Description
This particular detailed file resolve the role of entrepreneurship education in finnish high schools.
The role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high
schools
MSc program in Entrepreneurship
Master's thesis
Ielizaveta Arensburg
2015
Department of Management Studies
Aalto University
School of Business
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Aalto University, P.O. BOX 11000, 00076 AALTO
www.aalto.fi
Abstract of master’s thesis
Author Ielizaveta Arensburg
Title of thesis The role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high schools
Degree Master’s Degree
Degree programme Entrepreneurship
Thesis advisor(s) Ewald Kibler
Year of approval 2015 Number of pages 62 Language English
Abstract
Purpose – This thesis aims to explore the role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high schools
from the perspective of high school principals and entrepreneurship education professionals. The
key research questions are:
1) How do high school principals and entrepreneurship education professionals define
entrepreneurship education and understand its (potential) role in Finnish high schools?
What are the main commonalities and differences in their perceptions?
2) What is the particular role of high school principals in the implementation of
entrepreneurship education in Finland? How do high school principals perceive themselves
in this potential role, and what are the main standpoints of entrepreneurship education
professionals?
Theories and methods – Based on a review of the recent entrepreneurship education literature, the
thesis identifies the under-researched role of entrepreneurship education in high schools. Following
this, it draws upon in-depth interviews with high school principals and entrepreneurship education
experts to examine the nature of discourses around entrepreneurship education in Finland.
Key contributions – This thesis contributes to entrepreneurship education research by providing
novel insight into the particular role of principals in the implementation of entrepreneurship
education in high schools. The thesis highlights the different understandings and sense-making of
the notion ‘entrepreneurship education’ between high school principals and entrepreneurship
education professionals, and emphasizes the needed for further research on how to build a greater
awareness of what ‘entrepreneurship education’ means and how it can be adequately implemented
in high schools.
Keywords entrepreneurship education, external entrepreneurship, internal entrepreneurship,
high school education, principals, perceptions of entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship
education research
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research Gap, Problem and Research Questions .................................................................. 2
1.3 Limitations............................................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Definitions ............................................................................................................................. 4
2 Literature review ........................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Entrepreneurship education: students .................................................................................... 6
2.2 Entrepreneurship education: teachers .................................................................................... 8
2.3 Entrepreneurship education: principals ............................................................................... 10
2.4 Entrepreneurship education: internal vs. external; classroom vs. society & life ................ 11
2.4.1 Internal entrepreneurship education or enterprise education ....................................... 12
2.4.2 External entrepreneurship education ............................................................................ 13
2.4.3 Classroom..................................................................................................................... 14
2.4.4 Society & life ............................................................................................................... 14
3 Sense-making of entrepreneurship education ............................................................................. 15
3.1 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a classroom level ............ 17
3.2 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a broader educational level
18
3.3 Entrepreneurship education - perceptions by experts and principals; perceptions about
principals’ role by experts .............................................................................................................. 19
4 Research methodology ................................................................................................................ 21
5 Empirical work - Grasping the experiential world of entrepreneurship education phenomenon ... 25
6 Discussion and recommendations ................................................................................................... 46
6.1 Perceptions of principals .......................................................................................................... 47
6.2 Perceptions of other entrepreneurship education experts ......................................................... 48
7 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 49
8 References ....................................................................................................................................... 52
Appendix
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Entrepreneurship education and training is growing rapidly in universities and colleges throughout
the world (Katz, 2003; Kuratko, 2005). This trend is fuelled by a recognition that entrepreneurship
can play an important (even critical) role in economic growth and employment (Shumpeter, 1934;
Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; Kuratko, 2005). However, there is more than one way of perceiving
entrepreneurship education. Understanding the concept of entrepreneurship is fundamental for
defining entrepreneurship education (Seikkula-Leino, Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, Rytkola,
2010). It is particularly important what perceptions about entrepreneurship and subsequently
entrepreneurship education exist among individuals involved in creating and implementing it. This
means that entrepreneurship education can be both defined as something that teaches students to
become entrepreneurial and something that can help teachers learn what methods would be most
efficient when teaching entrepreneurship. Furthermore, there are key terms that need to be understood
in order to deploy the strategy of promoting entrepreneurship education in high schools.
According to Kyrö (1997), entrepreneurship education deals with three main components: 1) self-
oriented, 2) internal and 3) external entrepreneurship. Self-oriented entrepreneurship refers to an
individual’s self-oriented behaviour. Self-oriented entrepreneurship is the basis for developing
internal and external entrepreneurship (Remes 2004: 84). While this thesis is tackling internal and
external entrepreneurship, self-oriented entrepreneurship is the base which means that while focusing
on internal and external entrepreneurship, self-oriented entrepreneurship is still a part of it.
Internal entrepreneurship deals with entrepreneurial and enterprising behaviour. External
entrepreneurship is about doing business (Ristimäki 2003: 6). Even though self-oriented and internal
entrepreneurship resemble each other, the difference between them is in the collectivistic sense which
emerges in internal entrepreneurship development and which could be developed in organizations
(Remes 2001). Internal entrepreneurship is generally associated with the pupils’ responsible attitude
to (school) work; it was represented as an ideal subjectivity for all and accepted as the natural aim of
schooling (Korhonen, Komulainen, Raty, 2012). On the other hand, external entrepreneurship is seen
to foster economic skills and to prepare the students for a future as business people or entrepreneurs
2
(Korhonen, Komulainen, Raty, 2012). External and internal education may also be referred to as
entrepreneurial and enterprising education.
Several studies have shown that teachers might need to obtain more knowledge about the conceptual
division of entrepreneurship into an entrepreneurial and enterprising part (e.g. Backstrom-Widjeskog,
2010; Leffler 2009), as well as the knowledge about the aims, contents and practices of
entrepreneurship education (e.g. Seikkula-Leino, 2007). Despite the differences as regards the aims
of entrepreneurship education, it is widely accepted that entrepreneurship is ultimately about learning
and therefore it is essential to know how entrepreneurial learning takes place (Minniti & Bygrave,
2001; Rae, 2005). In terms of teachers’ ideas regarding implementation of entrepreneurship education
in high schools, projects were seen as the leading technique which, despite advantages for pupils can
also require more development in order to become a part of a teacher’s everyday routine and
be integrated into the curriculum.
Principals and vice-principals are the ones who have more influence and understanding of a school
curriculum and education strategy of a particular school. Therefore, this creates a need for research
on principals’ and vice-principals’ connection to entrepreneurship education and whether they have
sufficient understanding to integrate entrepreneurship education into the school curriculum.
Moreover, principals and vice-principals have the power to influence the educational strategy of a
school; as well as have an impact on teachers’ professional development as entrepreneurship
educators for high school students. These are the main reasons why obtaining knowledge in this area
would be important for further research of entrepreneurship education in the context of high school.
1.2 Research Gap, Problem and Research Questions
Some research has been done on the topic of teachers’ understanding of entrepreneurship education
in a certain context and according to this research it is teachers in particular who have the essential
role in the process of transforming the different meanings and aims of entrepreneurship education
into teaching practices and learning outcomes which, in the long haul, result in the increase of
enterprising as well as entrepreneurial activities in the society (e.g. Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). The
results of previous research on teachers’ understanding of entrepreneurship education seem to
indicate that a lack of clear conceptual and contextual links between aims and results, that is, in terms
of the classroom and real life outside of the classroom, may affect the iterative processes of evaluating
3
and improving the education (Seikkula-Leino, Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, Rytkola, 2010).
Moreover, according to Seikku-Leino et. al., 2010, teachers do not seem to be able to generate
meaningful reflection in this context. At the same time there is no information about what perceptions
of entrepreneurship education exist among school principals and vice-principals who have more say
in creating a curriculum and other activities in a particular school. Therefore, this research gap needs
to be filled in order to obtain more knowledge of what perceptions exist among key players, i.e.
principals and vice-principals, involved in entrepreneurship education, who have the power to make
an impact on the further development of entrepreneurship education as a discipline in the context of
high schools. Moreover, it would be necessary to find out what perceptions about the role of principals
in entrepreneurship education exist among other experts in the field.
The implications of this research gap can lead to the lack of a bigger picture of entrepreneurship
education where the focus is not only on teachers or students but also on the main decision makers.
The consequences of this research gap are significant, as a vital element in the implementation of
entrepreneurship education is being overlooked, since it is principals and vice-principals who are able
to add entrepreneurship elements to a curriculum as well as offering entrepreneurial activities suitable
for high school students, therefore it is important to know what is the role of principals and vice-
principals in entrepreneurship education and how other entrepreneurship education experts perceive
the role of principals in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools.
In order to deal with the research gap mentioned above, this thesis is set to address the following
objectives. First, review in detail existing literature on entrepreneurship, more specifically on the role
of the teacher in entrepreneurship education; the existence of entrepreneurship education in the
curriculum and the methods which are most commonly used in high schools to engage and promote
entrepreneurship education among students. Secondly, identify principals’ role in entrepreneurship
education and their understanding of entrepreneurship education through the interviews of various
professionals in entrepreneurship education. Thirdly, analyze existing perceptions among
interviewees regarding both entrepreneurship education and principals’ role in entrepreneurship
education. Finally, using a theoretical framework, more specifically the interpretive
phenomenological analysis method, analyze the gathered data to identify the current realities of
entrepreneurship education in high schools and principals’ role and understanding (or lack of it) of
entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, it will be discussed what actions could be taken to improve
the current situation in terms of the state of entrepreneurship education in high schools, principals’
understanding and involvement in entrepreneurship education.
4
1.3 Limitations
The study was limited by the sample size, particularly in the ability to gain a larger scope of principals
participating in the study. In terms of research method, the interpretive phenomenological analysis
has been chosen for this thesis. Although smaller sample size is the main limitation of this IPA
(interpretive phenomenological analysis) study, Smith et al (2009) considered that reduced participant
numbers allows for a richer depth of analysis that might be inhibited with a larger sample.
Another important limitation refers to the challenges of gaining a broader response from principals
due to the novelty of the subject, language and time constraints. Limitations in terms of language are
particularly relevant in this situation in relation to the low levels of principals’ response due to the
challenges to express their thoughts on a complex subject in English as opposed to their native
language (Finnish). According to Smith, 2009, the effectiveness of an IPA study should be judged
by the light it sheds in a broader context. This might seem difficult to achieve if the sample group is
too specific or unique, therefore the sample group for this study was designed to have participants
with different connections to education and entrepreneurship education. Due to this approach, the
limitations related to reaching out to a particular group, i.e. principals, have little effect on the
outcomes of the study, since even a minimum response from principals has shown a clear pattern,
especially when combined with other responses.
1.4 Definitions
Entrepreneurship – There is no consensus suggesting a single, comprehensive theory of
entrepreneurship (e.g. Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Among other perspectives, entrepreneurship
can refer to the emergence and creation of organisations, which is a combination of definitions put
forward by many researchers (Pinchot, 1985; Gartner,1988); making new combinations and
innovations such as new products, production methods, markets and organizational forms
(Schumpeter, 1934) and exploring opportunities (e.g. Kirzner, 1973; Shane and Venkataraman,
2000).
External Entrepreneurship – fosters economic skills and prepares students for a future
as business people or entrepreneurs (The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture,
2004, p. 15).
5
I nternal Entrepreneurship – combines flexibility, initiative, creativity and independent action with
cooperation skills and strong motivation (The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture, 2004, p.
15).
Enterprise Education – consists of enterprise capability supported by better financial capability and
economic and business understanding (Ofsted, 2004; Teachernet, 2008).
Enterprise education is another term that is used for internal entrepreneurship, but generally describes
the same idea.
2 Literature review
This literature review aims to identify the current state of research in entrepreneurship education
through addressing previous research focusing on students, teachers, internal and external education,
and the role of entrepreneurship education on both classroom level and the broader educational level.
As a part of this literature review, current trends of entrepreneurship education from the perspectives
of EU policies will be also taken into account.
The strategy of the European Union highlights the importance of the development of entrepreneurial
culture by fostering the right mindset, entrepreneurship skills and awareness of career opportunities
(Commission of the European Communities 2006). However, according to Ikävalko, Ruskovaara
and Seikkula-Leino, 2008, there is a long distance from the international and national policy making
level to the future realization of outcome of entrepreneurship. A journey consisting two different
processes: first, from the goal setting in education system, starting from the EU strategies and national
curriculum, to the altered daily teaching work of all teachers, and secondly, from the teaching to the
altered behaviour of the students in the years to come (Ikävalko, Ruskovaara and Seikku-Leino,
2008). The processes described by Ikävalko et.al. in their work “Rediscovering teacher’s role in
entrepreneurship education” are shown in picture below.
6
Picture 1: Teacher executing the aims of entrepreneurship education.
2.1 Entrepreneurship education: students
Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behavior are considered to be essential competences and
constructs of individuals’ competitiveness in the future (Lämminpää and Kuopusjärvi, 2005). Most
European countries have a policy commitment towards promoting learning about entrepreneurship,
but, as yet, it has not become a widespread subject in the European educational system (European
Commission, 2006). Finland, however, has turned out to be an early adopter and reformer:
entrepreneurship education is now taken into consideration throughout the school system, from
primary schools to universities (Korhonen, Komulainen, Räty, 2012). Moreover, the Finnish Ministry
of education and Culture (2004) presents entrepreneurship as the right mindset and a route
to employment for every citizen.
Nevertheless, despite the claims that entrepreneurship can play an important (even critical) role in
economic growth and employment (Shumpeter, 1934; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; Kuratko,
2005) and assertions that entrepreneurship education can play a vital role in developing more and/or
more able entrepreneurs (e.g., Gorman et al., 1997; Katz, 2007; Pittaway and Cope, 2007), it has been
noted by several scholars (e.g., Weaver et al., 2006; Peterman and Kennedy, 2003), there is little
7
consistent evidence to support these claims. Furthermore, some studies raise doubts regarding the
efficacy of entrepreneurship education for either economic or individual outcomes
(Martinez et al., 2010; Oosterbeek et al., 2010; Pittaway and Cope, 2007; van Praag and Versloot,
2007).
According to Peterman and Kennedy (2003) even with a wide variety of entrepreneurship programs
on offer in the market place, while positive results may be found from a study of one program it could
not be assumed that all programs would have similar results due to variation in content, pedagogy
and learning styles. However, Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino, 2011, argues that
entrepreneurship education should support the students’ feeling of their internal locus of control. As
a learning outcome, the students would also try more persistently to achieve their goals, to be creative,
to discover existing opportunities and in general to cope with the complicated society. Also, according
to Gibb (2006) and Frank (2007), entrepreneurship education involves the development of attitudes,
behaviors, skills and attributes applied individually and/or collectively to help individuals and
organizations of all kinds to create, cope with and enjoy change and innovation.
The education of entrepreneurship can augment entrepreneurial attitudes and competencies (Henry,
et.al. 2005; Gibb, 2006a; Pfeiffer, et.al. 2008), and the improving social attitudes towards
entrepreneurship are evident among young people, perceiving entrepreneurship as a viable career
option (Chigunta, 2002). Furthermore, the importance of fostering entrepreneurial drive among young
people derives from their contribution to valuable products and services to their local communities in
particular, and society in general (Chigunta, 2002). Their start-ups increase market competition,
thereby support customers, increase innovation and flexibility, developing new ideas and solutions.
Innovative economic opportunities and trends appear and technological changes open new job
opportunities in the labor market (Chigunta, 2002).
At the same time, entrepreneurship education for younger students has been suggested to relate more
to learning the spirit and ways of doing and seeing than about business activity. The aim is that
students could take more responsibility for themselves and their learning (Gibb 2006; Remes 2001,
2004).
8
2.2 Entrepreneurship education: teachers
While the learning outcomes of entrepreneurship education have been under careful research, the
viewpoint of teaching has been seemingly underdeveloped (Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä &
Seikkula-Leino, 2011). Nevertheless, there are several recent studies on entrepreneurship education
from teachers’ perspectives available. For example, Korhonen, Komulainen, and Räty (2012) are
exploring whether the teachers deploy the discourse of internal and external entrepreneurship in their
meaning making of entrepreneurship education, and in what ways. According to this study
(Korhonen, Komulainen, and Räty, 2012), teachers construed the meaning of entrepreneurship
education in comprehensive school through two different discourses: the discourse of internal
entrepreneurship and the discourse of external entrepreneurship.
At the same time, according to Seikku-Leino,Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, and Rytkola, 2010,
despite the basic guidelines in the national strategies covering entrepreneurship education and the
national core curricula, internal and external entrepreneurship seem to lack balance in terms of the
aims, practices and results of teaching. Moreover, it is also seems that instruction given by teachers
is still rather insignificant, and entrepreneurship education is not a visible part of everyday activities
in school. Furthermore, Seikku-Leino et.al, 2010 points out that the teachers implied that the terms
and concepts were familiar to them, but it is obvious that there was no specific theoretical basis or
definition backing up their statements. Finally, in describing the aims of entrepreneurship education,
teachers used an abundance of favorable adjectives that applied to their pupils, but excluded
themselves from the objective-setting. Also, according to Seikkula-Leino (2006, 2007) and Fiet
(2000a, 2000b), teachers have at times had difficulties in identifying contents and means by which to
respond to challenges posed by entrepreneurship education.
Nevertheless, the development of entrepreneurial mindsets is becoming embedded in policy across
Europe (European commission, 2011). According to European Commission, 2011, the essential role
that education plays in the development of such mindsets, and in particular the central role that
teachers play in this process. It requires nothing less than a sea change in the approach to education,
emphasising active learning and the provision of new experiences for students outside of the
classroom (European commission, 2011). For many education systems this represents a fundamental
shift away from traditional approaches (European commission, 2011). This means that teachers need
to be equipped with the right skills, knowledge and attitudes to be able to provide their students with
the new curricula, pedagogies and learning environments that they will need if they are to acquire
9
entrepreneurial competencies (European commission, 2011). These changes will require significant
changes in the way teachers themselves are educated.
According to research carried out by the European Commission, 2010, core skills and values linked
to entrepreneurship education are seldom a priority in initial teacher education programs.
Furthermore, creativity is not fully embedded into these programs and there are significant variations
between Member States and approximately 90% of teachers say that they would like to receive some
further training on creativity (Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010). Moreover, teachers also feel that
educational and school cultures do not fully support them in fostering creative and innovative
approaches to learning; this requires time to explore new approaches and a culture that encourages
experimentation and allows for failure - in short, an environment that itself embodies the
characteristics of entrepreneurialism (Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010).
In response to proposals made by the European Commission, the Education Council in November
2007 for the first time adopted Conclusions that set a European agenda for improving the quality of
teaching and teacher education (European Commission, 2011). Ministers recognised that the quality
of teaching is the single most important within-school factor affecting student attainment (European
Commission, 2011). The importance of the teaching profession was again highlighted at an Informal
Ministerial Meeting in Gothenburg in September 2009 under the Swedish Presidency of the EU and
this was followed by the adoption of new Council Conclusions (The Council Of The European Union,
2009) in which Member States committed themselves to improving the professional development of
teachers and school leaders.
These Conclusions (The Council Of The European Union, 2009), taken together, provide a
comprehensive set of EU priorities for improving teacher education. They include improving teacher
competences by making sure that teachers possess the necessary pedagogical skills to teach their own
subjects and the transversal key competences, including in heterogeneous classes and making the best
use of ICT; improving the quality of Initial Teacher Education (ITE) which should provide a Higher
Education qualification and should balance research-based studies and teaching practice; ensuring the
quality of teacher educators (teacher trainers) who should have solid practical teaching experience,
good teaching competences and be of a high academic standard; and promoting professional values
and attitudes in the teaching profession (in which teachers adopt a culture of reflective practice,
undertake autonomous learning, engage with research, and collaborate extensively with colleagues).
10
2.3 Entrepreneurship education: principals
Research about the role of principals for developing an entrepreneurial attitude in learning and
teaching in schools, are in many ways an unexplored area. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013). Nevertheless,
it is obvious that the principals are the individuals who can make an impact on entrepreneurship
education on a larger scale. The principals are the pivots around which all major and important school
activities revolve. This means that, the managerial qualities that principals bring to their work have
far-reaching impact on how the overall enterprise of the school is done (Ezeani, 2012).
For a principal to aspire for effectiveness he or she must use indices of entrepreneurship management,
while carrying out his/her administrative task (Akinola, 2005). These include building trust, visionary
leadership, and communication, seeking self-improvement, making good decisions, being a role
model, being a risk taker and being innovative (Miller, 2005; Little and Foss, 2008; Lin, 2009). In
essence, an entrepreneur (principal) is an innovator, or developer who recognizes and seizes
opportunities, converts those opportunities into workable/marketable ideas, adds value through time,
effort, money or skills, and assumes the risk of the competitive market place to implement these ideas
(Erhuru,2007).
According to curricula, entrepreneurship education should be present in the everyday education
delivered in Finnish schools, and not only in the classroom but also happenings outside school and it
should have a role in school climate and culture. The curricula define entrepreneurship education both
as content and method of teaching and learning (Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino,
2011). Nevertheless, entrepreneurship education requires a shift in pedagogy (Seikkula-Leino, 2011).
In traditional classrooms, each act of teaching focuses on a particular segment of the curriculum; each
learning situation is controlled in such a way that students do not feel insecure while they learn (e.g.
Gibb 2005). Furthermore, Gibb (2005) suggests, the pedagogy of entrepreneurship education is
focused on students’ activity in learning; the learning situations are flexible, interactive, and based
on multidimensional knowledge-development. What is needed is a range of activities that encourage
students’ interactive learning and reflections: co-operative learning, problem-based learning, group
and peer work, project work, team work, learning by doing, pedagogical drama, and learning diaries
(Seikkula-Leino, 2011). Principles and vice-principals have the power to implement those activities.
11
In leading schools towards an entrepreneurial attitude, the transformation of ideas into practical
activities might be the most provocative part, though it can be a big culture-breaking challenge in
schools. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013) A challenge for principals is to have and firmly establish a clear
direction and focus on possibilities within all regulations with attention on students’ utilizing their
full potential for learning by which means to motivate and coach teachers to supervise students within
the boundaries set by national steering documents, without limit their creativity. (Hörnqvist, Leffler,
2013)
Another challenge for principals is then to be sufficiently acquainted with what is going on in
classrooms to know how to support and motivate teachers to invest energy in this learning process
(Hersey et al., 2001). Finally, a big challenge is to build a network with businesses and workplaces
to open up new arenas for learning. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013).
2.4 Entrepreneurship education: internal vs. external; classroom vs. society
& life
According to Kyrö (1997), entrepreneurship education deals with three main components: 1) self-
oriented, 2) internal and 3) external entrepreneurship. Self-oriented entrepreneurship is the basis for
developing internal and external entrepreneurship (Remes 2004, p. 84). Internal entrepreneurship
deals with entrepreneurial and enterprising behavior. External entrepreneurship is about doing
business (Ristimäki 2003, p. 6). On the other hand, entrepreneurship in an educational context can be
understood in two ways (Erkkilä, 2000): entrepreneurship education, or a narrow understanding i.e.
education in starting and running business, and enterprise education, or a broad understanding, with
focus on abilities that characterize entrepreneurs such as an energetic, creative, cooperative and
innovative person who looks for opportunities and is not afraid of taking risks (Johannisson &
Madsén, 1997). In essence entrepreneurship education refers to external entrepreneurship and
enterprising entrepreneurship refers to the internal one. This thesis will consider both ways of
entrepreneurship education.
12
2.4.1 Internal entrepreneurship education or enterprise education
The primary focus of enterprise education is on an active learning enterprise education pedagogy;
knowledge needed to function effectively as a citizen, consumer, employee or self-employed person
in a flexible market economy; the development of personal skills, behaviors and attributes for use in
a variety of contexts; the person as an enterprising individual - in the community, at home, in the
workplace or as an entrepreneur; the use of entrepreneurship skills, behaviors and attributes
throughout the life course; and how a business, particularly a small business, works (Jones and
Iredale, 2010).
According to European Commission, 2011, entrepreneurship in this sense refers to an individual's
ability to turn ideas into action, it includes creativity, innovation, showing initiative and risk-taking,
as well as the ability to plan and manage projects in order to achieve objectives. This supports
everyone in day-to-day life at home and in society, makes employees more aware of the context of
their work and better able to seize opportunities, and provides a foundation for entrepreneurs
establishing a social or commercial activity (Official Journal of the European Union, 2006).
Furthermore, according to European Commission, 2011, as well as contributing to European
competitiveness, entrepreneurship education also helps to ensure a number of positive social benefits.
In 2004, the Finnish Ministry of Education (FME) started an action plan with the aim to promote, on
the one hand, a general enterprising attitude and a new basic mentality for every citizen – ‘an outlook
of internal entrepreneurship combining flexibility, initiative, creativity and independent action with
cooperation skills and strong motivation’ (FME 2004, p. 15). In light of a new 21st century economy,
the emphasis on knowledge, service, and information creates space for more new firms to emerge,
but also pressures existing companies to hire employees with higher level skills in order to compete
successfully. The core set of 21
st
century skills includes capabilities in analytical problem solving,
innovation and creativity, self-direction and initiative, flexibility and adaptability, critical thinking,
and communication and collaboration skills (Autor, Levy, & Murnane, 2007; Boyd & Vozikis, 1994;
Cavanagh et al., 2006; Goldin & Katz, 2008; Pink, 2008; Porter, Ketels, & Delgado, 2007; Scherer,
Adams, & Wiebe, 1989; Wagner, 2008).
13
Without a doubt these changes will have implications on teachers and how they teach
entrepreneurship. The core set of skills of 21
st
century mentioned earlier are difficult to teach through
traditional teaching and learning practices in which the learner tends to be a more or less passive
recipient and require active, learner-centered pedagogies and learning activities that use practical
learning opportunities from the real world. (European Commission, 2011). Furthermore, since
entrepreneurship education is a transversal competence it should be available to all students and be
taught as a theme rather than as a separate subject at all stages and levels of education (ECOTEC,
2010).
2.4.2 External entrepreneurship education
The primary focus of external entrepreneurship is on how to start a business including the key
processes of business start-up; how to plan and launch a new business venture; how to grow and
manage a business; the deployment of entrepreneurial skills and knowledge in a business context;
imminent use of the knowledge and skills related to start a business; and self-employment (Jones and
Iredale, 2010). In the context of schools, external entrepreneurship education is about developing
innovation (Gibb 2005, p. 48) and business ideas, as well as strengthening co-operation between
schools and the world of work, including such activities as work experience and study tours.
(Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino, 2011).
In contrast to internal education that addresses the requirements of a wider range of stakeholders,
including consumers and community, external entrepreneurship education focuses primarily on the
needs of the entrepreneur (Jones and Iredale, 2010). Nevertheless, the key difference between the two
terms is that the primary focus of entrepreneurship education is on starting, growing and managing a
business whereas the primary focus of enterprise education is on the acquisition and development of
personal skills, abilities and attributes that can be used in different contexts and throughout the life
course (Jones and Iredale, 2010). Both external and internal entrepreneurship education deal with two
angles of perception: firstly, what methods and practices are introduced in classrooms and how they
fit into the general curriculum; secondly, what are the long term outcomes of entrepreneurship
education outside of the classroom in terms of its value for society and the individual life.
14
2.4.3 Classroom
When implementing entrepreneurship education in schools a difference between internal and external
(enterprise) education should be considered. A key differentiator between entrepreneurship (internal)
and enterprise (external) education lies in the pedagogical approach adopted (Jones and Iredale,
2010). Internal entrepreneurship education might, for example, use traditional didactic approaches
(Jones and Iredale, 2006) to the teaching and learning of business ideas generation, business planning
and the new venture creation process. In contrast, enterprise education takes a more creative,
innovative pedagogical approach that utilises experiential action learning methods (Jones and Iredale,
2010). Moreover, Jones and Iredale, 2010, point out that the scope and practice of enterprise education
is much broader than external entrepreneurship education, which is overly focused on how to start a
business.
2.4.4 Society & life
European Commission’s 2012 report “Effects and impact of entrepreneurship programs in higher
education” is focusing on the entrepreneurship education impact on four dimensions: impact on the
entrepreneurship key competence; impact on intentions towards entrepreneurship; impact on the
individual’s employability; impact on society and economy. Despite the fact that this research
concerns higher education, all of the dimensions mentioned above are relevant to the long term
objectives of entrepreneurship education. In other words, these are the long term outcomes of
entrepreneurship education outside the classroom, the impact that applies to life after school,
contribution to society and individual life.
According to European Commission, 2012, entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on the
entrepreneurship key competence of individuals which consists of an entrepreneurial attitude,
entrepreneurial skills and knowledge of entrepreneurship. In turn, improving the entrepreneurship
key competences is expected to increase the employability of individuals: entrepreneurship education
seems to have a positive effect on employability in terms of job experience, creativity in the current
job and annual income earned of the alumni in paid employment. (European Commission, 2012).
Furthermore, entrepreneurship education is expected to improve the entrepreneurship key
competence which will have an impact not only on the role of the individual in the economy (the
15
likelihood that the entrepreneurship alumni will participate in a business start-up is substantially
higher and the enterprises run by these individuals are perceived as more innovative and the
expectations regarding employment growth and turnover growth are higher), but also in society
(social and personal life), in terms of the extent to which individuals take initiatives to start non-
commercial projects outside of work. (European Commission, 2012).
The next chapter will focus in more detail on how entrepreneurship education is represented and
understood on different educational and societal levels and how it is related to aims, practices,
outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education that were addressed by previous
entrepreneurship education research.
3 Making sense of entrepreneurship education
This thesis is about how entrepreneurship education is perceived by professionals involved in
entrepreneurship education with the focus on high school principals. In order to get a bigger picture
of what perceptions about entrepreneurship education exist among entrepreneurship education
professionals and principals, both classroom level and broader level will be addressed during the
interviews. (Figure 1). This chapter will be focused on how interviewees could make sense out of
entrepreneurship education in terms of aims, practices, results and strategy in the context of the
classroom (that is actual activities and teaching in a school) and on the level of society (that is how
entrepreneurship education affects the broader educational system). Furthermore, the perceptions on
the role of principals’ in entrepreneurship education will be addressed as a part of the interview. This
chapter will serve as a framework for the empirical work and is meant to serve as a base for
recommendations for further development and improvement of entrepreneurship education
understanding among high school principals.
16
Figure 1. The levels of perceptions of entrepreneurship education
Figure 1 shows the two different levels that will serve as a base for entrepreneurship education
professionals’ and principals’ sense-making of entrepreneurship education. The “classroom” level is
a micro level that is related to the implementation of entrepreneurship education in a particular school.
This level addresses both internal and external entrepreneurship. In other words it will focus both on
what the existing perceptions of entrepreneurship education are in terms of acquiring business related
skills and general skills that will help to succeed in working life. Furthermore, the perceptions about
aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education existing on a classroom level
will be addressed. The “broader educational level” is a macro level, and is concerned with the larger
and long-term impact of implementing entrepreneurship education in high schools. This level is
concerned with how entrepreneurship education in high schools can affect the education strategy and
curriculum among a higher number of schools on the city or even country level. The perceptions of
aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education on a bigger scale will be
addressed in the same manner as on the micro that is classroom level.
Addressing each of the elements presented in the Figure 1 will allow us to see the bigger picture of
different dimensions of entrepreneurship education at high school level and the role of principals in
entrepreneurship education both in terms of principals’ current understanding, current participation
as well as ability to learn and take actions towards having entrepreneurship education as an integral
part of the high school curriculum and school life in general. In terms of aims, practices, outcomes
17
and strategies, several existing ideas both on a classroom and broader level will be presented in this
part.
The following sections will talk about aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on both classroom and
boarder educational level.
3.1 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a
classroom level
Entrepreneurship education is one of seven cross-curricular themes for basic education, and one of
six cross-curricular themes for upper secondary education. (Finnish National Board of Education
2004; 2003). The theme in the curriculum for upper secondary education (high school) is called
“Active citizenship and entrepreneurship” (Finnish National Board of Education 2004). The goals of
the “Active citizenship and entrepreneurship” for high school students are similar to the goals set for
a basic school education, that is 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, although the levels of participation are global. (Finnish National Board of
Education 2003). In terms of the ongoing curriculum reform process, according to Finnish National
Board of Education, The National Core Curriculum for Upper Secondary Schools was reformed in
2003 and the local curricula based on the new national core curriculum came into effect on 1 August
2005. The core curriculum is being reformed and will be implemented in schools in 2016 (Finnish
National Board of Education, 2015).
The main focus in the implementation of entrepreneurship education must be on practical exercises
and on the creation of personal experiences of participation and influence. (Finnish National Board
of Education 2003). The outcomes from the implementation of entrepreneurship education on a
classroom level are related to external and internal entrepreneurship. In other words, the two possible
outcomes of entrepreneurship education relate to establishing new enterprises and becoming
entrepreneurs or alternatively utilising the skills received from entrepreneurship education in other
professional societal areas.
According to Seikkula-Leino et al., 2009, in spite of the core curriculum, there is a long way to go
from the international and national policy making level to the actual establishment of business
18
enterprises. The journey consists of two different stages: first, from the goal setting in the education
system, starting from EU strategies and national curricula, to the altered daily teaching work of all
teachers, and secondly, from the teaching to the altered behavior of the students in the years to come.
(Seikkula-Leino et al., 2009). In terms of this study, the first stage is represented by a broader level
of impact of entrepreneurship education while the second stage is relevant to entrepreneurship
education on a classroom level. Furthermore, this study doesn’t only address the establishment of
business enterprises as an outcome of entrepreneurship education (internal entrepreneurship), it also
focuses on how entrepreneurship education can help students to develop the qualities necessary to
succeed in working and social life in general (external entrepreneurship). Therefore, entrepreneurship
education strategy on a classroom level should address both internal and external entrepreneurship
education. This creates a need to identify what perspectives among principals exist regarding
entrepreneurship education strategies since principals are the ones who have the power to make an
impact on those strategies on an actual classroom teaching level.
3.2 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a
broader educational level
In Finnish comprehensive school, entrepreneurship education is not a school subject of its own,
although ‘participatory citizenship and entrepreneurship’ is a new module in the national core
curriculum (The Finnish National Board of Education 2004, pp. 40—41). Instead, the concept of
entrepreneurship is supposed to be addressed through all school practices as a cross-curricular theme
(Komulainen, Korhonen, Räty, 2013).
In comprehensive school, the aimof entrepreneurship education is that the learners become familiar
with the world of work and entrepreneurship, that they gain basic knowledge of the operation and the
respective functions of the school community, the public sector, businesses, the industry and
organisations and of entrepreneurship as a profession (FME, 2009). According to Elena Ruskovaara,
Timo Pihkala, Tiina Rytkölä & Jaana Seikkula-Leino, 2011, entrepreneurship education in practice
is rather limited since it is not a part of normal schoolwork. Instead, separate projects and theme days
are carried out to fulfil the requirements set out in the curricula. In addition, many teachers do not
know enough about the curricula or strategies connected to entrepreneurship education. (Seikkula-
Leino et al. 2010; Ruskovaara et al.). According to European Commission, 2013, reinforcing
entrepreneurial education in schools, vocational education institutions and universities will have a
19
positive impact on the entrepreneurial dynamism of our economies. Moreover, it emphasizes that
besides contributing to the creation of social enterprise and business start-ups, entrepreneurship
education will make young people more employable and more ‘intrapreneurial’ in their work within
existing organizations, across the social, public and private sectors. In other words, all of this can be
considered as the outcomes of entrepreneurship education on a broader level.
Finally, an appropriate strategy would be required in order to be able to achieve the results mentioned
earlier. Once again, according to European Commission's report “Entrepreneurship Education: Guide
for Educators”, 2013, Through the Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan and the Rethinking Education
Communication, the European Commission emphasizes the need to embed entrepreneurial learning
in all sectors of education including non-formal learning. Both documents call on Member States to
provide all young people with practical entrepreneurial experience before leaving compulsory
education, highlighting the importance of learning by doing within education and training (European
Comission, 2013). Nevertheless, this report still emphasizes mostly the role of the teacher in
entrepreneurship education by stating that teachers have a central role, as they have a strong impact
on the attainment of learners (European Commission, 2013). Despite the fact that teachers do have a
strong impact on the attainment of learners, there’s little attention devoted to principals, who in turn
can have a significant impact on the implementation of entrepreneurship education in schools.
By taking into account all the existing knowledge about entrepreneurship education on classroom and
broader education levels and by using the model of different levels of perceptions about
entrepreneurship education in Figure 1, this thesis is aiming to demonstrate how much understanding
about entrepreneurship education exists among one of the key players, i.e. principals, and what
measures should be taken to develop this understanding and convert it into actions.
3.3 Entrepreneurship education - perceptions by experts and principals;
perceptions about principals’ role by experts
One of the main aspects of this framework is to find out what perceptions about the role of high school
principals in entrepreneurship education exist among professionals who are directly involved in
entrepreneurship education. For this purpose, professionals involved in entrepreneurship education
in high school internally will be analyzed, and professionals involved in entrepreneurship education
externally will be interviewed. (Figure 2).
20
Figure 2. The perceptions and opinions about entrepreneurship education in high school and the role
of principals in entrepreneurship education
Perceptions about
Entrepreneuship
Education and the
Role of Principals
Principals
(INTERNAL)
Teacher
(INTERNAL)
Entrepreneurship
Education Expert
(EXTERNAL)
Researcher
(EXTERNAL)
21
Figure 2 represents the focus group that will be used for this thesis to get versatile perceptions and
opinions, which would allow us once again see a bigger picture of entrepreneurship education in high
schools and the role of high school principals. Therefore, using Figure 1 as a basis for the
questionnaire and discussion that will be initiated with professionals demonstrated in Figure 2, this
thesis will deliver the qualitative outcomes of empirical work through the interpretive
phenomenological analysis method which will be further discussed in the following chapter.
Only once all the elements have been put together would it be possible to draw conclusions on the
role of principals’ and most importantly their power to impact entrepreneurship education on different
levels. Therefore, both Figure 1 and Figure 2 will serve as a structure for analysis, discussion and
recommendations of this thesis, namely the future actions by both internal and external experts that
need to be taken both at classroom level and broader educational level to create further integration of
entrepreneurship education in high schools both as a part of the curriculum and as a part of school
life and the educational environment.
4 Research methodology
The research methodology follows interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). Entrepreneurship
and entrepreneurship education are seen here as socially constructed phenomena (Berger and
Luckmann, 1969; Bouchikhi, 1993). This thesis is committed to examining how experts in the area
make sense of this phenomena in the context of high school education and particularly in the context
of the principals’ role in entrepreneurship education in high schools. Moreover, this thesis aims to
look into how a group of experts in entrepreneurship education make sense of entrepreneurship
education at both classroom level and broader educational level.
The method of gathering data was designed to address a smaller yet heterogeneous focus group which
includes people involved in high school entrepreneurship education internally (e.g. a teacher) and
externally (e.g. a researcher). One of the key elements of the focus group would be principals’
perceptions about entrepreneurship education and the perceptions about principals’ role in
entrepreneurship education by other interviewees.
The research data has been gathered through a number of face-to-face and email interviews. The data
was collected from 5 respondents including a teacher, researcher, an expert involved in
22
entrepreneurship education in several ways, a high school principal and a high school coordinator
who will be placed under the category “principals” in the following chapters. The data has been
recorded, transcribed and then interpreted based on the access to the experience of entrepreneurship
education phenomena provided by participants. When interviewing principals, the data was received
through email interviews. The data has then been analysed to identify commonalities in participants’
experiences in order to tell a complete story about entrepreneurship education perceptions among the
participants. In accordance with the outcomes of the analysis the appropriate discussion and
recommendations have been made.
The questions have been designed to address both entrepreneurship education on a classroom level
and on a broader educational level; emphasizing the importance of entrepreneurship education both
for students and teachers as well as the education system as a whole. The questions have been
structured in a very personal manner in order to be able to get personal perceptions and interpretations
of the interviewees in the context of the entrepreneurship education phenomenon, specifically in the
high schools with the focus on high school principals.
The focus group have been presented with a set of questions including common core questions
regarding entrepreneurship education and additional questions depending on a participant’s role in
order to get a better insight into the perceptions and experiences of a specific expert. All the
participants were asked the following 5 core questions:
1) What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
2) How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
3) How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader education
system?
4) Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
5) Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
6) How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in
the short and long-term?
23
In addition to 5 core common questions, the internal group (Figure 2) were asked the following
question:
1) Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching?
In addition to 5 core questions, the external group (Figure 2) and a teaching participant from internal
group were asked the following questions related to the role of principals in entrepreneurship
education in high schools:
1) Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in
high school?
2) What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
3) Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
4) Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals?
5) What do you think would be the best way to coach principals in entrepreneurship education?
6) Who do you think would be the right people to do that?
In terms of reaching out to participants to request an interview, principals turned out to be the most
difficult group to reach. The main reasons for that included very busy schedules, language issues (the
whole research had been conducted in English which would make it harder for Finnish principals to
express their opinions), timing (when empirical work started at the end of May principals were busy
due to the end of the school year; during the whole summer principals were out of school;
subsequently the beginning of school year in mid-August was also the busiest time) as well as a lack
of involvement in entrepreneurship education issues which will be further analysed and discussed in
following chapters.
Initially, a large number of principals were contacted via email and invited to have an email interview
in order to gather more versatile data. Plenty of responses have been received stating that principals
will either direct the interview question to other people in school (for example counselors), or it was
requested to do an interview in their native language, or simply stated that they had no time. Only
two people among all principals, vice-principals and program coordinators asked have responded to
the interview. Nevertheless, even having in-depth interviews with other experts and email interviews
with principals have shown a clear connection which will be discussed and explain later. In other
24
words, there is a deeper reasoning behind principals being reluctant to responding to the questions
regarding entrepreneurship.
According to Smith, (Smith et al, 2009), the aim of interpretive phenomenological analysis is to
explore in detail how participants are making sense of their personal and social world, and the main
currency for an IPA study is the meanings particular experiences, events, states hold for participants.
In this thesis, the aim of the interpretive phenomenological analysis is to explore how experts in
various areas of entrepreneurship education make sense of entrepreneurship education with the focus
on a high school level and the role of principals in entrepreneurship education.
Furthermore, Smith argues that consistent with its phenomenological origins, IPA is concerned with
trying to understand what it is like, from the point of view of the participants, to take their side. This
is particularly relevant to this thesis since participants, while being a small focus group, represent a
wide variety of perceptions that would allow us to see the entrepreneurship education phenomenon
from different, whether opposite or similar, angles. Thus, this thesis aims to deliver more detailed
outcomes of the research through a two-stage interpretation process (Smith et al, 2009) where
participants are trying to make sense of their world; this thesis is trying to make sense of the
participants trying to make sense of entrepreneurship education.
The received data was analysed through gathering different perceptions around one question and
analysing the whole with eventually creating a bigger picture and making sense of the whole
questionnaire and the various perceptions that were presented by participants. The data analysis was
then discussed both in relation to each particular question and participants involved in responding to
that question as well as the results and participants as a whole unit build around the phenomenon of
entrepreneurship education in the context of high school and the role of principals. Moreover, the
connection between the participants’ area of expertise and their experiences has been created in order
to get a better understanding of why certain perceptions are different or similar to each other. Based
on the outcomes, the appropriate and justified conclusions as well as possible call to action were
established and explained.
25
5 Empirical work - Making sense of the word of entrepreneurship education
Q1: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Entrepreneurship education is such a broad area. For me it’s mainly about how people can learn to
behave in an entrepreneurial way and adopt that kind of behaviour in any context and as a teacher,
when I look at entrepreneurship education my main goal is to enhance that kind of behaviour and
mindset in all my students; and the second target is to enhance their competencies in studying
business, but that’s not the primary goal for me. Of course, when you look at entrepreneurship
education, one area, which is not often discussed, is also how to help people who are entrepreneurs.
How to help them to learn more and how to help them to enhance their skills and competencies to
enlarge their business.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“We have created a model (EnTree-model: A multilayered discussion on entrepreneurship education,
Figure 3). This is the idea of what I think about entrepreneurship education. So it is a very holistic. It
concerns the whole life of a human being and also, we have these two different ways of
thinking/approaches about entrepreneurship. So we have this American approach, and then we have
the continental approach. I would like to say that we have also got a Nordic approach, which is quite
close to the continental approach. And, you know the difference. There are the questions “why”, “why
are we educating?” and “why do we think entrepreneurship is important?” That is the part we have in
this model, in this continental approach, but not in this American approach. So this is more
methodology and teaching methods, and this is a more holistic/philosophical approach. So in this
figure: “entree model” I would like to put some stress on this culture. Entrepreneurship is also culture
related, and it depends on where you are what the context or the culture may be. Where you are living
or where you are working.”
26
Figure 3. EnTree -model: A multilayered discussion on entrepreneurship education (Hägg &
Peltonen, 2014)
27
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Entrepreneurship is a very new concept to the leaders. The ideas that we’re seeing in educational
leadership is, the world is drastically changing on the outside, so that means that schools have to
drastically change. Entrepreneurship itself is a very new concept to be implementing in the schools.
So the leaders are still trying to embrace that. They’re not against it. A good educational leader’s not
going to be against a lot of things. Although they’re not against it, it was better for me to come onto
the team and help translate some of the key terms and ideas coming out of the field of entrepreneurship
and what can be implemented into school. Students don’t need to know everything about
entrepreneurship. However, breaking entrepreneurship down to the key fundamentals can be difficult
sometimes, especially when the educational leaders don’t really have time to study a new field of
science. They’re busy doing their normal stuff. So that would be the first hurdle. That would also be
the first opportunity for educational leaders in the future, is to maybe take somebody on who can
translate and identify the core principles of entrepreneurship.”
4: Principal’s perspective
“It means that the students learn how to proceed when they want to establish a company or get
somebody interested in ideas they have or inventions they have made. They need help with
bureaucracy and legal and financial matters.”
“Equipping young people with the skills and aptitudes necessary to succeed in establishing their own
business”
Summary: There are clear similarities in perceptions among entrepreneurship education professionals
in terms of a broader understanding of entrepreneurship education. This perspective differs to
principals’ perspective who only identify entrepreneurship education as something related to
establishing a company. In other words, principals see entrepreneurship education on a classroom
level only in terms of external entrepreneurship while other professionals clearly identify internal
entrepreneurship attributes.
28
Q2: How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
1: Researcher’ perspective
“I would say that the main issue that always must be kept in mind is to put the student first. By that I
mean that, in many cases when we talk about entrepreneurship education, we take it for granted and
there are a lot of discussions that we need more companies because of the economy and (I don’t think
that) when we look at education we always have to be very clear about goals, and also about values.
So educational consciousness is very important. As a teacher you have to be very aware that you are
not pushing students in the wrong direction. They have to have the freedom to choose their own path.
But, if we are discussing how as a teacher we can enhance entrepreneurial behavior, I would say that
learning should be student-centered, it should be rooted in action, but also in theory. So there must
be a mix of theories and action. Also, learning should take place in teams and should be experiential;
they should learn from their own experiences and mistakes. Also confusion is good, it’s part of the
process. It has to be fun, there has to be a passion for learning, and it has to be outside school premises,
as you can’t really learn how to be an entrepreneur while you are sitting in a classroom. And so you
have to get in a world with a different kind of people and you have to learn ways to get to know your
own strengths and also your own shortcomings. It’s not easy, but if you keep in mind the things which
are normally attached to entrepreneurs: freedom, risk-taking, the skill to see opportunities and handle
your opportunities, then basically that’s it.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I have been thinking this for 10 years, and I am very happy that we have managed to figure out this
model (EnTree) because it’s not so easy. And it’s also very important that you can use different kinds
of orientations; these pedagogical orientations. But you always have to have some elements of the
essence of entrepreneurship. Also, to be able to live in security and certainty. These elements are
very important. There are many others also, as well as here. These are the main theoretical approaches,
but of course you can use many others. So we don’t say that in entrepreneurship education, you should
for instance, be experimental but you can use whatever you have in your toolbox. If you combine
these two, for instance if you use behaviourism you have to have something about entrepreneurship,
the essence of entrepreneurship combined with this way of approach. And then you have to know
what the aim of this education is.”
29
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I think speaking from the educational leadership point of view; you’d probably get an honest “I don’t
know”. For me if you’re going to ask the business studies teacher, then of course I have a big grand
idea that it should all be creative and we should all play and create and do all this fun stuff. So you’re
going to see two drastic views within this school. You’re going to have it from the educational leader
side and then from the business studies teacher. From the educational leader side, I don’t think they
have any idea what their ideal entrepreneurial curriculum is going to be. Our principal is the
educational leader and he has identified how critical it will be, that’s the stopping point. From that
point, as a good leader I think he has stepped back from that, and I think a good leader will let go
when they need to let go, and that’s what he has done. He’s said, “Ok, this needs to happen”. It needs
to happen because the government is changing the curriculum. Obviously the job markets are
changing from more corporate to small businesses.
Everything’s changing. Yes there’s a need to change. I think that needs to be stressed that our
principal and the educational leaders have recognized it needs to change. So I think there’s a big
holistic idea to bring entrepreneurship into the school. But how, when, where, why is that going to
happen? I think you’d be very lucky to find an educational leader who knows that. They haven’t been
taught entrepreneurship, they’re not being taught entrepreneurship, maybe they will in the future.
What they do teach in the educational programs up here is that leaders in schools are going to have
to learn to collaborate. They’re going to learn how to bootstrap their finances. They’re going to learn
how to think outside the box. So it’s interesting that, if you look at all these courses that are offered
to their educational leaders, they teach the principals in the frameworks of effectuation theory. So
they teach theories of entrepreneurship, but they don’t call it entrepreneurship. So the courses offered
to educational leaders aren’t entitled “entrepreneurship”, the professors don’t say, “This is how an
entrepreneurial leader would think”. They skip over all of that and move into the field of educational
leadership, and call the same principle something different.”
30
4: Principals’ perspective
“Somebody experienced would encourage them and guide them through the procedure. Definitely
NOT a regular teacher.”
“This question lies outside my remit. We have a Young Entrepreneurship scheme operating within
the school, open to IB students. We offer IB Business Management.”
Summary: There are clear similarities in perceptions, where the experimental nature of
entrepreneurship education is emphasized as well as the need for bringing educators with more
significant entrepreneurship education experience. Nevertheless, the perceptions about the “ideal”
entrepreneurship education depend on each participant’s personal experience and expertise in
entrepreneurship education.
Q3: How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader education
system?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Right now we are in a position where entrepreneurship education is in a minor role. Although in
Finland entrepreneurship education has been in the curriculum since 1994/95 so almost 20 years, but
we still have a lot of work to do because entrepreneurship education, from my point of view, it would
demand that we change the whole structure. We could get rid of timetables in the present form and
also it would need teachers to do teamwork and to collaborate with businesses and other external
organisations and people. I would disrupt the whole thing.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“You know, there has been a lot of misunderstanding between general education and entrepreneurship
education. I am an educator, and I think that most of the educators think that there’s something that
comes from economics, and it’s some kind of political, you know, hidden agenda. They are afraid of
it, but I think this model will help them to understand that our aim is also to educate towards a good
life. Not because we want to support some policies.”
31
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I think you would hear from leaders that entrepreneurship is something that could and should affect
everything else. So if it’s your biology students, working with the wood and metal class (last year
they were building birdhouses and they could sell those), so given the idea that education leaders
should and will go to this broader definition of entrepreneurship about collaboration and
bootstrapping and have a bigger definition on entrepreneurship, I think they’ll start to see that every
subject within the school, if it’s the language department or the science department. All those
departments will see that entrepreneurship can be utilized in all of them. Entrepreneurship right now
is very limited to the business studies thing, and I’m the only business studies teacher. So
entrepreneurship is not being distributed throughout the school very evenly at all.”
4: Principals’ perspective
“It would make studying more motivating when you see what you are heading towards and why you
have to study.”
“Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century job market”
Summary: All the interviewees agree on the need for change in relation to the perceptions of
entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, there seem to be need to disrupt the whole educational
system since apparently entrepreneurship education is still very limited to business studies. All in all,
there’s a need to tackle the misunderstanding that exists between general education and
entrepreneurship education and create a better understanding of a broad purpose of entrepreneurship
education which is not only related to implementing governmental policies.
32
Q4: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I think it’s important to know that in high schools, the whole learning is focused on exams that are
taken at the end of term, but I’m not so sure if anyone should spend 3-4 years in school only for a
score and only for learning things in theory as I think that learning is about learning for life. In that
way there are many ways to learn, so I don’t think that just sitting in a classroom and making memos
is the only way to learn and I don’t think it’s a very good way to learn in modern society.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“It’s very important. Because it’s a way of life; a way of thinking. And wherever you are, you need
this attitude. So it’s not only thinking about business. Of course if you have this entrepreneurial
mindset, you act as an entrepreneur or you act in an entrepreneurial way, wherever you are. And it’s
not only for running a business of your own, it’s very large…”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I don’t think it’s very critical for students to learn how to start a company. I think that’s probably
the least of their worries. When you talk to other educational leaders here I think their naivety towards
entrepreneurship will limit their response to that question. I think you will get a lot of responses from
educational leaders saying, well, “It’s important because corporations are changing to small/medium
sized companies and we’re going to need to better prepare our students to work in those
environments.” Yes, to better equip students for tomorrow’s changing work environment we do need
to teach them more entrepreneurial traits than how to work in a corporation. You definitely hear the
importance of teaching students to be critical thinkers, so I think you’re going to hear that from
everybody in the leadership position. Taking it a little deeper as an entrepreneur, those are great things
to teach kids, but those are the realities, they’re going to go out and change jobs a lot. We can just tell
them to be prepared about that. Taking it a little deeper, I think if you’re teaching students how to
collaborate, how to bootstrap instead of teaching students “hey, this is what’s going to happen” now
we can teach them the “how”. So a lot of education has always been emphasized on “what” and now
we’re changing to the “how”, and entrepreneurship is going to be a critical tool that leaders can use
to teach that “how”.
33
4: Principals’ perspective
“Definitely. The school is too closed and too dependent on teachers who might know the theory but
not the practice.”
“As above”, i.e. “Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century
job market”
Summary: In terms of the importance of entrepreneurship education for students, all of the
participants seem to have common perceptions and an understanding of the importance of this
particular issues.
Q5: Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“When teachers understand the true meaning of entrepreneurship education and see that there are a
lot of different aims and a lot of different ways they can teach in an entrepreneurial way, it really
enhances their competencies so it’s concerned about professional growth. When they do teamwork it
gives them more freedom to arrange the learning. Also when they contact other people it enlarges
their own competencies and their skills and gives them new ideas, and they also, which I find very
interesting, is that somehow they learn to respect their own work in a new light. So being a teacher is
not just something that has to be done; it really has a meaning. And my research showed that when
teachers realized that, it was so enlightening.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I think they key point is that; people who adopt this idea of entrepreneurial behaviour. For instance,
students: they are more active, they are more responsible for how they go on with their studies, and
also they are very alert to what is happening around them and they want to take the benefits from
these opportunities that they see around them. So they are more active and they are more responsible
for their own lives.”
34
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Well, teaching is the best way to learn, they say, so if somebody’s teaching entrepreneurship they’re
going to be able to learn the different characteristics or traits of entrepreneurship and one of the big
ones that teachers and leaders would find is the idea of collaboration. I think it would be really cool
for teachers to learn some aspects of entrepreneurship like collaborating, and once they find those
traits within it they’ll probably see their job ease up a little bit. So not only will they be able to teach
students better, but their actual work environment and the spirit around here would be a lot better too.
Practically, the learning outcomes would be great for the students. On the other hand being practical
too, another positive benefit for teachers in entrepreneurship is that they’ll probably better their
environment, and happier teachers equals better outcomes.”
4: Principals’ perspective
“I am more interested in teaching the students than the present teachers. There is a need for the school
to open up and invite other actors from “real” life outside the school.”
“The Business Management (SL/HL) option in our school permits many students to gain a broad
familiarity with marketing, finance, management skills, etc. These are life skills in many ways.
Teachers of other subjects are less directly involved”
Summary: All of the entrepreneurship education professionals seem to have common perceptions
about the importance of entrepreneurship learning for teachers. At the same time, principals consider
that inviting other professionals to school instead of educating their own teachers is a better idea.
Furthermore, from the principals’ perspective, entrepreneurship education is only related to business
studies and teachers of other subjects are not involved, which means that internal entrepreneurship
education doesn’t seem to be taken into consideration by principals.
35
Q6: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I don’t think there are any easy answers to that. I think that in the short-term, teachers should attend
further training more eagerly, because there is some training available. There should be more, but
they are there and most of them are really good, so that’s in the short-term. And also there is
information available on the internet for example, so they just need to sit down and talk with their
colleagues and start to experiment in the short-term. In the long run, I think that support from the
management, from the principals, is needed because in many cases teachers say that they don’t feel
that they are supported or appreciated by their colleagues or by their principals. So it is important to
get feedback and support from the management.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“The problem at the moment is that the teachers don’t adopt this model. If the teachers and all the
staff who are responsible adopt this model, and they themselves are entrepreneurial, in how they act
and how they handle people. Young people, they are like… how do I say… a virgin mind. If teachers
are giving this example when they behave like this, the young people can learn.”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Yeah, that’s a super-critical question because you have the short and the long-term thing. The current
situation is that educational leaders today are not being taught entrepreneurship whatsoever. So I think
that there’s a huge understanding at the national level that entrepreneurship needs to be taught. That’s
why it’s in the next curriculum. However, it’s not coming from the bottom up. The stress on schools
and education to be more entrepreneurial is definitely coming from the top down. So you’re going to
have a lot of leaders in the future (in the next 5-10 years) being super-reactive to entrepreneurship.
You’re not going to find a lot of proactive leaders. So I would say that the current situation is horrible
for entrepreneurship and leaders. Maybe not horrible, but scary if you think that the teachers are not
being prepared whatsoever, or the leaders aren’t being prepared whatsoever.”
36
4: Principal’s perspective
“New teachers should be instructed before they leave university. Thus we would get the thought
rooted in the school environment.”
“Why not? We have a broad mission to provide a solid educational experience. Economics is
compulsory for all. Thereafter students with an interest can opt for Business Management. A
surprisingly large number of graduates go on to study business in higher education. Whether they
become entrepreneurs or employees is of less significance.”
Summary: Some of the common perceptions regarding the implementation of the entrepreneurship
education in the short and long-terms are related to educating teachers. At the same time, some of the
principals’ perception show us once again that entrepreneurship education is only perceived in the
context of business studies. Some of the other different perceptions have to do with the role of
policymakers and the lack of a proactive approach to entrepreneurship education.
The internal group (Figure 2) were asked the following question:
Q1: Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching?
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Very slowly. Very slowly, with a lot of difficulties. When you have a leader trying to implement
something they’re not an expert on you’re going to have a lot of difficulties. And I think one of the
only real ways to have it implemented is doing what our principal is doing, a hands off approach.
Bring in people that are motivated, bring in people that have the knowledge and just let it be. So if
you’re trying to implement ideas and you only know half of the ideas then you’re implementing half
of the whole concept to students and then everybody loses. So nationwide it’s probably being
implemented on a very slow process. There’s a lot of room and risk that it’s going to be implemented
wrong.”
37
4: Principals’ perspective
“We actually have for many years offered a course called “Innovation”. It has been very popular and
we have a teacher who has a company of her own. She has an MSc and MBA education.”
“Business Management - 150 hours at Secondary Level and 240 hours at High school Level”
Summary: Some of the common perceptions regarding this question have to do with bringing in
people who have the required knowledge. Nevertheless, principals’ opinions differ in that there is still
a very strong perception regarding entrepreneurship education being only related to business studies.
Following questions related to the role of principals in entrepreneurship education in high schools:
Q1: Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in
high school?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Personally I think it should start from the teachers themselves, because right now we are being given
pressure and challenges from the government and it leaves nothing basically. Also it’s important to
have feedback and support from the management, but in the end it’s always the teacher who does or
doesn’t implement new things, in my opinion. You don’t really need guidance or permission from
the management because nobody is saying how you can deliver a certain course, you must start doing
things your own way.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
Based on the previous answer, teachers play the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship
education in high schools (See Appendix 3 for the full interview).
38
3: Teacher’s perspective
The interviewed teacher was hired specifically to teach business studies, teach entrepreneurship and
teach business to their students, as well as to work on projects with the leadership staff and other
projects around the city and around the community that the school is trying to get involved in
entrepreneurially. Therefore, the above question was modified to fit in with the interview flow (See
Appendix 1 for original interview and the context of responses below).
“In the classroom the principal has a very hands-off approach to what I would like to do in the
classroom. They’ve had some lessons planned out in the past, but it was very, very super-practical:
“this is how you start a business.” For a lot of 14 year-olds, they don’t need to know how to go to the
registration office, the tax office. They’re more creative, they want to play. So getting a 13 and a 14-
year old student to play with entrepreneurship is becoming more of the idea then how to use it as a
tool. They’ll learn how to use it as a tool later in life. We’ve had business studies in the past. The
vice-principal for example, he’s a PE, Gym and a math teacher. However, he’s done some of the
business studies in the past. Now with the business studies needing to be taught, plus this whole new
requirement of schools adjusting to entrepreneurship there was a need for a separate person to come
into it. As a private school, this school has the ability and the freedom to make decisions to do that.
Whereas all the other school are city operated, and they don’t have the flexibility to create a position
like that. So the city schools are going to need to be super-innovative and entrepreneurial themselves
in figuring out how to put somebody into that spot.”
Summary: There is a common perception existing among the participants that teachers play the main
role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools. It is also appears that
management and principals have a hands-off approach but can contribute by supporting the teachers.
Furthermore, when combining different opinions it seems that most schools cannot bring a
professional from the outside therefore, teachers taking initiative and teaching their courses in a more
entrepreneurial way is very important.
39
Q2: What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I would say that when a teacher tries new things and then gets some results, he or she can go the
principal and say, “ok, I’m going to try that,” and then say, “ok, it went this way or that way,” and if
he or she sees that it was a good experiment, then he can ask, “how can I enhance this? How can I
broaden this? How can I take more colleagues into that approach and how can we take it further?” So
that’s the role of the management to then make it happen in the future.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
Of course they also have a very important role. I think that the whole system should be established
on the base like this. And of course teachers and professors can use their own personality as they
want, but this idea should be… this is the key point that, that they understand that, not just giving
lessons…”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Our principal’s title officially, as the leader of a private school, is a CEO. He sits in the principal’s
office, he doesn’t do very much with the teachers, and he doesn’t do very much with the planning of
the school itself. He’ll get a lot of information from the vice-principals. He’ll sit down with the
teachers and he’ll sit down with the vice-principals, but only to listen to their ideas, only to hear them
and then sign off. He’s not really taking their ideas and then making them his own. He’ll take what
the outside community is saying, bring it to the vice-principals, and then it becomes the job of the
vice-principals and teachers to distribute it throughout the school. So what you see is our principal is
being a like a pivot point. But he’s not really going to change the world and he’s not going to really
change the school, that’s the job of the teachers and the vice-principal. His job is to be the pivot point
where all of that can happen and all of this can happen freely. So, since he doesn’t know
entrepreneurship so well, it’s a lot better for him to back off, bring somebody in that knows that a
little bit more. I think the next is; an educational leader here has to know how to bootstrap, has to
know how to collaborate, has to know all those fundamental traits of a good entrepreneurial leader,
they just don’t know that they’re being entrepreneurial. They were never taught to be entrepreneurial,
they were never told, and “this is entrepreneurship.” So if they’re not told what entrepreneurship is,
40
how can they tell teachers or students what entrepreneurship is? So that’s what you’re seeing today,
and that’s what you’re going to see in the future.”
Summary: In terms of the role of principals, some common perceptions have to do with principals’
role in supporting teachers and listening to their ideas in order to implement these ideas in the future
if they prove to be working. The main perception related to this question, points out that principals
are not the ones who create and implement entrepreneurship education but rather they are the ones
who can provide necessary support to other educators and help them to make things happen in the
future.
Q3: Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I think that is the next phase. If you look a few years back, there wasn’t any research on teachers
either, but there was a lot of research on entrepreneurial learning. Then it started by defining what is
entrepreneurial learning, and then it moved on to the issues of entrepreneurial pedagogy, but no one
defined what entrepreneurial pedagogy is, it was taken as granted. Then if you look at the newest
research, there is a trend that is saying, “Ok, next we have to look at how teachers perceive
entrepreneurship education,” so some research has already been done on that level and the next level
I guarantee is principals. But I think that one of the reasons why this kind of research is missing is
that we are so focused on the learning aspect and we are not interested in teaching and certainly in
Finland, we already talk about education. Education is as challenging a word as entrepreneurship,
because some people think that when you educate something, you try to put someone else to a certain
form, and it is more neutral to talk about learning, rather than education or teaching and talk about
management then, because if you look at school management you end up dealing with obstructions
and timetables and nobody knows how to fix that.”
41
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I don’t know. Good question. I don’t have an answer.”
3: Teacher’s perspective
According to the teacher’s perspective, educational leaders were never taught to be entrepreneurial,
they were never told, “this is entrepreneurship” and this could be a reason of the lack of research:
“...And Finland being one of the leading education research places… If that’s true, then it’s interesting
to see that the world leading education system has no emphasis whatsoever on entrepreneurship and
leaders at all. And there’s one finance course and one project management course. Everything else
is…” (See Appendix 1 for the full interview).
Summary: It appears that the lack of entrepreneurship education research focusing on principals is a
difficult questions. Some of the perceptions point out that so far entrepreneurship education research
has focused on other aspects and focusing on principals might be the next phase.
Q4: Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals?
1: Researcher’s perspective (note: the question was paraphrased to fit in with the interview flow yet
the response is relevant to the question stated in this thesis):
“Right now, I am afraid that many of them think that entrepreneurship, especially in high school, is
something to do with studying business and that is not the main idea of a high school. So it is
understandable, but if the principals can see and get more information and experience about
entrepreneurship education, maybe they can then see it in a new light. But, I’m afraid I have no answer
on how to fix it, except maybe sending principals to training.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“No, they’re very narrow. They have this idea that entrepreneurship education is how to educate the
people to establish a business of their own and how to establish a start-up. You know. It’s very, very
narrow, so we have a lot of work to do to understand this.”
42
3: Teacher’s perspective
“So, our principal is not an expert in entrepreneurship. He knows that it’s going to be a big part of
the school in the coming years. I was doing some teaching before here, supporting the school, so I
was brought on specifically to translate what entrepreneurship is to our principal, to the staff so a lot
of, when things are being implemented here in the school, from the entrepreneurship point of view
they’ll look at me and say “is this ok? Is this good, or what’s next?” So if you find an educational
leader who knows what entrepreneurship is in the first place, great, I think you’ve found a gold mine.
Good luck trying to find a leader who even understands what entrepreneurship is, besides starting a
company.”
Summary: It appears that all the participants have a common perception about principals’
understanding of entrepreneurship education, which only relates to establishing a business.
Q5: What do you think would be the best way to coach principals in entrepreneurship education?
1: Researcher’s perspective (note: the response refers to the previous answer where “sending
principals to training” was suggested):
“It would be more like coaching. What I would do, I would first explain what entrepreneurship
education is about, what the different aims are, but then I would like to get the principals to open
projects in their own schools. The one thing that is missing right now in entrepreneurship education
is strategies for schools. I think that is the next step. You know, original entrepreneurship education
strategies have been made and some of them are in existence right now. Helsinki launched an
entrepreneurship education strategy; I also know that in other parts of Finland similar approaches are
going on, but at school level there is still a lack of strategies and programs related to what it means
in practice, what is entrepreneurship education in our schools.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“Yes they should be. At the moment I’m having systems for principals. They come from primary
schools and upper secondary schools.”
43
3: Teacher’s perspective
The answer to this question was derived from the interview flow (See Appendix 1 for the full
interview).
“...it would maybe be cool to start my own coaching or consulting company and then hire other
entrepreneurs that are interested in getting that into the schools. I could approach it saying “ok this is
my job: coaching other leaders how to be entrepreneurial”. So that’s one way, we could do it as a job.
You could also, I was thinking about contacting the EU commission or the US embassy and seeing if
they would fund my research and then, for example if the EU education commission funds my project
then obviously they would have those findings at their ability to distribute. So I think there’s a lot of
different possibilities of how to get the word out. I don’t know what the best method is; I just think
that the word needs to be spread somehow. Maybe do like a TV commercial…”
Summary: It seems that participants have a common perception that providing coaching to principals
might be necessary for them to gain a broader understanding of entrepreneurship education.
Q6: Who do you think would be the right people to do that?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I don’t think there’s any specific group, but whoever it is, that person or group has to understand the
whole picture of entrepreneurship education, because otherwise, it will be too narrow. It can’t focus
just on business or education, it has to be taking the whole picture into consideration.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I think for instance, in Etu-Töölö high school, principals have studied these models for as long as I
have been teaching this. They have always sent teachers to courses every year. And at the moment
more than 20 teachers have been trained to this model and they are using it. It takes years but I think
in 10 years we will come a long way.”
44
3: Teacher’s perspective
The answer to this question was derived from the interview flow (See Appendix 1 for the full
interview).
“Think “ok what can we do as researchers? What can we do to suggest that entrepreneurship needs
to be implemented? Or how can it be implemented. So like, “how” and “what” of entrepreneurship
should be implemented in the future would be the first step. It just needs to be marketed. The traits of
entrepreneurship just need to be communicated. They’re not being communicated. And with that
you’ll be 50/50 with finding a leader who’s open to it, or who doesn’t know anything and backs away
from it. And then the leaders that you do find are open to it, then you have a 50/50 chance of it being
implemented correctly. So with the current situation you’ve a very low percentage or a very low
opportunity that entrepreneurship will be implemented somewhat ok. Like, maybe 20% and the other
80% is either it’s not going to be implemented or it’s going be implemented horribly, and it’s going
to be all reactive and not proactive. I think if you look at it, the whole situation like that, I think it’s
very optimistic, we now see that there is a niche, there’s an opening in the studies.”
Summary: Generally, perceptions regarding this question point out that there is no specific group of
people who could coach principals and that all entrepreneurship education professionals and
educators themselves can be involved in the process.
The empirical work demonstrated a range of opinions which nevertheless lead us to a strong case in
relation to entrepreneurship education overall, entrepreneurship education in high schools and
especially the role of high school principals in entrepreneurship education and the current state of
awareness that exists among them. Main conclusions from the data are:
1) Principals agree with the importance of entrepreneurship education, although they mostly
view it as a business education
2) Teachers play an important role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education and can
make changes at the classroom level but there can be lack of support from the management
3) Steps were taken in the past to create a coaching program for principals but haven’t been
successful yet
45
4) Despite the entrepreneurship focus of decision makers in education and EU, there is still a
fundamental lack of understanding of the term “entrepreneurship education”
5) Entrepreneurship studies are not included in the training of future principals
6) Public schools in Helsinki don’t have enough flexibility and finance to focus on
entrepreneurship education and hire people with expertise
7) Fundamentally principals have a hands-off role when it comes to entrepreneurship education
implementation
8) Some actions are taken to address entrepreneurship education in high schools and educate
principals locally but they are not nearly enough to scale and affect the broader education
system
Furthermore, the empirical work shows how different experts involved in entrepreneurship education
interpret this phenomenon. It is not surprising that interviewees discuss the entrepreneurship
education through their own experiences.
The main message of the empirical work shows that while principals don’t create entrepreneurship
education strategies as a part of their job, they are important facilitators of the entrepreneurship
education in high schools through supporting teachers and being open to a new approach to teaching.
Nevertheless, it appears that the core understanding of entrepreneurship education by principals both
on a classroom level and broader level is only limited to the business context. In practice it means
that this issue has to be address through future research in order to gain understanding on how to
reach current principals and coach them about entrepreneurship education and what changes need to
be made to educate future principals to understand the holistic nature of entrepreneurship education
and its importance on different educational levels.
46
6 Discussion and recommendations
Even by taking a glance at the participants’ responses it is clear that there is a massive gap in
entrepreneurship education understanding between principals and other professionals who are
directly involved with entrepreneurship education. It is obvious that principals interpret
“entrepreneurship education” just in the context of including business classes in the curriculum and
generally, relate entrepreneurship education to starting a venture. In other words, it appears that
essentially principals perceive entrepreneurship education to be equal to business education.
On the other hand, when we look at the response received from a teacher directly involved in the
planning of entrepreneurship activities (which is an exceptional case among high schools in Helsinki),
we can see how perceptions are drastically different from those of principals. In this particular case,
the participant had a strong entrepreneurship background; therefore it is not surprising that there is a
broader understanding of entrepreneurship education. At the same time, we can also see an
understanding of the whole picture and what measures can be taken to create more awareness of
entrepreneurship education among principals.
When we move further, we can see that the interviewed researcher has a clear idea from personal
experience regarding those measures to help principals understand entrepreneurship education. Here,
we get another set of interesting perceptions regarding what this kind of a “coaching program” would
entail and why it is not that simple to bring it to life as well as what challenges might arise in terms
of overall principals’ attitudes towards entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurship education
coaching. Even with having a small research sample, we can clearly see how perceptions evolve
through the course of empirical work. In other words, it is clear that principals, while having the
power to make a change, don’t have enough understanding of entrepreneurship education, at the same
time other participants are able to see the whole picture, and have a clear vision on how this situation
could be changed on a broader educational level.
In essence, this thesis used a sample group that included both internal and external players who could
affect the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools in different ways.
47
6.1 Perceptions of principals
The study shows that there’s clearly a lack of understanding of what entrepreneurship education really
means and despite the fact that principals recognise its importance, they tend to believe that
entrepreneurship education only has to do with establishing a company and the business side of
things. In other words, entrepreneurship education among principals is only perceived in terms of
external entrepreneurship. Furthermore, it appears that teachers have more awareness and willingness
towards integrating more entrepreneurship related activities into the curriculum yet, it seems that they
don’t get enough support from the management, i.e. principals. Therefore, there’s a clear
misconception that exists among principals and other educators regarding the meaning of the word
“entrepreneurship” in entrepreneurship education.
As was mentioned earlier, the word entrepreneurship is interpreted as business, therefore when
hearing about “entrepreneurship education”, education professionals automatically think about
“business education”. Therefore, the first step would be to change a common misconception about
the meaning of entrepreneurship education and create channels through which this information could
be delivered to principals and other educators who are in the position to make a change on a school
level. Some schools make an effort to implement entrepreneurship education; therefore it is essential
for principals to share the knowledge and experience among each other. The empirical work has
shown that there are local measures that are taken to educate or at least help principals to understand
entrepreneurship education but there is no trend yet.
The lack of understanding leads to the lack of support of the initiatives taken by others, for example
teachers. While principals themselves are not directly involved in education, they have the power to
create an entrepreneurship environment within the school. But in order to do so, they have to have a
better understanding of entrepreneurship education or at least about its importance outside of starting
a business. Essentially, to enhance principals’ understanding of entrepreneurship education, external
support by entrepreneurship education professionals is required.
48
6.2 Perceptions of other entrepreneurship education experts
This thesis has shown not only other experts in entrepreneurship education can clearly understand the
holistic nature of the subject; all of them have expressed similar opinions as to the role of principals
in entrepreneurship education and the lack of understanding among principals. While principals were
found to be an important fundament for entrepreneurship education, the importance and the ability of
teachers to make a change was emphasized. Furthermore, it has shown that researchers and educators
are trying to make a change themselves by using available measures. Nevertheless, there is a common
notion that there is a need for coaching/training for principals to expand their understanding of
entrepreneurship education.
All in all, the empirical work suggests that the interviewees make sense out of the entrepreneurship
education phenomenon and the role of principals in entrepreneurship education in a similar way. At
the same time, there seems to be less knowledge regarding the lack of previous entrepreneurship
education research focusing on principals, although there were good assumptions related to these
questions.
While initially this thesis was supposed to emphasize aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of
entrepreneurship education, even in the early stages of empirical work it became clear that there is a
very long way to go before these aspects can be discussed with principals as there is a lack of
understanding of the holistic meaning and purpose of entrepreneurship education. One of the
interesting findings is that principals are not the ones who can implement entrepreneurship education
because they simply have other duties. However, principals are a crucial element in every school
system and therefore can provide much-needed support to teachers who would like to add elements
of entrepreneurship education into their classes. Nevertheless, the first step towards principals’
participation in the questions of entrepreneurship education would be developing an understanding
of the true nature of entrepreneurship education and how it can benefit students, teachers and society
in the long-term.
Furthermore, as mentioned earlier some of the educators and researchers are very keen to address the
issue by creating coaching programs or using certain methods to decode the “entrepreneurship
education” meaning to principals. While individual attempts are very important, the change has to be
made on a higher level. Simultaneously, for the change to be made on a higher level, there is a need
for more awareness of principals’ roles and their lack of understanding of entrepreneurship education.
This certainly calls for more in depth research on the topic of principals’ role in entrepreneurship
49
education and the perceptions and most likely misconceptions that exist among principals regarding
the meaning of entrepreneurship education.
One of the significant findings from this study shows the initial causes for the lack of entrepreneurship
education understanding among principals, namely the lack of entrepreneurship courses for future
school leaders. This thesis has shown the lack of understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals which is not surprising given the fact that future principals and future leaders in general
are not taught to be entrepreneurial. This leaves us with the even bigger issue - the lack of
entrepreneurship courses for future leaders, which might lead us to another question: whether those
with the power to implement entrepreneurship education for future leaders understand the broader
meaning of the terms or do they only see it as something related to the starting of a company. This is
another topic that requires further research in order for us to understand the whole structure of causes
and consequences in terms of entrepreneurship education on different educational levels.
7 Conclusion
Entrepreneurship education is a phenomenon worth studying in view of its central focus in the
development of social and economic well-being (Seikku-Leino et al, 2010). This thesis aimed to
address entrepreneurship education in high schools and obtain a better understanding on how the
implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools works. Since principals and vice
principals appear to have the power to make changes and integrate more entrepreneurship activities
in their schools, the role of principals in entrepreneurship education was addressed. It would be
impossible to assume how principals can take part in entrepreneurship education implementation in
high schools without knowing whether principals fully understand the concept of entrepreneurship
education. To get a broader idea about what’s going on in entrepreneurship education in schools, the
sample group didn’t consists solely of principals but other experts in the field who gave a valuable
contribution to the development of this study.
Despite the novelty of this study, various limitation and lack of previous studies focusing on
principles, this study gave insights into how principals view entrepreneurship education, why it is
important to consider principals as one of the key players when it comes to the implementation of
entrepreneurship education, why there hasn’t been enough focus on principals in the context of
entrepreneurship education, what measures can be taken to coach principals to understand the concept
50
and the importance of entrepreneurship education and why it is important to focus on the
entrepreneurship education of future leaders.
Since entrepreneurship education is considered important at many societal levels (Seikku-Leino et al,
2010), this study demonstrates yet another area of entrepreneurship education research that requires
more attention, However, the results presented in this study show that even with a small focus group
there are clear indications that: 1) the role of principals in entrepreneurship education is highly
overlooked; 2) principals’ lack of understanding and misinterpretation can result in a lack of support
to teachers who want to implement more entrepreneurship education in their classes; 3) the effort
from teachers, policy makers and entrepreneurship education experts is required to change the current
situation; 4) there is clearly a lack of entrepreneurship courses when preparing principals who will
lead schools in the future.
In summary, the findings suggest a strong need for:
- more focus on principals and education leaders in entrepreneurship education research;
- development of a learning tool that would help create a better understanding of
entrepreneurship education among principals such as coaching/training programs;
- in terms of long-term effects, it is essential to integrate entrepreneurship courses into studies
and training for future principals
This thesis highlights the crucial factor in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high
schools, namely the role of principals and the need for development of principals’ understanding of
entrepreneurship education, which has received insufficient attention in the context of
entrepreneurship education.
The interpretive phenomenological analysis demonstrated a clear gap that exists between
entrepreneurship education experts’ interpretation and principals’ interpretations. Furthermore, other
experts who participated in this study interpret principals’ lack of understanding in a similar way,
which shows us a clear pattern regarding insufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education by
principals strengthened by perceptions of entrepreneurship education experts. All in all, this study
demonstrated that high school principals perceive entrepreneurship education in a narrow manner, as
opposed to the holistic nature of this phenomenon.
This study suggested several measures that can be taken in order to create more awareness of the true
meaning of entrepreneurship education among principals. Nevertheless, much more research on this
issue is required in order to fully understand why the role of principals have been overlooked in
51
previous research, what the best ways are to improve the present situation and how future principals
can be taught to be entrepreneurial.
This study is meant to introduce a new orientation for research on entrepreneurship education, in
which increasing attention should be paid to high school principals as one of the fundamental groups
of educators who play an important role in the support of entrepreneurship education implementation
in high schools.
Finally, as it was pointed out in the literature review, the EU Commission recognised that the quality
of teaching is the single most important within-school factor affecting student attainment (European
Commission, 2011). While the outcomes of this study have confirmed the importance of teachers in
entrepreneurship education it is important to remember that teachers can only make changes if they
are supported by principals. Therefore, future research focusing on principals in the context of
entrepreneurship education in high schools is important in order to create more awareness among
policymakers who could subsequently contribute to making a change on a broader educational level.
52
8 References
Akinola, 2005, in Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a
panacea for effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business
Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
Autor, D., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. (2007). The Skill Content of Recent Technological change: An
Empirical Exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4).Boyd & Vozikis, 1994. in Boyles, T.
(2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for
undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-
55
Backström-Widjeskog, B. (2010). “Teachers’ thoughts on entrepreneurship education”. In K. Skigen
& J. Sjovoll (Eds.), Creativity and innovation - Preconditions for entrepreneurship education (pp. 107
- 120). Trondheim: Tapir Academic Press.
Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010, Creativity in Schools: A Survey Of Teachers in Europe, European
Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Accessed
17.01.2015 fromhttp://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC59232.pdf
Cavanagh, R. E., Kay, K., Klein, D., & Meisinger, S. R. (2006). Are they really ready to work?
Employers' perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century
workforce: The Conference Board, Partnership for 21st Century skills, Corporate voices for Working
Families, and Society for Human Resource Management. in Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century
knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for undergraduate
entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-55
Chouliaraki, L. & Fairclough, N. (1999) “Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse
Analysis”, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
Chigunta, F. (2002). Youth Entrepreneurship: Meeting the Key Policy Challenges. Youth
Employment Summit. 1-34.
53
Council conclusions of 26 November 2009 on the professional development of teachers and school
leaders (2009/C 302/04), Official Journal of the European Union. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/leraar/bestanden/council_conclusions_2009.pdf
Erhurun, H.E.O. (2007). Skills acquisition. A toll for youth empowerment for economic growth &
development. Journal of business and management studies 1(2), 116 -125. in Ezeani, N.S., (2012),
Application of entrepreneurship education: a panacea for effective secondary schools management in
Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-
45
Erkkilä,K. (2000). Entrepreneurial Education. New York: Garland. in Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E.,
2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an Entrepreneurial Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and
Innovation in Educational Research
European Commision, 2006. Entrepreneurship action plan. Key action sheets. Key action 1 -
Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through school education. in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and
Räty, H., 2012. “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School
Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship Education and the Related Abilities of the
Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
European Commission, November 2011. Entrepreneurship Education: Enabling Teachers as a
Critical Success Factor. “A report on Teacher Education and Training to prepare teachers for the
challenge of entrepreneurship education.” Final Report Bruxelles 2011. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-
entrepreneurship/files/education/teacher_education_for_entrepreneurship_final_report_en.pdf
European Commission, 2012. “Effects and impact of entrepreneurship programmes in higher
education”, Brussels, March 2012
European Commission, June 2013. Entrepreneurship Education: A Guide for Educators,
Bruxelles 2013. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-entrepreneurship/files/education/entredu-
manual-fv_en.pdf
54
European Communities, 2007. The Key Competences for Lifelong Learning – A European
Framework is an annex of a Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Accessed on 18.01.2015 fromhttp://www.alfa-trall.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/EU2007-
keyCompetencesL3-brochure.pdf
Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a
panacea for effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business
Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
Frank, A. I. (2007), “Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Skills: A Missing Element of Planning
Education”, Planning, Practice & Research 22 (4), 635-648.
Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. (2004). Yritta¨jyyskasvatuksen linjaukset ja
toimenpideohjelma [Policy for entrepreneurship education]. (Publications of Ministry of Education
and Culture No. 18). Helsinki. in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone
is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of
Entrepreneurship Education and the Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. (2009). Yritta¨jyyskasvatuksen suuntaviivat [Guidelines
for entrepreneurship education]. (Publications of Ministry of Education and Cultures No. 7). Helsinki.
in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the
Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship
Education and the Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
Finnish National Board of Education. (2004). Peruskoulun opetussuunnitelman perusteet. [The basics
of the comprehensive school curriculum] in Komulainen, K., Naskali, P., Korhonen, M. and
Keskitalo-Foley, S. (2013), Internal Entrepreneurship – a Trojan horse of the neoliberal governance
of education? Finnish pre- and in-service teachers’ implementation of and resistance towards
entrepreneurship education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, vol.9. no.1
55
Finnish National Board of Education, 2015, General upper secondary education,http://www.oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/general_upper_secondary_education
Accessed 17.01.2015
Fiet, J.O. (2000a), “The Theoretical Side of Teaching Entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business
Venturing 16 (1), 1-24.
Fiet, J.O. (2000b), “The Pedagogical Side of Entrepreneurship Theory”, Journal of Business
Venturing 16 (1), 101-117.
Gartner, W.B. (1988), “Who is the entrepreneur? is the wrong question”, American Journal of Small
Business, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 11-32.
Gibb, A. (2005) The future of entrepreneurship education: determining the basis for coherent policy
and practice? in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship education through
curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies, 2011, Vol. 43, No.
1, 69–85
Gibb, A. (2006) Entrepreneurship/enterprise education in schools and colleges: are we really building
the onion or peeling it away? in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2008). The Race Between Education and Technology. Boston: Harvard
University Press. Haynie, M. J., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E., & Early, C. P. (2010). A situated
metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 13 in
Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A
model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol.
15, pp. 41-55
Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., King, W., 1997. Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education,
enterprise education and education for small business
management: a ten-year literature review. International Small Business Journal 15 (3), 56–77.
56
Henry, C., Hill, F. & Leicht, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can
entrepreneurship be taught: Part I-II, Education and Training, 47(2), 98-111; 47(3), 158-169.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2001). Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading
Human Resourses (8 ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E., 2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an Entrepreneurial
Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research.
Hägg, O. & Peltonen, K., 2014 “Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurship pedagogy”,
Aalto University School of Business, Helsinki, pp. 21 - 44
Ikävalko, M., Ruskovaara, E., & Seikkula-Leino, J., (2008), Rediscovering teacher’s role in
entrepreneurship education, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland
Institute for Educational Leadership, (2008), Teacher Leadership in High Schools: How Principals
Encourage It—How Teachers Practice It,
Available athttp://www.iel.org/pubs/metlife_teacher_report.pdf accessed 12th of April 2014
Jones, B. and Iredale, N., (2010), Enterprise education as pedagogy, Education + Training, Vol. 52
No. 1, pp. 7-19
Jorgensen M., Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, Sage Publications:
London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi.
Johannison, B. and Madsén, T. (1997). I entreprenörskapets tecken - en studie av skolning i förnyelse.
[In thesign of entrepreneurship - a study of education in renewal]. Stockholm: Närings- och
handelsdepartementet. in Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E., 2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an
Entrepreneurial Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research
Katz, J.A., 2003. The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education
1876–1999. Journal of Business Venturing 18, 283–300.
57
Katz, J.A., 2007. Education and training in entrepreneurship. In: Baum, J.R., Frese, M., Baron, R.A.
(Eds.), The Psychology of Entrepreneurship. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 209–235.
Kirzner, I. (1973), Competition and Entrepreneurship, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Komulainen, K., Naskali, P., Korhonen, M. and Keskitalo-Foley, S. (2013), Internal Entrepreneurship
– a Trojan horse of the neoliberal governance of
education? Finnish pre- and in-service teachers’ implementation of and resistance
towards entrepreneurship education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, vol.9. no.1
Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur
Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship Education and the
Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1,
February 2012, 1-19.
Kuratko, D.F., 2005. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and
challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 29, 577–597.
Kyrö, P. (1997). Yrittäjyyden muodot ja tehtävä ajan murroksessa. Jyväskylä Studies in Computer
Science. Economics and Statistics 38. University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä: Finland in Seikkula-Leino
J., Ruskovaara, E., Ikävalko, M., Mattila, J., Rytkölä, T. (2009), Teachers’ reflections about
entrepreneurship education.
Kyrö, P. & Carrier, C., 2005. The dynamics of learning entrepreneurship in a cross-cultural university
context. Entrepreneurship Education Series 2. Tampere: University of Tampere.
Leffer, E. (2009). “The many faces of entrepreneurship: A discursive battle for the school arena”,
European Education Research Journal, 8(1), 104-116.
Lin, G.H.C. (2008) in Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a panacea for
effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business Economics,
and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
58
Little, J.S.W. and Foss, K.A. (2008). Theories of human communication. Belmont: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Lämminpää and Kuopusjärvi, (2005), E-Learning Programs on Entrepreneurship in Higher Education
and Secondary Schools in Finland – two Different cases, Small Business Institute, Turku School of
Economic and Business Administration
Martinez, A.C., Levie, J., Kelley, D.J., Sæmundsson, R.J., Schøtt, T., 2010. Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor Special Report: A Global Perspective on Entrepreneurship, Education and Training. in
O’Connor A. (2013). “A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting
government and economic purposes, Journal of Business Venturing, No. 28, 2013. p. 546-563
Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts. (2nd eds.). Boston
MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Minniti, M & Bygrave, W., 2001, A Dynamic Model of Entrepreneurial Learning. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 25 (3):5-15.
Schumpeter, J.A., 1934. The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Shane, S., Venkataraman, S., 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy
of Management Review 25, 217–226.
Seikku-Leijno, J. Ikavalko, M., Mattila, J., Ruskovaara, E., Rytkola, T., (2010), “Promoting
entreprenurship education: the role of the teacher?” Education+ Training, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp.117-127
Smith, J.A., Flowers, P. & Larkin, M., 2009, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis
Theory, Method and Research, SAGE Publications Ltd
Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M., Ijsselstein, A., 2010. The impact of entrepreneurship education on
entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic. Review 54, 442–454.
59
Ofsted, 2004,Learning to Be Enterprising; An Evaluation of Enterprising Learning at Key Stage 4,
HMI 2148, Report, 5 June, Ofsted, Manchester.
Peterman, N.E., Kennedy, J., 2003. Enterprise education: influencing students' perceptions of
entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 28 (2),
129–144.
Pfeiffer, S., Oberman-Peterka, S. & Jeger, M., 2008. Assessing entrepreneurship education programs
in Croatia higher education area. Erenet Profile, III (3), 25-35.
Pink, D. (2008). Tom Friedman on Education in the 'Flat World'. School Administrator, 65(2), 12-
16.Porter, Ketels, & Delgado, 2007. in Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities
and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal
of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-55
Pinchot, G. (1985),Intrapreneuring: Why You Don’t Have to Leave the Organization to Become an
Entrepreneur, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Pittaway, L., Cope, J., 2007. Entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of the evidence.
International Small Business Journal 25, 479–510.
Remes, L. (2001) Yrittäjyyskasvatus pedagogisessa toimintatehtävässä [Entrepreneurship education
in pedagogical task]. Kasvatus [Education], 32(4), 368–381. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The
implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Remes, L. (2004) Yrittäjyys [Entrepreneurship]. In M.-L. Loukola (ed.), Aihekokonaisuudet
perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelmassa [The integrating themes in the curriculum of basic education]
(Jyväskylä, Finland: Gummerus), 89–90. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of
entrepreneurship education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal
curriculum studies, 2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
60
Ristimäki, K. (2003) Yrittäjyyskasvatus—enemmän metodi kuin sisältö [Entrepreneurship
education—more method than content]. In Taloudellinen tiedotustoimisto (ed.), Yrittäjyyskasvatus,
Yrittäjyyttä ja kasvatusta [Entrepreneurship education: Entrepreneurship and education]. (Saarijärvi,
Finland: Gummerus), 12–15. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Rogers, R. (2004). An Introduction to critical discourse analysis in education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkers, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., and O’Garro Joseph, G., (2005). Critical
Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature, Review of Educational Research, Vol.
75, No. 3, pp. 365 - 416
Ruskovaara, E., Pihkala, T., Rytkölä T. & Seikkula-Leino, J., (2011), Entrepreneurship in
Entrepreneurship Education– Practices in Finnish Basic and Secondary Education Level, Available
athttp://developmentcentre.lut.fi/files/muut/ICSB_2011_Tukholma.pdf accessed 12th April 2014
Seikkula-Leino, J., 2006. Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelmauudistus 2004-2006 ja
yrittäjyyskasvatuksen kehittäminen. Paikallinen opetussuunnitelmatyö yrittäjyyskasvatuksen
näkökulmasta [The basic school curriculum reform 2004—2006 and the development of
entrepreneurship education. Local curriculum work from the point of view of entrepreneurship
education.]. Helsinki: Opetusministeriön julkaisuja 22.
Scherer, R. F., Adams, J. F., & Wiebe, F. A. (1989). Role model performance effects on development
of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13, 18. in Boyles, T.
(2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for
undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-
55
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). Opetussuunnitelmauudistus ja yrittäjyyskasvatuksen toteuttaminen
[Curriculum reform and entrepreneurship education], (Publication of Ministery of Education No. 28).
Helsinki
61
Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Sherman, L. (2000, Spring). The new principal. NW Education Magazine, 5 (3), 2.Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Development Laboratory.
Spurgin, K.M. (2006). The Sense-Making Approach and the Study of Personal
Information Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Available athttp://pim.ischool.washington.edu/pim06/files/spurgin-paper.pdf accessed 12th April 2014.
Teachernet (2008), “National guidance on enterprise education” in Jones, B. and Iredale, N., (2010),
Enterprise education as pedagogy, Education + Training, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 7-19
van Praag, C.M., Versloot, P.H., 2007. What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent
research. Small Business Economics 29, 351–382.
Wagner, T. (2008). The Global Achievement Gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new
survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books. in Boyles,
T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model
for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp.
41-55
Wallace Foundation, 2012, The School Principal as Leader: Guiding Schools to Better Teaching and
Learning, Available athttp://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/school-
leadership/effective-principal-leadership/Documents/The-School-Principal-as-Leader-Guiding-
Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf accessed 12th of April 2014
Weaver, K.M., Dickson, P.H., Solomon, G., 2006. Entrepreneurship and education: what is known
and what is not known about the links between education and entrepreneurial activity. In: Moutray,
Chad (Ed.), The Small Business Economy: A Report to the President. SBA Office of Advocacy,
Washington, pp. 113–156.
62
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking, London: Sage.
Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Institute for
Educational Leadership, 2008
Appendix I
Interview 1 - Full transcription (Teacher)
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
A: Going into what I was mentioning earlier, entrepreneurship is a very new concept to the leaders.
The ideas that we’re seeing in educational leadership is, the world is drastically changing on the
outside, so that means that schools have to drastically change. 10 years ago computer technology
studies were a big thing. Entrepreneurship itself is a very new concept to be implementing in the
schools. So the leaders are still trying to embrace that. They’re not against it. A good educational
leader’s not going to be against a lot of things. Although they’re not against it, it was better for me to
come onto the team and help translate some of the key terms and ideas coming out of the field of
entrepreneurship and what can be implemented into school. Like I said earlier, students don’t need to
know everything about entrepreneurship. There are reasons why we get a masters in it, and we deal
with that stuff. However, breaking entrepreneurship down to the key fundamentals can be difficult
sometimes, especially when the educational leaders don’t really have time to study a new field of
science. They’re busy doing their normal stuff. So that would be the first hurdle. That would also be
the first opportunity for educational leaders in the future, is to maybe take somebody on who can
translate and identify the core principles of entrepreneurship.
Q: And this is what you’re doing here?
Ai: Partly yeah, so coming on and teaching actual entrepreneurship is one thing. In the classroom the
principal has a very hands-off approach to what I would like to do in the classroom. They’ve had
some lessons planned out in the past, but it was very very super-practical: “this is how you start a
business.” For a lot of 14 year-olds, they don’t need to know how to go to the registration office, the
tax office. They’re more creative, they want to play. So getting a 13 and a 14-year old student to play
with entrepreneurship is becoming more of the idea then how to use it as a tool. They’ll learn how to
use it as a tool later in life.
Q: Is your role at this school unique, or do other schools employ people in a similar role?
Appendix I, 2
A: It’s new to this school. We’ve had business studies in the past. The vice-principal for example,
he’s a PE, Gym and a maths teacher. However, he’s done some of the business studies in the past.
Now with the business studies needing to be taught, plus this whole new requirement of schools
adjusting to entrepreneurship there was a need for a separate person to come into it. As a private
school, this school has the ability and the freedom to make decisions to do that. Whereas all the other
school are city operated, and they don’t have the flexibility to create a position like that. So the city
schools are going to need to super-innovative and entrepreneurial themselves in figuring out how to
put somebody into that spot. This school has had the opportunity to do it a different way. Is it going
to be better? I haven’t figured that out.
Q: What would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education entail?
A: I think speaking from the educational leadership point of view; you’d probably get an honest “I
don’t know”. For me if you’re going to ask the business studies teacher, then of course I have a big
grand idea that it should all be creative and we should all play and create and do all this fun stuff. So
you’re going to see two drastic views within this school. You’re going to have it from the educational
leader side and then from the business studies teacher. From the educational leader side, I don’t think
they have any idea what their ideal entrepreneurial curriculum is going to be. In fact, the teacher who
was just here taking some books, he was put on as the key person to create, in the high school, 100
new study spots, and those new students are going to focus on society and economical issues. So
they’ll be taking a lot of history classes, some economics classes, not so much entrepreneurship, but
more economics and business and general type… So our principal is the educational leader and he
has identified how critical it will be, that’s the stopping point. From that point, as a good leader I
think he has stepped back from that, and I think a good leader will let go when they need to let go,
and that’s what he has done. He’s said “Ok, this needs to happen”. It needs to happen because the
government is changing the curriculum. Obviously the job markets are changing from more corporate
to small businesses. Everything’s changing. Yes there’s a need to change. I think that needs to be
stressed that our principal and the educational leaders have recognized it needs to change. From that
good point, as a good leader they’ve said “Ok now we’re
Appendix I, 3
going to put this in the hands of experts”. So I think there’s a big holistic idea to bring
entrepreneurship into the school. But how, when, where, why is that going to happen? I think you’d
be very lucky to find an educational leader who knows that. Because the stuff that I’m studying, these
are the compulsory courses that we have to take, and then there are specialties. There’s one course in
finance. How does an educational leader do some finance stuff? And then there’s project
management. Everything else is how to be a leader. How to lead in a school. Very soft human science
type of thing, nothing very concrete. So this is the leading curriculum of the leading university in
Finland for educational leaders. That’s the current curriculum form. There’s absolutely no
entrepreneurship in it. So this is the curriculum that educational leaders in Finland are going to be
taught over the next 3-5 years. No entrepreneurship. They haven’t been taught entrepreneurship,
they’re not being taught entrepreneurship, maybe they will in the future. In 3 or 5 years, education
leaders that are being trained will start to be introduced to it. But, people of our young age are not
being exposed to it in educational leadership programs throughout Finland. So if you see a lack of
entrepreneurship from the educational leaders now. You’re going to at least see it for the next 5-10
years. This is why I think it would be super-important for our research to actually happen. And if
you’re coming from your research and a very entrepreneurial theory and stuff like that, I’m going to
have to push my research form the educational leadership. Somewhere in the middle if we start
comparing notes later on, I can give you all the notes from the educational leadership side, if you find
entrepreneurial stuff. But I think you and I will be pretty frustrated next year when we put all of this
together and we realize there’s big gaps, but that’s just a bigger opportunity for you and I to have a
cool thesis, because it’s going to be more fresh research into the field. Just the fact is, good luck for
the both of us in finding past information on this because it’s not happening in leadership, it hasn’t
happened in leadership and I don’t understand why there hasn’t been an interest in seeing how
entrepreneurial leaders have to be. What they do teach in the educational programs up here is that
leaders in schools are going to have to learn to collaborate. They’re going to learn how to bootstrap
their finances. They’re going to learn how to think outside the box. So it’s interesting that, if you look
at all these courses that are offered their educational leaders, they teach the principals in the
frameworks of effectuation theory. So they teach theories of entrepreneurship, but they don’t call it
entrepreneurship.
Appendix I, 4
Our principal’s title officially, as the leader of a private school, is a CEO. So this is a private school
and it has a board and it has it’s own finances and its set up as a company. The board elects our
principal as the principal, he’s not hired but the city, he’s not hired by the government. He’s hired by
a private board, just as a board in a company would elect a CEO. He’s been the CEO of the company.
He sits in the principal’s office, he doesn’t do very much with the teachers, he doesn’t do very much
with the planning of the school itself. He’ll get a lot of information from the vice-principals. He’ll sit
down with the teachers and he’ll sit down with the vice-principals, but only to listen to their ideas,
only to hear them and then sign off. He’s not really taking their ideas and then making them his own.
He’s basically dealing with the media on the outside. He’s dealing with the board, he’s dealing with
a lot of the outside stakeholders and the community. He’ll take what the outside community is saying,
bring it to the vice-principals, and then it becomes the job of the vice-principals and teachers to
distribute it throughout the school. So what you see is our principal being a like a pivot point. So
everything underneath him is translated down, although he lets that all be. And then on the outside
he’s taking everything from there and taking it. Although he’s not pushing so much into the outside,
he’ll tell the board, “hey we need some more money here,” or “the teachers need better coffee,” things
like that. But he’s not really going to change the world and he’s not going to really change the school,
that’s the job of the teachers and the vice-principal. His job is to be the glue. His job is to be the pivot
point where all of that can happen and all of this can happen freely. If he starts saying, “well, we’re
going to be doing this more, we’re going to be doing this more,” the whole school can go and do it.
So, since he doesn’t know entrepreneurship so well, it’s a lot better for him to back off, bring
somebody in that knows that a little bit more and that puts more pressure on me to build a program.
But, if I fail, I’ve failed because of knowledge and skills and all that. If he fails, it was because of the
lack of knowledge or the lack of skills, which is even worse. So that’s’ the next step. I think the next
is; an educational leader here has to know how to bootstrap, has to know how to collaborate, has to
know all those fundamental traits of a good entrepreneurial leader, they just don’t know that they’re
being entrepreneurial. They were never taught to be entrepreneurial, they were never told, “this is
entrepreneurship.” So if they’re not told what entrepreneurship is, how can they tell teachers or
students what entrepreneurship is? So that’s what you’re seeing today, and that’s what you’re going
Appendix I, 5
to see in the future. You’re still going to see a lot of this confusion and chaos in the next couple of
years.
Q: Maybe that’s the reason that there hasn’t been much research. Its not been taught as a concept to
principals
A: Could be. And Finland being one of the leading education research places… If that’s true, then
it’s interesting to see that the world leading education system has no emphasis whatsoever on
entrepreneurship and leaders at all. And there’s one finance course and one project management
course. Everything else is…
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education contributes to the broader educational system?
A: I think you would hear from leaders that entrepreneurship is something that could and should
affect everything else. So if it’s your biology students, working with the wood and metal class (last
year they were building birdhouses and they could sell those), so given the idea that education leaders
should and will go to this broader definition of entrepreneurship about collaboration and
bootstrapping and have a bigger definition on entrepreneurship, I think they’ll start to see that every
subject within the school, if it’s the language department or the science department. All those
departments will see that entrepreneurship can be utilized in all of them. Entrepreneurship right now
is very limited to the business studies thing, and I’m the only business studies teacher. So when we
go into meetings and department meetings I’m always with the history and civics people, so business
is somehow tied into civics, society thing. So for me to talk about entrepreneurship, when I talk about
it, my voice and ideas only reach a certain amount of teachers, particularly around me. If I want to go
and talk to somebody in the language department about entrepreneurship I have to set up a very
specific meeting with that person or with that department, and they have to take time out of their
schedule to specifically listen to me. So entrepreneurship is not being distributed throughout the
school very evenly at all.
Q: The next question is about why entrepreneurship education is important for students, but I think
you’ve probably already answered that.
A: Yeah, well I mean, just to emphasize a couple of key things, just to put it on the record, obviously
coming from an entrepreneurial background I don’t think its very critical for students to
Appendix I, 6
learn how to start a company. I think that’s probably the least of their worries. When you talk to other
educational leaders here I think their naivety towards entrepreneurship will limit their response to that
question. I think you will get a lot of responses from educational leaders saying, well, “it’s important
because corporations are changing to small/medium sized companies and we’re going to need to
better out students to work in those environments.” I think you’re going to get a lot of that answer,
which is a true thing. Yes, to better equip students for tomorrow’s changing work environment we do
need to teach them more entrepreneurial traits than how to work in a corporation. You definitely hear
the importance of teaching students to be critical thinkers, so I think you’re going to hear that from
everybody in the leadership position. Taking it a little deeper as a entrepreneur, those are great things
to teach kids, but those are the realities, they’re going to go out and change jobs a lot. We can just tell
them to be prepared about that. Taking it a little deeper, I think if you’re teaching students how to
collaborate, how to bootstrap instead of teaching students “hey, this is what’s going to happen” now
we can teach them the “how”. So a lot of education has always been emphasized on “what” and now
we’re changing to the “how”, and entrepreneurship is going to be a critical tool that leaders can use
to teach that “how”.
Q: How can teachers benefit from entrepreneurship education?
A: Well, teaching is the best way to learn, they say, so if somebody’s teaching entrepreneurship
they’re going to be able to learn the different characteristics or traits of entrepreneurship and one of
the big ones that teachers and leaders would find is the idea of collaboration. Teachers here I think
by the end of the school year; kind of April/May, they’re so tired and they’re so focused on what their
projects have been through the year. At the beginning of the year you see a lot of teachers talking to
other teachers and being very collaborative and, the language department wants to do something with
the science department, but come April or May they want to do their own thing, they just want the
school year to finish and just be done with it. So I think it would be really cool for teachers to learn
some aspects of entrepreneurship like collaborating, and once they find those traits within it they’ll
probably see their job ease up a little bit. So not only will they be able to teach students better, but
their actual work environment. And the spirit around here would be a lot better too. Practically, the
learning outcomes would be great for the students (yay! We should all celebrate
Appendix I, 7
that). On the other hand being practical too, another positive benefit for teachers in entrepreneurship
is that they’ll probably better their environment, and happier teachers equals better outcomes.
Q: Another question, which I think you’ve also already mentioned concerns how entrepreneurship
education is implemented here in the curriculum.
A: Very slowly. Very slowly, with a lot of difficulties. When you have a leader trying to implement
something they’re not an expert on you’re going to have a lot of difficulties. And I think one of the
only real ways to have it implemented is doing what our principal is doing; a hands off approach.
Bring in people that are motivated, bring in people that have the knowledge and just let it be. So if
you’re trying to implement ideas and you only know half of the ideas then you’re implementing half
of the whole concept to students and then everybody loses. So nationwide it’s probably being
implemented on a very slow process. There’s a lot of room and risk that its going to be implemented
wrong. So there’s no cookie cutter way of doing it, and you’re going to see a lot of trial and error,
with a lot of error.
Q: Do you think its common in a lot of schools that it’s slow?
A: Yeah. An educational leader today is so busy, and just to run a normal school year takes 99% of
your energy. So, when there’s big national curriculum changes then in order to implement that, it’s
going to be a lot of stress and a lot of work.
Q: So that’s why they hire someone to…?
A: Yeah. Our principal is a young dynamic guy, he’s one of the youngest principals in Finland, and
being in a private school he has a lot of flexibility and can be very open to ideas. So I think he was
given the best scenario for that, even with the openness and the flexibility, he’s completely backed
off, which I think is a pretty good characteristic of a leader.
Q: But do you think there is less flexibility in the city schools?
A: Well financially they do. Financially they’re limited. Everything that they do they need to create
reports and write requests, so they need to see the financial implications of doing that and then they’ll
get money after spending it. Whereas in the beginning here, this school gets their pot of gold at the
beginning of the school year and then it can be used as our principal sees fit. So if I go up to
Appendix I, 8
him and say, “hey, we need to be doing this in the entrepreneurship department, that means we need
money for this,” he can at that very moment say yes or no. And as a city school, if I had an idea
halfway through the school year to implement something I would have to wait until the next school
year. So you’ll see a lot of time delays too, so not only are they going to have financial restrictions in
the city schools, that’s going to lead to time constraints, so if they do implement something it’s
probably going to be implemented late.
Q: How many private schools are there in Finland generally? Do you have any idea?
A: I think it’s probably less than 20.
Q: In the whole of Finland?
A: Yeah. Well, the Finnish education system went really far away from private schools in the 90’s.
They basically tried to bankrupt all of them, and the ones that survived were the ones that thought
entrepreneurially then. This school, the leader at that point had to find out what was going on in the
current world to draw people in, and in the early 90s, having a bilingual international school was kind
of exotic and was the next cool thing. So this school changed in the early 90s towards the
internationalism, and that has been it saving phase. The school was basically bankrupt, but now it’s
doing very well. So the private schools that do exist, exist because they have found a niche. And I
think a lot of the private schools that survived are more like religious based. So when you get outside
of Helsinki and into the countryside you have a little bit more of farming type people who are very
religious. They want to send their students to more of a religious type school. There’s a couple out
there.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be implemented successfully in both the short-
term and long-term?
A: Yeah, that’s a super-critical question because you have the short and the long-term thing. Going
back to; what’s the current situation? The current situation is that educational leaders today are not
being taught entrepreneurship whatsoever. More than likely they never took it in their undergraduate
program and they’re definitely not taking it in their masters program. So seeing that these are going
to be the leaders in 5-10 years, and I would say that’s the long run, even then, you’re going to have
leaders who don’t know the basic concepts of entrepreneurship. So from there
Appendix I, 9
it’s all speculation. Given the fact that neither you or I can really find a lot historical context with it
is horrible news, given that the current curriculum in universities for leaders is not teaching it, that’s
even worse news. So I think that there’s a huge understanding at the national level that
entrepreneurship needs to be taught. That’s why it’s in the next curriculum. However, it’s not coming
from the bottom up. The stress on schools and education to be more entrepreneurial is definitely
coming from the top down. So you’re going to have a lot of leaders in the future (in the next 5-10
years) being super-reactive to entrepreneurship. You’re not going to find a lot of proactive leaders.
So I would say that the current situation is horrible for entrepreneurship and leaders. Maybe not
horrible, but scary if you think that the teachers are not being prepared whatsoever, or the leaders
aren’t being prepared whatsoever. So it’s bad and going to get worse.
Q: Why is there no focus on entrepreneurship for future leaders in in universities?
A: Well the universities are very reactive also. I think, when they build their curriculum they see
what’s working in education and they build a program to fit what’s currently working. So it’s very
reactive to what’s successful out there now. Again, it’s not being very proactive in deciding what’s
next. You would think in an education program, and especially an educational leadership program
would be more proactive. Sadly it’s not. That means the leaders of the schools are not going to be
very proactive entrepreneurially in the future either. You might want to rephrase your question there
cause maybe I’ve got a better answer to that. I don’t think that really answered your question so well.
The thing is, nobody told the leaders that this is a good thing to do. I think that entrepreneurship has
always been one of those things where you can go off and do it if you’re an entrepreneur. You don’t
realize that everybody’s an entrepreneur. Everybody, at some point during their day, exhibits or
utilizes some entrepreneurial trait. At some point. Some people do it more than others. Some people
make money doing it. Some people don’t, they’re nurses or doctors and they make their money doing
that, but they utilize entrepreneurial traits in frameworks, but they were never told to do it. So that’s
the worst thing is, maybe one of the objectives of our research is to start pushing universities to teach
entrepreneurship outside of the business world. You know, it’s good for us to learn all of those great
ideas, but you go talk to a hospital leader; a hospital leader is going to need to be entrepreneurial.
Appendix I, 10
Q: And who’s responsible for implementing entrepreneurship education for future leaders?
A: Every program has a program director, and that program director is just as human as you or I. The
program director knows those students. The program director should know everybody in the program
to some extent. So it’s not like each department is this big bureaucratic system. The departments and
the universities are small, inclusive. They just rebuilt this curriculum last year and it was basically
the secretary, the program director and one other person. So in that meeting with those three people,
it should have just been brought to their attention that entrepreneurship is good. And they’re very
easy to approach people. They might seem like “oh, they’re program directors” or “they’re school
leaders” and yes they’re very busy and things like that. However, a good program director and a good
school leader should always be open to receiving information about what’s out there. And our
principal is an open guy and I think most of them are open about it, they just have never been taught
it. And they’re so busy in their other day to day things, you come to them with a great idea and they
say “yeah you’re right, that is a good idea. Now how do we do that? Can you do that and I back off
of it?” Then they’re taking the idea and trying to implement it to the best of their ability. So I think if
you go and you talk to an educational leader and you show them how important entrepreneurship is,
you’re not going to get anything like “no this is a bad idea, we don’t have enough time or money to
do this”, no, it’s one of those great ideas that I think all of them would realize how great it is, it’s just
they’ve never been exposed to it. So if they’ve never been exposed to it how are they supposed to
know how good it is?
Q: What do you think should be done so those program directors so that they can realize
entrepreneurship can be a part of the curriculum?
A: I could approach it saying “ok this is my job: coaching other leaders how to be entrepreneurial”.
So that’s one way, we could do it as a job. You could also, I was thinking about contacting the EU
commission or the US embassy and seeing if they would fund my research and then, for example if
the EU education commission funds my project then obviously they would have those findings at
their ability to distribute. So I think there’s a lot of different possibilities of how to get the word out.
I don’t know what the best method is, I just think that the word needs to be spread somehow. Maybe
do like a TV commercial…
Appendix I, 11
And they would be open to like… I don’t think you’re going to get a really negative response from
education… You’ll get a realistic thing, them saying “hey, I’m a little busy for this” and stuff, but
none of them are going to look at this and go “this is a waste of time. This is just a bad idea and I
don’t know why you’re doing it”. No they’re going to say, “this is really good, however I wish I had
more time to do this”. So the market is there, the niche is there, the need, the want from educational
leaders is there. It’s just not being put out there to them. So when you think about the next step or two
in your own research, I would suggest that you start looking at more of the future; what is the future
of entrepreneurship and leaders going to be? Obviously by looking into the literature review I think
we can both agree that it’s been horrible. I think with the responses you’re going to get now, and then
also looking at the curriculum for a masters program in leadership, the current situation is going to
be identified as horrible. So there’s a bad past and a horrible, and I think our research would be best
in the future. Think “ok what can we do as researchers? What can we do to suggest that
entrepreneurship needs to be implemented? Or how can it be implemented?” Like, maybe if you’re
research came from “what aspects of entrepreneurship need to be implemented?” and then I came at
it from the “how” because I know how educational leaders work, I know their schedule, I know what’s
being told to them. You’re very current and you’re very knowledgeable of the current day
entrepreneurial frameworks. For me effectuation was like the cool thing about the framework. It still
is but there’s other frameworks in entrepreneurship and I think if you’re job was to break down the
different traits and the different facets and what should be in education and then there was like a “how
can it be implemented?” that might be the future. So like, “how” and “what” of entrepreneurship
should be implemented in the future would be the first step. It just needs to be marketed. The traits of
entrepreneurship just need to be communicated. They’re not being communicated. And with that
you’ll be 50/50 with finding a leader who’s open to it, or who doesn’t know anything and backs away
from it. And then the leaders that you do find are open to it, then you have a 50/50 chance of it being
implemented correctly. So with the current situation you’ve a very low percentage or a very low
opportunity that entrepreneurship will be implemented somewhat ok. Like, maybe 20% and the other
80% is either it’s not going to be implemented or it’s going be implemented horribly, and it’s going
to be all reactive and not proactive. I think if you look at it, the whole situation like that, I think it’s
very optimistic for you and I, because for us, we now see that there is a niche, there’s an opening in
the studies.
Appendix II
Interview 2 - Full transcription (Researcher)
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
A: Entrepreneurship education is such a broad area. For me it’s mainly about how people can learn
to behave in an entrepreneurial way and adopt that kind of behaviour in any context and as a teacher,
when I look at entrepreneurship education my main goal is to enhance that kind of behaviour and
mindset in all my students; and the second target is to enhance their competencies in studying
business, but that’s not the primary goal for me. Of course, when you look at entrepreneurship
education, one area, which is not often discussed, is also how to help people who are entrepreneurs.
How to help them to learn more and how to help them to enhance their skills and competencies to
enlarge their business.
Q: How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship look like?
A: I would say that the main issue that always must be kept in mind is to put student first. By that I
mean that, in many cases when we talk about entrepreneurship education, we take it for granted and
there are a lot of discussions that we need more companies because of the economy and (I don’t think
that) when we look at education we always have to be very clear about goals, and also about values.
So educational consciousness is very important. As a teacher you have to be very aware that you are
not pushing students in the wrong direction. They have to have the freedom to choose their own path.
But, if we are discussing how as a teacher we can enhance entrepreneurial behavior, I would say that
learning should be student-centered, it should be rooted in action, but also in theory. So there must
be a mix of theories and action. Also, learning should take place in teams and should be experiential;
they should learn from their own experiences and mistakes. Also confusion is good, it’s part of the
process. It has to be fun, there has to be a passion for learning, and it has to be outside school premises,
as you can’t really learn how to be an entrepreneur while you are sitting in a classroom. And so you
have to get in a world with a different kind of people and you have to learn ways to get to know your
own strengths and also your own shortcomings. It’s not easy, but if you keep in mind the things which
are normally attached to entrepreneurs: freedom, risk-taking, the skill to see opportunities and handle
your opportunities, then basically that’s it.
Appendix II, 2
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
A: Right now we are in a position where entrepreneurship education is in a minor role. Although in
Finland entrepreneurship education has been in the curriculum since 1994/95 so almost 20 years, but
we still have a lot of work to do because entrepreneurship education, from my point of view, it would
demand that we change the whole structure. We could get rid of timetables in the present form and
also it would need teachers to do teamwork and to collaborate with businesses and other external
organisations and people. I would disrupt the whole thing.
Q: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
A: I think its important to know that in high schools, the whole learning is focused on exams that are
taken at the end of term, but I’m not so sure if anyone should spend 34 years in school only for a
score and only for learning things in theory as I think that learning is about learning for life. In that
way there are many ways to learn, so I don’t think that just sitting in a classroom and making memos
is the only way to learn and I don’t think it’s a very good way to learn in modern society.
Q: Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
A: When teachers understand the true meaning on entrepreneurship education and see that there are
a lot of different aims and a lot of different ways they can teach in an entrepreneurial way, it really
enhances their competencies so its concerned about professional growth. When they do teamwork it
gives them more freedom to arrange the learning. Also when they contact other people it enlarges
their own competencies and their skills and gives them new ideas, and they also, which I find very
interesting, is that somehow they learn to respect their own work in a new light. So being a teacher is
not just something that has to be done; it really has a meaning. And my research showed that when
teachers realized that, it was so enlightening.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in the short and
long-term?
Appendix II, 3
A: I don’t think there are any easy answers to that. I think that in the short-term, teachers should
attend further training more eagerly, because there is some training available. There should be more,
but they are there and most of them are really good, so that’s in the short-term. And also there is
information available on the internet for example, so they just need to sit down and talk with their
colleagues and start to experiment in the short-term. In the long run, I think that support from the
management, from the principals, is needed because in many cases teachers say that they don’t feel
that they are supported or appreciated by their colleagues or by their principals. So it is important to
get feedback and support from the management.
Q: Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high
school?
A: Personally I think it should start from the teachers themselves, because right now we are being
given pressure and challenges from the government and it leaves nothing basically. Also it’s
important to have feedback and support from the management, but in the end it’s always the teacher
who does or doesn’t implement new things, in my opinion. You don’t really need guidance or
permission from the management because nobody is saying how you can deliver a certain course, you
must start doing things your own way.
Q: What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
A: I would say that when a teacher tries new things and then gets some results, he or she can go the
principal and say, “ok, I’m going to try that,” and then say, “ok, it went this way or that way,” and if
he or she sees that it was a good experiment, then he can ask, “how can I enhance this? How can I
broaden this? How can I take more colleagues into that approach and how can we take it further?” So
that’s the role of the management to then make it happen in the future.
Q: In terms of principals and management, how do you know if they are able to make the right
judgment if a teacher wants to implement something new? Particularly if a principal does not like the
idea of implementing something new. Is this a challenge?
A: That is, because I think that a principal should also know what entrepreneurship is about, because
right now, I am afraid that many of them think that entrepreneurship, especially in high school, is
something to do with studying business and that is not the main idea of a high school. So
Appendix II, 4
it is understandable, but if the principals can see and get more information and experience about
entrepreneurship education, maybe they can then see it in a new light. But, I’m afraid I have no answer
on how to fix it, except maybe sending principals to training.
Q: So you think perhaps creating a training program for principals would be effective?
A: I mean the governmental educational office, is giving funding for this kind of training. For
instance, myself and my colleague tried to get it last year. We failed, but we are going to apply for
training, entrepreneurship education training for principals again in January, because I feel that its so
important to have this kind of training.
Q: Who do you think would be the right people to create this training program for principals?
A: I don’t think there’s any specific group, but whoever it is, that person or group has to understand
the whole picture of entrepreneurship education, because otherwise, it will be too narrow. It can’t
focus just on business or education, it has to be taken the whole picture into consideration.
Q: For example, if you were to get this funding, what would the ideal training program for principals
look like or consist of?
A: It would be more like coaching. What I would do, I would first explain what entrepreneurship
education is about, what the different aims are, but then I would like to get the principals to open
projects in their own schools. The one thing that is missing right now in entrepreneurship education
is strategies for schools. I think that is the next step. You know, original entrepreneurship education
strategies have been made and some of them are in existence right now. Helsinki launched
entrepreneurship education strategy; I also know that in other parts of Finland similar approaches are
going on, but at school level there is still a lack of strategies and programs related to what it means
in practice, what is entrepreneurship education in our schools.
Q: Do you think principals would be open to this? And how would you get them interested in
participating?
A: That’s a challenge. Some of them would be interested, but of course there are many principals
who hear the word entrepreneurship and say, “that’s not for me.” But, what I have seen with the
Appendix II, 5
teachers is that when you have the energy to start and carry on with the approach of some programs,
then word will go out.
Q: Would it be a good idea to name entrepreneurship in another way? Would this help dispel certain
assumptions made by people?
A: That’s something I hear a lot. Personally I think its better to talk about entrepreneurship as long as
we are open with what we mean by it, that it is not just venture creation. I understand that problem,
but I am a little bit worried that if we start discussing something else and trying to avoid the term
entrepreneurship then I don’t think we end up with what we want to end up with. That’s my theory.
A: I’m not talking about entrepreneurship education as such. I try to interlink it with broader subjects
like ethical education or responsible education or good school environment and in that way, open up
what entrepreneurship education could be.
Q: Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
A: I think that is the next phase. If you look a few years back, there wasn’t any research on teachers
either, but there was a lot of research on entrepreneurial learning. Then it started by defining what is
entrepreneurial learning, and then it moved on to the issues of entrepreneurial pedagogy, but no one
defined what is entrepreneurial pedagogy, it was taken as granted. Then if you look at the newest
research, there is a trend that is saying, “Ok, next we have to look at how teachers perceive
entrepreneurship education,” so some research has already been done on that level and the next level
I guarantee is principals. But I think that one of the reasons why this kind of research is missing is
that we are so focused on the learning aspect and we are not interested in teaching and certainly in
Finland, we already talk about education. Education is as challenging a word as entrepreneurship,
because some people think that when you educate something, you try to put someone else to a certain
form, and it is more neutral to talk about learning, rather than education or teaching and talk about
management then, because if you look at school management you end up dealing with obstructions
and timetables and nobody knows how to fix it.
Appendix II, 6
Q: There is still very little entrepreneurship in the high school curriculum. Who do you think is
responsible for that and what are the steps to improve this?
A: Before becoming principals in high schools or primary schools you have to take a course. It’s an
administrational course for principals, so I would like to see entrepreneurship education become a
theme within that program. That would help. But in any way, when we talk about management and
leadership studies, also needing entrepreneurial behaviour in management in general would be a huge
step forward. But I’m not sure if management studies see it that way. I think there shouldn’t be any
difference if you are leading and managing school organisations than any other organization because
they have to be also better coaching in school organisations. In general I would say that enhancing
entrepreneurial behaviour in any organization is needed.
Q: Why was previous application for funding rejected?
A: I don’t know. I’m doing this through my own company and it’s a new company, so maybe there
was some lack of trust or something. Let’s see how we manage this time. It’s not easy to get funding
for principal programs. I don’t know why.
Q: Generally it seems to be easy to get funding, especially for things like tech startups
A: Yes. But the government are funding further training for teachers and further training for
principals. There are a lot of applications for that kind of thing. It’s a lot of competition. So its not
easy to get funding, even if you have a good idea how you would like to carry out your new program
and you have to argue why you are doing it and how you are doing it.
Q: So many other people are also concerned with this issue?
A: Yes, but I think that, because entrepreneurship education, as you have mentioned in your thesis,
its just one of the themes which is going on in the educational world. There is e-learning, ensuring a
safe learning environment etc. There are many competing teams so to speak, and if you don’t see
what entrepreneurship education can be means to any of those, but if you can’t see then yeah… And
sometimes even the people who are giving the funding don’t see it in the same way.
Appendix II, 7
Q: So it seems that generally, there is a lack of understanding of this issue
A: Its quite funny because there is a clear definition coming from the EU and also we have had this
discussion going on for 20 years and still there is a lot to do.
Appendix III
Interview 3 - Full transcription (Entrepreneurship Education Expert)
Q: My thesis is about a principal’s role in entrepreneurship education in high schools. First I will ask
you some questions about your own views on entrepreneurship education and then I’ll ask some
questions about your views on the role of principals within entrepreneurship education.
A: Have you seen the figure… (EnTree figure) We have created a model. This is the idea of what I
think about entrepreneurship education. So it is a very holistic…
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean for you?
A: So if you read this article through, you can understand this very holistic model. It concerns the
whole life of a human being and also, you know… we have these two different kinds of… ways of
thinking/approaches about entrepreneurship. So we have this American approach, and then we have
the continental approach. I would like to say that we have also got a Nordic approach, which is quite
close to the continental approach. And, you know the difference… There are the questions “why”,
“why are we educating?” and “why do we think entrepreneurship is important?” That is the part we
have in this model, in this continental approach, but not in this American approach. So this is more
methodology and teaching methods, and this is a more holistic/philosophical approach. So in this
figure: “entree model” I would like to put some stress on this culture. Entrepreneurship is also culture
related, and it depends on where you are what the context or the culture may be. Where you are living
or where you are working. So you know this ontology, epistemology and axiology is a very important
route of this figure because there are values and… what is valuable?... what kind of person is valuable.
You know the picture of a man and a picture of the world, and then you also… what kind of
knowledge is important, and where is it derived from? So for me, this axiology is most important.
And also you see this educational consciousness, it goes through the whole tree, and so you are aware
why you are educating people towards entrepreneurship. So I would like to say that this is a
sustainable way to educate. Also, if you manage to make it so that the people understand what this is
all about. I believe that that their life will be sustainable.
Q: So your ideal type of entrepreneurship education would be based on EnTree?
A: Yes. I have been thinking this for 10 years, and I am very happy that we have managed to figure
out this model because it’s not so easy. And it’s also very important that you can use different kinds
Appendix III, 2
of orientations; these pedagogical orientations. But you always have to have some elements of the
essence of entrepreneurship. And there are just examples. I can give you a list of 30 or 40 different
attributes, but maybe these are the most important. Also to be able to live in security and certainty.
These elements are very important. There are many others also, as well as here. These are the main
theoretical approaches, but of course you can use many others. So we don’t say that in
entrepreneurship education, you should just, for instance, experimental… you know… but you can
use whatever you have in your toolbox. If you combine these two… so… for instance in you use
behaviourism you have to have something about entrepreneurship, the essence of entrepreneurship
combined with this way of approach. And then you have to know what the aim of this education is.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education contributes to the broader educational system?
A: You know, there has been a lot of misunderstanding between general education and
entrepreneurship education because… I am an educator, and I think that… most of the educators think
that… there’s something that comes from economics, and its some kind of political, you know, hidden
agenda. They are afraid of it, but I think this model will help them to understand that our aim is also
to educate towards a good life. Not because we want to support some policies… you know…
Q: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
A: It’s very important. Because it’s a way of life; a way of thinking. And wherever you are, you need
this attitude. So it’s not only thinking about business. Of course if you have this entrepreneurial
mindset, you act as an entrepreneur or you act in and entrepreneurial way, wherever you are. And it’s
not only for running a business of your own, it’s very large…
Q: What about teachers? How can teachers benefit from entrepreneurship education?
A: I think they key point is that; people who adopt this idea of entrepreneurial behaviour. For instance,
students: they are more active, they are more responsible for how they go on with their studies, and
also they are very alert to what is happening around them and they want to take the benefits from
these opportunities that they see around them. So they are more active and they are more responsible
for their own lives.
Appendix III, 3
Q: How can entrepreneurship education be implemented in high schools in the long and short-term?
A: The problem at the moment is that the teachers don’t adopt this model. If the teachers and all the
staff who are responsible adopt this model, and they themselves are entrepreneurial, in how they act
and how they handle people. Young people; they are like… how do I say… a virgin mind. If teachers
are giving this example when they behave like this, the young people can learn.
Q: So you think that teachers play the main role?
A: Yes! Exactly.
Q: What do you think is the role of high-school principals?
A: Of course they also have a very important role. I think that the whole system should be established
on the base like this And of course teachers and professors can use their own personality as they want,
but this idea should be… this is the key point that, that they understand that, not just giving lessons…
Q: Do you think that principals should also understand this idea, to help teachers?
A: Yes, exactly. Because of course, the principals, they have their power over the whole system.
Q: Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among principals?
A: No, they’re very narrow, especially in these business schools. They have this idea that
entrepreneurship education is how to educate the people to establish a business of their own and how
to establish a start-up. You know. It’s very very narrow, so we have a lot of work to do to understand
this. But all the time I get good feedback. A teacher from Finnish university called me and was asking
about this model. They want to adopt this model.
Q: How do you think principals should be coached? Also using this model?
A: Yes they should be. At the moment I’m having systems for principals. They come from primary
schools and upper secondary schools. I also have this university of applied sciences, some principals
of this level, but not scientific universities.
Appendix III, 4
Q: Generally, who would be the right people to educate and coach high-school principals?
I think for instance, in Etu-Töölö high school, principals have studied these models for as long as I
have been teaching this. They have always sent teacher to courses every year. And at the moment
more than 20 teachers have been trained to this model and they are using it. It takes years but I think
in 10 years we will come a long way.
Q: There is some research related to teachers but hardly any related to principals. Why do you think
there is no focus on principals when we speak about entrepreneurship?
A: I don’t know. Good question. I don’t have an answer, but maybe you can raise this question.
Appendix IV
Principals - email interview 1
1. What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
It means that the students learn how to proceed when they want to establish a company or get
somebody interested in ideas they have or inventions they have made. They need help with
bureaucracy and legal and financial matters.
2. How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
Somebody experienced would encourage them and guide them through the procedure. Definitely
NOT a regular teacher.
3. How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
It would make studying more motivating when you see what you are heading towards and why you
have to study.
4. Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
Definitely. The school is too closed and too dependent on teachers who might know the theory but
not the practice.
5. Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
I am more interested in teaching the students than the present teachers. There is a need for the school
to open up and invite other actors from “real” life outside the school.
6. Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching? And
how?
We actually have for many years offered a course called “Innovation”. It has been very popular and
we have a teacher who has a company of her own. She has an MSc and MBA education.
7. How you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term? New teachers should be instructed before they leave university. Thus we would
get the thought rooted in the school environment.
Appendix IV, 2
Principals - email interview 2
1. What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
Equipping young people with a skills and aptitudes necessary to succeed in establishing their own
businesses.
2. How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
This question lies outside my remit. We have a Young Entrepreneurship scheme operating within the
school, open to IB students. We offer IB Business Management.
3. How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century job market
4. Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
As above.
5. Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
The Business Management (SL/HL) option in our school permits many students to gain a broad
familiarity with marketing, finance, management skills, etc. These are life skills, in many ways.
Teachers of other subjects are less directly involved.
6. Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching? And
how?
As above - BM=150 hours at SL and 240 hours at HL.
7. How you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term?
Why not? We have a broad mission to provide a solid educational experience. Economics is
compulsory for all. Thereafter students with an interest can opt for Business Management. A
surprisingly large number of graduates go on to study business in higher education. Whether they
become entrepreneurs or employees is of less significance.
doc_936263098.pdf
This particular detailed file resolve the role of entrepreneurship education in finnish high schools.
The role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high
schools
MSc program in Entrepreneurship
Master's thesis
Ielizaveta Arensburg
2015
Department of Management Studies
Aalto University
School of Business
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Aalto University, P.O. BOX 11000, 00076 AALTO
www.aalto.fi
Abstract of master’s thesis
Author Ielizaveta Arensburg
Title of thesis The role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high schools
Degree Master’s Degree
Degree programme Entrepreneurship
Thesis advisor(s) Ewald Kibler
Year of approval 2015 Number of pages 62 Language English
Abstract
Purpose – This thesis aims to explore the role of entrepreneurship education in Finnish high schools
from the perspective of high school principals and entrepreneurship education professionals. The
key research questions are:
1) How do high school principals and entrepreneurship education professionals define
entrepreneurship education and understand its (potential) role in Finnish high schools?
What are the main commonalities and differences in their perceptions?
2) What is the particular role of high school principals in the implementation of
entrepreneurship education in Finland? How do high school principals perceive themselves
in this potential role, and what are the main standpoints of entrepreneurship education
professionals?
Theories and methods – Based on a review of the recent entrepreneurship education literature, the
thesis identifies the under-researched role of entrepreneurship education in high schools. Following
this, it draws upon in-depth interviews with high school principals and entrepreneurship education
experts to examine the nature of discourses around entrepreneurship education in Finland.
Key contributions – This thesis contributes to entrepreneurship education research by providing
novel insight into the particular role of principals in the implementation of entrepreneurship
education in high schools. The thesis highlights the different understandings and sense-making of
the notion ‘entrepreneurship education’ between high school principals and entrepreneurship
education professionals, and emphasizes the needed for further research on how to build a greater
awareness of what ‘entrepreneurship education’ means and how it can be adequately implemented
in high schools.
Keywords entrepreneurship education, external entrepreneurship, internal entrepreneurship,
high school education, principals, perceptions of entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurship
education research
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research Gap, Problem and Research Questions .................................................................. 2
1.3 Limitations............................................................................................................................. 4
1.4 Definitions ............................................................................................................................. 4
2 Literature review ........................................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Entrepreneurship education: students .................................................................................... 6
2.2 Entrepreneurship education: teachers .................................................................................... 8
2.3 Entrepreneurship education: principals ............................................................................... 10
2.4 Entrepreneurship education: internal vs. external; classroom vs. society & life ................ 11
2.4.1 Internal entrepreneurship education or enterprise education ....................................... 12
2.4.2 External entrepreneurship education ............................................................................ 13
2.4.3 Classroom..................................................................................................................... 14
2.4.4 Society & life ............................................................................................................... 14
3 Sense-making of entrepreneurship education ............................................................................. 15
3.1 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a classroom level ............ 17
3.2 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a broader educational level
18
3.3 Entrepreneurship education - perceptions by experts and principals; perceptions about
principals’ role by experts .............................................................................................................. 19
4 Research methodology ................................................................................................................ 21
5 Empirical work - Grasping the experiential world of entrepreneurship education phenomenon ... 25
6 Discussion and recommendations ................................................................................................... 46
6.1 Perceptions of principals .......................................................................................................... 47
6.2 Perceptions of other entrepreneurship education experts ......................................................... 48
7 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 49
8 References ....................................................................................................................................... 52
Appendix
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Entrepreneurship education and training is growing rapidly in universities and colleges throughout
the world (Katz, 2003; Kuratko, 2005). This trend is fuelled by a recognition that entrepreneurship
can play an important (even critical) role in economic growth and employment (Shumpeter, 1934;
Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; Kuratko, 2005). However, there is more than one way of perceiving
entrepreneurship education. Understanding the concept of entrepreneurship is fundamental for
defining entrepreneurship education (Seikkula-Leino, Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, Rytkola,
2010). It is particularly important what perceptions about entrepreneurship and subsequently
entrepreneurship education exist among individuals involved in creating and implementing it. This
means that entrepreneurship education can be both defined as something that teaches students to
become entrepreneurial and something that can help teachers learn what methods would be most
efficient when teaching entrepreneurship. Furthermore, there are key terms that need to be understood
in order to deploy the strategy of promoting entrepreneurship education in high schools.
According to Kyrö (1997), entrepreneurship education deals with three main components: 1) self-
oriented, 2) internal and 3) external entrepreneurship. Self-oriented entrepreneurship refers to an
individual’s self-oriented behaviour. Self-oriented entrepreneurship is the basis for developing
internal and external entrepreneurship (Remes 2004: 84). While this thesis is tackling internal and
external entrepreneurship, self-oriented entrepreneurship is the base which means that while focusing
on internal and external entrepreneurship, self-oriented entrepreneurship is still a part of it.
Internal entrepreneurship deals with entrepreneurial and enterprising behaviour. External
entrepreneurship is about doing business (Ristimäki 2003: 6). Even though self-oriented and internal
entrepreneurship resemble each other, the difference between them is in the collectivistic sense which
emerges in internal entrepreneurship development and which could be developed in organizations
(Remes 2001). Internal entrepreneurship is generally associated with the pupils’ responsible attitude
to (school) work; it was represented as an ideal subjectivity for all and accepted as the natural aim of
schooling (Korhonen, Komulainen, Raty, 2012). On the other hand, external entrepreneurship is seen
to foster economic skills and to prepare the students for a future as business people or entrepreneurs
2
(Korhonen, Komulainen, Raty, 2012). External and internal education may also be referred to as
entrepreneurial and enterprising education.
Several studies have shown that teachers might need to obtain more knowledge about the conceptual
division of entrepreneurship into an entrepreneurial and enterprising part (e.g. Backstrom-Widjeskog,
2010; Leffler 2009), as well as the knowledge about the aims, contents and practices of
entrepreneurship education (e.g. Seikkula-Leino, 2007). Despite the differences as regards the aims
of entrepreneurship education, it is widely accepted that entrepreneurship is ultimately about learning
and therefore it is essential to know how entrepreneurial learning takes place (Minniti & Bygrave,
2001; Rae, 2005). In terms of teachers’ ideas regarding implementation of entrepreneurship education
in high schools, projects were seen as the leading technique which, despite advantages for pupils can
also require more development in order to become a part of a teacher’s everyday routine and
be integrated into the curriculum.
Principals and vice-principals are the ones who have more influence and understanding of a school
curriculum and education strategy of a particular school. Therefore, this creates a need for research
on principals’ and vice-principals’ connection to entrepreneurship education and whether they have
sufficient understanding to integrate entrepreneurship education into the school curriculum.
Moreover, principals and vice-principals have the power to influence the educational strategy of a
school; as well as have an impact on teachers’ professional development as entrepreneurship
educators for high school students. These are the main reasons why obtaining knowledge in this area
would be important for further research of entrepreneurship education in the context of high school.
1.2 Research Gap, Problem and Research Questions
Some research has been done on the topic of teachers’ understanding of entrepreneurship education
in a certain context and according to this research it is teachers in particular who have the essential
role in the process of transforming the different meanings and aims of entrepreneurship education
into teaching practices and learning outcomes which, in the long haul, result in the increase of
enterprising as well as entrepreneurial activities in the society (e.g. Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). The
results of previous research on teachers’ understanding of entrepreneurship education seem to
indicate that a lack of clear conceptual and contextual links between aims and results, that is, in terms
of the classroom and real life outside of the classroom, may affect the iterative processes of evaluating
3
and improving the education (Seikkula-Leino, Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, Rytkola, 2010).
Moreover, according to Seikku-Leino et. al., 2010, teachers do not seem to be able to generate
meaningful reflection in this context. At the same time there is no information about what perceptions
of entrepreneurship education exist among school principals and vice-principals who have more say
in creating a curriculum and other activities in a particular school. Therefore, this research gap needs
to be filled in order to obtain more knowledge of what perceptions exist among key players, i.e.
principals and vice-principals, involved in entrepreneurship education, who have the power to make
an impact on the further development of entrepreneurship education as a discipline in the context of
high schools. Moreover, it would be necessary to find out what perceptions about the role of principals
in entrepreneurship education exist among other experts in the field.
The implications of this research gap can lead to the lack of a bigger picture of entrepreneurship
education where the focus is not only on teachers or students but also on the main decision makers.
The consequences of this research gap are significant, as a vital element in the implementation of
entrepreneurship education is being overlooked, since it is principals and vice-principals who are able
to add entrepreneurship elements to a curriculum as well as offering entrepreneurial activities suitable
for high school students, therefore it is important to know what is the role of principals and vice-
principals in entrepreneurship education and how other entrepreneurship education experts perceive
the role of principals in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools.
In order to deal with the research gap mentioned above, this thesis is set to address the following
objectives. First, review in detail existing literature on entrepreneurship, more specifically on the role
of the teacher in entrepreneurship education; the existence of entrepreneurship education in the
curriculum and the methods which are most commonly used in high schools to engage and promote
entrepreneurship education among students. Secondly, identify principals’ role in entrepreneurship
education and their understanding of entrepreneurship education through the interviews of various
professionals in entrepreneurship education. Thirdly, analyze existing perceptions among
interviewees regarding both entrepreneurship education and principals’ role in entrepreneurship
education. Finally, using a theoretical framework, more specifically the interpretive
phenomenological analysis method, analyze the gathered data to identify the current realities of
entrepreneurship education in high schools and principals’ role and understanding (or lack of it) of
entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, it will be discussed what actions could be taken to improve
the current situation in terms of the state of entrepreneurship education in high schools, principals’
understanding and involvement in entrepreneurship education.
4
1.3 Limitations
The study was limited by the sample size, particularly in the ability to gain a larger scope of principals
participating in the study. In terms of research method, the interpretive phenomenological analysis
has been chosen for this thesis. Although smaller sample size is the main limitation of this IPA
(interpretive phenomenological analysis) study, Smith et al (2009) considered that reduced participant
numbers allows for a richer depth of analysis that might be inhibited with a larger sample.
Another important limitation refers to the challenges of gaining a broader response from principals
due to the novelty of the subject, language and time constraints. Limitations in terms of language are
particularly relevant in this situation in relation to the low levels of principals’ response due to the
challenges to express their thoughts on a complex subject in English as opposed to their native
language (Finnish). According to Smith, 2009, the effectiveness of an IPA study should be judged
by the light it sheds in a broader context. This might seem difficult to achieve if the sample group is
too specific or unique, therefore the sample group for this study was designed to have participants
with different connections to education and entrepreneurship education. Due to this approach, the
limitations related to reaching out to a particular group, i.e. principals, have little effect on the
outcomes of the study, since even a minimum response from principals has shown a clear pattern,
especially when combined with other responses.
1.4 Definitions
Entrepreneurship – There is no consensus suggesting a single, comprehensive theory of
entrepreneurship (e.g. Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Among other perspectives, entrepreneurship
can refer to the emergence and creation of organisations, which is a combination of definitions put
forward by many researchers (Pinchot, 1985; Gartner,1988); making new combinations and
innovations such as new products, production methods, markets and organizational forms
(Schumpeter, 1934) and exploring opportunities (e.g. Kirzner, 1973; Shane and Venkataraman,
2000).
External Entrepreneurship – fosters economic skills and prepares students for a future
as business people or entrepreneurs (The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture,
2004, p. 15).
5
I nternal Entrepreneurship – combines flexibility, initiative, creativity and independent action with
cooperation skills and strong motivation (The Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture, 2004, p.
15).
Enterprise Education – consists of enterprise capability supported by better financial capability and
economic and business understanding (Ofsted, 2004; Teachernet, 2008).
Enterprise education is another term that is used for internal entrepreneurship, but generally describes
the same idea.
2 Literature review
This literature review aims to identify the current state of research in entrepreneurship education
through addressing previous research focusing on students, teachers, internal and external education,
and the role of entrepreneurship education on both classroom level and the broader educational level.
As a part of this literature review, current trends of entrepreneurship education from the perspectives
of EU policies will be also taken into account.
The strategy of the European Union highlights the importance of the development of entrepreneurial
culture by fostering the right mindset, entrepreneurship skills and awareness of career opportunities
(Commission of the European Communities 2006). However, according to Ikävalko, Ruskovaara
and Seikkula-Leino, 2008, there is a long distance from the international and national policy making
level to the future realization of outcome of entrepreneurship. A journey consisting two different
processes: first, from the goal setting in education system, starting from the EU strategies and national
curriculum, to the altered daily teaching work of all teachers, and secondly, from the teaching to the
altered behaviour of the students in the years to come (Ikävalko, Ruskovaara and Seikku-Leino,
2008). The processes described by Ikävalko et.al. in their work “Rediscovering teacher’s role in
entrepreneurship education” are shown in picture below.
6
Picture 1: Teacher executing the aims of entrepreneurship education.
2.1 Entrepreneurship education: students
Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behavior are considered to be essential competences and
constructs of individuals’ competitiveness in the future (Lämminpää and Kuopusjärvi, 2005). Most
European countries have a policy commitment towards promoting learning about entrepreneurship,
but, as yet, it has not become a widespread subject in the European educational system (European
Commission, 2006). Finland, however, has turned out to be an early adopter and reformer:
entrepreneurship education is now taken into consideration throughout the school system, from
primary schools to universities (Korhonen, Komulainen, Räty, 2012). Moreover, the Finnish Ministry
of education and Culture (2004) presents entrepreneurship as the right mindset and a route
to employment for every citizen.
Nevertheless, despite the claims that entrepreneurship can play an important (even critical) role in
economic growth and employment (Shumpeter, 1934; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; Kuratko,
2005) and assertions that entrepreneurship education can play a vital role in developing more and/or
more able entrepreneurs (e.g., Gorman et al., 1997; Katz, 2007; Pittaway and Cope, 2007), it has been
noted by several scholars (e.g., Weaver et al., 2006; Peterman and Kennedy, 2003), there is little
7
consistent evidence to support these claims. Furthermore, some studies raise doubts regarding the
efficacy of entrepreneurship education for either economic or individual outcomes
(Martinez et al., 2010; Oosterbeek et al., 2010; Pittaway and Cope, 2007; van Praag and Versloot,
2007).
According to Peterman and Kennedy (2003) even with a wide variety of entrepreneurship programs
on offer in the market place, while positive results may be found from a study of one program it could
not be assumed that all programs would have similar results due to variation in content, pedagogy
and learning styles. However, Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino, 2011, argues that
entrepreneurship education should support the students’ feeling of their internal locus of control. As
a learning outcome, the students would also try more persistently to achieve their goals, to be creative,
to discover existing opportunities and in general to cope with the complicated society. Also, according
to Gibb (2006) and Frank (2007), entrepreneurship education involves the development of attitudes,
behaviors, skills and attributes applied individually and/or collectively to help individuals and
organizations of all kinds to create, cope with and enjoy change and innovation.
The education of entrepreneurship can augment entrepreneurial attitudes and competencies (Henry,
et.al. 2005; Gibb, 2006a; Pfeiffer, et.al. 2008), and the improving social attitudes towards
entrepreneurship are evident among young people, perceiving entrepreneurship as a viable career
option (Chigunta, 2002). Furthermore, the importance of fostering entrepreneurial drive among young
people derives from their contribution to valuable products and services to their local communities in
particular, and society in general (Chigunta, 2002). Their start-ups increase market competition,
thereby support customers, increase innovation and flexibility, developing new ideas and solutions.
Innovative economic opportunities and trends appear and technological changes open new job
opportunities in the labor market (Chigunta, 2002).
At the same time, entrepreneurship education for younger students has been suggested to relate more
to learning the spirit and ways of doing and seeing than about business activity. The aim is that
students could take more responsibility for themselves and their learning (Gibb 2006; Remes 2001,
2004).
8
2.2 Entrepreneurship education: teachers
While the learning outcomes of entrepreneurship education have been under careful research, the
viewpoint of teaching has been seemingly underdeveloped (Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä &
Seikkula-Leino, 2011). Nevertheless, there are several recent studies on entrepreneurship education
from teachers’ perspectives available. For example, Korhonen, Komulainen, and Räty (2012) are
exploring whether the teachers deploy the discourse of internal and external entrepreneurship in their
meaning making of entrepreneurship education, and in what ways. According to this study
(Korhonen, Komulainen, and Räty, 2012), teachers construed the meaning of entrepreneurship
education in comprehensive school through two different discourses: the discourse of internal
entrepreneurship and the discourse of external entrepreneurship.
At the same time, according to Seikku-Leino,Ruskovaara, Iklavalko, Mattila, and Rytkola, 2010,
despite the basic guidelines in the national strategies covering entrepreneurship education and the
national core curricula, internal and external entrepreneurship seem to lack balance in terms of the
aims, practices and results of teaching. Moreover, it is also seems that instruction given by teachers
is still rather insignificant, and entrepreneurship education is not a visible part of everyday activities
in school. Furthermore, Seikku-Leino et.al, 2010 points out that the teachers implied that the terms
and concepts were familiar to them, but it is obvious that there was no specific theoretical basis or
definition backing up their statements. Finally, in describing the aims of entrepreneurship education,
teachers used an abundance of favorable adjectives that applied to their pupils, but excluded
themselves from the objective-setting. Also, according to Seikkula-Leino (2006, 2007) and Fiet
(2000a, 2000b), teachers have at times had difficulties in identifying contents and means by which to
respond to challenges posed by entrepreneurship education.
Nevertheless, the development of entrepreneurial mindsets is becoming embedded in policy across
Europe (European commission, 2011). According to European Commission, 2011, the essential role
that education plays in the development of such mindsets, and in particular the central role that
teachers play in this process. It requires nothing less than a sea change in the approach to education,
emphasising active learning and the provision of new experiences for students outside of the
classroom (European commission, 2011). For many education systems this represents a fundamental
shift away from traditional approaches (European commission, 2011). This means that teachers need
to be equipped with the right skills, knowledge and attitudes to be able to provide their students with
the new curricula, pedagogies and learning environments that they will need if they are to acquire
9
entrepreneurial competencies (European commission, 2011). These changes will require significant
changes in the way teachers themselves are educated.
According to research carried out by the European Commission, 2010, core skills and values linked
to entrepreneurship education are seldom a priority in initial teacher education programs.
Furthermore, creativity is not fully embedded into these programs and there are significant variations
between Member States and approximately 90% of teachers say that they would like to receive some
further training on creativity (Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010). Moreover, teachers also feel that
educational and school cultures do not fully support them in fostering creative and innovative
approaches to learning; this requires time to explore new approaches and a culture that encourages
experimentation and allows for failure - in short, an environment that itself embodies the
characteristics of entrepreneurialism (Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010).
In response to proposals made by the European Commission, the Education Council in November
2007 for the first time adopted Conclusions that set a European agenda for improving the quality of
teaching and teacher education (European Commission, 2011). Ministers recognised that the quality
of teaching is the single most important within-school factor affecting student attainment (European
Commission, 2011). The importance of the teaching profession was again highlighted at an Informal
Ministerial Meeting in Gothenburg in September 2009 under the Swedish Presidency of the EU and
this was followed by the adoption of new Council Conclusions (The Council Of The European Union,
2009) in which Member States committed themselves to improving the professional development of
teachers and school leaders.
These Conclusions (The Council Of The European Union, 2009), taken together, provide a
comprehensive set of EU priorities for improving teacher education. They include improving teacher
competences by making sure that teachers possess the necessary pedagogical skills to teach their own
subjects and the transversal key competences, including in heterogeneous classes and making the best
use of ICT; improving the quality of Initial Teacher Education (ITE) which should provide a Higher
Education qualification and should balance research-based studies and teaching practice; ensuring the
quality of teacher educators (teacher trainers) who should have solid practical teaching experience,
good teaching competences and be of a high academic standard; and promoting professional values
and attitudes in the teaching profession (in which teachers adopt a culture of reflective practice,
undertake autonomous learning, engage with research, and collaborate extensively with colleagues).
10
2.3 Entrepreneurship education: principals
Research about the role of principals for developing an entrepreneurial attitude in learning and
teaching in schools, are in many ways an unexplored area. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013). Nevertheless,
it is obvious that the principals are the individuals who can make an impact on entrepreneurship
education on a larger scale. The principals are the pivots around which all major and important school
activities revolve. This means that, the managerial qualities that principals bring to their work have
far-reaching impact on how the overall enterprise of the school is done (Ezeani, 2012).
For a principal to aspire for effectiveness he or she must use indices of entrepreneurship management,
while carrying out his/her administrative task (Akinola, 2005). These include building trust, visionary
leadership, and communication, seeking self-improvement, making good decisions, being a role
model, being a risk taker and being innovative (Miller, 2005; Little and Foss, 2008; Lin, 2009). In
essence, an entrepreneur (principal) is an innovator, or developer who recognizes and seizes
opportunities, converts those opportunities into workable/marketable ideas, adds value through time,
effort, money or skills, and assumes the risk of the competitive market place to implement these ideas
(Erhuru,2007).
According to curricula, entrepreneurship education should be present in the everyday education
delivered in Finnish schools, and not only in the classroom but also happenings outside school and it
should have a role in school climate and culture. The curricula define entrepreneurship education both
as content and method of teaching and learning (Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino,
2011). Nevertheless, entrepreneurship education requires a shift in pedagogy (Seikkula-Leino, 2011).
In traditional classrooms, each act of teaching focuses on a particular segment of the curriculum; each
learning situation is controlled in such a way that students do not feel insecure while they learn (e.g.
Gibb 2005). Furthermore, Gibb (2005) suggests, the pedagogy of entrepreneurship education is
focused on students’ activity in learning; the learning situations are flexible, interactive, and based
on multidimensional knowledge-development. What is needed is a range of activities that encourage
students’ interactive learning and reflections: co-operative learning, problem-based learning, group
and peer work, project work, team work, learning by doing, pedagogical drama, and learning diaries
(Seikkula-Leino, 2011). Principles and vice-principals have the power to implement those activities.
11
In leading schools towards an entrepreneurial attitude, the transformation of ideas into practical
activities might be the most provocative part, though it can be a big culture-breaking challenge in
schools. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013) A challenge for principals is to have and firmly establish a clear
direction and focus on possibilities within all regulations with attention on students’ utilizing their
full potential for learning by which means to motivate and coach teachers to supervise students within
the boundaries set by national steering documents, without limit their creativity. (Hörnqvist, Leffler,
2013)
Another challenge for principals is then to be sufficiently acquainted with what is going on in
classrooms to know how to support and motivate teachers to invest energy in this learning process
(Hersey et al., 2001). Finally, a big challenge is to build a network with businesses and workplaces
to open up new arenas for learning. (Hörnqvist, Leffler, 2013).
2.4 Entrepreneurship education: internal vs. external; classroom vs. society
& life
According to Kyrö (1997), entrepreneurship education deals with three main components: 1) self-
oriented, 2) internal and 3) external entrepreneurship. Self-oriented entrepreneurship is the basis for
developing internal and external entrepreneurship (Remes 2004, p. 84). Internal entrepreneurship
deals with entrepreneurial and enterprising behavior. External entrepreneurship is about doing
business (Ristimäki 2003, p. 6). On the other hand, entrepreneurship in an educational context can be
understood in two ways (Erkkilä, 2000): entrepreneurship education, or a narrow understanding i.e.
education in starting and running business, and enterprise education, or a broad understanding, with
focus on abilities that characterize entrepreneurs such as an energetic, creative, cooperative and
innovative person who looks for opportunities and is not afraid of taking risks (Johannisson &
Madsén, 1997). In essence entrepreneurship education refers to external entrepreneurship and
enterprising entrepreneurship refers to the internal one. This thesis will consider both ways of
entrepreneurship education.
12
2.4.1 Internal entrepreneurship education or enterprise education
The primary focus of enterprise education is on an active learning enterprise education pedagogy;
knowledge needed to function effectively as a citizen, consumer, employee or self-employed person
in a flexible market economy; the development of personal skills, behaviors and attributes for use in
a variety of contexts; the person as an enterprising individual - in the community, at home, in the
workplace or as an entrepreneur; the use of entrepreneurship skills, behaviors and attributes
throughout the life course; and how a business, particularly a small business, works (Jones and
Iredale, 2010).
According to European Commission, 2011, entrepreneurship in this sense refers to an individual's
ability to turn ideas into action, it includes creativity, innovation, showing initiative and risk-taking,
as well as the ability to plan and manage projects in order to achieve objectives. This supports
everyone in day-to-day life at home and in society, makes employees more aware of the context of
their work and better able to seize opportunities, and provides a foundation for entrepreneurs
establishing a social or commercial activity (Official Journal of the European Union, 2006).
Furthermore, according to European Commission, 2011, as well as contributing to European
competitiveness, entrepreneurship education also helps to ensure a number of positive social benefits.
In 2004, the Finnish Ministry of Education (FME) started an action plan with the aim to promote, on
the one hand, a general enterprising attitude and a new basic mentality for every citizen – ‘an outlook
of internal entrepreneurship combining flexibility, initiative, creativity and independent action with
cooperation skills and strong motivation’ (FME 2004, p. 15). In light of a new 21st century economy,
the emphasis on knowledge, service, and information creates space for more new firms to emerge,
but also pressures existing companies to hire employees with higher level skills in order to compete
successfully. The core set of 21
st
century skills includes capabilities in analytical problem solving,
innovation and creativity, self-direction and initiative, flexibility and adaptability, critical thinking,
and communication and collaboration skills (Autor, Levy, & Murnane, 2007; Boyd & Vozikis, 1994;
Cavanagh et al., 2006; Goldin & Katz, 2008; Pink, 2008; Porter, Ketels, & Delgado, 2007; Scherer,
Adams, & Wiebe, 1989; Wagner, 2008).
13
Without a doubt these changes will have implications on teachers and how they teach
entrepreneurship. The core set of skills of 21
st
century mentioned earlier are difficult to teach through
traditional teaching and learning practices in which the learner tends to be a more or less passive
recipient and require active, learner-centered pedagogies and learning activities that use practical
learning opportunities from the real world. (European Commission, 2011). Furthermore, since
entrepreneurship education is a transversal competence it should be available to all students and be
taught as a theme rather than as a separate subject at all stages and levels of education (ECOTEC,
2010).
2.4.2 External entrepreneurship education
The primary focus of external entrepreneurship is on how to start a business including the key
processes of business start-up; how to plan and launch a new business venture; how to grow and
manage a business; the deployment of entrepreneurial skills and knowledge in a business context;
imminent use of the knowledge and skills related to start a business; and self-employment (Jones and
Iredale, 2010). In the context of schools, external entrepreneurship education is about developing
innovation (Gibb 2005, p. 48) and business ideas, as well as strengthening co-operation between
schools and the world of work, including such activities as work experience and study tours.
(Ruskovaara, Pihkala, Rytkölä & Seikkula-Leino, 2011).
In contrast to internal education that addresses the requirements of a wider range of stakeholders,
including consumers and community, external entrepreneurship education focuses primarily on the
needs of the entrepreneur (Jones and Iredale, 2010). Nevertheless, the key difference between the two
terms is that the primary focus of entrepreneurship education is on starting, growing and managing a
business whereas the primary focus of enterprise education is on the acquisition and development of
personal skills, abilities and attributes that can be used in different contexts and throughout the life
course (Jones and Iredale, 2010). Both external and internal entrepreneurship education deal with two
angles of perception: firstly, what methods and practices are introduced in classrooms and how they
fit into the general curriculum; secondly, what are the long term outcomes of entrepreneurship
education outside of the classroom in terms of its value for society and the individual life.
14
2.4.3 Classroom
When implementing entrepreneurship education in schools a difference between internal and external
(enterprise) education should be considered. A key differentiator between entrepreneurship (internal)
and enterprise (external) education lies in the pedagogical approach adopted (Jones and Iredale,
2010). Internal entrepreneurship education might, for example, use traditional didactic approaches
(Jones and Iredale, 2006) to the teaching and learning of business ideas generation, business planning
and the new venture creation process. In contrast, enterprise education takes a more creative,
innovative pedagogical approach that utilises experiential action learning methods (Jones and Iredale,
2010). Moreover, Jones and Iredale, 2010, point out that the scope and practice of enterprise education
is much broader than external entrepreneurship education, which is overly focused on how to start a
business.
2.4.4 Society & life
European Commission’s 2012 report “Effects and impact of entrepreneurship programs in higher
education” is focusing on the entrepreneurship education impact on four dimensions: impact on the
entrepreneurship key competence; impact on intentions towards entrepreneurship; impact on the
individual’s employability; impact on society and economy. Despite the fact that this research
concerns higher education, all of the dimensions mentioned above are relevant to the long term
objectives of entrepreneurship education. In other words, these are the long term outcomes of
entrepreneurship education outside the classroom, the impact that applies to life after school,
contribution to society and individual life.
According to European Commission, 2012, entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on the
entrepreneurship key competence of individuals which consists of an entrepreneurial attitude,
entrepreneurial skills and knowledge of entrepreneurship. In turn, improving the entrepreneurship
key competences is expected to increase the employability of individuals: entrepreneurship education
seems to have a positive effect on employability in terms of job experience, creativity in the current
job and annual income earned of the alumni in paid employment. (European Commission, 2012).
Furthermore, entrepreneurship education is expected to improve the entrepreneurship key
competence which will have an impact not only on the role of the individual in the economy (the
15
likelihood that the entrepreneurship alumni will participate in a business start-up is substantially
higher and the enterprises run by these individuals are perceived as more innovative and the
expectations regarding employment growth and turnover growth are higher), but also in society
(social and personal life), in terms of the extent to which individuals take initiatives to start non-
commercial projects outside of work. (European Commission, 2012).
The next chapter will focus in more detail on how entrepreneurship education is represented and
understood on different educational and societal levels and how it is related to aims, practices,
outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education that were addressed by previous
entrepreneurship education research.
3 Making sense of entrepreneurship education
This thesis is about how entrepreneurship education is perceived by professionals involved in
entrepreneurship education with the focus on high school principals. In order to get a bigger picture
of what perceptions about entrepreneurship education exist among entrepreneurship education
professionals and principals, both classroom level and broader level will be addressed during the
interviews. (Figure 1). This chapter will be focused on how interviewees could make sense out of
entrepreneurship education in terms of aims, practices, results and strategy in the context of the
classroom (that is actual activities and teaching in a school) and on the level of society (that is how
entrepreneurship education affects the broader educational system). Furthermore, the perceptions on
the role of principals’ in entrepreneurship education will be addressed as a part of the interview. This
chapter will serve as a framework for the empirical work and is meant to serve as a base for
recommendations for further development and improvement of entrepreneurship education
understanding among high school principals.
16
Figure 1. The levels of perceptions of entrepreneurship education
Figure 1 shows the two different levels that will serve as a base for entrepreneurship education
professionals’ and principals’ sense-making of entrepreneurship education. The “classroom” level is
a micro level that is related to the implementation of entrepreneurship education in a particular school.
This level addresses both internal and external entrepreneurship. In other words it will focus both on
what the existing perceptions of entrepreneurship education are in terms of acquiring business related
skills and general skills that will help to succeed in working life. Furthermore, the perceptions about
aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education existing on a classroom level
will be addressed. The “broader educational level” is a macro level, and is concerned with the larger
and long-term impact of implementing entrepreneurship education in high schools. This level is
concerned with how entrepreneurship education in high schools can affect the education strategy and
curriculum among a higher number of schools on the city or even country level. The perceptions of
aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of entrepreneurship education on a bigger scale will be
addressed in the same manner as on the micro that is classroom level.
Addressing each of the elements presented in the Figure 1 will allow us to see the bigger picture of
different dimensions of entrepreneurship education at high school level and the role of principals in
entrepreneurship education both in terms of principals’ current understanding, current participation
as well as ability to learn and take actions towards having entrepreneurship education as an integral
part of the high school curriculum and school life in general. In terms of aims, practices, outcomes
17
and strategies, several existing ideas both on a classroom and broader level will be presented in this
part.
The following sections will talk about aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on both classroom and
boarder educational level.
3.1 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a
classroom level
Entrepreneurship education is one of seven cross-curricular themes for basic education, and one of
six cross-curricular themes for upper secondary education. (Finnish National Board of Education
2004; 2003). The theme in the curriculum for upper secondary education (high school) is called
“Active citizenship and entrepreneurship” (Finnish National Board of Education 2004). The goals of
the “Active citizenship and entrepreneurship” for high school students are similar to the goals set for
a basic school education, that is 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, although the levels of participation are global. (Finnish National Board of
Education 2003). In terms of the ongoing curriculum reform process, according to Finnish National
Board of Education, The National Core Curriculum for Upper Secondary Schools was reformed in
2003 and the local curricula based on the new national core curriculum came into effect on 1 August
2005. The core curriculum is being reformed and will be implemented in schools in 2016 (Finnish
National Board of Education, 2015).
The main focus in the implementation of entrepreneurship education must be on practical exercises
and on the creation of personal experiences of participation and influence. (Finnish National Board
of Education 2003). The outcomes from the implementation of entrepreneurship education on a
classroom level are related to external and internal entrepreneurship. In other words, the two possible
outcomes of entrepreneurship education relate to establishing new enterprises and becoming
entrepreneurs or alternatively utilising the skills received from entrepreneurship education in other
professional societal areas.
According to Seikkula-Leino et al., 2009, in spite of the core curriculum, there is a long way to go
from the international and national policy making level to the actual establishment of business
18
enterprises. The journey consists of two different stages: first, from the goal setting in the education
system, starting from EU strategies and national curricula, to the altered daily teaching work of all
teachers, and secondly, from the teaching to the altered behavior of the students in the years to come.
(Seikkula-Leino et al., 2009). In terms of this study, the first stage is represented by a broader level
of impact of entrepreneurship education while the second stage is relevant to entrepreneurship
education on a classroom level. Furthermore, this study doesn’t only address the establishment of
business enterprises as an outcome of entrepreneurship education (internal entrepreneurship), it also
focuses on how entrepreneurship education can help students to develop the qualities necessary to
succeed in working and social life in general (external entrepreneurship). Therefore, entrepreneurship
education strategy on a classroom level should address both internal and external entrepreneurship
education. This creates a need to identify what perspectives among principals exist regarding
entrepreneurship education strategies since principals are the ones who have the power to make an
impact on those strategies on an actual classroom teaching level.
3.2 The perceptions of aims, practices, outcomes and strategies on a
broader educational level
In Finnish comprehensive school, entrepreneurship education is not a school subject of its own,
although ‘participatory citizenship and entrepreneurship’ is a new module in the national core
curriculum (The Finnish National Board of Education 2004, pp. 40—41). Instead, the concept of
entrepreneurship is supposed to be addressed through all school practices as a cross-curricular theme
(Komulainen, Korhonen, Räty, 2013).
In comprehensive school, the aimof entrepreneurship education is that the learners become familiar
with the world of work and entrepreneurship, that they gain basic knowledge of the operation and the
respective functions of the school community, the public sector, businesses, the industry and
organisations and of entrepreneurship as a profession (FME, 2009). According to Elena Ruskovaara,
Timo Pihkala, Tiina Rytkölä & Jaana Seikkula-Leino, 2011, entrepreneurship education in practice
is rather limited since it is not a part of normal schoolwork. Instead, separate projects and theme days
are carried out to fulfil the requirements set out in the curricula. In addition, many teachers do not
know enough about the curricula or strategies connected to entrepreneurship education. (Seikkula-
Leino et al. 2010; Ruskovaara et al.). According to European Commission, 2013, reinforcing
entrepreneurial education in schools, vocational education institutions and universities will have a
19
positive impact on the entrepreneurial dynamism of our economies. Moreover, it emphasizes that
besides contributing to the creation of social enterprise and business start-ups, entrepreneurship
education will make young people more employable and more ‘intrapreneurial’ in their work within
existing organizations, across the social, public and private sectors. In other words, all of this can be
considered as the outcomes of entrepreneurship education on a broader level.
Finally, an appropriate strategy would be required in order to be able to achieve the results mentioned
earlier. Once again, according to European Commission's report “Entrepreneurship Education: Guide
for Educators”, 2013, Through the Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan and the Rethinking Education
Communication, the European Commission emphasizes the need to embed entrepreneurial learning
in all sectors of education including non-formal learning. Both documents call on Member States to
provide all young people with practical entrepreneurial experience before leaving compulsory
education, highlighting the importance of learning by doing within education and training (European
Comission, 2013). Nevertheless, this report still emphasizes mostly the role of the teacher in
entrepreneurship education by stating that teachers have a central role, as they have a strong impact
on the attainment of learners (European Commission, 2013). Despite the fact that teachers do have a
strong impact on the attainment of learners, there’s little attention devoted to principals, who in turn
can have a significant impact on the implementation of entrepreneurship education in schools.
By taking into account all the existing knowledge about entrepreneurship education on classroom and
broader education levels and by using the model of different levels of perceptions about
entrepreneurship education in Figure 1, this thesis is aiming to demonstrate how much understanding
about entrepreneurship education exists among one of the key players, i.e. principals, and what
measures should be taken to develop this understanding and convert it into actions.
3.3 Entrepreneurship education - perceptions by experts and principals;
perceptions about principals’ role by experts
One of the main aspects of this framework is to find out what perceptions about the role of high school
principals in entrepreneurship education exist among professionals who are directly involved in
entrepreneurship education. For this purpose, professionals involved in entrepreneurship education
in high school internally will be analyzed, and professionals involved in entrepreneurship education
externally will be interviewed. (Figure 2).
20
Figure 2. The perceptions and opinions about entrepreneurship education in high school and the role
of principals in entrepreneurship education
Perceptions about
Entrepreneuship
Education and the
Role of Principals
Principals
(INTERNAL)
Teacher
(INTERNAL)
Entrepreneurship
Education Expert
(EXTERNAL)
Researcher
(EXTERNAL)
21
Figure 2 represents the focus group that will be used for this thesis to get versatile perceptions and
opinions, which would allow us once again see a bigger picture of entrepreneurship education in high
schools and the role of high school principals. Therefore, using Figure 1 as a basis for the
questionnaire and discussion that will be initiated with professionals demonstrated in Figure 2, this
thesis will deliver the qualitative outcomes of empirical work through the interpretive
phenomenological analysis method which will be further discussed in the following chapter.
Only once all the elements have been put together would it be possible to draw conclusions on the
role of principals’ and most importantly their power to impact entrepreneurship education on different
levels. Therefore, both Figure 1 and Figure 2 will serve as a structure for analysis, discussion and
recommendations of this thesis, namely the future actions by both internal and external experts that
need to be taken both at classroom level and broader educational level to create further integration of
entrepreneurship education in high schools both as a part of the curriculum and as a part of school
life and the educational environment.
4 Research methodology
The research methodology follows interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA). Entrepreneurship
and entrepreneurship education are seen here as socially constructed phenomena (Berger and
Luckmann, 1969; Bouchikhi, 1993). This thesis is committed to examining how experts in the area
make sense of this phenomena in the context of high school education and particularly in the context
of the principals’ role in entrepreneurship education in high schools. Moreover, this thesis aims to
look into how a group of experts in entrepreneurship education make sense of entrepreneurship
education at both classroom level and broader educational level.
The method of gathering data was designed to address a smaller yet heterogeneous focus group which
includes people involved in high school entrepreneurship education internally (e.g. a teacher) and
externally (e.g. a researcher). One of the key elements of the focus group would be principals’
perceptions about entrepreneurship education and the perceptions about principals’ role in
entrepreneurship education by other interviewees.
The research data has been gathered through a number of face-to-face and email interviews. The data
was collected from 5 respondents including a teacher, researcher, an expert involved in
22
entrepreneurship education in several ways, a high school principal and a high school coordinator
who will be placed under the category “principals” in the following chapters. The data has been
recorded, transcribed and then interpreted based on the access to the experience of entrepreneurship
education phenomena provided by participants. When interviewing principals, the data was received
through email interviews. The data has then been analysed to identify commonalities in participants’
experiences in order to tell a complete story about entrepreneurship education perceptions among the
participants. In accordance with the outcomes of the analysis the appropriate discussion and
recommendations have been made.
The questions have been designed to address both entrepreneurship education on a classroom level
and on a broader educational level; emphasizing the importance of entrepreneurship education both
for students and teachers as well as the education system as a whole. The questions have been
structured in a very personal manner in order to be able to get personal perceptions and interpretations
of the interviewees in the context of the entrepreneurship education phenomenon, specifically in the
high schools with the focus on high school principals.
The focus group have been presented with a set of questions including common core questions
regarding entrepreneurship education and additional questions depending on a participant’s role in
order to get a better insight into the perceptions and experiences of a specific expert. All the
participants were asked the following 5 core questions:
1) What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
2) How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
3) How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader education
system?
4) Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
5) Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
6) How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in
the short and long-term?
23
In addition to 5 core common questions, the internal group (Figure 2) were asked the following
question:
1) Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching?
In addition to 5 core questions, the external group (Figure 2) and a teaching participant from internal
group were asked the following questions related to the role of principals in entrepreneurship
education in high schools:
1) Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in
high school?
2) What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
3) Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
4) Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals?
5) What do you think would be the best way to coach principals in entrepreneurship education?
6) Who do you think would be the right people to do that?
In terms of reaching out to participants to request an interview, principals turned out to be the most
difficult group to reach. The main reasons for that included very busy schedules, language issues (the
whole research had been conducted in English which would make it harder for Finnish principals to
express their opinions), timing (when empirical work started at the end of May principals were busy
due to the end of the school year; during the whole summer principals were out of school;
subsequently the beginning of school year in mid-August was also the busiest time) as well as a lack
of involvement in entrepreneurship education issues which will be further analysed and discussed in
following chapters.
Initially, a large number of principals were contacted via email and invited to have an email interview
in order to gather more versatile data. Plenty of responses have been received stating that principals
will either direct the interview question to other people in school (for example counselors), or it was
requested to do an interview in their native language, or simply stated that they had no time. Only
two people among all principals, vice-principals and program coordinators asked have responded to
the interview. Nevertheless, even having in-depth interviews with other experts and email interviews
with principals have shown a clear connection which will be discussed and explain later. In other
24
words, there is a deeper reasoning behind principals being reluctant to responding to the questions
regarding entrepreneurship.
According to Smith, (Smith et al, 2009), the aim of interpretive phenomenological analysis is to
explore in detail how participants are making sense of their personal and social world, and the main
currency for an IPA study is the meanings particular experiences, events, states hold for participants.
In this thesis, the aim of the interpretive phenomenological analysis is to explore how experts in
various areas of entrepreneurship education make sense of entrepreneurship education with the focus
on a high school level and the role of principals in entrepreneurship education.
Furthermore, Smith argues that consistent with its phenomenological origins, IPA is concerned with
trying to understand what it is like, from the point of view of the participants, to take their side. This
is particularly relevant to this thesis since participants, while being a small focus group, represent a
wide variety of perceptions that would allow us to see the entrepreneurship education phenomenon
from different, whether opposite or similar, angles. Thus, this thesis aims to deliver more detailed
outcomes of the research through a two-stage interpretation process (Smith et al, 2009) where
participants are trying to make sense of their world; this thesis is trying to make sense of the
participants trying to make sense of entrepreneurship education.
The received data was analysed through gathering different perceptions around one question and
analysing the whole with eventually creating a bigger picture and making sense of the whole
questionnaire and the various perceptions that were presented by participants. The data analysis was
then discussed both in relation to each particular question and participants involved in responding to
that question as well as the results and participants as a whole unit build around the phenomenon of
entrepreneurship education in the context of high school and the role of principals. Moreover, the
connection between the participants’ area of expertise and their experiences has been created in order
to get a better understanding of why certain perceptions are different or similar to each other. Based
on the outcomes, the appropriate and justified conclusions as well as possible call to action were
established and explained.
25
5 Empirical work - Making sense of the word of entrepreneurship education
Q1: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Entrepreneurship education is such a broad area. For me it’s mainly about how people can learn to
behave in an entrepreneurial way and adopt that kind of behaviour in any context and as a teacher,
when I look at entrepreneurship education my main goal is to enhance that kind of behaviour and
mindset in all my students; and the second target is to enhance their competencies in studying
business, but that’s not the primary goal for me. Of course, when you look at entrepreneurship
education, one area, which is not often discussed, is also how to help people who are entrepreneurs.
How to help them to learn more and how to help them to enhance their skills and competencies to
enlarge their business.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“We have created a model (EnTree-model: A multilayered discussion on entrepreneurship education,
Figure 3). This is the idea of what I think about entrepreneurship education. So it is a very holistic. It
concerns the whole life of a human being and also, we have these two different ways of
thinking/approaches about entrepreneurship. So we have this American approach, and then we have
the continental approach. I would like to say that we have also got a Nordic approach, which is quite
close to the continental approach. And, you know the difference. There are the questions “why”, “why
are we educating?” and “why do we think entrepreneurship is important?” That is the part we have in
this model, in this continental approach, but not in this American approach. So this is more
methodology and teaching methods, and this is a more holistic/philosophical approach. So in this
figure: “entree model” I would like to put some stress on this culture. Entrepreneurship is also culture
related, and it depends on where you are what the context or the culture may be. Where you are living
or where you are working.”
26
Figure 3. EnTree -model: A multilayered discussion on entrepreneurship education (Hägg &
Peltonen, 2014)
27
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Entrepreneurship is a very new concept to the leaders. The ideas that we’re seeing in educational
leadership is, the world is drastically changing on the outside, so that means that schools have to
drastically change. Entrepreneurship itself is a very new concept to be implementing in the schools.
So the leaders are still trying to embrace that. They’re not against it. A good educational leader’s not
going to be against a lot of things. Although they’re not against it, it was better for me to come onto
the team and help translate some of the key terms and ideas coming out of the field of entrepreneurship
and what can be implemented into school. Students don’t need to know everything about
entrepreneurship. However, breaking entrepreneurship down to the key fundamentals can be difficult
sometimes, especially when the educational leaders don’t really have time to study a new field of
science. They’re busy doing their normal stuff. So that would be the first hurdle. That would also be
the first opportunity for educational leaders in the future, is to maybe take somebody on who can
translate and identify the core principles of entrepreneurship.”
4: Principal’s perspective
“It means that the students learn how to proceed when they want to establish a company or get
somebody interested in ideas they have or inventions they have made. They need help with
bureaucracy and legal and financial matters.”
“Equipping young people with the skills and aptitudes necessary to succeed in establishing their own
business”
Summary: There are clear similarities in perceptions among entrepreneurship education professionals
in terms of a broader understanding of entrepreneurship education. This perspective differs to
principals’ perspective who only identify entrepreneurship education as something related to
establishing a company. In other words, principals see entrepreneurship education on a classroom
level only in terms of external entrepreneurship while other professionals clearly identify internal
entrepreneurship attributes.
28
Q2: How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
1: Researcher’ perspective
“I would say that the main issue that always must be kept in mind is to put the student first. By that I
mean that, in many cases when we talk about entrepreneurship education, we take it for granted and
there are a lot of discussions that we need more companies because of the economy and (I don’t think
that) when we look at education we always have to be very clear about goals, and also about values.
So educational consciousness is very important. As a teacher you have to be very aware that you are
not pushing students in the wrong direction. They have to have the freedom to choose their own path.
But, if we are discussing how as a teacher we can enhance entrepreneurial behavior, I would say that
learning should be student-centered, it should be rooted in action, but also in theory. So there must
be a mix of theories and action. Also, learning should take place in teams and should be experiential;
they should learn from their own experiences and mistakes. Also confusion is good, it’s part of the
process. It has to be fun, there has to be a passion for learning, and it has to be outside school premises,
as you can’t really learn how to be an entrepreneur while you are sitting in a classroom. And so you
have to get in a world with a different kind of people and you have to learn ways to get to know your
own strengths and also your own shortcomings. It’s not easy, but if you keep in mind the things which
are normally attached to entrepreneurs: freedom, risk-taking, the skill to see opportunities and handle
your opportunities, then basically that’s it.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I have been thinking this for 10 years, and I am very happy that we have managed to figure out this
model (EnTree) because it’s not so easy. And it’s also very important that you can use different kinds
of orientations; these pedagogical orientations. But you always have to have some elements of the
essence of entrepreneurship. Also, to be able to live in security and certainty. These elements are
very important. There are many others also, as well as here. These are the main theoretical approaches,
but of course you can use many others. So we don’t say that in entrepreneurship education, you should
for instance, be experimental but you can use whatever you have in your toolbox. If you combine
these two, for instance if you use behaviourism you have to have something about entrepreneurship,
the essence of entrepreneurship combined with this way of approach. And then you have to know
what the aim of this education is.”
29
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I think speaking from the educational leadership point of view; you’d probably get an honest “I don’t
know”. For me if you’re going to ask the business studies teacher, then of course I have a big grand
idea that it should all be creative and we should all play and create and do all this fun stuff. So you’re
going to see two drastic views within this school. You’re going to have it from the educational leader
side and then from the business studies teacher. From the educational leader side, I don’t think they
have any idea what their ideal entrepreneurial curriculum is going to be. Our principal is the
educational leader and he has identified how critical it will be, that’s the stopping point. From that
point, as a good leader I think he has stepped back from that, and I think a good leader will let go
when they need to let go, and that’s what he has done. He’s said, “Ok, this needs to happen”. It needs
to happen because the government is changing the curriculum. Obviously the job markets are
changing from more corporate to small businesses.
Everything’s changing. Yes there’s a need to change. I think that needs to be stressed that our
principal and the educational leaders have recognized it needs to change. So I think there’s a big
holistic idea to bring entrepreneurship into the school. But how, when, where, why is that going to
happen? I think you’d be very lucky to find an educational leader who knows that. They haven’t been
taught entrepreneurship, they’re not being taught entrepreneurship, maybe they will in the future.
What they do teach in the educational programs up here is that leaders in schools are going to have
to learn to collaborate. They’re going to learn how to bootstrap their finances. They’re going to learn
how to think outside the box. So it’s interesting that, if you look at all these courses that are offered
to their educational leaders, they teach the principals in the frameworks of effectuation theory. So
they teach theories of entrepreneurship, but they don’t call it entrepreneurship. So the courses offered
to educational leaders aren’t entitled “entrepreneurship”, the professors don’t say, “This is how an
entrepreneurial leader would think”. They skip over all of that and move into the field of educational
leadership, and call the same principle something different.”
30
4: Principals’ perspective
“Somebody experienced would encourage them and guide them through the procedure. Definitely
NOT a regular teacher.”
“This question lies outside my remit. We have a Young Entrepreneurship scheme operating within
the school, open to IB students. We offer IB Business Management.”
Summary: There are clear similarities in perceptions, where the experimental nature of
entrepreneurship education is emphasized as well as the need for bringing educators with more
significant entrepreneurship education experience. Nevertheless, the perceptions about the “ideal”
entrepreneurship education depend on each participant’s personal experience and expertise in
entrepreneurship education.
Q3: How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader education
system?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Right now we are in a position where entrepreneurship education is in a minor role. Although in
Finland entrepreneurship education has been in the curriculum since 1994/95 so almost 20 years, but
we still have a lot of work to do because entrepreneurship education, from my point of view, it would
demand that we change the whole structure. We could get rid of timetables in the present form and
also it would need teachers to do teamwork and to collaborate with businesses and other external
organisations and people. I would disrupt the whole thing.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“You know, there has been a lot of misunderstanding between general education and entrepreneurship
education. I am an educator, and I think that most of the educators think that there’s something that
comes from economics, and it’s some kind of political, you know, hidden agenda. They are afraid of
it, but I think this model will help them to understand that our aim is also to educate towards a good
life. Not because we want to support some policies.”
31
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I think you would hear from leaders that entrepreneurship is something that could and should affect
everything else. So if it’s your biology students, working with the wood and metal class (last year
they were building birdhouses and they could sell those), so given the idea that education leaders
should and will go to this broader definition of entrepreneurship about collaboration and
bootstrapping and have a bigger definition on entrepreneurship, I think they’ll start to see that every
subject within the school, if it’s the language department or the science department. All those
departments will see that entrepreneurship can be utilized in all of them. Entrepreneurship right now
is very limited to the business studies thing, and I’m the only business studies teacher. So
entrepreneurship is not being distributed throughout the school very evenly at all.”
4: Principals’ perspective
“It would make studying more motivating when you see what you are heading towards and why you
have to study.”
“Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century job market”
Summary: All the interviewees agree on the need for change in relation to the perceptions of
entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, there seem to be need to disrupt the whole educational
system since apparently entrepreneurship education is still very limited to business studies. All in all,
there’s a need to tackle the misunderstanding that exists between general education and
entrepreneurship education and create a better understanding of a broad purpose of entrepreneurship
education which is not only related to implementing governmental policies.
32
Q4: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I think it’s important to know that in high schools, the whole learning is focused on exams that are
taken at the end of term, but I’m not so sure if anyone should spend 3-4 years in school only for a
score and only for learning things in theory as I think that learning is about learning for life. In that
way there are many ways to learn, so I don’t think that just sitting in a classroom and making memos
is the only way to learn and I don’t think it’s a very good way to learn in modern society.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“It’s very important. Because it’s a way of life; a way of thinking. And wherever you are, you need
this attitude. So it’s not only thinking about business. Of course if you have this entrepreneurial
mindset, you act as an entrepreneur or you act in an entrepreneurial way, wherever you are. And it’s
not only for running a business of your own, it’s very large…”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“I don’t think it’s very critical for students to learn how to start a company. I think that’s probably
the least of their worries. When you talk to other educational leaders here I think their naivety towards
entrepreneurship will limit their response to that question. I think you will get a lot of responses from
educational leaders saying, well, “It’s important because corporations are changing to small/medium
sized companies and we’re going to need to better prepare our students to work in those
environments.” Yes, to better equip students for tomorrow’s changing work environment we do need
to teach them more entrepreneurial traits than how to work in a corporation. You definitely hear the
importance of teaching students to be critical thinkers, so I think you’re going to hear that from
everybody in the leadership position. Taking it a little deeper as an entrepreneur, those are great things
to teach kids, but those are the realities, they’re going to go out and change jobs a lot. We can just tell
them to be prepared about that. Taking it a little deeper, I think if you’re teaching students how to
collaborate, how to bootstrap instead of teaching students “hey, this is what’s going to happen” now
we can teach them the “how”. So a lot of education has always been emphasized on “what” and now
we’re changing to the “how”, and entrepreneurship is going to be a critical tool that leaders can use
to teach that “how”.
33
4: Principals’ perspective
“Definitely. The school is too closed and too dependent on teachers who might know the theory but
not the practice.”
“As above”, i.e. “Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century
job market”
Summary: In terms of the importance of entrepreneurship education for students, all of the
participants seem to have common perceptions and an understanding of the importance of this
particular issues.
Q5: Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“When teachers understand the true meaning of entrepreneurship education and see that there are a
lot of different aims and a lot of different ways they can teach in an entrepreneurial way, it really
enhances their competencies so it’s concerned about professional growth. When they do teamwork it
gives them more freedom to arrange the learning. Also when they contact other people it enlarges
their own competencies and their skills and gives them new ideas, and they also, which I find very
interesting, is that somehow they learn to respect their own work in a new light. So being a teacher is
not just something that has to be done; it really has a meaning. And my research showed that when
teachers realized that, it was so enlightening.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I think they key point is that; people who adopt this idea of entrepreneurial behaviour. For instance,
students: they are more active, they are more responsible for how they go on with their studies, and
also they are very alert to what is happening around them and they want to take the benefits from
these opportunities that they see around them. So they are more active and they are more responsible
for their own lives.”
34
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Well, teaching is the best way to learn, they say, so if somebody’s teaching entrepreneurship they’re
going to be able to learn the different characteristics or traits of entrepreneurship and one of the big
ones that teachers and leaders would find is the idea of collaboration. I think it would be really cool
for teachers to learn some aspects of entrepreneurship like collaborating, and once they find those
traits within it they’ll probably see their job ease up a little bit. So not only will they be able to teach
students better, but their actual work environment and the spirit around here would be a lot better too.
Practically, the learning outcomes would be great for the students. On the other hand being practical
too, another positive benefit for teachers in entrepreneurship is that they’ll probably better their
environment, and happier teachers equals better outcomes.”
4: Principals’ perspective
“I am more interested in teaching the students than the present teachers. There is a need for the school
to open up and invite other actors from “real” life outside the school.”
“The Business Management (SL/HL) option in our school permits many students to gain a broad
familiarity with marketing, finance, management skills, etc. These are life skills in many ways.
Teachers of other subjects are less directly involved”
Summary: All of the entrepreneurship education professionals seem to have common perceptions
about the importance of entrepreneurship learning for teachers. At the same time, principals consider
that inviting other professionals to school instead of educating their own teachers is a better idea.
Furthermore, from the principals’ perspective, entrepreneurship education is only related to business
studies and teachers of other subjects are not involved, which means that internal entrepreneurship
education doesn’t seem to be taken into consideration by principals.
35
Q6: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I don’t think there are any easy answers to that. I think that in the short-term, teachers should attend
further training more eagerly, because there is some training available. There should be more, but
they are there and most of them are really good, so that’s in the short-term. And also there is
information available on the internet for example, so they just need to sit down and talk with their
colleagues and start to experiment in the short-term. In the long run, I think that support from the
management, from the principals, is needed because in many cases teachers say that they don’t feel
that they are supported or appreciated by their colleagues or by their principals. So it is important to
get feedback and support from the management.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“The problem at the moment is that the teachers don’t adopt this model. If the teachers and all the
staff who are responsible adopt this model, and they themselves are entrepreneurial, in how they act
and how they handle people. Young people, they are like… how do I say… a virgin mind. If teachers
are giving this example when they behave like this, the young people can learn.”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Yeah, that’s a super-critical question because you have the short and the long-term thing. The current
situation is that educational leaders today are not being taught entrepreneurship whatsoever. So I think
that there’s a huge understanding at the national level that entrepreneurship needs to be taught. That’s
why it’s in the next curriculum. However, it’s not coming from the bottom up. The stress on schools
and education to be more entrepreneurial is definitely coming from the top down. So you’re going to
have a lot of leaders in the future (in the next 5-10 years) being super-reactive to entrepreneurship.
You’re not going to find a lot of proactive leaders. So I would say that the current situation is horrible
for entrepreneurship and leaders. Maybe not horrible, but scary if you think that the teachers are not
being prepared whatsoever, or the leaders aren’t being prepared whatsoever.”
36
4: Principal’s perspective
“New teachers should be instructed before they leave university. Thus we would get the thought
rooted in the school environment.”
“Why not? We have a broad mission to provide a solid educational experience. Economics is
compulsory for all. Thereafter students with an interest can opt for Business Management. A
surprisingly large number of graduates go on to study business in higher education. Whether they
become entrepreneurs or employees is of less significance.”
Summary: Some of the common perceptions regarding the implementation of the entrepreneurship
education in the short and long-terms are related to educating teachers. At the same time, some of the
principals’ perception show us once again that entrepreneurship education is only perceived in the
context of business studies. Some of the other different perceptions have to do with the role of
policymakers and the lack of a proactive approach to entrepreneurship education.
The internal group (Figure 2) were asked the following question:
Q1: Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching?
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Very slowly. Very slowly, with a lot of difficulties. When you have a leader trying to implement
something they’re not an expert on you’re going to have a lot of difficulties. And I think one of the
only real ways to have it implemented is doing what our principal is doing, a hands off approach.
Bring in people that are motivated, bring in people that have the knowledge and just let it be. So if
you’re trying to implement ideas and you only know half of the ideas then you’re implementing half
of the whole concept to students and then everybody loses. So nationwide it’s probably being
implemented on a very slow process. There’s a lot of room and risk that it’s going to be implemented
wrong.”
37
4: Principals’ perspective
“We actually have for many years offered a course called “Innovation”. It has been very popular and
we have a teacher who has a company of her own. She has an MSc and MBA education.”
“Business Management - 150 hours at Secondary Level and 240 hours at High school Level”
Summary: Some of the common perceptions regarding this question have to do with bringing in
people who have the required knowledge. Nevertheless, principals’ opinions differ in that there is still
a very strong perception regarding entrepreneurship education being only related to business studies.
Following questions related to the role of principals in entrepreneurship education in high schools:
Q1: Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in
high school?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“Personally I think it should start from the teachers themselves, because right now we are being given
pressure and challenges from the government and it leaves nothing basically. Also it’s important to
have feedback and support from the management, but in the end it’s always the teacher who does or
doesn’t implement new things, in my opinion. You don’t really need guidance or permission from
the management because nobody is saying how you can deliver a certain course, you must start doing
things your own way.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
Based on the previous answer, teachers play the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship
education in high schools (See Appendix 3 for the full interview).
38
3: Teacher’s perspective
The interviewed teacher was hired specifically to teach business studies, teach entrepreneurship and
teach business to their students, as well as to work on projects with the leadership staff and other
projects around the city and around the community that the school is trying to get involved in
entrepreneurially. Therefore, the above question was modified to fit in with the interview flow (See
Appendix 1 for original interview and the context of responses below).
“In the classroom the principal has a very hands-off approach to what I would like to do in the
classroom. They’ve had some lessons planned out in the past, but it was very, very super-practical:
“this is how you start a business.” For a lot of 14 year-olds, they don’t need to know how to go to the
registration office, the tax office. They’re more creative, they want to play. So getting a 13 and a 14-
year old student to play with entrepreneurship is becoming more of the idea then how to use it as a
tool. They’ll learn how to use it as a tool later in life. We’ve had business studies in the past. The
vice-principal for example, he’s a PE, Gym and a math teacher. However, he’s done some of the
business studies in the past. Now with the business studies needing to be taught, plus this whole new
requirement of schools adjusting to entrepreneurship there was a need for a separate person to come
into it. As a private school, this school has the ability and the freedom to make decisions to do that.
Whereas all the other school are city operated, and they don’t have the flexibility to create a position
like that. So the city schools are going to need to be super-innovative and entrepreneurial themselves
in figuring out how to put somebody into that spot.”
Summary: There is a common perception existing among the participants that teachers play the main
role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools. It is also appears that
management and principals have a hands-off approach but can contribute by supporting the teachers.
Furthermore, when combining different opinions it seems that most schools cannot bring a
professional from the outside therefore, teachers taking initiative and teaching their courses in a more
entrepreneurial way is very important.
39
Q2: What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I would say that when a teacher tries new things and then gets some results, he or she can go the
principal and say, “ok, I’m going to try that,” and then say, “ok, it went this way or that way,” and if
he or she sees that it was a good experiment, then he can ask, “how can I enhance this? How can I
broaden this? How can I take more colleagues into that approach and how can we take it further?” So
that’s the role of the management to then make it happen in the future.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
Of course they also have a very important role. I think that the whole system should be established
on the base like this. And of course teachers and professors can use their own personality as they
want, but this idea should be… this is the key point that, that they understand that, not just giving
lessons…”
3: Teacher’s perspective
“Our principal’s title officially, as the leader of a private school, is a CEO. He sits in the principal’s
office, he doesn’t do very much with the teachers, and he doesn’t do very much with the planning of
the school itself. He’ll get a lot of information from the vice-principals. He’ll sit down with the
teachers and he’ll sit down with the vice-principals, but only to listen to their ideas, only to hear them
and then sign off. He’s not really taking their ideas and then making them his own. He’ll take what
the outside community is saying, bring it to the vice-principals, and then it becomes the job of the
vice-principals and teachers to distribute it throughout the school. So what you see is our principal is
being a like a pivot point. But he’s not really going to change the world and he’s not going to really
change the school, that’s the job of the teachers and the vice-principal. His job is to be the pivot point
where all of that can happen and all of this can happen freely. So, since he doesn’t know
entrepreneurship so well, it’s a lot better for him to back off, bring somebody in that knows that a
little bit more. I think the next is; an educational leader here has to know how to bootstrap, has to
know how to collaborate, has to know all those fundamental traits of a good entrepreneurial leader,
they just don’t know that they’re being entrepreneurial. They were never taught to be entrepreneurial,
they were never told, and “this is entrepreneurship.” So if they’re not told what entrepreneurship is,
40
how can they tell teachers or students what entrepreneurship is? So that’s what you’re seeing today,
and that’s what you’re going to see in the future.”
Summary: In terms of the role of principals, some common perceptions have to do with principals’
role in supporting teachers and listening to their ideas in order to implement these ideas in the future
if they prove to be working. The main perception related to this question, points out that principals
are not the ones who create and implement entrepreneurship education but rather they are the ones
who can provide necessary support to other educators and help them to make things happen in the
future.
Q3: Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I think that is the next phase. If you look a few years back, there wasn’t any research on teachers
either, but there was a lot of research on entrepreneurial learning. Then it started by defining what is
entrepreneurial learning, and then it moved on to the issues of entrepreneurial pedagogy, but no one
defined what entrepreneurial pedagogy is, it was taken as granted. Then if you look at the newest
research, there is a trend that is saying, “Ok, next we have to look at how teachers perceive
entrepreneurship education,” so some research has already been done on that level and the next level
I guarantee is principals. But I think that one of the reasons why this kind of research is missing is
that we are so focused on the learning aspect and we are not interested in teaching and certainly in
Finland, we already talk about education. Education is as challenging a word as entrepreneurship,
because some people think that when you educate something, you try to put someone else to a certain
form, and it is more neutral to talk about learning, rather than education or teaching and talk about
management then, because if you look at school management you end up dealing with obstructions
and timetables and nobody knows how to fix that.”
41
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I don’t know. Good question. I don’t have an answer.”
3: Teacher’s perspective
According to the teacher’s perspective, educational leaders were never taught to be entrepreneurial,
they were never told, “this is entrepreneurship” and this could be a reason of the lack of research:
“...And Finland being one of the leading education research places… If that’s true, then it’s interesting
to see that the world leading education system has no emphasis whatsoever on entrepreneurship and
leaders at all. And there’s one finance course and one project management course. Everything else
is…” (See Appendix 1 for the full interview).
Summary: It appears that the lack of entrepreneurship education research focusing on principals is a
difficult questions. Some of the perceptions point out that so far entrepreneurship education research
has focused on other aspects and focusing on principals might be the next phase.
Q4: Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals?
1: Researcher’s perspective (note: the question was paraphrased to fit in with the interview flow yet
the response is relevant to the question stated in this thesis):
“Right now, I am afraid that many of them think that entrepreneurship, especially in high school, is
something to do with studying business and that is not the main idea of a high school. So it is
understandable, but if the principals can see and get more information and experience about
entrepreneurship education, maybe they can then see it in a new light. But, I’m afraid I have no answer
on how to fix it, except maybe sending principals to training.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“No, they’re very narrow. They have this idea that entrepreneurship education is how to educate the
people to establish a business of their own and how to establish a start-up. You know. It’s very, very
narrow, so we have a lot of work to do to understand this.”
42
3: Teacher’s perspective
“So, our principal is not an expert in entrepreneurship. He knows that it’s going to be a big part of
the school in the coming years. I was doing some teaching before here, supporting the school, so I
was brought on specifically to translate what entrepreneurship is to our principal, to the staff so a lot
of, when things are being implemented here in the school, from the entrepreneurship point of view
they’ll look at me and say “is this ok? Is this good, or what’s next?” So if you find an educational
leader who knows what entrepreneurship is in the first place, great, I think you’ve found a gold mine.
Good luck trying to find a leader who even understands what entrepreneurship is, besides starting a
company.”
Summary: It appears that all the participants have a common perception about principals’
understanding of entrepreneurship education, which only relates to establishing a business.
Q5: What do you think would be the best way to coach principals in entrepreneurship education?
1: Researcher’s perspective (note: the response refers to the previous answer where “sending
principals to training” was suggested):
“It would be more like coaching. What I would do, I would first explain what entrepreneurship
education is about, what the different aims are, but then I would like to get the principals to open
projects in their own schools. The one thing that is missing right now in entrepreneurship education
is strategies for schools. I think that is the next step. You know, original entrepreneurship education
strategies have been made and some of them are in existence right now. Helsinki launched an
entrepreneurship education strategy; I also know that in other parts of Finland similar approaches are
going on, but at school level there is still a lack of strategies and programs related to what it means
in practice, what is entrepreneurship education in our schools.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“Yes they should be. At the moment I’m having systems for principals. They come from primary
schools and upper secondary schools.”
43
3: Teacher’s perspective
The answer to this question was derived from the interview flow (See Appendix 1 for the full
interview).
“...it would maybe be cool to start my own coaching or consulting company and then hire other
entrepreneurs that are interested in getting that into the schools. I could approach it saying “ok this is
my job: coaching other leaders how to be entrepreneurial”. So that’s one way, we could do it as a job.
You could also, I was thinking about contacting the EU commission or the US embassy and seeing if
they would fund my research and then, for example if the EU education commission funds my project
then obviously they would have those findings at their ability to distribute. So I think there’s a lot of
different possibilities of how to get the word out. I don’t know what the best method is; I just think
that the word needs to be spread somehow. Maybe do like a TV commercial…”
Summary: It seems that participants have a common perception that providing coaching to principals
might be necessary for them to gain a broader understanding of entrepreneurship education.
Q6: Who do you think would be the right people to do that?
1: Researcher’s perspective
“I don’t think there’s any specific group, but whoever it is, that person or group has to understand the
whole picture of entrepreneurship education, because otherwise, it will be too narrow. It can’t focus
just on business or education, it has to be taking the whole picture into consideration.”
2: Entrepreneurship education expert's perspective
“I think for instance, in Etu-Töölö high school, principals have studied these models for as long as I
have been teaching this. They have always sent teachers to courses every year. And at the moment
more than 20 teachers have been trained to this model and they are using it. It takes years but I think
in 10 years we will come a long way.”
44
3: Teacher’s perspective
The answer to this question was derived from the interview flow (See Appendix 1 for the full
interview).
“Think “ok what can we do as researchers? What can we do to suggest that entrepreneurship needs
to be implemented? Or how can it be implemented. So like, “how” and “what” of entrepreneurship
should be implemented in the future would be the first step. It just needs to be marketed. The traits of
entrepreneurship just need to be communicated. They’re not being communicated. And with that
you’ll be 50/50 with finding a leader who’s open to it, or who doesn’t know anything and backs away
from it. And then the leaders that you do find are open to it, then you have a 50/50 chance of it being
implemented correctly. So with the current situation you’ve a very low percentage or a very low
opportunity that entrepreneurship will be implemented somewhat ok. Like, maybe 20% and the other
80% is either it’s not going to be implemented or it’s going be implemented horribly, and it’s going
to be all reactive and not proactive. I think if you look at it, the whole situation like that, I think it’s
very optimistic, we now see that there is a niche, there’s an opening in the studies.”
Summary: Generally, perceptions regarding this question point out that there is no specific group of
people who could coach principals and that all entrepreneurship education professionals and
educators themselves can be involved in the process.
The empirical work demonstrated a range of opinions which nevertheless lead us to a strong case in
relation to entrepreneurship education overall, entrepreneurship education in high schools and
especially the role of high school principals in entrepreneurship education and the current state of
awareness that exists among them. Main conclusions from the data are:
1) Principals agree with the importance of entrepreneurship education, although they mostly
view it as a business education
2) Teachers play an important role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education and can
make changes at the classroom level but there can be lack of support from the management
3) Steps were taken in the past to create a coaching program for principals but haven’t been
successful yet
45
4) Despite the entrepreneurship focus of decision makers in education and EU, there is still a
fundamental lack of understanding of the term “entrepreneurship education”
5) Entrepreneurship studies are not included in the training of future principals
6) Public schools in Helsinki don’t have enough flexibility and finance to focus on
entrepreneurship education and hire people with expertise
7) Fundamentally principals have a hands-off role when it comes to entrepreneurship education
implementation
8) Some actions are taken to address entrepreneurship education in high schools and educate
principals locally but they are not nearly enough to scale and affect the broader education
system
Furthermore, the empirical work shows how different experts involved in entrepreneurship education
interpret this phenomenon. It is not surprising that interviewees discuss the entrepreneurship
education through their own experiences.
The main message of the empirical work shows that while principals don’t create entrepreneurship
education strategies as a part of their job, they are important facilitators of the entrepreneurship
education in high schools through supporting teachers and being open to a new approach to teaching.
Nevertheless, it appears that the core understanding of entrepreneurship education by principals both
on a classroom level and broader level is only limited to the business context. In practice it means
that this issue has to be address through future research in order to gain understanding on how to
reach current principals and coach them about entrepreneurship education and what changes need to
be made to educate future principals to understand the holistic nature of entrepreneurship education
and its importance on different educational levels.
46
6 Discussion and recommendations
Even by taking a glance at the participants’ responses it is clear that there is a massive gap in
entrepreneurship education understanding between principals and other professionals who are
directly involved with entrepreneurship education. It is obvious that principals interpret
“entrepreneurship education” just in the context of including business classes in the curriculum and
generally, relate entrepreneurship education to starting a venture. In other words, it appears that
essentially principals perceive entrepreneurship education to be equal to business education.
On the other hand, when we look at the response received from a teacher directly involved in the
planning of entrepreneurship activities (which is an exceptional case among high schools in Helsinki),
we can see how perceptions are drastically different from those of principals. In this particular case,
the participant had a strong entrepreneurship background; therefore it is not surprising that there is a
broader understanding of entrepreneurship education. At the same time, we can also see an
understanding of the whole picture and what measures can be taken to create more awareness of
entrepreneurship education among principals.
When we move further, we can see that the interviewed researcher has a clear idea from personal
experience regarding those measures to help principals understand entrepreneurship education. Here,
we get another set of interesting perceptions regarding what this kind of a “coaching program” would
entail and why it is not that simple to bring it to life as well as what challenges might arise in terms
of overall principals’ attitudes towards entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurship education
coaching. Even with having a small research sample, we can clearly see how perceptions evolve
through the course of empirical work. In other words, it is clear that principals, while having the
power to make a change, don’t have enough understanding of entrepreneurship education, at the same
time other participants are able to see the whole picture, and have a clear vision on how this situation
could be changed on a broader educational level.
In essence, this thesis used a sample group that included both internal and external players who could
affect the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools in different ways.
47
6.1 Perceptions of principals
The study shows that there’s clearly a lack of understanding of what entrepreneurship education really
means and despite the fact that principals recognise its importance, they tend to believe that
entrepreneurship education only has to do with establishing a company and the business side of
things. In other words, entrepreneurship education among principals is only perceived in terms of
external entrepreneurship. Furthermore, it appears that teachers have more awareness and willingness
towards integrating more entrepreneurship related activities into the curriculum yet, it seems that they
don’t get enough support from the management, i.e. principals. Therefore, there’s a clear
misconception that exists among principals and other educators regarding the meaning of the word
“entrepreneurship” in entrepreneurship education.
As was mentioned earlier, the word entrepreneurship is interpreted as business, therefore when
hearing about “entrepreneurship education”, education professionals automatically think about
“business education”. Therefore, the first step would be to change a common misconception about
the meaning of entrepreneurship education and create channels through which this information could
be delivered to principals and other educators who are in the position to make a change on a school
level. Some schools make an effort to implement entrepreneurship education; therefore it is essential
for principals to share the knowledge and experience among each other. The empirical work has
shown that there are local measures that are taken to educate or at least help principals to understand
entrepreneurship education but there is no trend yet.
The lack of understanding leads to the lack of support of the initiatives taken by others, for example
teachers. While principals themselves are not directly involved in education, they have the power to
create an entrepreneurship environment within the school. But in order to do so, they have to have a
better understanding of entrepreneurship education or at least about its importance outside of starting
a business. Essentially, to enhance principals’ understanding of entrepreneurship education, external
support by entrepreneurship education professionals is required.
48
6.2 Perceptions of other entrepreneurship education experts
This thesis has shown not only other experts in entrepreneurship education can clearly understand the
holistic nature of the subject; all of them have expressed similar opinions as to the role of principals
in entrepreneurship education and the lack of understanding among principals. While principals were
found to be an important fundament for entrepreneurship education, the importance and the ability of
teachers to make a change was emphasized. Furthermore, it has shown that researchers and educators
are trying to make a change themselves by using available measures. Nevertheless, there is a common
notion that there is a need for coaching/training for principals to expand their understanding of
entrepreneurship education.
All in all, the empirical work suggests that the interviewees make sense out of the entrepreneurship
education phenomenon and the role of principals in entrepreneurship education in a similar way. At
the same time, there seems to be less knowledge regarding the lack of previous entrepreneurship
education research focusing on principals, although there were good assumptions related to these
questions.
While initially this thesis was supposed to emphasize aims, practices, outcomes and strategies of
entrepreneurship education, even in the early stages of empirical work it became clear that there is a
very long way to go before these aspects can be discussed with principals as there is a lack of
understanding of the holistic meaning and purpose of entrepreneurship education. One of the
interesting findings is that principals are not the ones who can implement entrepreneurship education
because they simply have other duties. However, principals are a crucial element in every school
system and therefore can provide much-needed support to teachers who would like to add elements
of entrepreneurship education into their classes. Nevertheless, the first step towards principals’
participation in the questions of entrepreneurship education would be developing an understanding
of the true nature of entrepreneurship education and how it can benefit students, teachers and society
in the long-term.
Furthermore, as mentioned earlier some of the educators and researchers are very keen to address the
issue by creating coaching programs or using certain methods to decode the “entrepreneurship
education” meaning to principals. While individual attempts are very important, the change has to be
made on a higher level. Simultaneously, for the change to be made on a higher level, there is a need
for more awareness of principals’ roles and their lack of understanding of entrepreneurship education.
This certainly calls for more in depth research on the topic of principals’ role in entrepreneurship
49
education and the perceptions and most likely misconceptions that exist among principals regarding
the meaning of entrepreneurship education.
One of the significant findings from this study shows the initial causes for the lack of entrepreneurship
education understanding among principals, namely the lack of entrepreneurship courses for future
school leaders. This thesis has shown the lack of understanding of entrepreneurship education among
principals which is not surprising given the fact that future principals and future leaders in general
are not taught to be entrepreneurial. This leaves us with the even bigger issue - the lack of
entrepreneurship courses for future leaders, which might lead us to another question: whether those
with the power to implement entrepreneurship education for future leaders understand the broader
meaning of the terms or do they only see it as something related to the starting of a company. This is
another topic that requires further research in order for us to understand the whole structure of causes
and consequences in terms of entrepreneurship education on different educational levels.
7 Conclusion
Entrepreneurship education is a phenomenon worth studying in view of its central focus in the
development of social and economic well-being (Seikku-Leino et al, 2010). This thesis aimed to
address entrepreneurship education in high schools and obtain a better understanding on how the
implementation of entrepreneurship education in high schools works. Since principals and vice
principals appear to have the power to make changes and integrate more entrepreneurship activities
in their schools, the role of principals in entrepreneurship education was addressed. It would be
impossible to assume how principals can take part in entrepreneurship education implementation in
high schools without knowing whether principals fully understand the concept of entrepreneurship
education. To get a broader idea about what’s going on in entrepreneurship education in schools, the
sample group didn’t consists solely of principals but other experts in the field who gave a valuable
contribution to the development of this study.
Despite the novelty of this study, various limitation and lack of previous studies focusing on
principles, this study gave insights into how principals view entrepreneurship education, why it is
important to consider principals as one of the key players when it comes to the implementation of
entrepreneurship education, why there hasn’t been enough focus on principals in the context of
entrepreneurship education, what measures can be taken to coach principals to understand the concept
50
and the importance of entrepreneurship education and why it is important to focus on the
entrepreneurship education of future leaders.
Since entrepreneurship education is considered important at many societal levels (Seikku-Leino et al,
2010), this study demonstrates yet another area of entrepreneurship education research that requires
more attention, However, the results presented in this study show that even with a small focus group
there are clear indications that: 1) the role of principals in entrepreneurship education is highly
overlooked; 2) principals’ lack of understanding and misinterpretation can result in a lack of support
to teachers who want to implement more entrepreneurship education in their classes; 3) the effort
from teachers, policy makers and entrepreneurship education experts is required to change the current
situation; 4) there is clearly a lack of entrepreneurship courses when preparing principals who will
lead schools in the future.
In summary, the findings suggest a strong need for:
- more focus on principals and education leaders in entrepreneurship education research;
- development of a learning tool that would help create a better understanding of
entrepreneurship education among principals such as coaching/training programs;
- in terms of long-term effects, it is essential to integrate entrepreneurship courses into studies
and training for future principals
This thesis highlights the crucial factor in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high
schools, namely the role of principals and the need for development of principals’ understanding of
entrepreneurship education, which has received insufficient attention in the context of
entrepreneurship education.
The interpretive phenomenological analysis demonstrated a clear gap that exists between
entrepreneurship education experts’ interpretation and principals’ interpretations. Furthermore, other
experts who participated in this study interpret principals’ lack of understanding in a similar way,
which shows us a clear pattern regarding insufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education by
principals strengthened by perceptions of entrepreneurship education experts. All in all, this study
demonstrated that high school principals perceive entrepreneurship education in a narrow manner, as
opposed to the holistic nature of this phenomenon.
This study suggested several measures that can be taken in order to create more awareness of the true
meaning of entrepreneurship education among principals. Nevertheless, much more research on this
issue is required in order to fully understand why the role of principals have been overlooked in
51
previous research, what the best ways are to improve the present situation and how future principals
can be taught to be entrepreneurial.
This study is meant to introduce a new orientation for research on entrepreneurship education, in
which increasing attention should be paid to high school principals as one of the fundamental groups
of educators who play an important role in the support of entrepreneurship education implementation
in high schools.
Finally, as it was pointed out in the literature review, the EU Commission recognised that the quality
of teaching is the single most important within-school factor affecting student attainment (European
Commission, 2011). While the outcomes of this study have confirmed the importance of teachers in
entrepreneurship education it is important to remember that teachers can only make changes if they
are supported by principals. Therefore, future research focusing on principals in the context of
entrepreneurship education in high schools is important in order to create more awareness among
policymakers who could subsequently contribute to making a change on a broader educational level.
52
8 References
Akinola, 2005, in Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a
panacea for effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business
Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
Autor, D., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. (2007). The Skill Content of Recent Technological change: An
Empirical Exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4).Boyd & Vozikis, 1994. in Boyles, T.
(2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for
undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-
55
Backström-Widjeskog, B. (2010). “Teachers’ thoughts on entrepreneurship education”. In K. Skigen
& J. Sjovoll (Eds.), Creativity and innovation - Preconditions for entrepreneurship education (pp. 107
- 120). Trondheim: Tapir Academic Press.
Cachia, R. & Ferrari, A., 2010, Creativity in Schools: A Survey Of Teachers in Europe, European
Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Accessed
17.01.2015 fromhttp://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC59232.pdf
Cavanagh, R. E., Kay, K., Klein, D., & Meisinger, S. R. (2006). Are they really ready to work?
Employers' perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century
workforce: The Conference Board, Partnership for 21st Century skills, Corporate voices for Working
Families, and Society for Human Resource Management. in Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century
knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for undergraduate
entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-55
Chouliaraki, L. & Fairclough, N. (1999) “Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse
Analysis”, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.
Chigunta, F. (2002). Youth Entrepreneurship: Meeting the Key Policy Challenges. Youth
Employment Summit. 1-34.
53
Council conclusions of 26 November 2009 on the professional development of teachers and school
leaders (2009/C 302/04), Official Journal of the European Union. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/leraar/bestanden/council_conclusions_2009.pdf
Erhurun, H.E.O. (2007). Skills acquisition. A toll for youth empowerment for economic growth &
development. Journal of business and management studies 1(2), 116 -125. in Ezeani, N.S., (2012),
Application of entrepreneurship education: a panacea for effective secondary schools management in
Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-
45
Erkkilä,K. (2000). Entrepreneurial Education. New York: Garland. in Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E.,
2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an Entrepreneurial Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and
Innovation in Educational Research
European Commision, 2006. Entrepreneurship action plan. Key action sheets. Key action 1 -
Fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through school education. in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and
Räty, H., 2012. “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School
Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship Education and the Related Abilities of the
Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
European Commission, November 2011. Entrepreneurship Education: Enabling Teachers as a
Critical Success Factor. “A report on Teacher Education and Training to prepare teachers for the
challenge of entrepreneurship education.” Final Report Bruxelles 2011. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-
entrepreneurship/files/education/teacher_education_for_entrepreneurship_final_report_en.pdf
European Commission, 2012. “Effects and impact of entrepreneurship programmes in higher
education”, Brussels, March 2012
European Commission, June 2013. Entrepreneurship Education: A Guide for Educators,
Bruxelles 2013. Accessed 17.01.2015 fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/promoting-entrepreneurship/files/education/entredu-
manual-fv_en.pdf
54
European Communities, 2007. The Key Competences for Lifelong Learning – A European
Framework is an annex of a Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Accessed on 18.01.2015 fromhttp://www.alfa-trall.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/EU2007-
keyCompetencesL3-brochure.pdf
Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a
panacea for effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business
Economics, and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
Frank, A. I. (2007), “Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Skills: A Missing Element of Planning
Education”, Planning, Practice & Research 22 (4), 635-648.
Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. (2004). Yritta¨jyyskasvatuksen linjaukset ja
toimenpideohjelma [Policy for entrepreneurship education]. (Publications of Ministry of Education
and Culture No. 18). Helsinki. in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone
is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of
Entrepreneurship Education and the Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
Finnish Ministry of Education and Culture. (2009). Yritta¨jyyskasvatuksen suuntaviivat [Guidelines
for entrepreneurship education]. (Publications of Ministry of Education and Cultures No. 7). Helsinki.
in Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the
Entrepreneur Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship
Education and the Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
Vol. 56, No. 1, February 2012, 1-19.
Finnish National Board of Education. (2004). Peruskoulun opetussuunnitelman perusteet. [The basics
of the comprehensive school curriculum] in Komulainen, K., Naskali, P., Korhonen, M. and
Keskitalo-Foley, S. (2013), Internal Entrepreneurship – a Trojan horse of the neoliberal governance
of education? Finnish pre- and in-service teachers’ implementation of and resistance towards
entrepreneurship education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, vol.9. no.1
55
Finnish National Board of Education, 2015, General upper secondary education,http://www.oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/general_upper_secondary_education
Accessed 17.01.2015
Fiet, J.O. (2000a), “The Theoretical Side of Teaching Entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business
Venturing 16 (1), 1-24.
Fiet, J.O. (2000b), “The Pedagogical Side of Entrepreneurship Theory”, Journal of Business
Venturing 16 (1), 101-117.
Gartner, W.B. (1988), “Who is the entrepreneur? is the wrong question”, American Journal of Small
Business, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 11-32.
Gibb, A. (2005) The future of entrepreneurship education: determining the basis for coherent policy
and practice? in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship education through
curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies, 2011, Vol. 43, No.
1, 69–85
Gibb, A. (2006) Entrepreneurship/enterprise education in schools and colleges: are we really building
the onion or peeling it away? in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2008). The Race Between Education and Technology. Boston: Harvard
University Press. Haynie, M. J., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E., & Early, C. P. (2010). A situated
metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(2), 13 in
Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A
model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol.
15, pp. 41-55
Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., King, W., 1997. Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education,
enterprise education and education for small business
management: a ten-year literature review. International Small Business Journal 15 (3), 56–77.
56
Henry, C., Hill, F. & Leicht, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can
entrepreneurship be taught: Part I-II, Education and Training, 47(2), 98-111; 47(3), 158-169.
Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2001). Management of Organizational Behavior: Leading
Human Resourses (8 ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E., 2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an Entrepreneurial
Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research.
Hägg, O. & Peltonen, K., 2014 “Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurship pedagogy”,
Aalto University School of Business, Helsinki, pp. 21 - 44
Ikävalko, M., Ruskovaara, E., & Seikkula-Leino, J., (2008), Rediscovering teacher’s role in
entrepreneurship education, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland
Institute for Educational Leadership, (2008), Teacher Leadership in High Schools: How Principals
Encourage It—How Teachers Practice It,
Available athttp://www.iel.org/pubs/metlife_teacher_report.pdf accessed 12th of April 2014
Jones, B. and Iredale, N., (2010), Enterprise education as pedagogy, Education + Training, Vol. 52
No. 1, pp. 7-19
Jorgensen M., Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, Sage Publications:
London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi.
Johannison, B. and Madsén, T. (1997). I entreprenörskapets tecken - en studie av skolning i förnyelse.
[In thesign of entrepreneurship - a study of education in renewal]. Stockholm: Närings- och
handelsdepartementet. in Hörnqvist M.L.and Leffler E., 2013 ” Principals' leadership in Nurturing an
Entrepreneurial Attitude”, ECER 2013, Creativity and Innovation in Educational Research
Katz, J.A., 2003. The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education
1876–1999. Journal of Business Venturing 18, 283–300.
57
Katz, J.A., 2007. Education and training in entrepreneurship. In: Baum, J.R., Frese, M., Baron, R.A.
(Eds.), The Psychology of Entrepreneurship. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 209–235.
Kirzner, I. (1973), Competition and Entrepreneurship, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Komulainen, K., Naskali, P., Korhonen, M. and Keskitalo-Foley, S. (2013), Internal Entrepreneurship
– a Trojan horse of the neoliberal governance of
education? Finnish pre- and in-service teachers’ implementation of and resistance
towards entrepreneurship education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, vol.9. no.1
Korhonen, M., Komulainen, K. and Räty, H. (2012). “Not Everyone is Cut Out to be the Entrepreneur
Type”: How Finnish School Teachers Construct the Meaning of Entrepreneurship Education and the
Related Abilities of the Pupils, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 56, No. 1,
February 2012, 1-19.
Kuratko, D.F., 2005. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and
challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 29, 577–597.
Kyrö, P. (1997). Yrittäjyyden muodot ja tehtävä ajan murroksessa. Jyväskylä Studies in Computer
Science. Economics and Statistics 38. University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä: Finland in Seikkula-Leino
J., Ruskovaara, E., Ikävalko, M., Mattila, J., Rytkölä, T. (2009), Teachers’ reflections about
entrepreneurship education.
Kyrö, P. & Carrier, C., 2005. The dynamics of learning entrepreneurship in a cross-cultural university
context. Entrepreneurship Education Series 2. Tampere: University of Tampere.
Leffer, E. (2009). “The many faces of entrepreneurship: A discursive battle for the school arena”,
European Education Research Journal, 8(1), 104-116.
Lin, G.H.C. (2008) in Ezeani, N.S., (2012), Application of entrepreneurship education: a panacea for
effective secondary schools management in Nigeria, Singaporean Journal Of business Economics,
and management studies Vol.1, no.5, pp. 27-45
58
Little, J.S.W. and Foss, K.A. (2008). Theories of human communication. Belmont: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Lämminpää and Kuopusjärvi, (2005), E-Learning Programs on Entrepreneurship in Higher Education
and Secondary Schools in Finland – two Different cases, Small Business Institute, Turku School of
Economic and Business Administration
Martinez, A.C., Levie, J., Kelley, D.J., Sæmundsson, R.J., Schøtt, T., 2010. Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor Special Report: A Global Perspective on Entrepreneurship, Education and Training. in
O’Connor A. (2013). “A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting
government and economic purposes, Journal of Business Venturing, No. 28, 2013. p. 546-563
Miller, K. (2005). Communication theories: Perspectives, processes, and contexts. (2nd eds.). Boston
MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Minniti, M & Bygrave, W., 2001, A Dynamic Model of Entrepreneurial Learning. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 25 (3):5-15.
Schumpeter, J.A., 1934. The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Shane, S., Venkataraman, S., 2000. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy
of Management Review 25, 217–226.
Seikku-Leijno, J. Ikavalko, M., Mattila, J., Ruskovaara, E., Rytkola, T., (2010), “Promoting
entreprenurship education: the role of the teacher?” Education+ Training, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp.117-127
Smith, J.A., Flowers, P. & Larkin, M., 2009, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis
Theory, Method and Research, SAGE Publications Ltd
Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M., Ijsselstein, A., 2010. The impact of entrepreneurship education on
entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic. Review 54, 442–454.
59
Ofsted, 2004,Learning to Be Enterprising; An Evaluation of Enterprising Learning at Key Stage 4,
HMI 2148, Report, 5 June, Ofsted, Manchester.
Peterman, N.E., Kennedy, J., 2003. Enterprise education: influencing students' perceptions of
entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 28 (2),
129–144.
Pfeiffer, S., Oberman-Peterka, S. & Jeger, M., 2008. Assessing entrepreneurship education programs
in Croatia higher education area. Erenet Profile, III (3), 25-35.
Pink, D. (2008). Tom Friedman on Education in the 'Flat World'. School Administrator, 65(2), 12-
16.Porter, Ketels, & Delgado, 2007. in Boyles, T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities
and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal
of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-55
Pinchot, G. (1985),Intrapreneuring: Why You Don’t Have to Leave the Organization to Become an
Entrepreneur, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Pittaway, L., Cope, J., 2007. Entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of the evidence.
International Small Business Journal 25, 479–510.
Remes, L. (2001) Yrittäjyyskasvatus pedagogisessa toimintatehtävässä [Entrepreneurship education
in pedagogical task]. Kasvatus [Education], 32(4), 368–381. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The
implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Remes, L. (2004) Yrittäjyys [Entrepreneurship]. In M.-L. Loukola (ed.), Aihekokonaisuudet
perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelmassa [The integrating themes in the curriculum of basic education]
(Jyväskylä, Finland: Gummerus), 89–90. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of
entrepreneurship education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal
curriculum studies, 2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
60
Ristimäki, K. (2003) Yrittäjyyskasvatus—enemmän metodi kuin sisältö [Entrepreneurship
education—more method than content]. In Taloudellinen tiedotustoimisto (ed.), Yrittäjyyskasvatus,
Yrittäjyyttä ja kasvatusta [Entrepreneurship education: Entrepreneurship and education]. (Saarijärvi,
Finland: Gummerus), 12–15. in Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Rogers, R. (2004). An Introduction to critical discourse analysis in education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkers, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., and O’Garro Joseph, G., (2005). Critical
Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature, Review of Educational Research, Vol.
75, No. 3, pp. 365 - 416
Ruskovaara, E., Pihkala, T., Rytkölä T. & Seikkula-Leino, J., (2011), Entrepreneurship in
Entrepreneurship Education– Practices in Finnish Basic and Secondary Education Level, Available
athttp://developmentcentre.lut.fi/files/muut/ICSB_2011_Tukholma.pdf accessed 12th April 2014
Seikkula-Leino, J., 2006. Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelmauudistus 2004-2006 ja
yrittäjyyskasvatuksen kehittäminen. Paikallinen opetussuunnitelmatyö yrittäjyyskasvatuksen
näkökulmasta [The basic school curriculum reform 2004—2006 and the development of
entrepreneurship education. Local curriculum work from the point of view of entrepreneurship
education.]. Helsinki: Opetusministeriön julkaisuja 22.
Scherer, R. F., Adams, J. F., & Wiebe, F. A. (1989). Role model performance effects on development
of entrepreneurial career preference. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13, 18. in Boyles, T.
(2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for
undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp. 41-
55
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). Opetussuunnitelmauudistus ja yrittäjyyskasvatuksen toteuttaminen
[Curriculum reform and entrepreneurship education], (Publication of Ministery of Education No. 28).
Helsinki
61
Seikkula-Leino J. (2011), The implementation of entrepreneurship
education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. Journal curriculum studies,
2011, Vol. 43, No. 1, 69–85
Sherman, L. (2000, Spring). The new principal. NW Education Magazine, 5 (3), 2.Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Development Laboratory.
Spurgin, K.M. (2006). The Sense-Making Approach and the Study of Personal
Information Management, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Available athttp://pim.ischool.washington.edu/pim06/files/spurgin-paper.pdf accessed 12th April 2014.
Teachernet (2008), “National guidance on enterprise education” in Jones, B. and Iredale, N., (2010),
Enterprise education as pedagogy, Education + Training, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 7-19
van Praag, C.M., Versloot, P.H., 2007. What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent
research. Small Business Economics 29, 351–382.
Wagner, T. (2008). The Global Achievement Gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new
survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books. in Boyles,
T. (2012). “21
st
century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model
for undergraduate entrepreneurship education”. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, vol. 15, pp.
41-55
Wallace Foundation, 2012, The School Principal as Leader: Guiding Schools to Better Teaching and
Learning, Available athttp://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/school-
leadership/effective-principal-leadership/Documents/The-School-Principal-as-Leader-Guiding-
Schools-to-Better-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf accessed 12th of April 2014
Weaver, K.M., Dickson, P.H., Solomon, G., 2006. Entrepreneurship and education: what is known
and what is not known about the links between education and entrepreneurial activity. In: Moutray,
Chad (Ed.), The Small Business Economy: A Report to the President. SBA Office of Advocacy,
Washington, pp. 113–156.
62
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking, London: Sage.
Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Institute for
Educational Leadership, 2008
Appendix I
Interview 1 - Full transcription (Teacher)
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
A: Going into what I was mentioning earlier, entrepreneurship is a very new concept to the leaders.
The ideas that we’re seeing in educational leadership is, the world is drastically changing on the
outside, so that means that schools have to drastically change. 10 years ago computer technology
studies were a big thing. Entrepreneurship itself is a very new concept to be implementing in the
schools. So the leaders are still trying to embrace that. They’re not against it. A good educational
leader’s not going to be against a lot of things. Although they’re not against it, it was better for me to
come onto the team and help translate some of the key terms and ideas coming out of the field of
entrepreneurship and what can be implemented into school. Like I said earlier, students don’t need to
know everything about entrepreneurship. There are reasons why we get a masters in it, and we deal
with that stuff. However, breaking entrepreneurship down to the key fundamentals can be difficult
sometimes, especially when the educational leaders don’t really have time to study a new field of
science. They’re busy doing their normal stuff. So that would be the first hurdle. That would also be
the first opportunity for educational leaders in the future, is to maybe take somebody on who can
translate and identify the core principles of entrepreneurship.
Q: And this is what you’re doing here?
Ai: Partly yeah, so coming on and teaching actual entrepreneurship is one thing. In the classroom the
principal has a very hands-off approach to what I would like to do in the classroom. They’ve had
some lessons planned out in the past, but it was very very super-practical: “this is how you start a
business.” For a lot of 14 year-olds, they don’t need to know how to go to the registration office, the
tax office. They’re more creative, they want to play. So getting a 13 and a 14-year old student to play
with entrepreneurship is becoming more of the idea then how to use it as a tool. They’ll learn how to
use it as a tool later in life.
Q: Is your role at this school unique, or do other schools employ people in a similar role?
Appendix I, 2
A: It’s new to this school. We’ve had business studies in the past. The vice-principal for example,
he’s a PE, Gym and a maths teacher. However, he’s done some of the business studies in the past.
Now with the business studies needing to be taught, plus this whole new requirement of schools
adjusting to entrepreneurship there was a need for a separate person to come into it. As a private
school, this school has the ability and the freedom to make decisions to do that. Whereas all the other
school are city operated, and they don’t have the flexibility to create a position like that. So the city
schools are going to need to super-innovative and entrepreneurial themselves in figuring out how to
put somebody into that spot. This school has had the opportunity to do it a different way. Is it going
to be better? I haven’t figured that out.
Q: What would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education entail?
A: I think speaking from the educational leadership point of view; you’d probably get an honest “I
don’t know”. For me if you’re going to ask the business studies teacher, then of course I have a big
grand idea that it should all be creative and we should all play and create and do all this fun stuff. So
you’re going to see two drastic views within this school. You’re going to have it from the educational
leader side and then from the business studies teacher. From the educational leader side, I don’t think
they have any idea what their ideal entrepreneurial curriculum is going to be. In fact, the teacher who
was just here taking some books, he was put on as the key person to create, in the high school, 100
new study spots, and those new students are going to focus on society and economical issues. So
they’ll be taking a lot of history classes, some economics classes, not so much entrepreneurship, but
more economics and business and general type… So our principal is the educational leader and he
has identified how critical it will be, that’s the stopping point. From that point, as a good leader I
think he has stepped back from that, and I think a good leader will let go when they need to let go,
and that’s what he has done. He’s said “Ok, this needs to happen”. It needs to happen because the
government is changing the curriculum. Obviously the job markets are changing from more corporate
to small businesses. Everything’s changing. Yes there’s a need to change. I think that needs to be
stressed that our principal and the educational leaders have recognized it needs to change. From that
good point, as a good leader they’ve said “Ok now we’re
Appendix I, 3
going to put this in the hands of experts”. So I think there’s a big holistic idea to bring
entrepreneurship into the school. But how, when, where, why is that going to happen? I think you’d
be very lucky to find an educational leader who knows that. Because the stuff that I’m studying, these
are the compulsory courses that we have to take, and then there are specialties. There’s one course in
finance. How does an educational leader do some finance stuff? And then there’s project
management. Everything else is how to be a leader. How to lead in a school. Very soft human science
type of thing, nothing very concrete. So this is the leading curriculum of the leading university in
Finland for educational leaders. That’s the current curriculum form. There’s absolutely no
entrepreneurship in it. So this is the curriculum that educational leaders in Finland are going to be
taught over the next 3-5 years. No entrepreneurship. They haven’t been taught entrepreneurship,
they’re not being taught entrepreneurship, maybe they will in the future. In 3 or 5 years, education
leaders that are being trained will start to be introduced to it. But, people of our young age are not
being exposed to it in educational leadership programs throughout Finland. So if you see a lack of
entrepreneurship from the educational leaders now. You’re going to at least see it for the next 5-10
years. This is why I think it would be super-important for our research to actually happen. And if
you’re coming from your research and a very entrepreneurial theory and stuff like that, I’m going to
have to push my research form the educational leadership. Somewhere in the middle if we start
comparing notes later on, I can give you all the notes from the educational leadership side, if you find
entrepreneurial stuff. But I think you and I will be pretty frustrated next year when we put all of this
together and we realize there’s big gaps, but that’s just a bigger opportunity for you and I to have a
cool thesis, because it’s going to be more fresh research into the field. Just the fact is, good luck for
the both of us in finding past information on this because it’s not happening in leadership, it hasn’t
happened in leadership and I don’t understand why there hasn’t been an interest in seeing how
entrepreneurial leaders have to be. What they do teach in the educational programs up here is that
leaders in schools are going to have to learn to collaborate. They’re going to learn how to bootstrap
their finances. They’re going to learn how to think outside the box. So it’s interesting that, if you look
at all these courses that are offered their educational leaders, they teach the principals in the
frameworks of effectuation theory. So they teach theories of entrepreneurship, but they don’t call it
entrepreneurship.
Appendix I, 4
Our principal’s title officially, as the leader of a private school, is a CEO. So this is a private school
and it has a board and it has it’s own finances and its set up as a company. The board elects our
principal as the principal, he’s not hired but the city, he’s not hired by the government. He’s hired by
a private board, just as a board in a company would elect a CEO. He’s been the CEO of the company.
He sits in the principal’s office, he doesn’t do very much with the teachers, he doesn’t do very much
with the planning of the school itself. He’ll get a lot of information from the vice-principals. He’ll sit
down with the teachers and he’ll sit down with the vice-principals, but only to listen to their ideas,
only to hear them and then sign off. He’s not really taking their ideas and then making them his own.
He’s basically dealing with the media on the outside. He’s dealing with the board, he’s dealing with
a lot of the outside stakeholders and the community. He’ll take what the outside community is saying,
bring it to the vice-principals, and then it becomes the job of the vice-principals and teachers to
distribute it throughout the school. So what you see is our principal being a like a pivot point. So
everything underneath him is translated down, although he lets that all be. And then on the outside
he’s taking everything from there and taking it. Although he’s not pushing so much into the outside,
he’ll tell the board, “hey we need some more money here,” or “the teachers need better coffee,” things
like that. But he’s not really going to change the world and he’s not going to really change the school,
that’s the job of the teachers and the vice-principal. His job is to be the glue. His job is to be the pivot
point where all of that can happen and all of this can happen freely. If he starts saying, “well, we’re
going to be doing this more, we’re going to be doing this more,” the whole school can go and do it.
So, since he doesn’t know entrepreneurship so well, it’s a lot better for him to back off, bring
somebody in that knows that a little bit more and that puts more pressure on me to build a program.
But, if I fail, I’ve failed because of knowledge and skills and all that. If he fails, it was because of the
lack of knowledge or the lack of skills, which is even worse. So that’s’ the next step. I think the next
is; an educational leader here has to know how to bootstrap, has to know how to collaborate, has to
know all those fundamental traits of a good entrepreneurial leader, they just don’t know that they’re
being entrepreneurial. They were never taught to be entrepreneurial, they were never told, “this is
entrepreneurship.” So if they’re not told what entrepreneurship is, how can they tell teachers or
students what entrepreneurship is? So that’s what you’re seeing today, and that’s what you’re going
Appendix I, 5
to see in the future. You’re still going to see a lot of this confusion and chaos in the next couple of
years.
Q: Maybe that’s the reason that there hasn’t been much research. Its not been taught as a concept to
principals
A: Could be. And Finland being one of the leading education research places… If that’s true, then
it’s interesting to see that the world leading education system has no emphasis whatsoever on
entrepreneurship and leaders at all. And there’s one finance course and one project management
course. Everything else is…
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education contributes to the broader educational system?
A: I think you would hear from leaders that entrepreneurship is something that could and should
affect everything else. So if it’s your biology students, working with the wood and metal class (last
year they were building birdhouses and they could sell those), so given the idea that education leaders
should and will go to this broader definition of entrepreneurship about collaboration and
bootstrapping and have a bigger definition on entrepreneurship, I think they’ll start to see that every
subject within the school, if it’s the language department or the science department. All those
departments will see that entrepreneurship can be utilized in all of them. Entrepreneurship right now
is very limited to the business studies thing, and I’m the only business studies teacher. So when we
go into meetings and department meetings I’m always with the history and civics people, so business
is somehow tied into civics, society thing. So for me to talk about entrepreneurship, when I talk about
it, my voice and ideas only reach a certain amount of teachers, particularly around me. If I want to go
and talk to somebody in the language department about entrepreneurship I have to set up a very
specific meeting with that person or with that department, and they have to take time out of their
schedule to specifically listen to me. So entrepreneurship is not being distributed throughout the
school very evenly at all.
Q: The next question is about why entrepreneurship education is important for students, but I think
you’ve probably already answered that.
A: Yeah, well I mean, just to emphasize a couple of key things, just to put it on the record, obviously
coming from an entrepreneurial background I don’t think its very critical for students to
Appendix I, 6
learn how to start a company. I think that’s probably the least of their worries. When you talk to other
educational leaders here I think their naivety towards entrepreneurship will limit their response to that
question. I think you will get a lot of responses from educational leaders saying, well, “it’s important
because corporations are changing to small/medium sized companies and we’re going to need to
better out students to work in those environments.” I think you’re going to get a lot of that answer,
which is a true thing. Yes, to better equip students for tomorrow’s changing work environment we do
need to teach them more entrepreneurial traits than how to work in a corporation. You definitely hear
the importance of teaching students to be critical thinkers, so I think you’re going to hear that from
everybody in the leadership position. Taking it a little deeper as a entrepreneur, those are great things
to teach kids, but those are the realities, they’re going to go out and change jobs a lot. We can just tell
them to be prepared about that. Taking it a little deeper, I think if you’re teaching students how to
collaborate, how to bootstrap instead of teaching students “hey, this is what’s going to happen” now
we can teach them the “how”. So a lot of education has always been emphasized on “what” and now
we’re changing to the “how”, and entrepreneurship is going to be a critical tool that leaders can use
to teach that “how”.
Q: How can teachers benefit from entrepreneurship education?
A: Well, teaching is the best way to learn, they say, so if somebody’s teaching entrepreneurship
they’re going to be able to learn the different characteristics or traits of entrepreneurship and one of
the big ones that teachers and leaders would find is the idea of collaboration. Teachers here I think
by the end of the school year; kind of April/May, they’re so tired and they’re so focused on what their
projects have been through the year. At the beginning of the year you see a lot of teachers talking to
other teachers and being very collaborative and, the language department wants to do something with
the science department, but come April or May they want to do their own thing, they just want the
school year to finish and just be done with it. So I think it would be really cool for teachers to learn
some aspects of entrepreneurship like collaborating, and once they find those traits within it they’ll
probably see their job ease up a little bit. So not only will they be able to teach students better, but
their actual work environment. And the spirit around here would be a lot better too. Practically, the
learning outcomes would be great for the students (yay! We should all celebrate
Appendix I, 7
that). On the other hand being practical too, another positive benefit for teachers in entrepreneurship
is that they’ll probably better their environment, and happier teachers equals better outcomes.
Q: Another question, which I think you’ve also already mentioned concerns how entrepreneurship
education is implemented here in the curriculum.
A: Very slowly. Very slowly, with a lot of difficulties. When you have a leader trying to implement
something they’re not an expert on you’re going to have a lot of difficulties. And I think one of the
only real ways to have it implemented is doing what our principal is doing; a hands off approach.
Bring in people that are motivated, bring in people that have the knowledge and just let it be. So if
you’re trying to implement ideas and you only know half of the ideas then you’re implementing half
of the whole concept to students and then everybody loses. So nationwide it’s probably being
implemented on a very slow process. There’s a lot of room and risk that its going to be implemented
wrong. So there’s no cookie cutter way of doing it, and you’re going to see a lot of trial and error,
with a lot of error.
Q: Do you think its common in a lot of schools that it’s slow?
A: Yeah. An educational leader today is so busy, and just to run a normal school year takes 99% of
your energy. So, when there’s big national curriculum changes then in order to implement that, it’s
going to be a lot of stress and a lot of work.
Q: So that’s why they hire someone to…?
A: Yeah. Our principal is a young dynamic guy, he’s one of the youngest principals in Finland, and
being in a private school he has a lot of flexibility and can be very open to ideas. So I think he was
given the best scenario for that, even with the openness and the flexibility, he’s completely backed
off, which I think is a pretty good characteristic of a leader.
Q: But do you think there is less flexibility in the city schools?
A: Well financially they do. Financially they’re limited. Everything that they do they need to create
reports and write requests, so they need to see the financial implications of doing that and then they’ll
get money after spending it. Whereas in the beginning here, this school gets their pot of gold at the
beginning of the school year and then it can be used as our principal sees fit. So if I go up to
Appendix I, 8
him and say, “hey, we need to be doing this in the entrepreneurship department, that means we need
money for this,” he can at that very moment say yes or no. And as a city school, if I had an idea
halfway through the school year to implement something I would have to wait until the next school
year. So you’ll see a lot of time delays too, so not only are they going to have financial restrictions in
the city schools, that’s going to lead to time constraints, so if they do implement something it’s
probably going to be implemented late.
Q: How many private schools are there in Finland generally? Do you have any idea?
A: I think it’s probably less than 20.
Q: In the whole of Finland?
A: Yeah. Well, the Finnish education system went really far away from private schools in the 90’s.
They basically tried to bankrupt all of them, and the ones that survived were the ones that thought
entrepreneurially then. This school, the leader at that point had to find out what was going on in the
current world to draw people in, and in the early 90s, having a bilingual international school was kind
of exotic and was the next cool thing. So this school changed in the early 90s towards the
internationalism, and that has been it saving phase. The school was basically bankrupt, but now it’s
doing very well. So the private schools that do exist, exist because they have found a niche. And I
think a lot of the private schools that survived are more like religious based. So when you get outside
of Helsinki and into the countryside you have a little bit more of farming type people who are very
religious. They want to send their students to more of a religious type school. There’s a couple out
there.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be implemented successfully in both the short-
term and long-term?
A: Yeah, that’s a super-critical question because you have the short and the long-term thing. Going
back to; what’s the current situation? The current situation is that educational leaders today are not
being taught entrepreneurship whatsoever. More than likely they never took it in their undergraduate
program and they’re definitely not taking it in their masters program. So seeing that these are going
to be the leaders in 5-10 years, and I would say that’s the long run, even then, you’re going to have
leaders who don’t know the basic concepts of entrepreneurship. So from there
Appendix I, 9
it’s all speculation. Given the fact that neither you or I can really find a lot historical context with it
is horrible news, given that the current curriculum in universities for leaders is not teaching it, that’s
even worse news. So I think that there’s a huge understanding at the national level that
entrepreneurship needs to be taught. That’s why it’s in the next curriculum. However, it’s not coming
from the bottom up. The stress on schools and education to be more entrepreneurial is definitely
coming from the top down. So you’re going to have a lot of leaders in the future (in the next 5-10
years) being super-reactive to entrepreneurship. You’re not going to find a lot of proactive leaders.
So I would say that the current situation is horrible for entrepreneurship and leaders. Maybe not
horrible, but scary if you think that the teachers are not being prepared whatsoever, or the leaders
aren’t being prepared whatsoever. So it’s bad and going to get worse.
Q: Why is there no focus on entrepreneurship for future leaders in in universities?
A: Well the universities are very reactive also. I think, when they build their curriculum they see
what’s working in education and they build a program to fit what’s currently working. So it’s very
reactive to what’s successful out there now. Again, it’s not being very proactive in deciding what’s
next. You would think in an education program, and especially an educational leadership program
would be more proactive. Sadly it’s not. That means the leaders of the schools are not going to be
very proactive entrepreneurially in the future either. You might want to rephrase your question there
cause maybe I’ve got a better answer to that. I don’t think that really answered your question so well.
The thing is, nobody told the leaders that this is a good thing to do. I think that entrepreneurship has
always been one of those things where you can go off and do it if you’re an entrepreneur. You don’t
realize that everybody’s an entrepreneur. Everybody, at some point during their day, exhibits or
utilizes some entrepreneurial trait. At some point. Some people do it more than others. Some people
make money doing it. Some people don’t, they’re nurses or doctors and they make their money doing
that, but they utilize entrepreneurial traits in frameworks, but they were never told to do it. So that’s
the worst thing is, maybe one of the objectives of our research is to start pushing universities to teach
entrepreneurship outside of the business world. You know, it’s good for us to learn all of those great
ideas, but you go talk to a hospital leader; a hospital leader is going to need to be entrepreneurial.
Appendix I, 10
Q: And who’s responsible for implementing entrepreneurship education for future leaders?
A: Every program has a program director, and that program director is just as human as you or I. The
program director knows those students. The program director should know everybody in the program
to some extent. So it’s not like each department is this big bureaucratic system. The departments and
the universities are small, inclusive. They just rebuilt this curriculum last year and it was basically
the secretary, the program director and one other person. So in that meeting with those three people,
it should have just been brought to their attention that entrepreneurship is good. And they’re very
easy to approach people. They might seem like “oh, they’re program directors” or “they’re school
leaders” and yes they’re very busy and things like that. However, a good program director and a good
school leader should always be open to receiving information about what’s out there. And our
principal is an open guy and I think most of them are open about it, they just have never been taught
it. And they’re so busy in their other day to day things, you come to them with a great idea and they
say “yeah you’re right, that is a good idea. Now how do we do that? Can you do that and I back off
of it?” Then they’re taking the idea and trying to implement it to the best of their ability. So I think if
you go and you talk to an educational leader and you show them how important entrepreneurship is,
you’re not going to get anything like “no this is a bad idea, we don’t have enough time or money to
do this”, no, it’s one of those great ideas that I think all of them would realize how great it is, it’s just
they’ve never been exposed to it. So if they’ve never been exposed to it how are they supposed to
know how good it is?
Q: What do you think should be done so those program directors so that they can realize
entrepreneurship can be a part of the curriculum?
A: I could approach it saying “ok this is my job: coaching other leaders how to be entrepreneurial”.
So that’s one way, we could do it as a job. You could also, I was thinking about contacting the EU
commission or the US embassy and seeing if they would fund my research and then, for example if
the EU education commission funds my project then obviously they would have those findings at
their ability to distribute. So I think there’s a lot of different possibilities of how to get the word out.
I don’t know what the best method is, I just think that the word needs to be spread somehow. Maybe
do like a TV commercial…
Appendix I, 11
And they would be open to like… I don’t think you’re going to get a really negative response from
education… You’ll get a realistic thing, them saying “hey, I’m a little busy for this” and stuff, but
none of them are going to look at this and go “this is a waste of time. This is just a bad idea and I
don’t know why you’re doing it”. No they’re going to say, “this is really good, however I wish I had
more time to do this”. So the market is there, the niche is there, the need, the want from educational
leaders is there. It’s just not being put out there to them. So when you think about the next step or two
in your own research, I would suggest that you start looking at more of the future; what is the future
of entrepreneurship and leaders going to be? Obviously by looking into the literature review I think
we can both agree that it’s been horrible. I think with the responses you’re going to get now, and then
also looking at the curriculum for a masters program in leadership, the current situation is going to
be identified as horrible. So there’s a bad past and a horrible, and I think our research would be best
in the future. Think “ok what can we do as researchers? What can we do to suggest that
entrepreneurship needs to be implemented? Or how can it be implemented?” Like, maybe if you’re
research came from “what aspects of entrepreneurship need to be implemented?” and then I came at
it from the “how” because I know how educational leaders work, I know their schedule, I know what’s
being told to them. You’re very current and you’re very knowledgeable of the current day
entrepreneurial frameworks. For me effectuation was like the cool thing about the framework. It still
is but there’s other frameworks in entrepreneurship and I think if you’re job was to break down the
different traits and the different facets and what should be in education and then there was like a “how
can it be implemented?” that might be the future. So like, “how” and “what” of entrepreneurship
should be implemented in the future would be the first step. It just needs to be marketed. The traits of
entrepreneurship just need to be communicated. They’re not being communicated. And with that
you’ll be 50/50 with finding a leader who’s open to it, or who doesn’t know anything and backs away
from it. And then the leaders that you do find are open to it, then you have a 50/50 chance of it being
implemented correctly. So with the current situation you’ve a very low percentage or a very low
opportunity that entrepreneurship will be implemented somewhat ok. Like, maybe 20% and the other
80% is either it’s not going to be implemented or it’s going be implemented horribly, and it’s going
to be all reactive and not proactive. I think if you look at it, the whole situation like that, I think it’s
very optimistic for you and I, because for us, we now see that there is a niche, there’s an opening in
the studies.
Appendix II
Interview 2 - Full transcription (Researcher)
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
A: Entrepreneurship education is such a broad area. For me it’s mainly about how people can learn
to behave in an entrepreneurial way and adopt that kind of behaviour in any context and as a teacher,
when I look at entrepreneurship education my main goal is to enhance that kind of behaviour and
mindset in all my students; and the second target is to enhance their competencies in studying
business, but that’s not the primary goal for me. Of course, when you look at entrepreneurship
education, one area, which is not often discussed, is also how to help people who are entrepreneurs.
How to help them to learn more and how to help them to enhance their skills and competencies to
enlarge their business.
Q: How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship look like?
A: I would say that the main issue that always must be kept in mind is to put student first. By that I
mean that, in many cases when we talk about entrepreneurship education, we take it for granted and
there are a lot of discussions that we need more companies because of the economy and (I don’t think
that) when we look at education we always have to be very clear about goals, and also about values.
So educational consciousness is very important. As a teacher you have to be very aware that you are
not pushing students in the wrong direction. They have to have the freedom to choose their own path.
But, if we are discussing how as a teacher we can enhance entrepreneurial behavior, I would say that
learning should be student-centered, it should be rooted in action, but also in theory. So there must
be a mix of theories and action. Also, learning should take place in teams and should be experiential;
they should learn from their own experiences and mistakes. Also confusion is good, it’s part of the
process. It has to be fun, there has to be a passion for learning, and it has to be outside school premises,
as you can’t really learn how to be an entrepreneur while you are sitting in a classroom. And so you
have to get in a world with a different kind of people and you have to learn ways to get to know your
own strengths and also your own shortcomings. It’s not easy, but if you keep in mind the things which
are normally attached to entrepreneurs: freedom, risk-taking, the skill to see opportunities and handle
your opportunities, then basically that’s it.
Appendix II, 2
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
A: Right now we are in a position where entrepreneurship education is in a minor role. Although in
Finland entrepreneurship education has been in the curriculum since 1994/95 so almost 20 years, but
we still have a lot of work to do because entrepreneurship education, from my point of view, it would
demand that we change the whole structure. We could get rid of timetables in the present form and
also it would need teachers to do teamwork and to collaborate with businesses and other external
organisations and people. I would disrupt the whole thing.
Q: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
A: I think its important to know that in high schools, the whole learning is focused on exams that are
taken at the end of term, but I’m not so sure if anyone should spend 34 years in school only for a
score and only for learning things in theory as I think that learning is about learning for life. In that
way there are many ways to learn, so I don’t think that just sitting in a classroom and making memos
is the only way to learn and I don’t think it’s a very good way to learn in modern society.
Q: Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
A: When teachers understand the true meaning on entrepreneurship education and see that there are
a lot of different aims and a lot of different ways they can teach in an entrepreneurial way, it really
enhances their competencies so its concerned about professional growth. When they do teamwork it
gives them more freedom to arrange the learning. Also when they contact other people it enlarges
their own competencies and their skills and gives them new ideas, and they also, which I find very
interesting, is that somehow they learn to respect their own work in a new light. So being a teacher is
not just something that has to be done; it really has a meaning. And my research showed that when
teachers realized that, it was so enlightening.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in the short and
long-term?
Appendix II, 3
A: I don’t think there are any easy answers to that. I think that in the short-term, teachers should
attend further training more eagerly, because there is some training available. There should be more,
but they are there and most of them are really good, so that’s in the short-term. And also there is
information available on the internet for example, so they just need to sit down and talk with their
colleagues and start to experiment in the short-term. In the long run, I think that support from the
management, from the principals, is needed because in many cases teachers say that they don’t feel
that they are supported or appreciated by their colleagues or by their principals. So it is important to
get feedback and support from the management.
Q: Who do you think plays the main role in the implementation of entrepreneurship education in high
school?
A: Personally I think it should start from the teachers themselves, because right now we are being
given pressure and challenges from the government and it leaves nothing basically. Also it’s
important to have feedback and support from the management, but in the end it’s always the teacher
who does or doesn’t implement new things, in my opinion. You don’t really need guidance or
permission from the management because nobody is saying how you can deliver a certain course, you
must start doing things your own way.
Q: What do you think is the role of principals in entrepreneurship education?
A: I would say that when a teacher tries new things and then gets some results, he or she can go the
principal and say, “ok, I’m going to try that,” and then say, “ok, it went this way or that way,” and if
he or she sees that it was a good experiment, then he can ask, “how can I enhance this? How can I
broaden this? How can I take more colleagues into that approach and how can we take it further?” So
that’s the role of the management to then make it happen in the future.
Q: In terms of principals and management, how do you know if they are able to make the right
judgment if a teacher wants to implement something new? Particularly if a principal does not like the
idea of implementing something new. Is this a challenge?
A: That is, because I think that a principal should also know what entrepreneurship is about, because
right now, I am afraid that many of them think that entrepreneurship, especially in high school, is
something to do with studying business and that is not the main idea of a high school. So
Appendix II, 4
it is understandable, but if the principals can see and get more information and experience about
entrepreneurship education, maybe they can then see it in a new light. But, I’m afraid I have no answer
on how to fix it, except maybe sending principals to training.
Q: So you think perhaps creating a training program for principals would be effective?
A: I mean the governmental educational office, is giving funding for this kind of training. For
instance, myself and my colleague tried to get it last year. We failed, but we are going to apply for
training, entrepreneurship education training for principals again in January, because I feel that its so
important to have this kind of training.
Q: Who do you think would be the right people to create this training program for principals?
A: I don’t think there’s any specific group, but whoever it is, that person or group has to understand
the whole picture of entrepreneurship education, because otherwise, it will be too narrow. It can’t
focus just on business or education, it has to be taken the whole picture into consideration.
Q: For example, if you were to get this funding, what would the ideal training program for principals
look like or consist of?
A: It would be more like coaching. What I would do, I would first explain what entrepreneurship
education is about, what the different aims are, but then I would like to get the principals to open
projects in their own schools. The one thing that is missing right now in entrepreneurship education
is strategies for schools. I think that is the next step. You know, original entrepreneurship education
strategies have been made and some of them are in existence right now. Helsinki launched
entrepreneurship education strategy; I also know that in other parts of Finland similar approaches are
going on, but at school level there is still a lack of strategies and programs related to what it means
in practice, what is entrepreneurship education in our schools.
Q: Do you think principals would be open to this? And how would you get them interested in
participating?
A: That’s a challenge. Some of them would be interested, but of course there are many principals
who hear the word entrepreneurship and say, “that’s not for me.” But, what I have seen with the
Appendix II, 5
teachers is that when you have the energy to start and carry on with the approach of some programs,
then word will go out.
Q: Would it be a good idea to name entrepreneurship in another way? Would this help dispel certain
assumptions made by people?
A: That’s something I hear a lot. Personally I think its better to talk about entrepreneurship as long as
we are open with what we mean by it, that it is not just venture creation. I understand that problem,
but I am a little bit worried that if we start discussing something else and trying to avoid the term
entrepreneurship then I don’t think we end up with what we want to end up with. That’s my theory.
A: I’m not talking about entrepreneurship education as such. I try to interlink it with broader subjects
like ethical education or responsible education or good school environment and in that way, open up
what entrepreneurship education could be.
Q: Why do you think there hasn’t been any entrepreneurship education research focused on
principals?
A: I think that is the next phase. If you look a few years back, there wasn’t any research on teachers
either, but there was a lot of research on entrepreneurial learning. Then it started by defining what is
entrepreneurial learning, and then it moved on to the issues of entrepreneurial pedagogy, but no one
defined what is entrepreneurial pedagogy, it was taken as granted. Then if you look at the newest
research, there is a trend that is saying, “Ok, next we have to look at how teachers perceive
entrepreneurship education,” so some research has already been done on that level and the next level
I guarantee is principals. But I think that one of the reasons why this kind of research is missing is
that we are so focused on the learning aspect and we are not interested in teaching and certainly in
Finland, we already talk about education. Education is as challenging a word as entrepreneurship,
because some people think that when you educate something, you try to put someone else to a certain
form, and it is more neutral to talk about learning, rather than education or teaching and talk about
management then, because if you look at school management you end up dealing with obstructions
and timetables and nobody knows how to fix it.
Appendix II, 6
Q: There is still very little entrepreneurship in the high school curriculum. Who do you think is
responsible for that and what are the steps to improve this?
A: Before becoming principals in high schools or primary schools you have to take a course. It’s an
administrational course for principals, so I would like to see entrepreneurship education become a
theme within that program. That would help. But in any way, when we talk about management and
leadership studies, also needing entrepreneurial behaviour in management in general would be a huge
step forward. But I’m not sure if management studies see it that way. I think there shouldn’t be any
difference if you are leading and managing school organisations than any other organization because
they have to be also better coaching in school organisations. In general I would say that enhancing
entrepreneurial behaviour in any organization is needed.
Q: Why was previous application for funding rejected?
A: I don’t know. I’m doing this through my own company and it’s a new company, so maybe there
was some lack of trust or something. Let’s see how we manage this time. It’s not easy to get funding
for principal programs. I don’t know why.
Q: Generally it seems to be easy to get funding, especially for things like tech startups
A: Yes. But the government are funding further training for teachers and further training for
principals. There are a lot of applications for that kind of thing. It’s a lot of competition. So its not
easy to get funding, even if you have a good idea how you would like to carry out your new program
and you have to argue why you are doing it and how you are doing it.
Q: So many other people are also concerned with this issue?
A: Yes, but I think that, because entrepreneurship education, as you have mentioned in your thesis,
its just one of the themes which is going on in the educational world. There is e-learning, ensuring a
safe learning environment etc. There are many competing teams so to speak, and if you don’t see
what entrepreneurship education can be means to any of those, but if you can’t see then yeah… And
sometimes even the people who are giving the funding don’t see it in the same way.
Appendix II, 7
Q: So it seems that generally, there is a lack of understanding of this issue
A: Its quite funny because there is a clear definition coming from the EU and also we have had this
discussion going on for 20 years and still there is a lot to do.
Appendix III
Interview 3 - Full transcription (Entrepreneurship Education Expert)
Q: My thesis is about a principal’s role in entrepreneurship education in high schools. First I will ask
you some questions about your own views on entrepreneurship education and then I’ll ask some
questions about your views on the role of principals within entrepreneurship education.
A: Have you seen the figure… (EnTree figure) We have created a model. This is the idea of what I
think about entrepreneurship education. So it is a very holistic…
Q: What does entrepreneurship education mean for you?
A: So if you read this article through, you can understand this very holistic model. It concerns the
whole life of a human being and also, you know… we have these two different kinds of… ways of
thinking/approaches about entrepreneurship. So we have this American approach, and then we have
the continental approach. I would like to say that we have also got a Nordic approach, which is quite
close to the continental approach. And, you know the difference… There are the questions “why”,
“why are we educating?” and “why do we think entrepreneurship is important?” That is the part we
have in this model, in this continental approach, but not in this American approach. So this is more
methodology and teaching methods, and this is a more holistic/philosophical approach. So in this
figure: “entree model” I would like to put some stress on this culture. Entrepreneurship is also culture
related, and it depends on where you are what the context or the culture may be. Where you are living
or where you are working. So you know this ontology, epistemology and axiology is a very important
route of this figure because there are values and… what is valuable?... what kind of person is valuable.
You know the picture of a man and a picture of the world, and then you also… what kind of
knowledge is important, and where is it derived from? So for me, this axiology is most important.
And also you see this educational consciousness, it goes through the whole tree, and so you are aware
why you are educating people towards entrepreneurship. So I would like to say that this is a
sustainable way to educate. Also, if you manage to make it so that the people understand what this is
all about. I believe that that their life will be sustainable.
Q: So your ideal type of entrepreneurship education would be based on EnTree?
A: Yes. I have been thinking this for 10 years, and I am very happy that we have managed to figure
out this model because it’s not so easy. And it’s also very important that you can use different kinds
Appendix III, 2
of orientations; these pedagogical orientations. But you always have to have some elements of the
essence of entrepreneurship. And there are just examples. I can give you a list of 30 or 40 different
attributes, but maybe these are the most important. Also to be able to live in security and certainty.
These elements are very important. There are many others also, as well as here. These are the main
theoretical approaches, but of course you can use many others. So we don’t say that in
entrepreneurship education, you should just, for instance, experimental… you know… but you can
use whatever you have in your toolbox. If you combine these two… so… for instance in you use
behaviourism you have to have something about entrepreneurship, the essence of entrepreneurship
combined with this way of approach. And then you have to know what the aim of this education is.
Q: How do you think entrepreneurship education contributes to the broader educational system?
A: You know, there has been a lot of misunderstanding between general education and
entrepreneurship education because… I am an educator, and I think that… most of the educators think
that… there’s something that comes from economics, and its some kind of political, you know, hidden
agenda. They are afraid of it, but I think this model will help them to understand that our aim is also
to educate towards a good life. Not because we want to support some policies… you know…
Q: Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
A: It’s very important. Because it’s a way of life; a way of thinking. And wherever you are, you need
this attitude. So it’s not only thinking about business. Of course if you have this entrepreneurial
mindset, you act as an entrepreneur or you act in and entrepreneurial way, wherever you are. And it’s
not only for running a business of your own, it’s very large…
Q: What about teachers? How can teachers benefit from entrepreneurship education?
A: I think they key point is that; people who adopt this idea of entrepreneurial behaviour. For instance,
students: they are more active, they are more responsible for how they go on with their studies, and
also they are very alert to what is happening around them and they want to take the benefits from
these opportunities that they see around them. So they are more active and they are more responsible
for their own lives.
Appendix III, 3
Q: How can entrepreneurship education be implemented in high schools in the long and short-term?
A: The problem at the moment is that the teachers don’t adopt this model. If the teachers and all the
staff who are responsible adopt this model, and they themselves are entrepreneurial, in how they act
and how they handle people. Young people; they are like… how do I say… a virgin mind. If teachers
are giving this example when they behave like this, the young people can learn.
Q: So you think that teachers play the main role?
A: Yes! Exactly.
Q: What do you think is the role of high-school principals?
A: Of course they also have a very important role. I think that the whole system should be established
on the base like this And of course teachers and professors can use their own personality as they want,
but this idea should be… this is the key point that, that they understand that, not just giving lessons…
Q: Do you think that principals should also understand this idea, to help teachers?
A: Yes, exactly. Because of course, the principals, they have their power over the whole system.
Q: Do you think there is a sufficient understanding of entrepreneurship education among principals?
A: No, they’re very narrow, especially in these business schools. They have this idea that
entrepreneurship education is how to educate the people to establish a business of their own and how
to establish a start-up. You know. It’s very very narrow, so we have a lot of work to do to understand
this. But all the time I get good feedback. A teacher from Finnish university called me and was asking
about this model. They want to adopt this model.
Q: How do you think principals should be coached? Also using this model?
A: Yes they should be. At the moment I’m having systems for principals. They come from primary
schools and upper secondary schools. I also have this university of applied sciences, some principals
of this level, but not scientific universities.
Appendix III, 4
Q: Generally, who would be the right people to educate and coach high-school principals?
I think for instance, in Etu-Töölö high school, principals have studied these models for as long as I
have been teaching this. They have always sent teacher to courses every year. And at the moment
more than 20 teachers have been trained to this model and they are using it. It takes years but I think
in 10 years we will come a long way.
Q: There is some research related to teachers but hardly any related to principals. Why do you think
there is no focus on principals when we speak about entrepreneurship?
A: I don’t know. Good question. I don’t have an answer, but maybe you can raise this question.
Appendix IV
Principals - email interview 1
1. What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
It means that the students learn how to proceed when they want to establish a company or get
somebody interested in ideas they have or inventions they have made. They need help with
bureaucracy and legal and financial matters.
2. How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
Somebody experienced would encourage them and guide them through the procedure. Definitely
NOT a regular teacher.
3. How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
It would make studying more motivating when you see what you are heading towards and why you
have to study.
4. Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
Definitely. The school is too closed and too dependent on teachers who might know the theory but
not the practice.
5. Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
I am more interested in teaching the students than the present teachers. There is a need for the school
to open up and invite other actors from “real” life outside the school.
6. Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching? And
how?
We actually have for many years offered a course called “Innovation”. It has been very popular and
we have a teacher who has a company of her own. She has an MSc and MBA education.
7. How you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term? New teachers should be instructed before they leave university. Thus we would
get the thought rooted in the school environment.
Appendix IV, 2
Principals - email interview 2
1. What does entrepreneurship education mean to you?
Equipping young people with a skills and aptitudes necessary to succeed in establishing their own
businesses.
2. How would your ideal type of entrepreneurship education look like?
This question lies outside my remit. We have a Young Entrepreneurship scheme operating within the
school, open to IB students. We offer IB Business Management.
3. How do you think entrepreneurship education actually contributes to the broader educational
system?
Certainly education must be relevant to the challenges of the twenty-first century job market
4. Do you think entrepreneurship education is important for students? And why?
As above.
5. Do you think teachers can benefit from entrepreneurship education? And how?
The Business Management (SL/HL) option in our school permits many students to gain a broad
familiarity with marketing, finance, management skills, etc. These are life skills, in many ways.
Teachers of other subjects are less directly involved.
6. Do you see entrepreneurship education implemented in your school curriculum and teaching? And
how?
As above - BM=150 hours at SL and 240 hours at HL.
7. How you think entrepreneurship education can be successfully implemented in practice, in the
short and long-term?
Why not? We have a broad mission to provide a solid educational experience. Economics is
compulsory for all. Thereafter students with an interest can opt for Business Management. A
surprisingly large number of graduates go on to study business in higher education. Whether they
become entrepreneurs or employees is of less significance.
doc_936263098.pdf