Entrepeneurship

The traditional courses of mathematics education are organised by delivering theoretical knowledge and problem-solving techniques to students. But in order to give students real-world skills which they can use in the real world, entrepreneurship must be incorporated into math classes as the world changes. Students can gain vital skills like creativity, problem-solving, and financial literacy by fusing mathematics concepts with entrepreneurial thinking. In this project the partners evaluate the value of entrepreneurship in math classes by offering students skill-building activities and examples to encourage entrepreneurial thinking.

• How to merge mathematics and entrepreneurship courses
• A major aspect of entrepreneurship is mathematics. Using mathematical ideas to analyse market trends and calculate expenses and profits lays a strong basis for making wise business decisions. By emphasizing the relationship between math and entrepreneurship, students learn more about the topic and acquire transferable abilities that they can use in a variety of professional settings.

Examples of real-world mathematical entrepreneurship

• Budgeting and financial planning: By establishing a budget for several fictitious commercial enterprises, students can gain financial literacy skills. They are able to compute expenses, make revenue projections and pinpoint possible profit margins. Students gain an understanding of the financial ramifications of operating a business through this practice.
• Market analysis and data interpretation: Students can determine customer demands and arrive at well-informed conclusions by examining market trends and interpreting data. To comprehend the demands and potential of the industry, they can look at sales data, carry out surveys, and apply statistical analysis.
• Price strategies and optimization: Students can investigate price strategies by taking into account variables including demand elasticity, competition, and manufacturing costs. They can comprehend how pricing impacts profitability and optimize pricing decisions using mathematical models.

Ideas for developing skills to encourage entrepreneurial thinking

1. Problem-solving exercises: Present mathematical exercises that model authentic entrepreneurial situations. Urge students to use critical thinking skills and mathematical principles to solve problems creatively. This fosters entrepreneurial thinking and the development of problem-solving abilities.
2. Business simulation games: Assist students in making judgments by requiring them to use mathematical models in business simulation games. These games give players practical experience in financial management, corporate operations, and strategic decision-making. They encourage cooperation, judgment, and flexibility.
3. Design thinking projects: To encourage original problem-solving, include design thinking techniques into math classes. Students should be encouraged to recognize real-world issues, come up with solutions, and prototype their concepts. It is possible to assess the viability and efficacy of their ideas using mathematical concepts.
4. Guest speakers and field trips: Ask accomplished businesspeople and business leaders to share their knowledge and perspectives with students. Plan field tours to nearby companies, start-ups, or incubators to introduce students to actual entrepreneurial settings. This encourages kids to learn more about entrepreneurship by exposing them to real-world uses for math abilities.

Conclusion:

Students have a rare opportunity to cultivate an entrepreneurial mindset and acquire practical skills when entrepreneurship is incorporated into math classes. Students learn key skills like problem-solving, critical thinking, and financial literacy while also developing a deeper understanding of the subject by fusing mathematical ideas with practical applications. Employing the case studies and skill-building strategies covered in this article can enable students to embrace entrepreneurship and develop as creative thinkers in a world that is always changing.

Alberti, A., O. Sciascia and A. Poli, 2004. Theory of entrepreneurship London: Macmillan Publishers.

Borrofice, O.B., 2008. Building partnership for entrepreneurship development in Nigerian Universities. Proceedings of the National Sensitization Workshop on Entrepreneurship Development in Nigerian Universities, organized by National board for Technical Education (NBTE) and National Universities Commission (NUC), May 21-22, 2008, Nigeria.

Brown, C., 2000. Curriculum for entrepreneurship education: A review. Kansa City: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

Condouris, K., E. Meyer and H. Tager-Flusberg, 2003. The relationship between standardized measures of language and measures of spontaneous speech in children with autism. Am Journal of Speech Language Pathol, 12(3): 349-358.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1044/1058-0360(2003/080.

Consortium for Entrepreneurship Education, 2004. National content standards for entrepreneurship education. Ohio, Columbus. Available from https://www.entre-ed.org/ [Accessed 28 August 2015].

Entrepreneurship Education, 2013. A guide for educators. Brussels: European Commission — DG Enterprise and Industry.

Ineghenebor, I., 2013. Entrepreneurship education at the University of Tarapaca, Arica Chile. In APEC Workshop on Embedding Entrepreneurship in University Curriculum, Ha Noi.

Lesko, T., 2010. Teaching entrepreneurship: The role of education and training-the hungarian experience.

Miron-Shatz, T., I. Shatz, S. Becker, J. Patel and G. Eysenbach, 2014. Promoting business and entrepreneurial awareness in health care professionals: Lessons from venture capital panels at medicine. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(8): 184.

Osakwe, R.N., 2011. A survey on the perception of need for entrepreneurial skills acquisition among undergraduate students of Tertiary Institutions in Delta State (DELSU). Journal Educational Research Development, 2(2): 78-106.

Postigo, H. and M. Tomborini, 2002. Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35: 60-85.

Rasmussen, E.A. and R. Sørheim, 2006. Action-based entrepreneurship education. Technovation, 26(2): 185-194.

Unachukwu, G.O., 2009. Issues and challenges in the development of entrepreneurship education in Nigeria. An International Multi-Disciplinary Journal, Ethiopia, 3(5): 89-94.

Aikina, T., & Bolsunovskaya, L. (2020). Moodle-based learning: Motivating and demotivating factors. International journal of emerging technologies in learning (iJET), 15(2), 239-248.

Aikina, Tatiana Yu, & Liudmila M. Bolsunovskaya. 2020. Moodle-Based Learning: Motivating and Demotivating Factors. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(2), 239–48.

Andel, S. A., de Vreede, T., Spector, P. E., Padmanabhan, B., Singh, V. K., & De Vreede, G. J. (2020). Do social features help in video-centric online learning platforms? A social presence perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 113(7).

Andrew, L., Wallace, R., & Sambell, R. (2021). A peer-observation initiative to enhance student engagement in the synchronous virtual classroom: A case study of a COVID-19 mandated move to online learning. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 18(4).

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, D. R., Ice, P., Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. Internet and Higher Education, 11(3–4), 133–136.

Bedenlier, S., Wunder, I., Gläser-Zikuda, M., Kammerl, R., Kopp, B., Ziegler, A., & Händel, M. (2021). “Generation invisible?. Higher Education Students” (Non)Use of Webcams in Synchronous Online Learning. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2(8), 100068.

Bolliger, D.U., & Halupa, C. (2018). Online student perceptions of engagement, transactional distance, and outcomes. Distance Education, 39(3), 299–316.

Bowyer, J., & Chambers, L. (2017). Evaluating blended learning: Bringing the elements together. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment Publication, 23(1), 17-26.

Carbajal-Carrera, B. (2021). Mapping connections among activism interactional practices and presence in videoconferencing language learning. System, 99, 102527. Chan, S. L., Lin, C. C.,

Chau, P. H., Takemura, N., & Fung, J. T. C. (2021). Evaluating online learning engagement of nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 104, 1–7.

Chase, P. A., Hilliard, L. J., John Geldhof, G., Warren, D. J., & Lerner, R. M. (2014). Academic Achievement in the High School Years: The Changing Role of School Engagement. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(6), 884–896.

Clark, C., Strudler, N., & Grove, K. (2015). Comparing asynchronous and synchronous video vs. Text based discussions in an online teacher education course. Online Learning Journal, 19(3), 1–22.

Colling, J., Wollschläger, R., Keller, U., Preckel, F., & Fischbach, A. (2022). Need for Cognition and its relation to academic achievement in different learning environments. Learning and Individual Differences, 93, 102110.

Cooper, K.S. (2014). Eliciting Engagement in the High School Classroom: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Teaching Practices. American Educational Research Journal, 51(2), 363–402.

Croxton, R.A. (2014). The Role of Interactivity in Student Satisfaction and Persistence in Online Learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 314–325.

Cunningham, U., & Una Cunningham, S. (2014). Teaching the Disembodied: Othering and Activity Systems in a Blended Synchronous Learning Situation. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 15(6), 33–51.

Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.

Feeley, A. M., & Biggerstaff, D. L. (2015). Exam success at undergraduate and graduate-entry medical schools: is learning style or learning approach more important? A critical review exploring links between academic success, learning styles, and learning approaches among school-leaver entry (“traditional”) and graduate-entry (“nontraditional”) medical students. Teaching and learning in medicine, 27(3), 237-244.

Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., & Paris, A.H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

Garrison, D., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Garratt-Reed, D., Roberts, L.D., & Heritage, B. (2016). Grades, student satisfaction and retention in online and face-to-face introductory psychology units: A test of equivalency theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–10.

Gomez-Rey, P., Barbera, E., & Fernandez-Navarro, F. (2016). Measuring teachers and learners’ perceptions of the quality of their online learning experience. Distance Education, 37(2), 146–163.

Gray, J. A., & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments.  International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1).

Greene, B.A. (2015). Measuring Cognitive Engagement With Self-Report Scales: Reflections From Over 20 Years of Research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 14–30.

Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. Internet and Higher Education, 20, 20–34.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.

Hubbard, P. (2019). Five keys from the past to the future of CALL. International Journal of ComputerAssisted Language Learning and Teaching, 9(3), 1–13.

Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J. W., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. J. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments To cite this version. Educational Technology Research and Development. 52(3), 47–66.

Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10.

Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS‐SEM: The inverse square root and gamma‐exponential methods. Information systems journal, 28(1), 227-261.

Martin, F., & Bolliger, D.U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 205– 222.

Meskill, C., & Anthony, N. (2014). Managing synchronous polyfocality in new media/new learning: Online language educators’ instructional strategies. System, 42(1), 177–188.

Meyer, K.A. (2014). Student Engagement in Online Learning: What Works and Why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1–114.

Miller, R. B., Greene, B. A., Montalvo, G. P., Ravindran, B., & Nichols, J. D. (1996). Engagement in academic work: The role of learning goals, future consequences, pleasing others, and perceived ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(4), 388–422.

Murillo-Zamorano, L.R., Lopez Sanchez, J.A., & Godoy-Caballero, A.L. (2019). How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: Effects on students’ satisfaction. Computers and Education, 141, 103608.

Ohrstedt, M., & Lindfors, P. (2019). First-semester students’ capacity to predict academic achievement as related to approaches to learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(10), 1420–1432.

Palvia, S., Aeron, P., Gupta, P., Mahapatra, D., Parida, R., Rosner, R., & Sindhi, S. (2018). Online Education: Worldwide Status, Challenges, Trends, and Implications. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 233–241.

Phelps, A., & Vlachopoulos, D. (2019). Successful transition to synchronous learning environments in distance education: A research on entry-level synchronous facilitator competencies. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1511–1527.

Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 183–204.

Richardson, J. C., Besser, E., Koehler, A., Lim, J., & Strait, M. (2016). International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning Instructors ’ Perceptions of Instructor Presence in Online Learning Environments. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(4), 1–14.

Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students’ satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417.

van Rooij, E.C.M., Jansen, E.P.W.A., & van de Grift, W.J.C.M. (2017). Secondary school students’ engagement profiles and their relationship with academic adjustment and achievement in university. Learning and Individual Differences, 54, 9–19.

Tiedt, J.A., Owens, J.M., & Boysen, S. (2021). The effects of online course duration on graduate nurse educator student engagement in the community of inquiry. Nurse Education in Practice, 55, 103164.

Toraman, C., Ozdemir, H. F., Kosan, A. M. A., & Orakci, S. (2020). Relationships between cognitive flexibility, perceived quality of faculty life, learning approaches, and academic achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 85-100.

Torun, E.D. (2013). Synchronous Interaction in Online Learning Environments with Adobe Connect Pro. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 2492–2499.

Turk, M., Heddy, B.C., & Danielson, R.W. (2022). Teaching and social presences supporting basic needs satisfaction in online learning environments: How can presences and basic needs happily meet online?. Computers and Education, 180, 1–15.

Wolverton, C.C. (2018). Utilizing synchronous discussions to create an engaged classroom in online executive education. International Journal of Management Education, 16(2), 239–244.

Wolverton, C.C., Guidry Hollier, B.N., & Lanier, P.A. (2020). The impact of computer self efficacy on student engagement and group satisfaction in online business courses. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 18(2), 175–188.