Curriculum of Entrepreneurship in Institutions of Higher Learning: A Critical Analysis

Abstract

Entrepreneurship education in India, or for that matter anywhere else, is of recent origin. In fact, few until very recently believed that entrepreneurs could be created through educational endeavours, or that entrepreneurship could be a matter of training. For well-over a century or longer, entrepreneurship was confined to economic literature as a mere concept to explain the process of production, without giving much practical value to those concerned with the mundane task of enterprise development. Educational intervention in entrepreneurship was given less importance due to its emphasis on market mechanism which was being considered the principal driving force behind economic changes. The situation remained more or less unchanged until post world war 11 when the concern for economic development became all pervasive. At that time, the need to improve the human factor in production began to be increasingly recognised. Scholars of other disciplines also, such as psychology, which had remained practically aloof from entrepreneurial theorisation previously, entered the arena. Their primary interest was not to define the entrepreneur or his place in the development process. They were more interested in analysing the psychological variables responsible for creating an entrepreneurial personality, and suggesting the ways and means to develop these traits (Tripathi & Mehta, 1990). Perhaps, the pioneer in this genre of works was David C. McClelland. He (1961) asserted that n. ach., i.e. 'need for achievement' or 'achievement motivation' was the central force behind entrepreneurial manifestations and that this quality can, in fact, be developed. He, even, conducted a few experiments, of which the one at Kakinada in Andhra Pradesh in 1964 is the best known, through which he tried to establish that motivation for economic success can be induced through appropriate training and teaching. None, however, picked up the thread which McClelland had left until Gujarat took the lead in organising the first Entrepreneurship Development Programme (EDP) in 1970 (Patel 1981). Progress since then has been swift and by now entrepreneurship development (ED)' has become almost a movement. Various Institutes and Centres, both governmental and non-governmental (NGO), are organising ED Programmes in one form or the other. Institutions of higher learning like Engineering Colleges and Business Schools have also started introducing entrepreneurship in their formal curricula. A number of engineering colleges and polytechnics have created Entrepreneurship Development Cells (EDCs), in association with National Science & Technology Entrepreneurship Development Board (NSTEDB), Department of Science & Technology, Government of India with objective of carrying out ED related activities within the institutions, as well as in nearby areas. It has been observed, that unlike many other programmes of applied education, the entrepreneurship development programmes and courses seem to have had less impact. This is reflected in the lukewarm response of students towards taking entrepreneurship as a career option. Only about one-third or even less of those receiving entrepreneurship training as a part of entrepreneurship development programmes actually launch their own enterprises (Awasthi & Sebastian, 1992; Patel, 1991). The situation is more or less similar or even worse in case of academic institutions, if their objective is to create entrepreneurs. The country's premier management educational institution, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad (IIMA) has included entrepreneurship education as an elective course in second year of its Post-Graduation Programme. The objective is to motivate and help students to become entrepreneurs. A study shows that not many of them chose to become entrepreneurs, though their interest towards it as a career option was observed to be increasing later on. (Ramchandran, 1991). The proportion of the students of other programmes joining their respective operating systems is much larger; in some cases it is close to 100% (like management institutions). The products of entrepreneurship education have not been by and large very conspicuous on the contours of Indian Entrepreneurship. Significantly enough during the last three decades, which have witnessed the consolidation of EDP movement, none among the new breed or prominent Indian entrepreneurs have emerged out of the EDP stream. The print and electronic media is filled with success stories of entrepreneurs who parlay their resources into fortunes with little knowledge but great determination. Most of them had no formal training in entrepreneurship (Jain, 1988). The purpose of an educational programme and thus its impact would broadly depend on two crucial factors; (i) quality of intake and (ii) the nature of the academic input. The quality of intake would depend on admission policies and criteria. In case of entrepreneurship education, we need to standardise the same. The more important and matter of utmost concern is the nature of the "academic input. EDPs, offered by various organisations, are often not based on an rigorous criteria. A considerable variation has been found not only in the duration of the on programme and the other but also in the academic input. Different programmes have given different emphasis on different aspects (Shukla, 1994). Not only in India, the situation is more or less similar in other countries too (Ray, 1993). In case of educational programmes of institutions of higher learning offered as a part of formal system, we do not have any substantial data or findings, though such an analysis could be highly relevant, in the context of entrepreneurship education.