This paper introduces a course design that used history and inquiry-based learning to develop science students' understanding of invention, innovation and commercialization processes. First, it explains inquiry-based learning and then introduces a sample course design, explaining the rationale, structure and process. Following on from this introduction, a student case study on the development of Taxol is used to show how inquiry-based learning can enhance science students' understanding of entrepreneurial processes. The case study provides an illustration of the forms of knowledge gained through the use of inquiry-based learning. The paper concludes by highlighting the benefits and challenges of this type of course for the students and pointing out how such a course can provide a different approach for entrepreneurship education targeted at science and engineering students.
BeeE. (2003), ‘Knowledge networks and technical invention in America's metropolitan areas: A paradigm for high-technology economic development’, Economic Development Quarterly, Vol 17, No 2, p 115.
2.
BirkinshawJ. (2000), Entrepreneurship in the Global Firm, Sage, London.
3.
BirleyS. (1985), ‘The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 1, No 1, p 107.
4.
BlumenfeldP.C.SolowayE.MarxR.KrajcikJ.S.GuzdialM.PalincsarA. (1991), ‘Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning’, Educational Psychologist, Vol 26, pp 369–398.
5.
BrewA. (2001), The Nature of Research: Inquiry in Academic Contexts, Routledge Falmer, London.
6.
ChesbroughH. (2002), Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Publishing, Cambridge, MA.
7.
ChesnoffS. (1995), ‘The use of Taxol as a trademark’, Nature, Vol 374, March, p 208.
8.
ConwayS. (1995), ‘Informal boundary-spanning communication in the innovation process: An empirical study’, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol 7, No 3, p 327.
9.
DeweyJ. (1964), ‘Progressive organization of subject matter’, in ArchambaultR.D., ed, John Dewey on Education: Selected Writings, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, pp 373–387.
10.
EdelsonD.C.GordinD.N.PeaR.D. (1999), ‘Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design’, Journal of Learning Sciences, Vol 8, No 3&4, pp 391–450.
11.
FritschM., (2001), ‘Co-operation in regional innovation systems’, Regional Studies, Vol 35, No 4, p 297.
12.
GartnerW.B.VesperK.H. (1994), ‘Experiments in entrepreneurship education: Successes and failures’, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol 9, No 3, p 179.
13.
GemundenH.HeydebreckP.HerdenR. (1992), ‘Technological interweavement: A means of achieving innovation success’, R & D Management, Vol 22, No 4, p 359.
14.
GibbA., (2002), ‘In pursuit of a new enterprise and entrepreneurship paradigm for learning: Creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of knowledge’, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol 4, No 3, pp 213–232.
15.
GoodmanJ.WalshV. (2001), The Story of Taxol, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
16.
GormanG.HanlonD.KingW. (1997), ‘Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small business management: A ten-year literature review’, International Small Business Journal, Vol 15, No 3, pp 56–78.
17.
HandscombeR.KothariS.Rodriguez-FalconE.PattersoE. (2007), ‘Embedding enterprise in science and engineering departments’, NCGE Working Paper No 025/2007, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship, Birmingham.
18.
HannonP. (2005), ‘Philosophies of enterprise and entrepreneurship education and challenges for higher education in the UK’, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, Vol 6, No 2, pp 105–114.
19.
HendryC.BrownJ.DefillippiR. (2000), ‘Regional clustering of high technology-based firms: Opto-electronics in three countries’, Regional Studies, Vol 34, No 2, p 129.
20.
JenkinsA.BreenR.LindsayR.BrewA. (2003), Reshaping Teaching in Higher Education: Linking Teaching with Research, Kogan Page, London.
21.
KhanP.O'RourkeK. (2005), ‘Understanding enquiry-based learning’, in BarrettT.MacLabhrainnI.FallonH., eds, Handbook of Enquiry and Problem Based Learning, CELT, Galway, www.aishe.org/readings/2005-2/contents.html.
Nature (1995), ‘Names for hi-jacking’, Nature, Vol 373, February, p 370.
24.
PittawayL.CopeJ. (2007a), ‘Entrepreneurship education – a systematic review of the evidence’, International Small Business Journal, Vol 25, No 5, pp 477–506.
25.
PittawayL.CopeJ. (2007b), ‘Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Assessing the utility of experiential learning designs’, Management Learning, Vol 38, No 2, pp 211–233.
26.
PittawayL.HannonP. (2008), ‘Institutional strategies for developing enterprise education: A conceptual analysis’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol 15, No 1, pp 202–226.
27.
PittawayL.HannonP.GibbA.ThompsonJ. (2009), ‘Assessment in enterprise education’, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, Vol 15, No 1, pp 71–93.
28.
PittawayL.RobertsonM.MunirK.DenyerD.NeelyA. (2004), ‘Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence’, International Journal of Management Reviews, vol 5/6, No 3&4, pp 137–168.
29.
RagatzG.HandfieldR.ScannellT. (1997), ‘Success factors for integrating suppliers into new product development’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol 14, No 3, p 190.
30.
RevansR.W. (1982), The Origin and Growth of Action Learning. Chartwell Bratt, London.
31.
WallM.E. (1998), ‘Medicinal’, Research Reviews, Vol 18, No 5, pp 299–314.
