Entrepreneurship 4.0: Young learners' perspectives on traditional and techno-pedagogical approaches

Abdellatif Marjani; Assia Dlimi; Abdelhak Chakli; Youssef Sefri

doi:10.55056/etq.1215

Authors

Abdellatif Marjani University of Hassan II Casablanca https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8677-8192
Assia Dlimi University of Hassan II Casablanca https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6520-0660
Abdelhak Chakli University of Hassan II Casablanca https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8993-6566
Youssef Sefri University of Hassan II Casablanca https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5420-0206

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55056/etq.1215

Keywords:

Entrepreneurship 4.0, techno-pedagogy, training, reinvention, education

Abstract

This study examines how Moroccan university students (n = 94, aged 18-25) perceive traditional versus techno-pedagogical approaches to entrepreneurship education in the context of Entrepreneurship 4.0. A mixed-methods design combines a questionnaire with an exploratory workshop in which two groups (n = 10, n = 12) worked on the same entrepreneurial task under different pedagogical conditions, including a simulated technical breakdown for the digital group. Findings show a strong preference for techno-pedagogical approaches, valued for their interaction and engagement; traditional methods are seen as clearer in structure but less effective for innovation and autonomy. Both modalities face constraints: digital tools require infrastructure and teacher preparation; traditional methods struggle to develop practical and creative competencies. The results support a hybrid model that pairs the stability of conventional teaching with the interactivity of digital tools.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Abstract views: 18 / PDF views: 1

References

Biggs, J., Tang, C. and Kennedy, G., 2022. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill Education.

Bonwell, C.C. and Eison, J.A., 1991. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 1). Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. Available from: https://scispace.com/pdf/active-learning-creating-excitement-in-the-classroom-1991-5gd5694owy.pdf.

Brennan, J., Broek, S., Durazzi, N., Kamphuis, B., Ranga, M. and Ryan, S., 2014. Study on innovation in higher education: final report. (European Commission Directorate for Education and Training Study on Innovation in Higher EducationTechnical report). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Available from: https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/55819/.

Bygrave, W.D. and Hofer, C.W., 1991. Theorizing about Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(2), pp.13–22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879201600203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879201600203

Cantillon, R., 1755. Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en Général. Traduit de l’Anglois. Chez Fletcher Gyles dans Holborn. Available from: https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_essai-sur-la-nature-du-c_cantillon-richard_1755/mode/2up.

de Alencar Alves, R., Vidal da Luz, M. and Severo Leite da Silva, A., 2019. Empreendedorismo 4.0: Conceitos e Definições [Entrepreneurship 4.0: Concepts and Definitions]. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Micro e Pequenas Empresas, 5(1), pp.119–136. Available from: https://revistas.editoraenterprising.net/index.php/regmpe/article/view/231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20872/24478407/regmpe.v5n1p119-136

Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M., 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior, Perspectives in Social Psychology. New York and London: Plenum Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7_2

Dede, C., 2009. Immersive Interfaces for Engagement and Learning. Science, 323(5910), pp.66–69. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167311

Drucker, P.F., 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. Harper & Row.

Fleming, N.D. and Mills, C., 1992. Not Another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for Reflection. To Improve the Academy, 11(1), pp.137–155. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.1992.tb00213.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-4822.1992.tb00213.x

Garrison, D.R. and Kanuka, H., 2004. Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), pp.95–105. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001

Gartner, W.B., 1988. “Who Is an Entrepreneur?” Is the Wrong Question. American DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/104225878801200401

Gibb, A., 2002. In pursuit of a new ‘enterprise’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ paradigm for learning: creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of knowledge. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), pp.233–269. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00086

Giones, F. and Brem, A., 2017. Digital Technology Entrepreneurship: A Definition and Research Agenda. Technology Innovation Management Review, 7(5), pp.44–51. Available from: https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1076. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1076

International Commission on the Futures of Education, 2021. Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. Paris: UNESCO. Available from: https://doi.org/10.54675/ASRB4722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54675/ASRB4722

Laurillard, D., 2012. Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. New York: Routledge. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083

Mishra, P. and Koehler, M.J., 2006. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), pp.1017–1054. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610

OECD, 2019. OECD Skills Outlook 2019: Thriving in a Digital World. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1787/df80bc12-en. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/df80bc12-en

OECD/Eurostat, 2005. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities. 3rd ed. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264013100-en. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264013100-en

Redecker, C., 2017. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2760/159770.

Schumpeter, J.A., 1934. The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry Into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle, Harvard Economic Studies, vol. XLVI. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Schwab, K., 2016. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Cologny/Geneva: World Economic Forum. Available from: https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/3385454/Schwab-The_Fourth_Industrial_Revolution_Klaus_S.pdf.

Sweller, J., 1988. Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), pp.257–285. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Vogus, T.J. and Sutcliffe, K.M., 2007. Organizational resilience: Towards a theory and research agenda. 2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. pp.3418–3422. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2007.4414160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2007.4414160