子謙創(chuàng)業(yè)教育譯文系列
Competency based education in entrepreneurship: a call to action for the discipline
Rebecca White, Giles Hertz and Kevin Moore
行動的呼吁——基于能力的創(chuàng)業(yè)教育（上）
作者：[美] 瑞貝卡.懷特、吉爾斯.赫茲、凱文.摩爾
翻譯：師柔劍 審稿：朱燕空
本文目錄：
一、引言 INTRODUCTION
二、基于能力的高等教育 COMPETENCY BASED POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION
三、能力教育與創(chuàng)業(yè)教育 CBE AND ENTREPRENEUR-SHIP EDUCATION
四、學(xué)科法第一步：通用語言的開發(fā) ADOPTING A DISCIPLINE APPROACH: STEP I DEVELOPING A COMMON LANGUAGE
（一）能力結(jié)構(gòu) The Competency Structure
（二）課程規(guī)劃 Curriculum Mapping
五、學(xué)科法第二步：數(shù)據(jù)和技術(shù)的使用 ADOPTING A DISCIPLINE APPROACH: STEP 2-USING DATA AND TECHNOLOGY
六、基于學(xué)科的能力教育方式的益處 BENEFITS OF A DISCIPLINE BASED APPROACH TO CBE
七、面臨的挑戰(zhàn) CHALLENGES
INTRODUCTION
引言
Introduced by David McClelland in the early 1970s,competencies were recognized as significant predictors of employee performance and success and were traditionally more associated with training than education. More recently, competency based learning has been adopted by the State of New Hampshire’s public school system, the health disciplines, and other advanced education systems to develop and assess mastery of knowledge and skills. The concept and practice of using competencies to define and measure performance have been widely researched and defined. For our purposes, we use the term “competency' to describe the capability of applying or using knowledge, skills, abilities, behaviors, and personal characteristics to successfully perform in a given domain.
早在20世紀(jì)70年代初，大衛(wèi)麥克萊蘭德就提出了能力可被當(dāng)作預(yù)測員工績效和成功可能性的重要因素這一理論。一般來說，能力的培養(yǎng)與實訓(xùn)的關(guān)聯(lián)性比與理論傳授更強(qiáng)。最近，新罕布什爾州公立學(xué)校、健康衛(wèi)生學(xué)科以及其他一些先進(jìn)的教育系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)開始采用基于能力的學(xué)習(xí)方式來推進(jìn)和評估知識與技能的掌握情況。把能力作為衡量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的理念和相關(guān)實踐已被廣泛的研究和定義。從培養(yǎng)目標(biāo)來看，“能力”一詞用來形容能夠靈活應(yīng)用知識、技能、能力、行為習(xí)慣和性格特征等資源在既定領(lǐng)域?qū)崿F(xiàn)價值的特質(zhì)。
Competency based education(CBE)is a framework for designing and implementing education that focuses on the desired performance capabilities of the learner within this broad definitional context. While attaining a level of 'competence” has long been the goal of traditional systems, these educational models of curriculum design have largely been based on the delineation of intended learning objectives of instruction. Courses and curricula are then created based on these learning objectives that focus on identifying and measuring what a learner should know. Success is measured by the completion of hours in the classroom as much as by more direct measures of learning. By contrast, CBE makes the acquisition of selected competencies explicit by establishing observable and measurable Performance metrics that learners must demonstrate to be deemed “competent.' Whereas traditional education tends to focus on what and how learners are taught, CBE is focused on whether or not learners can demonstrate application of learning to solve problems, communicate electively, perform procedures, and make appropriate decisions within a given context.
基于能力的教育（能力教育）是一個對滿足社會需求型教育機(jī)制的設(shè)計及實現(xiàn)具有指導(dǎo)性意義的框架。雖然在傳統(tǒng)的教育中一直把能達(dá)到一定“能力”作為培養(yǎng)目標(biāo)，但這樣的教學(xué)模式很大程度上仍是基于對教學(xué)預(yù)期和學(xué)習(xí)目標(biāo)的劃定。這樣一來，課程體系的建立也相應(yīng)地根據(jù)獲取知識量為目標(biāo)而設(shè)定。 學(xué)習(xí)者的成績?nèi)Q于到教室上課的時長以及其他更為直接的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。相比之下，能力教育則設(shè)立了顯而易見、可量化的性能指標(biāo)，如此一來，學(xué)習(xí)過程就變得很明確。傳統(tǒng)教育傾向于關(guān)注學(xué)習(xí)者所學(xué)內(nèi)容及教授方式，而能力教育關(guān)注的是學(xué)習(xí)者是否能夠應(yīng)用到所學(xué)知識去解決問題、有效表達(dá)、有條理執(zhí)行以及在既定環(huán)境下做出適當(dāng)決策。
In recent years, educators in the field of entrepreneurship have been seeking a model to define key learning outcomes for entrepreneurship education and to develop assessment models as a way to integrate curricular and co-curricular programs. CBE models Provide a meaningful solution to these challenges. Why? First, CBE is based on competency sets of knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics(KSAOS)of high performance in a particular domain. These include behaviors demonstrating abilities that then can be used to assess degrees of competency. This methodology allows for clear assessment of learning in any educational program that is experiential by design. Second, CBE allows for distinguishing between top performers and average performers; thus, there is a fit with the traditional grading models. Third, CBE allows for change over time in competencies, offering an opportunity to evaluate individual student growth in competencies. Finally, the use of CBE models to design and educational program provides an opportunity to tie models of learning directly to best practices in the field.
近年來，創(chuàng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域的教育者也一直在尋求一種可以界定創(chuàng)業(yè)教育主要學(xué)習(xí)成果的方式，并試圖開發(fā)一種評估機(jī)制去完善創(chuàng)業(yè)及相關(guān)課程體系的建立。能力教育為創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者面臨的這些挑戰(zhàn)提供了可行的策略。原因如下：首先，能力教育是一種在特定領(lǐng)域內(nèi)集知識、技能、能力和其他高效能特質(zhì)為一體的教育模式，這些特質(zhì)包括可鑒別能力高低的行為表現(xiàn)力。這種方法論適用于任何一個需經(jīng)設(shè)計的教學(xué)項目，可為其提供一個明確的測評方法。其次，能力教育有利于區(qū)分出優(yōu)劣，這一點與傳統(tǒng)的評分機(jī)制相符。第三，能力教育認(rèn)可時間變化下的能力增長，提供了一個可對學(xué)習(xí)者個體能力的成長進(jìn)行評估的機(jī)會。最后，將能力教育用于設(shè)計課程及教學(xué)項目為理論與實踐完美的結(jié)合提供了可能性。
A few scholars have attempted to explore competencies as a way to understand entrepreneurial behavior. Additionally, a small number of schools are in the early stages of attempting to apply CBE in their entrepreneurship programs. However, there is significant misunderstanding of what this application must include in order to ensure the delivery of the desired results. In early 2016, a group of scholars from 10 US universities came together to apply and extend this work based upon the principles of competency based education that have been successfully applied in other contexts and are in the early stages of application to entrepreneurship education at the University of Tampa. This chapter is a call to action for entrepreneurship educators and a discussion of why a discipline wide approach is the most effective and efficient pathway to CBE.
一些學(xué)者試圖通過洞悉能力素質(zhì)去了解創(chuàng)業(yè)行為。此外，少數(shù)學(xué)校已處在嘗試將能力教育融入創(chuàng)業(yè)項目的初期階段。然而，對于應(yīng)用中須涵蓋哪些內(nèi)容才得以在交付時達(dá)到預(yù)期效果仍存在著很大的誤區(qū)。2016年初，來自美國10所大學(xué)的學(xué)者們齊聚一堂，推廣基于能力的教育原則。這一原則已成功應(yīng)用在某些領(lǐng)域，并在美國坦帕大學(xué)的創(chuàng)業(yè)教育應(yīng)用中初見成效。本文是對創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者付諸行動的呼吁，也是對為什么各學(xué)科的大范圍參與是實現(xiàn)能力教育最佳途徑的探討。
COMPETENCY BASED POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION
基于能力的高等教育
CBE models are at the root of a learning revolution which is being driven by the advancement of technology as well as a new competitive landscape that includes institutions with missions that promise to deliver education anytime, anywhere. In this new paradigm of learning, delivery options are multiple, learning products are explicitly defined and assessment is made at a new level of granularity not captured by traditional transcripts (Voorhees, 2001). However, we argue that embedded in the model of CBE is a method to create and assess learning that can be adapted to and enhance traditional higher education models -especially in highly applied disciplines. Voorhees (2001, p 5) describes the role of CBE as follows: “The bridge between the traditional paradigm, which depends on traditional credit hour measures of student achievement and the learning revolution can be found in competency based approaches.”
能力教育模式是學(xué)習(xí)方式變革的根源，這一變革正受到技術(shù)進(jìn)步和全新競爭格局的驅(qū)動，其中包括能保證隨時隨地提供教育的機(jī)構(gòu)。 在這種全新的學(xué)習(xí)范式中，獲取知識的渠道是多種多樣的，學(xué)習(xí)產(chǎn)品是被明確定義的，評估方式是在一個傳統(tǒng)成績單無法采集到的新層面上進(jìn)行的（沃里斯，2001）。然而，我們認(rèn)為嵌入能力教育模式是一種可使學(xué)習(xí)發(fā)生并能評估學(xué)習(xí)結(jié)果的方法，這可與傳統(tǒng)的高等教育模式特別是高頻應(yīng)用的學(xué)科相適應(yīng)，并有利于其發(fā)展。沃里斯（2001，p5）這樣描述了能力教育模式的作用：“一座連接基于學(xué)分評測的傳統(tǒng)范式教育和基于能力的教育變革之間的橋梁?！?/strong>
CBE is not new. These models were introduced in the early 1970s (McClelland, 1973) and have been used for the past 40 years to enhance human performance in the workplace (Ennis, 2008). The interest in applying CBE in higher education was first formalized in the US with the establishment of the National Skill Standards Board, an entity created in 1994 in the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Since that time a number of states and institutions have adopted CBE in some form, most notably the movement toward the three-year degree programs funded by the Department of Education and instituted at Southern New Hampshire University, Grace College in Indiana, Arcadia University in Pennsylvania, and Lynn University in Florida. These programs seek to address the issues of the accelerating cost of higher education, increasing competition from non-traditional higher education and the need for an opportunity to institute curriculum Innovation (Bradley et al., 2012).
能力教育并不是一個全新概念。 20世紀(jì)70年代早期這一概念就已被引入（大衛(wèi)麥克萊蘭德，1973），并在過去40年中一直在被用于提升人們在職場的表現(xiàn)（恩尼斯，2008）。創(chuàng)建于1994年“千年發(fā)展目標(biāo)：美國教育法”倡導(dǎo)下的實體——美國國家技能建立標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會第一次正式提出能力教育在高等教育中應(yīng)用的益處。從那時起，許多國家和機(jī)構(gòu)便開始逐步采用能力教育，最引人注目的是由教育部資助并在南新罕布什爾大學(xué)、印第安納州格雷斯學(xué)院、賓夕法尼亞州阿卡迪亞大學(xué)以及佛羅里達(dá)州林恩大學(xué)展開的三年制學(xué)位課程運(yùn)動。這些項目旨在解決高等教育成本上升、非傳統(tǒng)高等教育競爭加劇以及課程改革機(jī)會的需求等問題（布蘭得利等，2012）。
The practice of using competencies to define and measure performance has been widely researched and discussed. However, as with many concepts, the term “competency” has suffered from multiple definitions both in research and in application. The definition of “competency” dominated the early CLM literature. In 1997, the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP)established a task force led by Jeffery Shippmann and leading researchers and practitioners to focus on the following five questions:
1. What is a competency?
2. What is the difference between competency modeling and job analysis?
3. Why are competencies so appealing to consumers in business and industry?
4. Should competency models be validated?
5. What is the future of competency modeling?
用能力來定義和測量成效的實踐已經(jīng)被廣泛地研究和討論。然而，與許多概念一樣，“能力”一詞在研究和應(yīng)用中都被賦予了多種定義。 “能力”的定義主導(dǎo)了早期的交際文學(xué)。 1997年，工業(yè)和組織心理學(xué)會（SIOP）成立了一個由杰夫里.希普曼領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的工作組，帶領(lǐng)相關(guān)研究者和從業(yè)人員針對以下五個問題進(jìn)行研究：
1.什么是能力？
2.能力模式與工作驗定之間的區(qū)別是什么？
3.為什么能力對工商業(yè)消費(fèi)者如此有吸引力？
4.能力模式是否需要被驗證？
5.能力模式的未來是什么？
For two years the task force investigated these questions and, based upon a comprehensive literature review, concluded that even with the most knowledgeable competency modeler or researcher there was no single agreed-upon definition of competency. However, they did agree upon a number of principles. First, a job analysis is 'work focused, 'while competency modeling is 'individual” focused, and neither is a singular approach to describing the working environment. Second, competency models should be validated using a process involving those who are in the workforce and already doing the work of interest. Finally, while there exists a significant need for further research in specific areas there is great hope for the discipline of competency modeling (Shippmann et al., 2000).
兩年來，工作組對這些問題進(jìn)行了調(diào)查，并基于全面的文獻(xiàn)綜述得出一個結(jié)論：即使是學(xué)識最深廣的能力建模者或研究人員，也無法為能力商榷出一個一致且單一的定義。但是，他們商討出一些相關(guān)的原則。首先，工作驗定是“以工作為中心”，而能力模式是以“個人”為中心的，他們都不是用來描述工作環(huán)境的單一方法。其次，能力模式應(yīng)該通過一個有對所從事工作感興趣的人參與的流程進(jìn)行驗證。最后，盡管在某些特定領(lǐng)域仍有待進(jìn)一步研究，但能力模式學(xué)科的應(yīng)用被寄予厚望（希普曼等，2000）。
For our purposes, we define a competency as the capability of applying or using knowledge, skills abilities, behaviors, and personal characteristics to successfully perform in a given domain. While admittedly broad, this definition is based on the one developed by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education workgroup which was funded by the US Department of Education to develop a common language for CBE (US Department of Education, 2002). Personal characteristics include the mental/intellectual/cognitive, social/emotional/attitudinal, and physical/psychomotor attributes necessary for success (Boyatzis, 1982; Dubois,1993; Fogg, 1999; Lucia and Lepsinger, 1999 ), as well as internal and external constraints, environments, and relationships related to performance. These personal characteristics help explain why learners pursue different learning experiences and acquire different levels and kinds of skills, abilities, and knowledge. Motivations and perceptions of the activity and one’s self or talents are also viewed as influential in competently and successfully performing in a given role (Boyatzis, 1982; Fulmer and Conger, 2004; Gangani et al. 2006; Sandberg, 2000). Therefore, competencies become the result of integrative learning experiences. It should be noted that this definition of competency is more inclusive than “knowledge and skill” and focuses on the application of knowledge, skill, attitude and the ability to meet complex demands by drawing on many psychosocial resources (Mann et al., 2009; Schratz et al, 2013).
出于成果導(dǎo)向，我們將能力定義為能夠靈活應(yīng)用知識、技能、能力、行為習(xí)慣和個人特征等資源在某一領(lǐng)域?qū)崿F(xiàn)目標(biāo)的特質(zhì)。 雖然這個定義較寬泛，但它是被美國教育部資助下的國家公共政策和高等教育中心工作組為了開發(fā)能力教育的通用語言所定義的（美國教育部，2002年）。個人特征包括成功所需的心理/智力/認(rèn)知、社交/情感/態(tài)度和身體/心理活動（博亞特茲，1982; 杜布瓦，1993; 福格，1999; 露西婭和萊辛格，1999）、內(nèi)部和外部的約束、環(huán)境、與績效相關(guān)的人際關(guān)系。這些個人特征合理的解釋了為什么學(xué)習(xí)者所追求的學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷、到達(dá)的水平和獲取的技能、能力以及知識內(nèi)容不盡相同。行動的動機(jī)和直覺以及個體本身或天資也被視為能夠影響其在特定角色中有能力的成功實現(xiàn)價值的因素（博亞特茲，1982; 富爾默和康格，2004;岡阿尼等人，2006; 桑德伯格，2000）。因此，能力是綜合學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)驗的成果。值得注意的是，這種能力定義比“知識和技能”更具囊括性，并側(cè)重于應(yīng)用知識、技能、態(tài)度、能力，通過調(diào)配各種社會資源去滿足不同復(fù)雜需求的能力（曼等人，2009;施拉茨等人，2013）。
CBE is a framework that focuses on desired Performance in a given context. The learner is put into a situation, given conditions, taught the rules, provided with coaching and mentoring, and allowed to practice until he or she can reach desired performance standards. For example, in the game of basketball one might argue that dribbling, passing, and shooting a basketball are three of the key abilities necessary for success. We know from experience that it is likely that, at some point in a game, a player will be fouled and be given the opportunity to shoot a foul shot. In fact, we also know that many games are won and lost with foul shots. Thus, it follows that one (among many) of the abilities that a basketball player should have is the ability to shoot a foul shot. Therefore, we might set up a performance measure that reads as follows: Given a ball, a hoop and a foul line, a leaner will practice shooting until he or she reaches the ability to shoot 10 foul Shots with a success rate of 8 out of 10. Not all learners will get to that level of mastery, but some may exceed it. Thus, CBE is customized learning, and the heart of CBE is simply the framework, which is made up of performance based learning objectives, designed by the educator, that will allow individualized learning and assessment. This framework is commonly referred to as a competency structure or model.
能力教育是一個側(cè)重能否在既定條件下達(dá)到預(yù)期表現(xiàn)的框架。學(xué)習(xí)者處在一種既定條件下被教授規(guī)則、提供訓(xùn)練和指導(dǎo)，并允許其鍛煉至達(dá)到期望的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。這就好比在籃球比賽中，有些人可能認(rèn)為運(yùn)球，傳球和投籃是贏得比賽所必備的三項關(guān)鍵能力。但從經(jīng)驗中我們得知，在比賽的某個時刻，球員可能會因為他人犯規(guī)而得到一個投籃的機(jī)會。事實上，我們也知道許多比賽的輸贏都是與一個罰球命中與否息息相關(guān)。因此，罰球命中也是一個籃球運(yùn)動員應(yīng)具備的眾多能力之一。所以相應(yīng)地設(shè)置了如下的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)評估球員練習(xí)的表現(xiàn)：給定練習(xí)球員一個球，一個籃筐和一條罰球線，讓其練習(xí)投籃，直至達(dá)到10投8進(jìn)的命中率。并非所有的練習(xí)球員都能達(dá)到這種掌握程度，但也有人可以超過這個指標(biāo)。因此，能力教育是一種定制化學(xué)習(xí)，能力教育的核心僅是一個教育者設(shè)計的、由基于績效的學(xué)習(xí)目標(biāo)所組成、且允許個性化學(xué)習(xí)和評估的框架。這種框架通常被稱為能力結(jié)構(gòu)或能力模型。
It is important to note here that the authors are well aware of the difference between training and education and, while CBE provides a structure that is education focused. A competency structure aids in the design, development and assessment of learning programs. It does not dictate how the teacher teaches these concepts. So, in the earlier example of the game of basketball, one would need to put the player into the game to observe other critical abilities, such as the ability to respond creatively to a play that is set up by the other team. The practice of basketball provides the opportunity to learn various responses, with coaching that can help a learner respond in a favorable way to unpredictable experiences on the basketball floor. This is not unlike entrepreneurship or medicine or many other fields where CBE has been applied with success. The goal of the remainder of the chapter is to describe a method for how entrepreneurship educators can begin the process of building a discipline-wide approach to CBE by applying it to the field of entrepreneurship education.
值得一提的是，筆者非常了解培訓(xùn)和教育之間的區(qū)別，而能力教育提供的是一個教育所關(guān)注的藍(lán)本。能力結(jié)構(gòu)有助于學(xué)習(xí)項目的設(shè)計、開發(fā)和評估。它沒有規(guī)定教師如何教授那些概念。因此，在上文籃球運(yùn)動的例子中，需要將球員置于比賽中才得以發(fā)現(xiàn)其他關(guān)鍵能力，比如在其他球隊主場的比賽中隨機(jī)應(yīng)變的能力?；@球比賽的實戰(zhàn)為球員提供了學(xué)習(xí)各種應(yīng)對措施的機(jī)會，以培養(yǎng)他們在籃球場上以有利的方式應(yīng)對不可預(yù)測的事件。這與創(chuàng)業(yè)、醫(yī)學(xué)或其他將能力教育成功應(yīng)用其中的領(lǐng)域沒有什么不同。本章其余部分將會著重說明創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者如何通過將能力教育應(yīng)用在創(chuàng)業(yè)教育，從而開啟能力教育在全學(xué)科普及應(yīng)用之路。
CBE AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION
能力教育與創(chuàng)業(yè)教育
Many of the leading educators in the discipline of entrepreneurship are advocating that entrepreneurship education is an instrument of empowerment for individuals and a tool for transforming markets, businesses, industries, economies, and communities (Morris, 2013: Timmons and pinelli, 2008). However, educators in the field have acknowledged that traditional pedagogy is not sufficient and that teaching entrepreneurship may be considered more like the study of other 'crafts' such as medicine and architecture (White et al., 2011). The result has been a new Interest in CBE as a foundation for curriculum design and learning assessment.
創(chuàng)業(yè)教育的一些先行者都在提倡創(chuàng)業(yè)教育是為個體賦能的工具，也是一種改造市場、企業(yè)、行業(yè)、經(jīng)濟(jì)和社區(qū)的工具（莫里斯，2013；蒂蒙斯和史賓尼利，2008）。然而，創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者已經(jīng)意識到使用傳統(tǒng)的教學(xué)法是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的，創(chuàng)業(yè)教學(xué)可能更像醫(yī)學(xué)、建筑學(xué)等其他“技藝”類的學(xué)科（懷特等人，2011）。這使得能力教育作為課程設(shè)計和學(xué)習(xí)評估的基礎(chǔ)為創(chuàng)業(yè)教育注入新鮮血液。
A few scholars have attempted to explore competencies as a way to understand entrepreneurial behavior. For example, Wing Yan Man (2006) empirically explored entrepreneurial behaviors through a competency framework and identified six behavioral patterns in the entrepreneurial learning construct. More recently, Morris et al. (2013) identified 13 competencies demonstrated by successful entrepreneurs, and White and Moore(2016a) have developed a model for the application of CBE to both coursework and co-curricular learning experiences. Table 6.1 compares the three CBE models.
一些學(xué)者試圖以通過探索能力素質(zhì)的方式來理解創(chuàng)業(yè)行為。例如，翼燕人（2006）就以經(jīng)驗主義方式通過能力框架探索了創(chuàng)業(yè)行為，并在創(chuàng)業(yè)學(xué)習(xí)構(gòu)建中確立了六種行為模式。最近，莫里斯等人（2013）確定出了成功企業(yè)家所具備的13項能力，并且懷特和摩爾（2016a）已經(jīng)開發(fā)了一個將能力教育應(yīng)用于課程作業(yè)和輔助課程學(xué)習(xí)活動的模式。表1比較了三種能力教育模式。
表1: 創(chuàng)業(yè)精選模式中的能力教育研究
懷特R，摩爾K. 為高等教育、工作文件、坦帕大學(xué)開發(fā)一套能力結(jié)構(gòu). 整合課程和輔助課程活動以增加學(xué)生的成果，2016b. 懷特R,摩爾K. 基于能力的學(xué)習(xí)在創(chuàng)業(yè)教育中的應(yīng)用：整合課程和輔助課程元素以提高學(xué)科掌握度. 整合課程和輔助課程活動以增加學(xué)生的成果，2016a. | 莫里斯MH, 韋伯J， 福J, 辛格爾S. 基于能力的企業(yè)教育觀點：概念和實證的見解. 小企業(yè)管理期刊, 2013, 51(3), 352-369. | 曼T.W, 勞T, 占K.F. 中小企業(yè)的競爭力：以創(chuàng)業(yè)能力為重點的構(gòu)想. 商業(yè)風(fēng)險期刊, 2002, 17, 123-142 | |
使用定義 | 可應(yīng)用或使用知識、技能、才能、行為和個人特征在特定領(lǐng)域獲得成功的能力。 | 能力是指人們成功執(zhí)行特定任務(wù)或活動所需的知識、技能、態(tài)度、觀念和行為，例如在重整房屋或執(zhí)行外科手術(shù)時會用到的能力(布羅菲、凱利，2002；蘭金，2004)。 | 創(chuàng)業(yè)能力是企業(yè)家能夠成功完成工作角色的總體能力。 |
解釋說明 | 根據(jù)來自Q分類法便利樣本中500多位企業(yè)家的反饋，確定出了六項能力。每種能力都在下面以粗體列出，并列出了企業(yè)家認(rèn)定的包含在每種能力中的關(guān)鍵才能。 | 利用來自20位企業(yè)家和20位創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者的小組調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)來確定13種不同的能力。針對企業(yè)家已經(jīng)擁有成功增長到100名或更多員工的公司這一現(xiàn)象。在一項兩種多層次型的研究中，小組成員被要求確定出推廣新創(chuàng)企業(yè)所需的關(guān)鍵能力。 | 通過對12位企業(yè)家的半結(jié)構(gòu)式訪談來制定，這些訪談的關(guān)注點是在那些他們事業(yè)發(fā)展之前和期間促成重要學(xué)習(xí)發(fā)生的關(guān)鍵事件。 |
創(chuàng)業(yè)能力 | 企業(yè)家精神 市場風(fēng)險意識 激情和動力 機(jī)會識別 誠信道德 適應(yīng)力 持續(xù)的學(xué)習(xí) 溝通能力 人際關(guān)系的建立 同理心 人際交流 學(xué)術(shù)交流 在沖突中溝通 思考力 態(tài)勢感知力 判斷力 創(chuàng)新和創(chuàng)造力 問題解決能力 自我意識 自我反思 專業(yè)精神 責(zé)任感 得當(dāng)?shù)膽B(tài)度和外觀 知識認(rèn)證 技術(shù)能力 正直且有正確的價值觀 持續(xù)的提升力 自覺行動力 領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力 商業(yè)頭腦 合作能力 靈敏度 戰(zhàn)略思維 多元化 更換管理層 道德感 發(fā)展他人的能力 工作管理能力 有計劃 授權(quán) 確立權(quán)威 協(xié)調(diào)力 評測 團(tuán)隊建設(shè)力 管控力 | 機(jī)會識別 機(jī)會評估 風(fēng)險管理和緩解 愿景的傳達(dá)令人信服 堅韌且有毅力 有想象力并可創(chuàng)造性地解決問題 資源分配利用 靈活周旋 價值創(chuàng)造 保持專注力和適應(yīng)力 復(fù)原力 自我效能感 建立和使用網(wǎng)絡(luò) | 機(jī)會識別與利用 人際關(guān)系的建立 概念構(gòu)思 組織能力 策略形成力 遵守承諾 |
In late 2015, four university based entrepreneurship programs came together at the Global Consortium of Entrepreneurship Centers’ Annual conference to present their interest in, and research on, the application of CBE in entrepreneurship education (White et al., 2015). This group identified four primary arguments for the application of CBE to entrepreneurship education.
2015年底，四個大學(xué)創(chuàng)業(yè)項目匯集在全球創(chuàng)業(yè)中心聯(lián)合會的年會上，展示了他們將能力教育在創(chuàng)業(yè)教育中的應(yīng)用、興趣所在和研究方向（懷特等人，2015）。該小組確定了將能力教育應(yīng)用于創(chuàng)業(yè)教育的四個主要論點。
First, the discipline is being impacted by the new learning revolution that is affecting all of higher education and has developed via advanced technology and increased competition from non-traditional educational sources. In the case of entrepreneurship, the discipline has been so successful with selling the value of entrepreneurship education that vast numbers of people and institutions from city and state governments to business leaders and service providers have created their own version of education for aspiring entrepreneurs. As in any market space where disruption is occurring, the incumbent is called upon to clearly demonstrate value to stakeholders. Moreover, if entrepreneurship education programs do not step up and define learning outcomes for themselves, those guidelines will be imposed from elsewhere. A CBE approach can provide clear measurements of learning progress and prevents the dilution of the discipline.
首先，牽扯著所有高等教育并通過先進(jìn)技術(shù)和非傳統(tǒng)教育資源的競爭而發(fā)展的新型學(xué)習(xí)變革正影響著學(xué)科發(fā)展。就創(chuàng)業(yè)領(lǐng)域而言，該學(xué)科在推廣創(chuàng)業(yè)教育的價值方面非常成功，以至于廣大市政府和州政府機(jī)構(gòu)、商業(yè)領(lǐng)袖和服務(wù)供應(yīng)商為有抱負(fù)的創(chuàng)業(yè)者創(chuàng)建了自己的教育版本。正如在任何發(fā)生中斷的市場中一樣，經(jīng)營中的企業(yè)需要向利益相關(guān)者清楚地展示其價值所在。此外，如果創(chuàng)業(yè)教育項目不加快推進(jìn)并明確其學(xué)習(xí)成果，那些指導(dǎo)方針將從其他方面被強(qiáng)加。 能力教育可以提供清晰測量學(xué)習(xí)進(jìn)度的方法，并防止學(xué)科淡化。
Second, while traditional educational programs in entrepreneurship have more than 40 years of experience in educating entrepreneurs, there is no consensus on a common nomenclature for the discipline. This has led to challenges as the discipline has moved beyond the walls of the business colleges and into disciplines such as engineering and the arts where educators have created their own versions of entrepreneurship. While across discipline access to entrepreneurship is a necessary and valuable step in the growth of entrepreneurship, without a common language of learning outcomes 'entrepreneurship everywhere can quickly transform into entrepreneurship nowhere.” Thus, one of the key attributes of employing a CBE model is the ability to develop a common language upon which to build student learning.
其次，雖然傳統(tǒng)的創(chuàng)業(yè)教育項目有40多年培養(yǎng)企業(yè)家的經(jīng)驗，但在該學(xué)科的統(tǒng)一術(shù)語系統(tǒng)方面始終沒有達(dá)成共識。該學(xué)科已漸漸超越商學(xué)院所教授的范疇，進(jìn)入工程和藝術(shù)等學(xué)科，這致使創(chuàng)業(yè)教育者們面臨著需要創(chuàng)造出創(chuàng)業(yè)教育專屬體系的挑戰(zhàn)。雖然跨學(xué)科的專創(chuàng)融合對于創(chuàng)業(yè)者的成長是必要且有價值的一步，但如果在學(xué)習(xí)成果方面沒有一個通用語言系統(tǒng)，那“無處不在的企業(yè)家”可能會很快轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)椤盁o處可在的企業(yè)家”。因此，有效應(yīng)用能力教育模型的關(guān)鍵之一是能夠開發(fā)出一種用于構(gòu)建學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)的通用語言系統(tǒng)。
Third, many educators have faced the challenge of students succeeding as entrepreneurs while enrolled in a degree program but failing their coursework in the process. Entrepreneurship has become one of the most popular areas of study on many college campuses, with students from all disciplines interested in the field. One of the key components of these programs is their experiential nature. In fact, it can be argued that the majority of learning often takes place outside of the classroom, where students apply what they are currently learning in the classroom. Programs such as boot camps, pitch competitions, and networking events provide the opportunity for students to learn the basic skills required for success in new venture creation. To date, measuring learning in these environments has been mostly anecdotal and has not provided an avenue for longitudinal program assessment, nor the opportunity for continuous improvement based upon multiple evaluations. As suggested by White and Moore (2016a), CBE can provide a solution for this.
第三，許多教育工作者都會遇到一種問題，學(xué)生能夠成功地像創(chuàng)業(yè)者一樣完成學(xué)位，但卻在完成學(xué)位進(jìn)程中的作業(yè)時不盡如人意。創(chuàng)業(yè)已成為許多大學(xué)校園里最受歡迎的研究領(lǐng)域之一，來自各個專業(yè)的學(xué)生都對該領(lǐng)域感興趣。這些項目的關(guān)鍵組成部分之一是其體驗性。事實上，大多數(shù)學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)常發(fā)生在課堂之外，學(xué)生在那里得以真正應(yīng)用他們當(dāng)前在課堂上學(xué)到的知識。一些有如創(chuàng)客訓(xùn)練營、路演競賽、網(wǎng)絡(luò)活動等項目為學(xué)生提供了學(xué)習(xí)企業(yè)創(chuàng)新所需的基本技能的機(jī)會。迄今為止，衡量這些情境中的學(xué)習(xí)主要是依靠事件，并沒有為縱向項目的評估提供渠道，也沒有為基于多方評價進(jìn)行持續(xù)迭代提供機(jī)會。正如懷特和摩爾（2016a）所建議的那樣，能力教育可以為此提供解決方案。
Finally, assessing learning in entrepreneurship has been a challenge for the discipline as well. Few studies have examined the short-term or long term effects of entrepreneurship education on student attitudes, behaviors and professional competencies (duval-couetil, 2013; Pittaway et al, 2009). To date, the literature has focused on the development of programs, with an assumption that, through the offering of well-designed courses and curricula, students will increase their knowledge and skills and that this will lead to an increased likelihood of success in the workplace and as founders of new ventures. However, few studies have tested this assumption (Dick son et al., 2008: Gorman et al., 1997).
最后，評估創(chuàng)業(yè)學(xué)習(xí)成果對該學(xué)科也是一個挑戰(zhàn)。很少有研究考察過創(chuàng)業(yè)教育在短期或長期內(nèi)對學(xué)生的態(tài)度、行為以及專業(yè)能力的影響（杜瓦爾. 庫埃蒂，2013;皮特韋等，2009）。迄今為止，有關(guān)文獻(xiàn)一直側(cè)重于項目的開發(fā)，并設(shè)想通過提供精心設(shè)計的課程，學(xué)生將增加他們的知識和技能，從而增加他們在職場和創(chuàng)業(yè)中成功的可能性。然而，很少有研究驗證過這個設(shè)想（迪克森等人，2008：戈爾曼等人，1997）。據(jù)杜瓦爾. 庫埃蒂（2013）的研究表明，創(chuàng)業(yè)教育項目的評估面臨著幾項特殊挑戰(zhàn)。其中包括學(xué)科的年輕化和不確定性、項目之間的巨大差異性、對實踐的高度強(qiáng)調(diào)和對教師學(xué)術(shù)及實踐的雙重要求，以及其主要結(jié)果的預(yù)估是風(fēng)險創(chuàng)造和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展。為了解決這些獨(dú)特的挑戰(zhàn)，我們建議開發(fā)和實施基于能力的學(xué)習(xí)模型。這些經(jīng)過驗證的模型為明確解決前三個挑戰(zhàn)提供了可能性，并提供了一個擴(kuò)展視角的途徑，而不僅僅局限于風(fēng)險創(chuàng)造和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的結(jié)果。因此，我們相信通過將能力教育應(yīng)用在創(chuàng)業(yè)教育中，許多當(dāng)前面臨的挑戰(zhàn)可以迎刃而解。我們確定了一個兩步學(xué)科法：（1）開發(fā)一種通用語言；（2）利用實時數(shù)據(jù)和技術(shù)來創(chuàng)建持續(xù)的反饋和迭代機(jī)制。
（上期已完結(jié)）
作者：瑞貝卡·懷特——創(chuàng)業(yè)學(xué)教授、任美國坦帕大學(xué)創(chuàng)業(yè)中心主任
