BA 260 - Introduction to Entrepreneurship
Assessment Spring, 2007

[Return to BA 260 Home Page]

Assessment:

1. Class participation including mandatory attendance at 3 Austin Entrepreneurship Program Activities (individual grade) 10%

2. Entrepreneur interview (written document 10%; KLP presentation 5%) (team grade) 15%

3. Feasibility Plan (written document 20%; presentation 10%) (team grade) 30%

4. Progressive assessment (3 x 15% quizzes) 45%

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 less formal 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 10 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. Consult the course 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 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.

1. Progressive Assessment: There will be progressive assessment throughout the term. Specifically, students will take three quizzes that will contribute 15% each to your final grade (i.e., 45%). Each quiz will consist of 40 multiple choice and 3 short-medium length essay type answer questions that will test knowledge of the key concepts introduced in the chapters of the assigned textbook.

Indicative grading for progressive assessment:

>90: Evidence in short answer questions 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 in short answer questions 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:

A > 92; A- 90-91; B+ 88-89; B 82-87; B- 80-81; C + 78-79; C- 70-71; D+ 68-69; D 62-67; D- 60-61; F <60