|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BA 260 - Introduction to
Entrepreneurship
DRAFT VERSION
Assessment,Spring 2005
[Return to BA 260 Home Page]
1. Class participation including mandatory attendance at 3 Austin Entrepreneurship Program Activities (individual grade) 10%
2. Entrepreneur interview (written document 15%; KLP presentation 5%) (team grade) 20%
3. Feasibility Plan (written document 20%; presentation 10%) (team grade) 30%
4. Final exam 40%
1. Class Participation: Entrepreneurship is a “full contact”
activity and it is expected that students engage in lively class discussions.
Optimum learning will occur if students arrive to each session adequately
prepared. Quality input to all class activities will secure a good class
participation grade. Participation does not equate to attendance…class
attendance is mandatory. Students will also be required to attend at least 3
Austin Entrepreneurship Program (AEP) activities over the course of the term
and submit a brief emailed summary that includes 3 key learning points (KLPs).
These activities include attending sessions with visiting Weatherford Fellows
or attending Entrepreneurship Society meetings or entrepreneurship related
lectures etc. that will be advertised in class and via the weekly email
bulletin. The purpose of these sessions is to promote “out of the classroom”
learning in informal settings.
Indicative grading for class
participation:
>90: Attend ALL class sessions having completed chapter reading and contributed to class discussion and attending 3 AEP activities.
80-90: Attend MOST class sessions (i.e., missed only 1-2 sessions) having completed chapter reading and contributed to class discussion and attending 2 AEP activities.
70-79: Attend MOST class sessions (i.e., missed only 1-2 sessions) with minimal preparation and contribution and attending only 1 AEP activity.
<70: Spasmodic class attendance with minimal preparation and contribution and not attending any AEP activities.
2.
Entrepreneur
Interview: In
session two, students will be required to form into teams (maximum of four per
team). Each team will be required to conduct an interview with an entrepreneur.
Application of the themes and issues covered in lectures and/or class
discussion are the keys to a good grade. Each team member will be required to
share equally in this assignment and submit a signed declaration that this was
the case. There are three submission requirements:
(1) a one-page outline detailing the entrepreneur whom
your team will interview is due in session four (this submission will not be
graded);
(2) a
paper (maximum 12 pages, 12-point font, double-spaced) that links the course
concepts to the information gathered from the entrepreneur in the interview
(email me a copy of the paper as well so I can include it in the Weatherford
collection); and
(3) each team will be required to share the key learning
points (KLPs) that they gained from the interview process with the class in a
semi-formal presentation. These presentations will take place at the
commencement of classes in the second half of the semester. Time slots will be
allocated in session six. Presentations will be graded. Marking criteria will be
distributed for all assessment items.
(4) In order for scholars to continue to understand the
role of education in the entrepreneurial process, consider including the
following questions in your interview:
· What is your undergraduate degree (if any...)?
· Do you have a graduate degree (if yes, what discipline? Did it include any entrepreneurship courses?)
· How did your studies prepare you to become an entrepreneur?
· What was the most useful class or experience you had?
· What is the most important skill that entrepreneurs need to learn?
· How best would that skill be taught?
· (optional) Do you consider yourself an entrepreneur, an inventor, or a business person?
Consult the course Outlook webfolder for examples from previous groups.
Indicative grading for
entrepreneur interview:
>90: Team shared workload; identified entrepreneur early; submitted
outline and paper on time; comprehensive application of course concepts to
interviewee; professional approach and follow-up (e.g., thank you letter sent)
80-90: Team shared workload etc. adequate but limited application of
course concepts in write-up.
70-79: Adequate application of course concepts but imbalance in team
(e.g., one person carries the workload)
<70: Unprofessional and disorganized team dynamics combined with failure
to apply concepts to interviewee.
3.
Feasibility
Plan: Student teams will be
required to identify an entrepreneurial business opportunity (with a potential
for high growth) and conduct a thorough feasibility study for the proposed
business using the template that will be distributed in class and posted on the
course web-page. Again, there
are three submission requirements:
(1) a one-page outline detailing the opportunity on which
you are going to conduct your feasibility plan is due in session eight (this submission
will not be graded);
(2) a
professionally presented feasibility plan (maximum 20 pages, 12-point font)
(a sample plan is included in course materials folder); and
(3) each team will be required to present their plans to the
class (and representatives from the investment and business community) in a
business plan competition format in the final weeks of the course.
Further
clarification will be provided in early lecture sessions. Marking criteria will
be distributed for all assessment items.
Indicative grading for
feasibility plan projects:
>90: Team shared
workload; identified business opportunity early; submitted outline and paper on
time; comprehensive, professionally produced paper that includes evidence of
demand for product/service, adequate overview of market, economics and plan for
further action etc.
80-90: Team shared
workload etc. but limited evidence of comprehension of market demand, economics
etc.
70-79: Adequate
evidence of market demand, economics etc. but imbalance in team.
<70:
Unprofessional and dysfunctional team dynamics combined with failure to
comprehend the market demand, economics etc.
4. Final Exam: The final exam will consist of: (1) short answer questions that will test knowledge of the key concepts introduced in the assigned textbook, and (2) a case study analysis.
Indicative grading for final
exam:
>90: Evidence of thorough understanding of course concepts combined with application to case studies and examples introduced throughout the term; a balanced exam that includes a high degree of interpretation and insightful analysis etc.
80-90: Evidence of understanding of course concepts but limited application etc.
70-80: Limited understanding of course concepts and scant application to case examples etc.
<70: Poor understanding of course concepts and failure to apply to case examples etc.
The following (final) grade cut-offs will be employed in this class: