E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A systematic literature review

E-learning in Entrepreneurship
Education: A Systematic
Literature Review
Jingjing Lin
Assistant Professor,
Centre of IT-based Education,
Toyohashi University of Technology
LIN.JINGJING.QC@TUT.JP
(Former JSPS postdoctoral fellow at Kyoto University)
Tomoki Sekiguchi
Professor,
Graduate School of Management,
Kyoto University

What’s the problem
12/10/2020
IEEETALE2020CONFERENCEFULLPAPER
PRESENTATION-(Lin&Sekiguchi,2020)
2

12/10/2020
3
USA: 568 educators from 270 US community colleges (Dominik & Banerji, 2018)

12/10/2020
4
Covid-19 situation: 100% online
0
0
100
0

We only want an extinguisher installed
when an unexpected fire breaks out.
E-Learning
12/10/2020
5
pandemic

Entrepreneurship
education offerings
E-learning E-learning in EE
offering
Before 1960 - Early age of distance
education
-
1960s - - Computer-assisted
distance education
-
1970s - In the USA
1980s - In the UK Web-based distance
education
-
1990s - Across the Europe
2000s - In Asian nations UK: 82 HEIs
(Bennett, 2006)Open and social distance
education2010s - Global USA: 270
community colleges
(Dominik & Banerji,
2018)
12/10/2020
6
Qual.
Quan.

Untrained lecturers
+
Preference in teaching via conventional lectures
and seminars
+
Need to teach online fully
=
What will happen?
12/10/2020
7

My dad tried to ZOOM a workout session for our family
It didn’t work out
12/10/2020
8

Why this study?
12/10/2020
9
E-learning in EE
needs urgent update.
We need to be
informed of
existing
research.
Such synthesis
does not exist.
SLR of
e-learning
in EE
Center of IT-based Education, Toyohashi University of Technology

Research question
12/10/2020
10Center of IT-based Education, Toyohashi University of Technology
What is the research status quo regarding the
integration of e-learning in EE?

Methodology
12/10/2020
11

Step
E-Learning
Journals
(Articles)
Entre-Manage
Journals
(Articles)
Total Journals
(Articles)
Article
Retention Rate
1 71(-) 195(-) 266(-) -
2 71(45,053) 112(60,026) 183(105,079) -
3 65(2,050) 93(2,611) 158(4,661) 4.4%
4 58(571) 77(1,333) 135(1,904) 40.8%
5 12(15) 17(26) 29(41) 2.2%
12/10/2020
Scopus
5/2020, Ar./Re.Ar.
/En
TI, AB, KW
Keywords: Next
slide
Eye screening
Incl.&Excl.: Next
slide
10.13140/RG.2.2.3
4722.66240/1

12/10/2020
13
Journals entrepreneurship and
management journals
e-learning related journals
Keywords (a) “elearn*” or “e-learn*”, or
(b) “online” or “virtual” or
“distan*” cross-referenced
(AND search) with “learn*” or
“course*” or “class*” or
“educat*”, or (c) “MOOC*” or
“massive* open online
course*”
(a) “entrepreneur*” cross-
referenced with “educat*”,
or (b) “entrepreneur*”, or
(c) “business educat*”, or
(d) “entrepreneurship”, or
(e) “enterprise education”
Keywords Back to 5 teps

Inclusion & exclusion
• Relevant: when both aspects of
entrepreneurship education and e-learning are
present in titles or abstracts
• Irrelevant: when at least one of the two aspects
are missing. When an article is about e-learning
and business education at large, we also excluded
it.
12/10/2020
14
Back to 5 teps

• Temporal and spatial distribution and their impact on the
academic community
• VOSviewer: ran co-authorship analysis and citation analysis by
source
• 5W1H model was used to extract semantic elements of each
article
 3W1H (who, what, where, and how)
12/10/2020
15
Data analysis

• Used broad terms in the two domains to conduct the
literature search
• Used VOSviewer to analyze the bibliometric data but our
sample was rather small
• The result of using the 5W1H model was not fully
reported in this paper
• Citation chaining was not included in the procedure
12/10/2020
16
Some limitations

Findings
12/10/2020
17

1. Temporal distribution
• E-learning in EE is surprisingly and disappointedly under-
researched
12/10/2020

• Dispersed publication outlets
 1 art./journal scenario (24 articles)
• Most active journals:
 Journal of Entrepreneurship Education (7 articles)
 Interactive Learning Environments (3)
 Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development (3)
 Knowledge Management and E-Learning (2)
 Simulation and Gaming (2)
• Balanced distribution between business journals and e-learning
journals
12/10/2020
19
2. Spatial distribution
By publication outlet

Inconsistent with Arbaugh et
al. (2009)
• Avoidance of business school
scholars to publish in online
education journals and
inform the broader online
learning research
community
Possible reasons
• Actual improvement after
one decade’s development
(2002–2020) since the
review work of Arbaugh et
al. (2000–2008), or
• The topic’s novelty attracted
pioneer researchers from
both communities
simultaneously
12/10/2020
By publication outlet

Very few serial authors
• 8/103 authors (1<n<3);
others (n=1)
• Co-authorship among 103
authors is rare (2 groups: 5
authors, 4 papers).
Possible reasons
• Temporary research
interests
• Early-stage research field
• Stressing continuity
problem of the topic
12/10/2020
By author

European scholars are most
active
• European scholars are most
active
• USA and UK as the market
leaders of entrepreneurship
education development were
not found representative on the
topic.
Consistent with previous
studies
• Western Europe (especially the
Scandinavian and German-
speaking countries) has
progressed considerably in
offering entrepreneurship
education (Haase and
Lautenschläger, 2011)
• Entrepreneurship education
research is a European
discussion (Blenker et al, 2014)
12/10/2020
By nation

Limited impact.
12/10/2020
23
3. Impact of research
Sum: 748
Max.: 119 (@2014)
Avr.: 18/Art.
18-year citations

What is a good number of citations?
12/10/2020
24
Citation number Percentile 41 studies here
>= 100 Top 1.8% 7.3%
>= 10 Top 24% of the most cited work
worldwide
36.6%
< 10 Common scenario 63.4%
>= 1 Top 55.8% 92.7%
0 Bottom 44% 7.3%
Beaulieu, L. (2015). How many citations are actually a lot of citations?

After 20-year development, what is a
good number of citations?
12/10/2020
25
H-index (average number of
citations per article published)
Percentile
(12: 12 articles with 12+ citations) (41 studies here)
20 Good
40 Outstanding
60 Truly exceptional
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research
output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-
16572.

• Students were the most common sample under study (18 out of 41).
They were from different education levels including secondary
education, undergraduate, and postgraduate education.
Who
12/10/2020
26
4. Thematic dimensions of contents

• Education: Gamification/simulation, social networking, e-mentoring, and
online assessment.
• Learning issues: MOOCs, entrepreneurial traits/characteristics, and
social enterprise/entrepreneurship.
• Students: Learning performance, attitude, and perception of e-learning.
• Usability: Web-based learning, online course, and learning analytics.
What
12/10/2020

• European scholars were comparatively active in researching the
topic of e-learning in entrepreneurship education, followed by their
peers in the USA and some Asian areas such as Taiwan and
Malaysia
12/10/2020
28
Where

• Quantitative research: 68.3% of 41 studies
 Majority used surveying (questionnaire or/and interview)
 Minority used experiment design, or web analytics to obtain data
• Qualitative research: less than 31%
 11 were case studies that reported specific e-learning related practices
 2 were conceptual/commentary
• Different from Blenker et al. (2014) stating that qualitative
approach was more dominant than quantitative approach in EE
research
12/10/2020
29
How

12/10/2020

Summary
12/10/2020
31

• The topic of e-learning in entrepreneurship education is facing urgency
in practice and scarcity in research. This paper reports the first attempt
to systematically examine the status quo of research development in
this field by following a clearly defined review protocol.
• Some methodological observation: The low retention rate showed
that solely relying on automatically generated results from the
academic database engines (i.e., Web of Science or Scopus) without eye
screening can lead to a high risk of biased results due to irrelevant data.
• Sub-topics/concepts as keywords should be used to investigate further.
• Citation chaining should be added to track relevant literature based on
41 articles identified by this study.
12/10/2020

Thank You
ありがとうございました
E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A
Systematic Literature Review
Dr. Jingjing Lin
Assistant Professor,
Centre of IT-based Education,
Toyohashi University of Technology
LIN.JINGJING.QC@TUT.JP
(Former JSPS postdoctoral fellow at Kyoto University)

References
• Bennett, R. (2006). Business lecturers' perceptions of the nature of entrepreneurship.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research.
• F. Lourenço and O. Jones, “Developing entrepreneurship education: comparing traditional
and alternative teaching approaches,” International Journal of Entrepreneurship
Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 111–140, 2006.
• H. Haase and A. Lautenschläger, “The ‘Teachability Dilemma’ of entrepreneurship,”
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 145–162, Jun.
2011.
• J. B. Arbaugh et al., “Research in online and blended learning in the business disciplines:
Key findings and possible future directions,” The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 12,
no. 2, pp. 71–87, 2009.
• M. T. Dominik and D. Banerji, “US community college entrepreneurship educator
practices,” Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 228–
242, 2019.
• P. Blenker et al., “Methods in entrepreneurship education research: a review and
integrative framework,” Education+ Training, vol. 56, no. 8–9, pp. 697–715, 2014.
12/10/2020

E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A systematic literature review

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A systematic literature review

Similaire à E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A systematic literature review (20)

Plus de Jingjing Lin

Plus de Jingjing Lin (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

E-learning in Entrepreneurship Education: A systematic literature review