Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/56535
Defining Social Entrepreneurship by Dianne H.B. Welsh and Norris Krueger taught by such a wide mix of professors that it's difficult to determine what it is or how it's being taught. Athough most people could agree on a definition of an "entrepreneurial mindset," it is much more difficult to define "a social entrepre- neurial mindset." But if SE is going to grow and evolve, it's important for the field to develop a strong personality and an identifiable set of traits. With that in mind, in 2007 the faculty team of Dianne W Welsh, Norris Krueger, Debbie Brock, and Susan Steiner conducted a survey to discover how SE is being taught in schools right now. To provide some parameters to the programs we studied, we used J.G. Dees' definition of a social entrepreneur: a change agent in the social sector who adopts a mission to create and sustain social value, who engages in continuous innovation, and who exhibits a higher accountability both to constituents and outcomes. After sending surveys to 269 faculty and receiving 145 responses, our team analyzed content in nearly 300 social entrepreneurship syllabi from around the world. We found that most courses are project-based—that is, instructors typi- cally require students either to engage the community through real-world projects or design viable ventures of their own. In addition, most courses place very little emphasis on innovation or ethics, unless they include a heavy dose of sustainability. What we found most compelling about the survey results is the wide range of approaches faculty are taking to teach- ing social entrepreneurship. In this evolving field, what is taught and how it is taught can be highly idiosyncratic. For instance, faculty with no entrepreneurship training are sig- nificantly less likely to use the experiential pedagogies that entrepreneurship-trained faculty take for granted. Instruc- tors who view social entrepreneurs as social activists who happen to have business ventures will teach their courses much differently than instructors who see such individuals as social entrepreneurs. Still Evolving That difference in perception may well be behind the identity crisis that seems to divide the field of social entrepreneurship. 36 BizEd JULY/AUGUST 2009 hile social entrepreneurship is growing more popu- lar on college campuses, the field is so diverse and A passionate 42 percent of our respondents believe that SE should, in fact, be its own field. They argue that it possesses a unique set of characteristics and research agendas that cut across sociology, public policy, social work, urban and com- munity development, education, and business. However, 58 percent believe SE should be taught as part of their schools' general entrepreneurship programs. Entrepre- neurship is still trying to establish itself as a field, they point out, so separating the two disciplines would dilute both. This difference of viewpoint is only one obstacle fac- ing SE. According to the survey, the biggest barrier to social entrepreneurship being taken seriously as an aca- demic field is the schism between SE faculty and profes- sors in other fields. Survey respondents noted other barriers, including lack of acceptance, lack of publication outlets, lack of common language as a discipline, lack of critical faculty, no clear academic home, and no clear-cut research focus. Respondents also believe that there's little demand for graduates except