A contemporary approach to entrepreneurship education

Entrepreneurial education is the process of providing individuals with the ability to recognise commercial opportunities and the insight, self-esteem, knowledge and skills to act on them. It includes instruction in opportunity recognition, commercialising a concept, marshalling resources in the face of risk, and initiating a business venture. It also includes instruction in traditional business disciplines such as management, marketing, information systems and finance. The purpose of this paper is to describe the design and introduction of a new program in Entrepreneurship at the University of Tasmania. Within this program the process and responsibility of learning has largely been reversed through the process of student centred learning. This method of learning represents a challenging departure from the traditional mainstream teaching practices. In considering the benefits achievable from this teaching method, this paper also considers the difficulties in transferring increased responsibility to students to manage their futures.

Constructive alignment: A journey for new eyes

The needs of students engaged in enterprise education programs are of ever growing importance. This paper considers the pedagogical challenges that confront the designers of such-programs. It is argued that it is the designer's mindset that will most likely determine the program's outcomes. That, regardless of where such programs reside, their development should be guided by a learner-centred approach. The recently developed hic et nunc framework, provides an example of such a student-centred approach. The process through which student learning outcomes occur is argued to be essentially Darwinian in nature. Taking into account both knowledge and skills, it is also argued that assessment of desirable learning outcomes should occur in visible interaction spaces. That the failure to eliminate invisible interaction spaces from such programs is an invitation for criticism from those who favour a more traditional lecturer-centred approach to teaching and learning.

STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration

This commentary was stimulated by Yeping Li's first editorial (2014) citing one of the journal's goals as adding multidisciplinary perspectives to current studies of single disciplines comprising the focus of other journals. In this commentary I argue for a greater focus on STEM integration, with a more equitable representation of the four disciplines in studies purporting to advance STEM learning. The STEM acronym is often used in reference to just one of the disciplines, commonly science. Although the integration of STEM disciplines is increasingly advocated in the literature, studies that address multiple disciplines appear scant with mixed findings and inadequate directions for STEM advancement. Perspectives on how discipline integration can be achieved are varied, with reference to multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches adding to the debates. Such approaches include core concepts and skills being taught separately in each discipline but housed within a common theme; the introduction of closely linked concepts and skills from two or more disciplines with the aim of deepening understanding and skills; and the adoption of a transdisciplinary approach, where knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines are applied to real-world problems and projects with the aim of shaping the total learning experience. Research that targets STEM integration is an embryonic field with respect to advancing curriculum development and various student outcomes. For example, we still need more studies on how student learning outcomes arise not only from different forms of STEM integration but also from the particular disciplines that are being integrated. As noted in this commentary, it seems that mathematics learning benefits less than the other disciplines in programs claiming to focus on STEM integration. Factors contributing to this finding warrant more scrutiny. Likewise, learning outcomes for engineering within K-12 integrated STEM programs appear under-researched. This commentary advocates a greater focus on these two disciplines within integrated STEM education research. Drawing on recommendations from the literature, suggestions are offered for addressing the challenges of integrating multiple disciplines faced by the STEM community.

Student satisfaction with models of field placement supervision

Field placements provide social work students with the opportunity to integrate their classroom learning with the knowledge and skills used in various human service programs. The supervision structure that has most commonly been used is the intensive one-to-one, clinical teaching model. However, this model is being challenged by significant changes in educational and industry sectors, which have led to an increased use of alternative fieldwork structures and supervision arrangements, including task supervision, group supervision, external supervision, and shared supervisory arrangements. This study focuses on identifying models of supervision and student satisfaction with their learning experiences and the supervision received on placement. The study analysed responses to a questionnaire administered to 263 undergraduate social work students enrolled in three different campuses in Australia after they had completed their first or final field placement. The study identified that just over half of the placements used the traditional one student to one social work supervisor model. A number of “emerging” models were also identified, where two or more social workers were involved in the professional supervision of the student. High levels of dissatisfaction were reported by those students who received external social work supervision. Results suggest that students are more satisfied across all aspects of the placement where there is a strong on-site social work presence.

Student satisfaction with models of field placement supervision

Field placements provide social work students with the opportunity to integrate their classroom learning with the knowledge and skills used in various human service programs. The supervision structure that has most commonly been used is the intensive one-to-one, clinical teaching model. However, this model is being challenged by significant changes in educational and industry sectors, which have led to an increased use of alternative fieldwork structures and supervision arrangements, including task supervision, group supervision, external supervision, and shared supervisory arrangements. This study focuses on identifying models of supervision and student satisfaction with their learning experiences and the supervision received on placement. The study analysed responses to a questionnaire administered to 263 undergraduate social work students enrolled in three different campuses in Australia after they had completed their first or final field placement. The study identified that just over half of the placements used the traditional one student to one social work supervisor model. A number of “emerging” models were also identified, where two or more social workers were involved in the professional supervision of the student. High levels of dissatisfaction were reported by those students who received external social work supervision. Results suggest that students are more satisfied across all aspects of the placement where there is a strong on-site social work presence.