risks involved, and lead one to create rosy forecasts that often favor action over analysis, (Shane and Venkataraman 2000). Another view of entrepreneurship focuses on the entrepreneurial process. Shane and Venkatara- man (2000) proposed a conceptualization of entrepreneurship that was a fluid, three-stage model requiring the pre-existence of entrepreneurial opportunities in the environment, the discovery of an entrepreneurial opportunity, and the decision to exploit a discovered entrepreneurial opportunity. Thus, having an entrepreneurial mindset is necessary, but not sufficient—there needs to be exist- ing opportunities in the environment and the decision that these opportunities are accessible and feasible to an entrepreneur. FALL 2018 5 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset ON BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR: DEVELOPING AN ENTREPRENEURIAL MINDSET Becoming an entrepreneur is learning a way of being that goes beyond knowing and doing what entrepreneurs know and do. It is becoming ‘who we are’ (Dall’Alba 2009). This process of becom- ing was found in feedback from individuals grappling with the development of an entrepreneurial mindset, which was gathered from an entrepreneurial workshop designed to develop an entre- preneurial mindset in engineering faculty and motivate them to commercialize their innovations (National Science Foundation n.d.). These were academic professionals who had been funded to develop educational innovations as traditional researchers and then encouraged to participate in an eight-week workshop to become more entrepreneurial in their approach. Among other things, these participants reported their experiences with ‘trying on’ an entrepreneurial mindset (Ibarra 1999). After eight weeks, some enthusiastically adopted the new mindset, some were tentative, and some were resistant. For example: one participant described how his perception of being an academic changed. As I mentioned, it transformed me significantly. Before coming to the [entrepreneurial workshop] program I used to think of myself as an academic whose job is to publish and train students. After coming back from [entrepreneurial workshop], oh my god, it has been changed. Right now, I look at everything like a business model, like it or not, I look at academia even as a business model. Sometimes I get into arguments with my colleagues because they think I am destroying academia because my view has been changed and I am in favor of running academia as a business unit rather than an academic unit. This statement clearly reflects how one’s identity and mindset govern how one perceives the world and processes information. This individual is identifying with and becoming a member of a different social group—a group labeled as entrepreneurs—and as is often the case when a member of one group adopts different norms and crosses boundaries, there is conflict. Another example described a state of uncertainty about adopting an entrepreneurial identity: “Thus, in a sense, the primary value [of this entrepreneurial workshop] is forcing a given educa- tor to choose whether they really want to do something entrepreneurial.” These experiences can also lead to rejection, as in this example: “This [entrepreneurial workshop] has reinforced my desire to NEVER start my own company, but I am glad that I have a better understanding of the business worldview.” This workshop allowed this participant to test a new identity—one that was eventually rejected. 6 FALL 2018 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS One of the difficulties in the process of fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students comes from existential differences between the traditional engineering mindset and an entrepreneurial mindset. In the case of fostering entrepreneurship in engineering education there is this natural tendency to resist those aspects of what is perceived as a business-oriented way of doing things when it conflicts with what is perceived to be the engineering way of doing things. Many academics in STEM who consider an entrepreneurial path struggle with simplistic stereotypes (i.e., identities) that favor the academic world of science over the commercial world of business. There are several advantages to developing an entrepreneurial mindset in the 21st century, most of which address the need to develop agility, adaptiveness, creativity, and social impact (for more in-depth discussions, see Kriewall and Mekemson 2010; National Academy of Engi- neering 2004; National Science Foundation 2010; Neck, Greene and Brush 2014; Robinson 2010; Sarasvathy 2001). The body of research and theory on identity and entrepreneurship support two main recommendations for developing an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering education. First, fostering an entrepreneurial mindset is not simply a matter of helping faculty and students become more innovative, ambitious, or risk-tolerant. It is a more complex task of altering who they think they are—personally, socially, and professionally. Second, the complex ecosystem that is entrepreneurship has multiple facets that accommodate multiple definitions of entrepreneurial identities and mindsets. An obvious distinction is among versions of entrepreneurship currently labeled as: entrepreneur, intrapreneur, and social entrepreneur (see Hockerts 2017; Kuratko, Morris and Schindehutte 2015; Mair and Marti 2006; Parker 2011). Each has a distinct mindset that is important to those pursuing those efforts. It would be useful to identify and develop more categories of entrepreneurs that help more people identify with the aim of discovering new opportunities to create new solutions to solve difficult social problems, promote social justice, and provide opportunities for the disadvantaged and oppressed to access a good education or other basic needs. The entrepreneurial spirit is an effective and necessary means of enhancing societal well-being. Identifying as a social entrepreneur or educational entrepreneur (edupreneur) are emerging catego- ries that expand the realm of entrepreneurship and allow a more diverse range of people to identify as entrepreneurs. In the words of the late Jeff Timmons, from Babson College, entrepreneurship is “not just about new company, capital and job formation, nor innovation, nor creativity, nor break- throughs. It is also about fostering an ingenious human spirit and improving human kind.” (quoted in Neck, Greene and Brush 2014, 1). FALL 2018 7 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author is grateful to Dr. Gary Lichtenstein for providing anonymous participant quotes from the NSF workshop described in the text. REFERENCES Ashforth, B. E., and Mael, F. 1989. “Social identity theory and the organization.” Academy of Management Review, 14, no. 1: 20–39. Bilen, S. G., Kisenwether, E. C., Rzasa, S. E., and Wise, J. C. 2005. “Developing and assessing students’ entrepreneurial skills and mind-set.” Journal of Engineering Education, 94, no. 2: 233–243. Bucholtz, M., and Hall, K. (2005). “Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach.” Discourse Studies, 7, no. 4–5: 585–614. Burke, P. J., and Stets, J. E. 2009. Identity theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burt, R. S. 1997. “The contingent value of social capital.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 339–365. Dall’Alba, G. 2009. “Learning professional ways of being: Ambiguities of becoming.” Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41, no. 1: 34–45. Davidsson, P., and Honig, B. 2003. “The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs.” Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 301–331. Doise, W. 1997. “Organizing social-psychological explanations.” In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.). The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 63–76. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Dweck, C. S. 2008. Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Ballantine Books Trade. Frese, M., and Gielnik, M. M. 2014. “The psychology of entrepreneurship.” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1: 413–438. Gergen, K. J. 2008. “On the very idea of social psychology.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 71, no. 4: 331–337. Glaeser, A. 2005. “An ontology for the ethnographic analysis of social process: Extending the extended-case method.” Social Analysis, 49, no. 3: 16–45. Hockerts, K. 2017. “Determinants of social entrepreneurial intentions.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41, no. 1: 105–130. Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S. and Hinkle, S. 2004. “The social identity perspective: Intergroup relations, self- conception, and small groups.” Small Group Research, 35: 246–276. Ibarra, H. 1999. “Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44: 764–791. Jenkins, R. 2008. Social Identity, 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Korte, R. F. 2007. “A review of social identity theory with implications for training and development.” Journal of European Industrial Training, 31, no. 3: 166–180. Kriewall, T. J., and Mekemson, K. 2010. “Instilling the entrepreneurial mindset into engineering undergraduates.” The Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship, 1, no. 1: 5–19. Kuratko, D. F., Morris, M. H., and Schindehutte, M. 2015. “Understanding the dynamics of entrepreneurship through framework approaches.” Small Business Economics, 45: 1–13. 8 FALL 2018 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset Mair, J., and Marti, I. 2006. “Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight.” Journal of World Business, 41: 36–44. National Academy of Engineering. 2004. The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. National Science Foundation; retrieved November 4, 2017 from: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID =1451245&HistoricalAwards=false National Science Foundation. 2010. “The role of the National Science Foundation in the innovation ecosystem.” A paper from the NSF Directorate for Engineering. Retrieved on November 5, 2017: https://www.nsf.gov/eng/iip/innovation.pdf Neck, H. M., Greene, P. G., and Brush, C. G. 2014. Teaching entrepreneurship: A practice-based approach. Chapter 3, The practice of empathy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Noble, C. 2015. “Mindsets, mind sets and mind sense.” Prometheus, 33, no. 4: 411–420. Parker, S. C. 2011. “Intrapreneurship or entrepreneurship?” Journal of Business Venturing, 26: 19–34. Robinson, P. B. 2010. “Engaged learning and the entrepreneurial mind set.” Journal of the Utah Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters, 87: 87–110. Sarasvathy, S. D. 2001. “Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entre- preneurial contingency.” Academy of Management Review, 26, no. 2: 243–263. Schelfhout, W., Bruggeman, K., and De Mayaer, S. 2016. “Evaluation of entrepreneurial competence through scaled behavioural indicators: Validation of an instrument.” Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51: 29–41. Shane, S., and Venkataraman, S. 2000. “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research.” Academy of Manage- ment Review, 25, no. 1: 217–226. Smith, E. R., and Mackie, D. M. 1997. “Integrating the psychological and the social to understand human behavior.” In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.). The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 305–314. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Taks, M., Tynjala, P., Toding, M., Kukemelk, H., and Venesaar, U. 2014. “Engineering students’ experiences in studying entrepreneurship.” Journal of Engineering Education, 103, no. 4: 573–598. Turner, J. C. and Onorato, R. S. 1999. “Social identity, personality, and the self-concept: a self-categorization perspective.” In Tyler, T. R., Kramer, R. M. and John, O. P. (Eds.), The Psychology of the Social Self, pp. 11–46. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Turner, J. C., and Oakes, P. J. 1997. “The socially structured mind.” In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 355–373. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Zachary, R. K., and Mishra, S. S. 2010. “Entrepreneurship research today and beyond: Hidden in plain sight!” Journal of Small Business Management, 48, no. 4: 471–474. https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1451245&HistoricalAwards=false https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1451245&HistoricalAwards=false https://www.nsf.gov/eng/iip/innovation.pdf FALL 2018 9 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset AUTHOR Russell Korte is an Associate Professor of Human and Organizational Learning at The George Washington University. Dr. Korte studies the socio-cultural systems in the professions and organizations, along with the effects of these systems on learning and performance in school and the workplace. This work specifically focuses on the professional socialization of engineering students, faculty, practicing engineers, medi- cal students, and teachers. Prior to GWU, Korte was at Colorado State University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign where he helped redesign the first-year engineering program as a Fellow with the Illinois Foundry for Innovation in Engineering Education and was a member of the Academy for Excellence in Engineering Education—a faculty development program at the University of Illinois. Earlier, he was a research assistant for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education at the University of Washington. Past work experiences include several years in business, including starting and growing his own consulting company. Additional research interests include theory, philosophy, social science, workplace learning and performance, socialization, professional educa- tion, and organization studies. DallAlba09 Gergen08 Smith97 _GoBack LEARNING STYLES AND STRATEGIES 1 Richard M. Felder Hoechst Celanese Professor of Chemical Engineering North Carolina State University Barbara A. Soloman Coordinator of Advising, First Year College North Carolina State University ACTIVE AND REFLECTIVE LEARNERS 2  Active learners tend to retain and understand information best by doing something active with it—discussing or applying it or explaining it to others. Reflective learners prefer to think about it quietly first.  “Let’s try it out and see how it works” is an active learner’s phrase; “Let’s think it through first” is the reflective learner’s response.  Active learners tend to like group work more than reflective learners, who prefer working alone.  Sitting through lectures without getting to do anything physical but take notes is hard for both learning types, but particularly hard for active learners. Everybody is active sometimes and reflective sometimes. Your preference for one category or the other may be strong, moderate, or mild. A balance of the two is desirable. If you always act before reflecting you can jump into things prematurely and get into trouble, while if you spend too much time reflecting you may never get anything done. How can active learners help themselves? If you are an active learner in a class that allows little or no class time for discussion or problem-solving activities, you should try to compensate for these lacks when you study. Study in a group in which the members take turns explaining different topics to each other. Work with others to guess what you will be asked on the next test and figure out how you will answer. You will always retain information better if you find ways to do something with it. How can reflective learners help themselves? If you are a reflective learner in a class that allows little or not class time for thinking about new information, you should try to compensate for this lack when you study. Don’t simply read or memorize the material; stop periodically to review what you have read and to think of possible questions or applications. You might find it helpful to write short summaries of readings or class notes in your own words. Doing so may take extra time but will enable you to retain the material more effectively. 1 1993 by Richard M. Felder and Barbara A. Soloman. See <www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Learning_Styles.html> for additional details about the Index of Learning Styles and the Felder-Silverman learning styles model upon which the ILS is based. 2 R.M. Felder and R. Brent, Teaching and Learning STEM: A Practical Guide, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (2016), pp. 107–109. <educationdesignsinc.com/book/>. 2 SENSING AND INTUITIVE LEARNERS 3  Sensing learners tend to like learning facts, intuitive learners often prefer discovering possibilities and relationships.  Sensors often like solving problems by well-established methods and dislike complications and surprises; intuitors like innovation and dislike repetition. Sensors are more likely than intuitors to resent being tested on material that has not been explicitly covered in class.  Sensors tend to be patient with details and good at memorizing facts and doing hands-on (laboratory) work; intuitors may be better at grasping new concepts and are often more comfortable than sensors with abstractions and mathematical formulations.  Sensors tend to be more practical and careful than intuitors; intuitors tend to work faster and to be more innovative than sensors.  Sensors don’t like courses that have no apparent connection to the real world; intuitors don’t like “plug-and-chug” courses that involve a lot of memorization and routine calculations. Everybody is sensing sometimes and intuitive sometimes. Your preference for one or the other may be strong, moderate, or mild. To be effective as a learner and problem solver, you need to be able to function both ways. If you overemphasize intuition, you may miss important details or make careless mistakes in calculations or hands-on work; if you overemphasize sensing, you may rely too much on memorization and familiar methods and not concentrate enough on understanding and innovative thinking. How can sensing learners help themselves? Sensors remember and understand information best if they can see how it connects to the real world. If you are in a class where most of the material is abstract and theoretical, you may have difficulty. Ask your instructor for specific examples of concepts and procedures, and find out how the concepts apply in practice. If the teacher does not provide enough specifics, try to find some in your course text or other references or by brainstorming with friends or classmates. How can intuitive learners help themselves? Many college lecture classes are aimed at intuitors. However, if you are an intuitor and you happen to be in a class that deals primarily with memorization and rote substitution in formulas, you may have trouble with boredom. Ask your instructor for interpretations or theories that link the facts, or try to find the connections yourself. You may also be prone to careless mistakes on test because you are impatient with details and don’t like repetition (as in checking your completed solutions). Take time to read the entire question before you start answering and be sure to check your results. VISUAL AND VERBAL LEARNERS 1 Visual learners remember best what they see—pictures, diagrams, flow charts, time lines, films, and demonstrations. Verbal learners get more out of words—written and spoken explanations. Everyone learns more when information is presented both visually and verbally. 3 R.M. Felder and R. Brent, Teaching and Learning STEM: A Practical Guide, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (2016), pp. 187–188. <educationdesignsinc.com/book/>. 3 In most college classes very little visual information is presented: students mainly listen to lectures and read material written on chalkboards and in textbooks and handouts. Unfortunately, most people are visual learners, which means that most students do not get nearly as much as they would if more visual presentation were used in class. Good learners are capable of processing information presented either visually or verbally. How can visual learners help themselves? If you are a visual learner, try to find diagrams, sketches, schematics, photographs, flow charts, or any other visual representation of course material that is predominantly verbal. Ask your instructor, consult reference books, and see if any videotapes or CD-ROM displays of the course material are available. Prepare a concept map by listing key points, enclosing them in boxes or circles, and drawing lines with arrows between concepts to show connections. Color- code your notes with a highlighter so that everything relating to one topic is the same color. How can verbal learners help themselves? Write summaries or outlines of course material in your own words. Working in groups can be particularly effective: you gain understanding of material by hearing classmates’ explanations and you learn even more when you do the explaining. SEQUENTIAL AND GLOBAL LEARNERS 4  Sequential learners tend to gain understanding in linear steps, with each step following logically from the previous one. Global learners tend to learn in large jumps, absorbing material almost randomly without seeing connections, and then suddenly “getting it.”  Sequential learners tend to follow logical stepwise paths in finding solutions; global learners may be able to solve complex problems quickly or put things together in novel ways once they have grasped the big picture, but they may have difficulty explaining how they did it. Many people who read this description may conclude incorrectly that they are global, since everyone has experienced bewilderment followed by a sudden flash of understanding. What makes you global or not is what happens before the light bulb goes on. Sequential learners may not fully understand the material but they can nevertheless do something with it (like solve the homework problems or pass the test) since the pieces they have absorbed are logically connected. Strongly global learners who lack good sequential thinking abilities, on the other hand, may have serious difficulties until they have the big picture. Even after they have it, they may be fuzzy about the details of the subject, while sequential learners may know a lot about specific aspects of a subject but may have trouble relating them to different aspects of the same subject or to different subjects. How can sequential learners help themselves? Most college courses are taught in a sequential manner. However, if you are a sequential learner and you have an instructor who jumps around from topic to topic or skips steps, you may have difficulty following and remembering. Ask the instructor to fill in the skipped steps, or fill them in yourself by consulting references. When you are studying, take the time to outline the lecture material for yourself in logical order. In the long run doing so will save you time. You 4 R.M. Felder, “Meet Your Students: 2. Susan and Glenda.” Chemical Engineering Education, Winter 1990, pp. 7–8. <www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/Susanglenda.html>. 4 might also try to strengthen your global thinking skills by relating each new topic you study to things you already know. The more you can do so, the deeper your understanding of the topic is likely to be. How can global learners help themselves? If you are a global learner, just recognizing that you aren’t slow or stupid but simply function differently from most of your classmates can help a great deal. 4 However, there are some steps you can take that may help you get the big picture more quickly. Before you begin to study the first section of a chapter in a text, skim through the entire chapter to get an overview. Doing so may be time-consuming initially but it may save you from going over and over individual parts later. Instead of spending a short time on every subject every night, you might find it more productive to immerse yourself in individual subjects for large blocks. Try to relate the subject to things you already know, either by asking the instructor to help you see connections or by consulting references. Above all, don’t lose faith in yourself; you will eventually understand the new material, and once you do your understanding of how it connects to other topics and disciplines may enable you to apply it in ways that most sequential thinkers would never dream of.