ENTREP 7049OL - Entrepreneurship Research in Practice
Online - Quadmester 1 - 2016
General Course Information
Course Code ENTREP 7049OL Course Entrepreneurship Research in Practice Coordinating Unit Entrepreneurship, Commercialisation & Innov Centre Term Quadmester 1 Level Postgraduate Coursework Location/s Online Units 3 Contact approx 4 hours per week over 10 weeks (interaction and preparation) Available for Study Abroad and Exchange Course Description This course explores the world of entrepreneurship theory and focuses on the skills needed to read academic research papers and write within academic standards. We will examine how to construct and write academic arguments based upon the empirical, theoretical and conceptual research of others. The course will cover selecting a research topic, defining the research question(s), preparing and organising a thesis structure, ethical considerations, referencing styles and formatting and how specifically to prepare a literature review and a research proposal. At the end of this course, you will - Know how to select and prepare a research topic; - Be able to design a literature search strategy based upon key concepts; - Be able to cite and reference materials correctly; - Understand the structure of a research thesis; and - Produce an academic literature review paper.
Course Coordinator: Dr Allan O'ConnorProgram Director Contact Details:
Innovation and Entrepreneurship (PG)
Name: Dr Allan O’Connor
Phone: +61 8 8313 0188
Teaching Staff:Short Bio:
Name: Dr Alistair Campbell
Alistair has a background in Engineering and Business, and a career that spans both industry and academia. After venturing into his own business for several years, he joined the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town. He left there to join the University of South Australia in 2005. In 2001 he spent a year's sabbatical at Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne studying non-linear aspects of Entrepreneurship at the AGSE under Emeritus Professor Murray Gillin. His research interests include: Applications of Systems Thinking, Innovation & Entrepreneurial Strategy, Human Dynamics in New Ventures, and Renewable Energy Systems.
The full timetable of all activities for this course can be accessed from Course Planner.Monday 11-January to Sunday 20-March 2016
Course Learning OutcomesThe key learning objectives of this course are to develop:
1. A framework to guide the development of an independent research project in an area of your interest within the field of entrepreneurship, by:
a. selecting relevant research topics, encompassing the question to be addressed, appropriate theories and potential
b. designing a literature search strategy based upon key concepts;
c. developing skills to review, analyse and critique research literature;
d. demonstrating citation and referencing skills to an academic and publishable standard.
2. A familiarity with the field of entrepreneurship research and to engage in the entrepreneurship literature, including:
a. the history and development of the field;
b. the main knowledge areas and sub-topics;
c. and the current debates at the research frontier.
University Graduate Attributes
This course will provide students with an opportunity to develop the Graduate Attribute(s) specified below:
University Graduate Attribute Course Learning Outcome(s) Deep discipline knowledge
- informed and infused by cutting edge research, scaffolded throughout their program of studies
- acquired from personal interaction with research active educators, from year 1
- accredited or validated against national or international standards (for relevant programs)
1a & 2 Critical thinking and problem solving
- steeped in research methods and rigor
- based on empirical evidence and the scientific approach to knowledge development
- demonstrated through appropriate and relevant assessment
1b-c, 2b-c Teamwork and communication skills
- developed from, with, and via the SGDE
- honed through assessment and practice throughout the program of studies
- encouraged and valued in all aspects of learning
1a & 2c Career and leadership readiness
- technology savvy
- professional and, where relevant, fully accredited
- forward thinking and well informed
- tested and validated by work based experiences
1a-b, 1d & 2a Intercultural and ethical competency
- adept at operating in other cultures
- comfortable with different nationalities and social contexts
- able to determine and contribute to desirable social outcomes
- demonstrated by study abroad or with an understanding of indigenous knowledges
1a & 1d Self-awareness and emotional intelligence
- a capacity for self-reflection and a willingness to engage in self-appraisal
- open to objective and constructive feedback from supervisors and peers
- able to negotiate difficult social situations, defuse conflict and engage positively in purposeful debate
1c & 2c
Required ResourcesThe University’s preferred textbook supplier is Unibooks: http://www.unibooks.com.au/
Bui, Y. N. (2014). How to write a Master’s Thesis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California, USE: Sage Publications Inc.
Also available through Google Books eVersion:
A number of selected readings will be assigned on the history of entrepreneurship research, selected sub-topics, and current
debates. Completion of all assigned readings is compulsory.
Recommended ResourcesAdditional Online Resources that may assist
Murray, R. (2011). How to write a Thesis, Open University Press, McGraw Hill Education, England.
Available at: http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9nzaT3M7IK4C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=how+to+write+a+masters+thesis&ots=OR_RvFI2lP&sig=Jlg4C8WbutMWdF1EJGsINqqg_k8#v=onepage&q=how%20to%20write%20a%20masters%20thesis&f=false
Whisker, G. (2008), The Postgraduate Research Handbook: Succeed with Your MA, MPhil, EdD and PhD, Palgrave MacMillan, New
Evans, D., Gruba, P. & Zobel, J. (2011), How To Write A Better Thesis, Melbourne University Publishing, Australia.
Available at: http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fYvzUnX4N14C&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=how+to+write+a+masters+thesis&ots=2HYG3nACqx&sig=3zcjCTEO94TjmTo7q3E9W5TXVpQ#v=onepage&q=how%20to%20write%20a%20masters%20thesis&f=false
Additional Print Resources
The following authors and texts may be useful in developing research approaches. While the dates may be a little old in some cases, more up to date editions by these authors are available.
· Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, California.
· Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2003). The Landscape of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, California, USA.
· Johnson, R. B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
· Neuman, W. L. (1994). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (2nd ed.). Massachusetts, USA: Allyn and Bacon.
· Sharp, J. A. & Howard, K. (1996). The Management of a Student Research Project, England: Gower Publishing Ltd.
· Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications, Inc.
· Veal, A. J. (2005). Business Research Methods: A Managerial Approach, Australia: Pearson Education Australia.
The University of Adelaide’s Barr Smith Library provides a range of learning resources including texts, journals, periodicals, magazines, and access to online databases and information services. It also offers a virtual library which is accessible via the University’s website. The University Library web page is: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/library/
From this link, you are able to access the Library's electronic resources.
Online LearningLEARN is the University of Adelaide's online learning environment for this course.
Learning & Teaching Activities
Learning & Teaching Modes
No information currently available.
No information currently available.
Learning Activities SummaryThis is a draft schedule and session dates are a guide only. The timetable may be changed during the course delivery if necessary.
Week Content Readings/Activities 1 Introduction and the Research Problem Bui (2014) Chapters 1 & 2
Draft a research topic and question
2 Reading & Reviewing The Literature – Part 1 Bui (2014) Chapter 3
Conduct a literature search on key terms related to your research topic
3 Reading & Reviewing The Literature – Part 2 Bui (2014) Chapters 3 & 4 4 Choosing Interesting Research Topics: Writing an Introduction Bui (2014) Chapter 2 & 5
Develop the key issues that shape your research topic
5 Literature Analysis & Critique: Writing a Literature Review Selected readings
6 History of Entrepreneurship Research & Main Sub-Topics Selected readings 7 Current Debates in Entrepreneurship Research Selected readings 8 Making an Impact: Writing a Discussion & Conclusion Bui (2014) Chapter 9
Develop the storyline and trace the thread of your Literature Review
9 Research Ethics; Formatting and Referencing, Setting up Styles
Bui (2014) Chapter 9
Develop the storyline and trace the thread of your Literature Review
10 Wrap up Research Project Literature Review
Specific Course RequirementsNone
The University's policy on Assessment for Coursework Programs is based on the following four principles:
- Assessment must encourage and reinforce learning.
- Assessment must enable robust and fair judgements about student performance.
- Assessment practices must be fair and equitable to students and give them the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned.
- Assessment must maintain academic standards.
Asssessment No. Form of Assessment/ Collaborative Task Length (in word count) Weighting Due Learning Outcome 1 Contribution to Discussion N/A
1, 2 2 Literature Analysis Min 1500 words, but
expect ~5 pages
30% Day 7
1a, 1c, 2b, 2c 3 Research Project Literature Review Max 5000 words 60% Day 7Week 5 1, 2b, 2c Total 100%
Assessment Related RequirementsCandidates will be assessed by engaged participation (including contribution to class discussions), and submission of two assignments. All assignments must be completed to be eligible to pass the course. Coverage of the lecture materials and
participation in the presentation sessions are compulsory.
It is expected that assignments will be typed in English, using word processing software such as Microsoft Word. The preference is for you to submit an electronic word file.
Don’t cram too many words onto a page: use a line spacing of 1.5 lines.
Students must complete all course assessment requirements and must regularly consult with the lecturer to be eligible to pass the course.
Course results are subject to moderation by the ECIC Board of Examiners
Assessment DetailAssessment 1: Contribution to Discussion
Due Dates: Weeks 1-10
You are expected to complete all assigned readings, actively contribute to their discussion and debate; as well as initiate and comment upon issues throughout the course.
It is requisite that each individual participant fully contributes to the group learning environment.
Length and Presentation:
Successful online learning requires active discussion area participation.
Substantive participation is measured by recording the posting date on which a student makes a substantive posting in the classroom. Examples of substantive participation do not include the posting of assignments or a question you might have for the
teaching staff or the group. Substantive participation does include responses to discussion questions as well as discourse between students related to the subject matter. Substantive responses must be based upon the course content, theory, or personal experiences, not mere opinion. A simple "I agree" will not count.
Substantive responses also should include appropriate documentation/citation where appropriate. The point value of participation in the learning experience is defined within each assignment as presented in the assignment pages associated with each course;
and/or as directed by the teaching staff.
Students must contribute to the class discussion in a substantive way each week. As a general rule of thumb, students need to post at least 2-3 substantive responses each week beyond the posting of assignments. However, students should not be
limited in the number of discussion postings that they contribute each week. Quantity is considered important, but the quality of the responses is even more important.
Students are expected to read all discussion area postings. The quality of the student responses will be graded. Students will earn weekly participation grades based upon the quality of their responses to weekly assignments, including discussion questions.
Posting assignments or emails to students and/or teaching staff outside of classroom threads does not count as discussion participation.
Participation in the discussion area must be completed before 11:59:59 pm ACST/ACDT. For participation to count for grades or assignments, it must be submitted within this time period and by the specified due day.
Criteria by which your assignment will be assessed:
You will receive a combined participation grade for all of the discussions on a cumulative basis worth 100 points and a total of 10% toward your final grade. These will be graded in two sections as Weeks 1-5 and Weeks 6-10. Grades for discussion responses will be posted in at the end of the course.
Keep in mind, your responses must be posted to the forum by the specified due dates. Late postings will not be accepted.
Assessment 2: Literature Analysis
Due Dates: Day 7, Week 5
Task: Prepare an analysis and critique of a current debate in entrepreneurship research. You are assigned a series of journal article reading which discuss the reasons for and merits of using business plans during the start-up process:
Delmar, F., & Shane, S. (2003). Does business planning facilitate the development of new ventures? Strategic Management Journal, 24(12), 1165-1185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.349
Honig, B., & Karlsson, T. (2004). Institutional forces and the written business plan. Journal of Management, 30(1), 29-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2002.11.002
Honig, B., & Samuelsson, M. (2014). Data replication and extension: A study of business planning and venture-level performance. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 1–2(0), 18-25. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2014.09.006
Delmar, F. (2015). A response to Honig and Samuelsson (2014). Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 3(0), 1-4. doi:
Davidsson, P. (2015). Data replication and extension: A commentary. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 3(0), 12-15. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2015.02.001
Please review these articles and discuss the reasons for (and the veracity of) the divergent claims made by these authors regarding the use of business plans. Based on your review and analysis of these articles, you are required to take a position, either for or against the use of business plans in new ventures. Please motivate your response based on the literature and provide support using other scholarly resources. Discuss any limitations of, or conditions for your findings.
This assessment item is designed to cover the review, analysis and critique of a series of journal articles regarding a single topic in entrepreneurship.
Length and Presentation:
The body of the literature analysis report should at minimum be 1,500 words; however something in the order of 5 pages is expected. Appendices may be used for supporting documents or summary tables of analysis to the extent that is appropriate. The report should be submitted as an electronic version in WORD. No report will be accepted in Adobe Portable Document Files (pdf) (they cannot be electronically marked). All reference material must be correctly cited and referenced in APA style.
Criteria by which your assignment will be marked:
· Analysis & critique (50%): Competent analysis and appropriate critique of the research articles provided.
· Theory & support (30%): Demonstrated use of relevant resources and theory including synthesis of associated literature to
· Presentation & clarity (20%): Provision of compelling and coherent arguments for positions taken using clear language
Assessment 2: Marking Rubric
Indicative Levels Criterion Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Competent analysis and appropriate critique of the research articles provided
Does not provide
useful or appropriately critical analysis of literature. Analytical basis is insufficiently developed
Some issues with the literature analysis. Analysis is descriptive rather than critical. Analytical base requires further development Appropriate
literature analysis, including a somewhat critical investigation. Analytical base is adequate, though some elements missing
literature analysis, including sufficiently critical investigation. Good
analytical base with elements of clarity
analysis, including highly critical investigation. Excellent analytical base providing clear and compelling insights
Demonstrated use of relevant resources and theory including synthesis of
associated literature to support arguments
Scant or no application of theory or poor supporting resources. Little or no attempt to synthesise information Applies some theory and minimal use of supporting resources, but misses important concepts or resources. Some synthesis of information Applies appropriate theory and concepts, and good use of supporting resources. Does not synthesise all information Applies highly appropriate theory and concepts, and
good use of supporting resources. Good synthesis of information
Applies most appropriate theory and concepts, and excellent use of supporting resources. Comprehensive synthesis of all information Provision of compelling and coherent arguments for positions taken using clear
language and expression
Argument is unclear and report contains material that is not relevant or coherent. Language and
expression is poorly presented
Argument is somewhat clear but broad or requiring structure. Report contains relevant material, but lacks coherence. Language and expression has some issues Argument is clear and logically structured. Report is relevant but requires refinement. Language and expression is adequately presented
Argument is persuasive and material presented is relevant and coherent. Language and expression is good, presenting a clear message Argument is convincing, highly refined and focused. Language
and expression is excellent, with exceptional clarity of message
Assessment 3: Research Project Literature Review
Due Dates: Day 7, Week 10
Prepare a research topic literature review in two parts. The first part develops the rationale for your future research project and research question framing its relevance and importance to particular stakeholders. The second part details the basis of academic literature that grounds your research question in theory. All reference material must be correctly cited and referenced in APA tyle.
The Research Project Literature Review will include the project’s aims and rationale and provide a literature review.
This assessment item is designed to be a major contribution to your Master’s Research Project and as such should be scoped to provide an appropriate platform to anchor discussions with your supervisors. It is also likely that as the Research develops there will be later modifications to the work presented at this time.
Length and Presentation:
Presentation will be in the format of a literature review in the style of an academic paper. The typical length will be between 3,000-4,000 words.
Criteria by which your assignment will be marked:
This assignment will be assessed on the overall basis of completeness, presentation and clarity of your Project rationale and research literature review. The document should reflect professional academic quality. The aims should be clear; the rationale well defined; the theoretical research area should be clearly justified with preliminary investigations detailed. The relationship
between your chosen topic and literature should be explicit, reasoned and argued.
The Research Project Literature Review Outline will need to demonstrate appropriate use of references. (Use the APA referencing system).
Specifically the criteria by which you will be assessed by are (refer also attached rubric):
· The relevance of your literature search and articulation of key concepts (40%)
· The strength of your arguments in linking the rationale to an academic theoretical base (40%)
· Accurate citations and referencing in APA style (10%)
· Overall presentation including correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation (10%)
Assessment 3: Marking Rubric
Indicative Levels Criterion Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction The relevance of your literature search and articulation of the study’s key concept(s) An inadequate
presentation of literature and poor extraction and/or articulation of key
A minimal literature
review and/or loosely or vaguely defined key concepts
An adequate literature review with defined key concept(s) needing further development A substantial literature review with clearly defined key concept(s) needing a little refinement A thorough literature review and a tightly defined investigation of refined key concept(s) The strength of your arguments in linking the
rationale to an academic theoretical base
There is no obvious
connection between the rationale of the project and academic theory
There is vague connection between the rationale of the project and academic theory
There is a clear connection between the rationale of the project and academic theory although the theory is minimally developed
There is a clear connection between the rationale of the project and academic theory although it is sufficient it could be better developed
There is obvious connection between the rationale of the project and
academic theory which is explicit and precise
Accurate citations and referencing in APA style Citations and
references not provided
Limited citations and references provided and presentation of APA style is inaccurate. Adequate citations and references with some inaccuracies in presentation of APA style. Well cited and referenced with only minor inaccuracies presentation of APA style.
Strongly cited and referenced with thoroughly accurate presentation of APA style.
Overall presentation and writing including correct grammar, spelling, and
Poor presentation and incomprehensible writing with substandard grammar, spelling and punctuation. Adequate presentation
and comprehensible writing but frequent errors in grammar, spelling and
and comprehensible writing with occasional errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation.
Good presentation and comprehensible writing with few errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation. Excellent and
professional presentation with flawless grammar, spelling and punctuation
No information currently available.
Grades for your performance in this course will be awarded in accordance with the following scheme:
M10 (Coursework Mark Scheme) Grade Mark Description FNS Fail No Submission F 1-49 Fail P 50-64 Pass C 65-74 Credit D 75-84 Distinction HD 85-100 High Distinction CN Continuing NFE No Formal Examination RP Result Pending
Further details of the grades/results can be obtained from Examinations.
Grade Descriptors are available which provide a general guide to the standard of work that is expected at each grade level. More information at Assessment for Coursework Programs.
Final results for this course will be made available through Access Adelaide.
The University places a high priority on approaches to learning and teaching that enhance the student experience. Feedback is sought from students in a variety of ways including on-going engagement with staff, the use of online discussion boards and the use of Student Experience of Learning and Teaching (SELT) surveys as well as GOS surveys and Program reviews.
SELTs are an important source of information to inform individual teaching practice, decisions about teaching duties, and course and program curriculum design. They enable the University to assess how effectively its learning environments and teaching practices facilitate student engagement and learning outcomes. Under the current SELT Policy (http://www.adelaide.edu.au/policies/101/) course SELTs are mandated and must be conducted at the conclusion of each term/semester/trimester for every course offering. Feedback on issues raised through course SELT surveys is made available to enrolled students through various resources (e.g. MyUni). In addition aggregated course SELT data is available.
- Academic Support with Maths
- Academic Support with writing and speaking skills
- Student Life Counselling Support - Personal counselling for issues affecting study
- International Student Support
- AUU Student Care - Advocacy, confidential counselling, welfare support and advice
- Students with a Disability - Alternative academic arrangements
- Reasonable Adjustments to Teaching & Assessment for Students with a Disability Policy
- LinkedIn Learning
Policies & Guidelines
This section contains links to relevant assessment-related policies and guidelines - all university policies.
- Academic Credit Arrangement Policy
- Academic Honesty Policy
- Academic Progress by Coursework Students Policy
- Assessment for Coursework Programs
- Copyright Compliance Policy
- Coursework Academic Programs Policy
- Elder Conservatorium of Music Noise Management Plan
- Intellectual Property Policy
- IT Acceptable Use and Security Policy
- Modified Arrangements for Coursework Assessment
- Student Experience of Learning and Teaching Policy
- Student Grievance Resolution Process
Students are reminded that in order to maintain the academic integrity of all programs and courses, the university has a zero-tolerance approach to students offering money or significant value goods or services to any staff member who is involved in their teaching or assessment. Students offering lecturers or tutors or professional staff anything more than a small token of appreciation is totally unacceptable, in any circumstances. Staff members are obliged to report all such incidents to their supervisor/manager, who will refer them for action under the university's student’s disciplinary procedures.
The University of Adelaide is committed to regular reviews of the courses and programs it offers to students. The University of Adelaide therefore reserves the right to discontinue or vary programs and courses without notice. Please read the important information contained in the disclaimer.