Teaching international entrepreneurship through student exchange: observations, obstacles and recommendations.

Jones, Scott A. ; Denslow, Diane ; Janssen, Frank 等

ABSTRACT

While most scholars and researchers recognize that entrepreneurship occurs differently in other countries, there are relatively few undergraduate courses that focus on International Entrepreneurship. Further, of those with an International focus, few provide students with an opportunity to interact with aspiring entrepreneurs from other countries. The following summarizes the results of six collaborations intended to test several models for international student exchange. Each of the collaborations included either one or two-way travel among participants, hosting responsibilities, and cultural activities. The authors present a number of observations and obstacles that will assist facilitators interested in providing similar course offerings. The article concludes with recommendations for future course offerings including a sample itinerary.

Keywords

International Entrepreneurship, Student Exchange, Cross-cultural education

INTRODUCTION

Entrepreneurship education was initially introduced in the United States in the late 1940s (Katz, 2003). Since then, the field has witnessed phenomenal growth with over 300 endowed positions, 100 centers and over 550 schools in the U.S. offering entrepreneurship courses both within and outside business schools (Katz, 2003; Kuratko, 2005; 2006). This growth caters to an increasing interest in entrepreneurship courses among students. USA Today (2006) reports Gallop Poll results indicating 69% of high school students are interested in starting their own companies. In addition, some of the leading business schools in the nation (Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Business, Stanford University, and the Harvard MBA program) report growing interest among their students in studying entrepreneurship and/or becoming entrepreneurs (Fiet, 2001a).

More recently, scholars have recognized the importance of the international dimensions of entrepreneurship. International entrepreneurship is defined as "the discovery, enactment, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities--across national borders--to create future goods and services" (McDougall & Oviatt, 2003, p.7). Jones and Oberst (2003) believe that entrepreneurship "must be taught within the global context; lacking that, graduates will be ill prepared to be internationally competitive" (p. 2). While the authors focus on the importance of teaching international entrepreneurship to engineering students, such a focus is relevant for students in other disciplines as well. This is consistent with Bell, Callaghan, Demick and Scharf (2004) who argue that "academic formation ... of international entrepreneurs ... is particularly crucial in light of the emergence of small entrepreneurial 'born global' firms that have been able to take advantage of technological advances to internationalize rapidly" (p. 109). Born global firms are those companies formed expressly with the international market in mind (Oviatt & McDougall, 1994)

Despite an increasing attention from public authorities and researchers (Dana, 2004), the importance of the international dimension of entrepreneurship has had few repercussions on its teaching. A recent web search identified only a handful of American business schools which offer International Entrepreneurship courses (Appendix A). Bell, Callaghan, Demick and Scharf (2004) note that despite the growth in the number of entrepreneurship programs offered at American academic institutions, "their primary focus tends to be on the study of entrepreneurship in a domestic market setting" (p. 110). This observation may be attributed to several factors. First, the majority of the teaching developments in the field of entrepreneurship come from the United States, a country whose domestic market is often self-sufficing for firms. Second, research on international entrepreneurship, which should support education programs, is still in its infancy and has only recently identified the competitive advantages of firms that are born global (Wijewardena & Tibbits, 1990). Third, textbooks and other teaching materials on International Entrepreneurship are rare (for an exception, see Kuemmerle, 2004).

The globalization and internationalization of the business world, however, demands that entrepreneurship educators give more attention to teaching international entrepreneurship. As the 2007 report of the A.T. Kearney / Foreign Policy Globalization Index indicates, U.S. foreign trade grew 12% from the last year, currently estimated to represent 26.2% of the nation's GDP. The Globalization Index Report ranks 72 countries (accounting for 97% of the world's gross domestic product and 88% of the world's population) on 12 variables covering economic integration, personal contact, technological connectivity, and political engagement (Anonymous, 2007). While the U.S.'s ranking as seventh in the world is based mostly on the non-economic measures, the report emphasizes the growing importance of international business to the national economy. Therefore, it is increasingly important for entrepreneurship education to be extended to addressing issues in International Entrepreneurship.

This article expands the knowledge base of international entrepreneurship education and provides a framework for other institutions planning or engaged in similar activities by summarizing the efforts of a consortium developed to offer curriculum in the area of International Entrepreneurship. The participating universities were supported by the Consortium for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises and Entrepreneurship Education (SMEEE), a project funded by the Department of Education's Fund for the Improvement of Post-secondary Education (FIPSE) and the European Commission's Directorate General Education and Culture as an EU/US program for Cooperation in Higher Education and Vocational Education and Training.. The consortium featured three U.S. universities (Appalachian State University in Boone, NC; Clemson University in Clemson, SC; and the University of North Florida in Jacksonville, FL) and three European universities (University of Alicante--Spain, Universite Catholique de Louvain--Belgium and Otto-Friedrich-University in Bamberg, Germany).

The following sections summarize the experiences of the exchange facilitators. University teachers may learn from these experiences and design syllabi that maximize the learning outcomes for students. A more widespread offering of International Entrepreneurship classes in the future will help entrepreneurial students to carefully consider the opportunities and threats of start-up projects in a globalized world.

OBJECTIVES AND LITERATURE REVIEW

A primary objective of the consortium was to develop and implement a variety of collaborative models for teaching International Entrepreneurship. A total of six partnerships were developed and completed. A goal of the consortium was to consider the various "types" of classes that could be combined to create exchange opportunities. Some of the collaborations involved students enrolled in special topic seminars while others involved semester long classes. Each of the collaborations described herein were taught in English.

Each course created by the partnering institutions met several criteria deemed critical for the student experience. First, the consortium members felt it important to establish a common definition of the term international entrepreneurship. As noted by Giamartino, McDougall and Bird (1993), one problem facing international entrepreneurship instructors is the complex definition of the construct. The consortium defined international entrepreneurship as ventures that become international under the founder's tenure and this description guided the development of the various projects used for student assessment.

Each collaboration included an international travel component. A wealth of research indicates that entrepreneurial opportunities may be recognized through "rich and varied life experience" (Baron, 2006, p. 105). Jones and Oberst (2003) believe that cultural understandings and communication strategies are important competencies for every entrepreneurially minded student. They suggest that "institutional and individual partnerships must be created to promote international collaborations, including design projects, international internships, exposure to successful entrepreneurs from other parts of the world including developing countries, etc." (p. 2). Bell et al. (2004) add that "ideally, programs should involve immersion in a foreign market" (p. 119). Research suggests that global literacy, cross-cultural knowledge, and inter-cultural competence can be developed through student exchanges and study abroad experiences (Carlsson-Paige & Lantiere, 2005; Emert & Pearson, 2007). Inter-cultural competence is defined as "the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately in intercultural situations based on one's intercultural knowledge, skills, and attitudes" (Deardorff, 2006, p. 247). As posited by Arpan, Folks and Kwok (1993) among others, creating an awareness, appreciation and understanding of international and cross-cultural issues may help to moderate negative perceptions of risk and build confidence in students considering such ventures (Bell et. al., 2004). Further, successful entrepreneurs often identify areas of opportunity through personal contacts and interpersonal interactions as opposed to public information such as publications or the media (de Clercq & Arenius, 2006).

Consistent with these insights, during each of the week long travel itineraries, students were exposed to a variety of cultural activities reflecting the unique characteristics of the area. This included visiting local companies, historic and or cultural sites, and interactions with students in the host country.

In principle, courses aim at helping students to understand the theoretical bases and specificities of international entrepreneurship, to acquire intercultural skills and, frequently, to develop international projects. At the theoretical level, the collaborations allow students to apprehend the common denominator between entrepreneurship and internationalization (for overviews, see Zahra & George, 2002; McDougall & Oviatt, 2003; Young, Dimitratos, & Dana, 2003), the process of creation and the strategies of an international organization, the cultural norms which result into distinct business practices, the opportunities and threats which such firms have to face, or the legal or social aspects to consider (see Hodgetts, Luthans, & Doh, 2005).

These aspects will be better apprehended by the students if, after teaching the theoretical concepts, the courses are organized around concrete projects. Such international projects can be developed in collaboration with a foreign university in order to make it possible for the students to immerse themselves in other cultures and markets, through regular contacts with their foreign counterparts. Certain programs, for example, require the students to work on a product or a service whose market would be "naturally" international and to develop a business plan around this product or service in collaboration with peers from a foreign institution. That type of course makes it possible to gather students from various universities within an integrated course. These "live" projects are more stimulating for the students and pedagogically richer than case studies, for example (Bell et. al., 2004). A stay abroad, intended to confront them with the cultural differences of entrepreneurial realities, supplements this type of teaching device usefully. One could think of the influence of these differences on the suppliers' or consumers' behaviors on businesses practices, on commercial law, on corporate social responsibility or on business ethics. This stay will make it possible for the students to attend classes, to visit companies or to interact with local entrepreneurs.

Yamazaki and Kayes (2004) have gathered evidence showing that, particularly in a cross-cultural context, learning entails more than just analytic skills developed through theorizing and applying quantitative techniques as well as proper technologies. Learning is also about developing action skills through experimentation, interpersonal skills through experiences in team settings, and information skills through what they call "reflective observation." Courses in International Entrepreneurship may meet these challenges in an ideal way.

COURSE STRUCTURE AND TRAVEL PLANNING

The structure of each course participating in the exchange and credit earned by participating students varied across each institution. Several of the collaborations involved enrollees in a "special topics seminar on International Entrepreneurship" where the travel, hosting and project work represented the entirety of the experience. For others (typically the U.S. institutions) the collaboration represented a component of a semester long, 3-credit hour course. In these contexts, while the collaborative project, travel and hosting responsibilities represented a sizable portion of the curriculum, the course also included a number of other topics and assignments.

The collaborations completed through this consortium involved both one-way and two-way travel. As noted in Table 1, the Universite Catholique de Louvain and University of North Florida exchange involved students from the former traveling to the latter. Similarly, Appalachian State University students traveled to the University of Alicante to fulfill the travel requirement of the collaboration. Other classes involved two-way travel where each group of students assumed the role of both host and guest. Each travel experience was approximately one week in duration.

With the diversity of academic calendars and schedules, including international travel in such a course presents a number of scheduling dilemmas dictated by the various start and end dates for academic terms and university holidays. In general, the European partners start their academic terms later than the U.S. institutions. Consequently, it was typically convenient for European partners to travel to the U.S. once the U.S. partners were in session. U.S. student travel to Europe was typically scheduled during semester breaks. For example, Clemson students enrolled in the Fall 2006 course traveled to Bamberg, Germany during the week which included a scheduled fall break while students enrolled in the Fall 2007 course traveled during finals week. Since both travel itineraries require students to miss other course work, emphasis must be placed on informing other instructors of the unique demands of the class at the outset of the term. Students and faculty impacted by the travel dates must make arrangements to re-schedule exams and other due dates.

STUDENT RECRUITMENT

While the majority of students participating in the various collaborations were studying in business disciplines (i.e. marketing, management and entrepreneurship), the collaborations also consisted of students from a variety of other disciplines based on the policies of the participating universities.

Students were informed of the courses through a variety of promotional mediums. Most facilitators used email announcements, flyers and postings on student websites to advertise the opportunity. Additionally, academic advisors were invited to attend meetings which served to organize the collaborations. In this manner, the advisors became familiar with the objectives of the consortium and were able to identify students which may benefit from such opportunities. Further, other instructors on each campus were informed of the exchanges and asked to promote the opportunity among their students.

Enrollment required students to submit a resume and a cover letter explaining their interest in the course. Students were selected based on criteria including G.P.A., accomplishments, service activities, and expressed interest in the international experience.

Perhaps the most important part of the student recruitment was establishing expectations for hosting responsibilities. Most students accepted the responsibility of hosting at least one guest from the partner university for a one week interval (with the exception of those courses with only one-way travel). As explained by one facilitator, hosting meant to "treat your guest as though they are family." Finally, students were asked to make every effort to free their schedule during the host period in order to attend all functions. Students were provided a letter which could be used to inform other instructors of the unique demands imposed by the course.

The nature of the course and the considerable time commitment does restrict access to various qualified students. More specifically, the course structure may exclude students with other time commitments (i.e. work or other leadership responsibilities). The additional fees and costs associated with international travel also eliminate students with financial constraints. Additionally, as described in the preceding section, some students are unable to participate due to requirements in other classes in which they are enrolled. For example, some students may be unable to reschedule a final exam for a course they were required to complete in order to graduate on schedule. Lastly, some qualified students may be excluded based on limited hosting resources. For example, some students may not have the accommodations required to fulfill the role of host while others were not able to gain the approval of roommates.

Collaborations involving students enrolled in special topic seminars benefit from greater student participation. When possible, the seminars were held outside of the traditional academic calendar thereby freeing students to participate in a week long itinerary of events. Student involvement is a greater challenge for those enrolled in semester long courses--particularly while hosting. Since such students are typically enrolled in numerous other courses, scheduling conflicts should be anticipated. Such contexts require students to proactively engage other instructors and may require the student to volunteer to complete assignments and/ or take scheduled exams early. It was the experience of this consortium that a letter from the course facilitator explaining the unique expectations of the course assisted in this process.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

The costs associated with the exchange were covered by a number of sources. A significant portion of the costs associated with these collaborations were covered by the aforementioned SMEEE grant. Further, depending on the university and the nature of the course, most students were required to pay an additional fee at the time of enrollment (the average was around $300.00). The consortium was also partially subsidized by corporate entities; particularly those that have subsidiaries in the areas of two partner universities (i.e. Bosch, B.M.W.). Other collaborations received support from Small Business Development organizations and/or Entrepreneurship Centers. These sources were particularly helpful for covering costs associated with the hosting itinerary. For example, providing support for van rentals from a university motor pool and/ or catered lunches.

Additionally, encouraging students to seek sponsorship for the exchange provides a practical exercise in entrepreneurial activities. For example, participants at Clemson University created a "club" motivated by the collaboration which allowed the group to apply for financial assistance through student government. For each of the collaborations students were responsible for covering daily expenses such as meals.

THE HOSTING EXPERIENCE

As noted by Giamartino, McDougall and Bird (1993), the availability of resources for the study of international entrepreneurship represents a substantial obstacle. The consortium overcame this challenge by having students host each other. This eliminated the costs associated with hotels as well as logistical and cost concerns associated with local transportation when hosts assumed the responsibility for transporting their guests for exchange related functions. Finally, and most critically, hosting represents a significant learning opportunity for cultural exchange when students reside with each other, serving to strengthen cross-cultural education. Indeed, many of the students listed the hosting experience as the greatest learning component of the course.

Hosting, however, creates an opportunity for conflict due to personality differences, sleeping arrangements or other environmental conditions (i.e., smoking, roommates, Internet access). While there were isolated incidents of conflict due to the hosting component, the obstacles were best attributed to personality differences as opposed to cultural. Furthermore, adapting and working through such conflict represents a valuable learning opportunity for individuals as well as the groups. Of course, teachers can play a major role in channeling conflicts and helping the students to reflect on their experiences.

Student feedback suggested in-group team building as a way to create a successful hosting experience so as to allow the hosting group to feel comfortable with one another before the arrival of their counterparts. Such in-group team building was found to foster a perception that it is not the responsibility of one student to host another student but the responsibility of the entire group. This has important implications for the overall experience when - as a result of in-group team building students are more likely to volunteer to assist one another with hosting responsibilities. Finally, the team spirit served to encourage additional activities outside the scheduled itinerary (e.g. group movie nights, meals, etc.).

Team building can be accomplished through classroom activities or by scheduling opportunities for the students to interact in a social setting such as a pre-exchange dinner where students can get to know each other outside of the classroom environment (appropriate for semester-long programs). For those students enrolled in a seminar which does not meet on a regular basis prior to the exchange, such in-group team building may require greater coordination. For example, participants from Otto-Friedrich-University Bamberg met in Washington, D.C. for several days before traveling to Clemson University. This provided the students the opportunity to get to know each other prior to the start of the collaboration.

CULTURAL EXPERIENCE

One of the most important components of the learning experience associated with the various collaborations offered through this consortium is the opportunity for students to gain a cross-cultural experience. While most universities provide student exchange opportunities, such experiences typically demand substantial time commitments (usually one semester at a minimum). Further, such experiences require significant costs and substantial planning in order for a student to maintain progress toward the completion of degree requirements.

The exchange opportunities offered through this collaboration provided students with a brief but highly engaging learning opportunity. The cultural experiences offered through the course described here varied widely. Most included several dining opportunities where students were able to interact in a social atmosphere. Other opportunities included attending sporting events (American football games and soccer matches in Europe), tours of various cities, and various team building exercises (a day spent white water rafting, team rope courses, etc.). One risk of such team building activities is that some student participants may be uncomfortable with those experiences involving physical activity. However, student feedback suggests these cultural experiences are critical for both team building and as an educational tool.

PRACTITIONER INTERACTION

Facilitators adopted a synergistic approach to the exchange program by allowing students to interact with a variety of entrepreneurs or companies that engage in entrepreneurial activities (Collins, Smith, & Hannon, 2006). Consistent with the observations of other scholars (Bell, et. al. 2004), while the collaborations included lectures from scholars and facilitators, the opportunity to interact with practitioners was considered a vital component. Such direct interactions included presentations by entrepreneurs in a classroom setting, specially organized for the exchange program, as well as during visits to business incubators in the regions visited. For example, during the visit to Alicante, Spain, students visited the European Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Alcoi (http://www.redceei.com/ceei-alcoy/ceei.aspx). During this visit, students could observe first hand how newly established small businesses can benefit from the services offered by the center, and speak directly with the entrepreneurs, ask questions and interact with them. European students had the opportunity to visit Small Business Development Centers at Clemson University, the University of North Florida, and at Appalachian State University. In addition, visits with established companies known for fostering an entrepreneurial culture (e.g. BMW both in the U.S. and in Germany) and small and/or start up entrepreneurial companies in both Europe and the US allowed for further learning and discussion.

PROJECT/COLLABORATIVE WORK

Fiet (2001a; 2001b) believes that entrepreneurship education should be theory driven as opposed to descriptive. He does not feel that exposing students to experienced visitors who inspire through personal stories and advice is an effective, stand alone approach to entrepreneurship education. Focusing on theory strengthens students' ability to predict entrepreneurial outcomes, contributing more to their future success than merely learning about a variety of experiences of other entrepreneurs. Fiet (2001b) adds that, for best results, theory should be combined with practical application, which allows students to apply theory to real events. Thus, "offering student's opportunities to 'experience' entrepreneurship and small business management" is a popular component of entrepreneurship programs (Solomon, Duffy, & Tarabishy, 2002, p. 7).

In each of the collaborations students were given the responsibility of developing a business plan for a new venture. Some of the collaborations asked students to focus on a venture with potential in both countries while others required a comparison of the respective markets and a recommendation as to which country appeared to be the best market for entry. Students formed small groups (typically 3-4 members) with the caveat that each group consist of at least one member of each partnering institution.

Student Work Groups

The formation of the groups and means by which each group selected the venture on which they would work varied across collaborations. The experience of the consortium suggests the best approach to group formation and idea selection is to have each student determine several potential ideas for a new venture prior to the start of the collaboration. The initial days of the hosting week (or, for one-way travel, the period prior to the physical meeting) are then allocated to allow students to communicate their ideas. For two-way travel, ideally this communication may occur in both a formal setting (i.e. presentation to the group on the first day) and casual setting (hosted dinner where students mingle and discuss their ideas).

This approach to group formation and idea generation was found to have two important benefits. First, group formation occurs more organically and is driven by interest areas and personality matches. This is viewed as a preferred approach to the facilitator assigning students to a group. Second, the group is encouraged in the initial days of the collaboration to explore several of the ideas offered by each member. Such an approach encourages organized "brain-storming" sessions among the group members which, in turn, fosters team building and involvement among all participants. This approach is preferred to having each participant determine a specific venture on which they would like to work prior to the collaboration which forces some participants to sacrifice their own ideas in order to fulfill the group requirement, creates a group with members of varying levels of interest and involvement, and removes the educational opportunity presented by collective idea generation and selection.

Work Group Interaction

The nature of the exchange dictates a variety of schedules for the interaction and completion of the project. For those collaborations utilizing one-way travel, emphasis is placed on fostering these interactions prior to the travel dates. More specifically, the student groups used a variety of mediums (i.e. tele--and video-conferencing, Skype[TM], email, My Space[TM], Facebook[TM]) to determine the nature of the project and content prior to meeting in person and such communications may be viewed as an important and integral part of the educational experience (Gavidia, Mogollon, & Hernandez, 2004).

For those collaborations involving two-way travel, the first meetings were used to develop the idea and interactions between physical meetings were used to update group members on the progress of the project. Encouraging a formal plan for continuing the work on the project between physical meetings is an important component of the two-way exchange. This is of particular importance for the group traveling for the second portion of the exchange. If work on the project does not progress during the period between visits, the final week is accompanied by the stress associated with preparing the final project and presentation. Groups that wait to complete the project for the final week limit the cultural and social opportunities sought by those students serving as guests.

In all but one of the collaborations, the final projects were presented in a classroom setting with all participants in attendance. The lone exception involved the presentation of the final projects via videoconferencing. The requirements for the final project consisted of both a formal presentation and either a written Business Plan or some variation such as a Feasibility Project.

Student feedback revealed different approaches to group work. These differences may be best attributed to individual/ personality differences--not systematic cultural differences. Perhaps the greatest issue across the various courses is the age difference between many of the U.S. and European students. U.S. students participating in the exchanges tend to be younger. This, in some instances, may lead to differences in maturity and commitment to work.

Possibly the most encouraging aspect of the exchange, and one that all facilitators universally agreed on, was that the projects resulting from the various collaborations exceeded expectations. This is particularly encouraging given the tremendous time constraints placed on the students and the cultural barriers. In spite of the previously mentioned challenges, cross-cultural student groups were capable of producing high quality output. Further, the presence of such challenges may be representative of realistic work place conditions. More specifically, the workplace is often characterized by group work with members of different cultures, different motives for participating and ambiguous group objectives. In this regard, the structure of this exchange represented a valuable learning opportunity.

PROJECT ADMINISTRATION

Faculty Compensation

Faculty compensation for the time and effort involved with course design, preparation, instruction and actual exchanges varied across participating institutions. Expenses incurred during the exchange were partially covered by the SMEEE grant and partially by student fees so that faculty did not incur any out-of-pocket expenses during the international travel component of the programs. Compensation, however, varied significantly across institutions. Some faculty received no additional compensation beyond what is normally provided per credit hour (as was the case for the participating faculty members of the European Universities and Clemson University) while others were financially compensated. For example, at Appalachian State University, courses taught 'in-load' during the semester, entitled the faculty member to an additional $1000. Courses taught as part of summer exchange programs were compensated at 8% of the faculty member's annual pay for a 3-credit exchange.

Student Grading

Students were graded based on the quality and international reach of their final project which consisted of both a formal presentation and either a written Business Plan or some variation such as a Feasibility Project. A second component of the grade was based on students' participation in group activities, requiring students to not only be 'physically' present during class and other activities, but also be engaged and attentive. Finally, some exchanges included a third component, requiring students to produce a personal journal in which they reflect on their international experience, addressing for example, an analytical discussion of the differences between their home country's business culture and the business culture of the country visited.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE PROJECTS AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

As presented in the Sample Itinerary provided below (Appendix B), it is recommended to start with an introductory session the very first day where students can give "informal" presentations of their ideas for a business concept. Another approach would be for students to present the ideas of a peer. That might take the "ownership" of the idea away from the individual and give it to the group. Further, it may be of value to go immediately into a social setting after the students present some of the general ideas they would consider pursuing. Such a setting may encourage the students to begin forming informal groups around interest areas in a casual setting. Given the success of the dinner events in prior exchanges, it seems feasible to go through an afternoon of presentations early in the week and then move straight to a neighboring restaurant or home for more casual group time and dinner.

Alternatives may also include an agreement among the instructors on three or four general topic areas, and to then ask the students to brainstorm within these limited areas, exercise their creativity skills, and develop proposals together early in the exchange. That way, the resulting proposals are the property of the groups from the beginning. The advantage of this approach is that students are forced to be creative and open-minded while learning about each other. The disadvantage is that the ideas might take a while to emerge. Facilitators would have to be very active at this step to help students focus their thoughts and direction.

Other suggestions for future itineraries may include specific training on group collaborations. This is perhaps most important in the early stages of the collaboration. Such training may include lectures on the topic of team building and/or greater moderation by instructors and other facilitators at various intervals in the process. It may also be of value to include in the early stages of the course training on the various mediums which may be used to maintain communication between group members (such as Skype[TM]).

Based on experiences gained through these exchanges, it is of value to avoid scheduling the presentation of the business concepts on the final day of the visitation. Ideally, the schedule allows the instructors to prepare formal feedback on each project and to then share this feedback in person with the entire group. By the end of the collaboration, each student is familiar with the projects of their peers. Consequently, it is of considerable educational value to organize a constructive feedback session where all participants may contribute their thoughts.

Given the importance of the hosting experience as part of such an exchange, it is critical for the instructor to set very clear expectations for those serving as host. These expectations could be established through discussions regarding sleeping arrangements, meals, access and availability of transportation, access to Internet, and introduction of roommates. Additionally, it would be of value to provide those students with hosting responsibilities the chance to interact with their guests prior to arrival. This may be accomplished through any of the aforementioned communication mediums. Clearly, this type of course is quite time-consuming for the facilitators as it requires substantial coordination. The courses require coordination in order to guarantee the quality and the homogeneity of the project work, the organizing of logistics and the scheduling of a week-long hosting itinerary. Further, instructors must seek to harmonize grading methods. For logistic, instructional and/or financial reasons, these courses are a challenge to organize. From the student's perspective, these collaborative exchanges place unique demands on both their time and financial resources.

The teaching and entrepreneurial contributions of this type of course largely compensate for the specific difficulties which they generate. At the end of such a course, students will have gained additional skills that will potentially turn them into better international entrepreneurs. These skills include improved intercultural communication, potential for improved fluency in another language, a knowledge of the cultural aspects of entrepreneurship specific to other countries and the ability to form a reflexive view on the business practices particular to his/her own culture.

Appendix A

Results of Internet Search for International Entrepreneurship Curriculum (July 2007)

* Harvard Business School

MBA Program

Course Number 1640 International Entrepreneurship

http://www.hbs.edu/mba/academics/coursecatalog/1640.html

* Cornell University

NBA 593 International Entrepreneurship

http://eship.cornell.edu/esh_composer.php? aud=st&col=all&cmd=6&ent=19316

* University of Colorado at Denver

Bard Center for Entrepreneurship

International Entrepreneurship

http://thunder1.cudenver.edu/bard/courses.htm

* Georgia State University

International Center for Entrepreneurship

IB 8100: International Entrepreneurship

http://rcbweb.gsu.edu/rec/mbaconcentration_intl.htm

* Iowa State University, Pappajohn Center for Entrepreneurship

Mgmt 567 - International Entrepreneurship (Graduate course)

http://www.isupjcenter.org/education/graduate/

* University of Maryland, Dingman Center for Entrepreneurship

BUMO 758: Special Topics in Mgt: International Entrepreneurship (Grad course)

http://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/dingman/education/grad.html

* University of Nebraska: Lincoln

University Honors Freshman Seminar 189H

(Comparative International Entrepreneurship) (Undergrad course)

http://www.cba.unl.edu/outreach/ent/eclasses.html

* Florida International University

Global Entrepreneurship Center

Entrepreneurship: An International Phenomena

http://www.entrepreneurship.fiu.edu/downloads/publications/

external_presentations/Entrepreneurship-MIB-Abo2004.ppt

* Penn State

ENGR 497B International Entrepreneurship and Organizational Leadership

http://www.eldm.psu.edu/core.htm

Appendix B: Suggested Itinerary for Two-Way Exchange

Day Goal Content

 1 Interaction and Arrival, settling in
 establishment of Afternoon presentations of
 expectations new venture ideas.
 Social activity/ Dinner

 2 Formation of Lecture on cross-cultural teams
 Groups Lecture on Brainstorming
 and Creativity

 3 Practitioner Interaction

 4 Group Work Research Time
 Special Topic Lectures
 Moderated teamwork sessions

 5 Team Building/Recreation Ropes course, White water
 rafting, Cultural activity

 6 Group Work Research Time
 Training on various
 virtual, audio-video
 conferencing

 7 Establish continuing Presentation of business ideas
 expectations Evaluation of the week
 and the teamwork
 Social gathering

Day Goal Content

 1 Interaction and Arrival, settling in.
 reaffirmation of Updating progress of the
 expectations project and plan for
 completion.
 Social activity/Dinner

 2 Group Work Research Time
 Special Topics Lectures

 3 Practitioner Interaction

 4 Enhance team learning International Entrepreneurship
 Group Work
 Moderated teamwork sessions

 5 Group Work Wrap-up and Presentation
 Preparation
 Final Presentations

 6 Team Building/ Free day or other planned activity
 Recreation
 7 Presentation feedback Wrap-up

REFERENCES

Anonymous (2007). The globalization index: The global top 20. Foreign Policy, 163, 68-76. Retrieved December 10, 2007, from http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3995&page=1

Arpan, J. S., W. Folks Jr. & C.Y. Kwok (1993). International Business in the 1990's. St. Louis, MI: AACSB.

Baron, R.A. (2006). Opportunity Recognition as Pattern Recognition: How Entrepreneurs 'Connect the Dots' to Identify New Business Opportunities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(1), 104-119.

Bell J., I. Callaghan, D. Demick & F. Scharf (2004). Internationalising entrepreneurship education. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 2(1-2), 109-124.

Carlsson-Paige, N. & L. Lantiere (2005). A changing vision of education. In N. Noddings (Ed.), Educating Citizens for Global Awareness. New York: Teachers College Press.

Collins, L.A., A.J. Smith & P.D. Hannon (2006). Applying a Synergistic Learning Approach in Entrepreneurship Education. Management Learning, 37(3), 335-354.

Dana, L.P. (Ed.) (2004). Handbook of research on international entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

de Clercq, D. & P. Arenius (2006). The Role of Knowledge in Business Start-up Activity. International Small Business Journal, 24(4), 339-358.

Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3), 241-266.

Emert, H.A. & D.L. Pearson (2007). Expanding the vision of international education: Collaboration, assessment, and intercultural development. New Directions for Community Colleges, 138, 67-75.

Fiet, J.O. (2001a). The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 1-24.

Fiet, J.O. (2001b). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 101-117.

Gavidia, J., R. Mogollon & B.C. Hernandez (2004). Using International Virtual Teams in the Business Classroom. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 16(2), 51-74.

Giamartino, G.A., P.P. McDougall & B.J. Bird (1993). International Entrepreneurship: The State of the Field. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 18(1), 37-42.

Hodgetts, R.M., F. Luthans, & J. Doh (2005). International Management: Culture, Strategy and Behavior. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Jones R.C & B.S. Oberst (2003). International entrepreneurship education. In Eleanor Baum and Carl McHargue (Eds.), Teaching Entrepreneurship to Engineering Students, ECI Symposium Series, 2.

Katz, Jerome A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education 1876-1999. Journal of Business Venturing , 18(2), 283-300.

Kuemmerle, W. (2004). Case Studies in International Entrepreneurship: Managing and Financing Ventures in the Global Economy. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Kuratko, Donald (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 577-597.

Kuratko, Donald (2006). A tribute to 50 years of excellence in entrepreneurship and small business. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(3), 383-392.

McDougall, P.P. & B.M. Oviatt (2003). Some fundamental issues in international entrepreneurship, working paper. Retrieved October 2007 from http://www.usasbe.org/knowledge/whitepapers/mcdougall2003.pdf

Oviatt, B.M. & P.P. McDougall (1994). Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 45-64.

USA Today (2006). Entrepreneurship education for children and youth. Retrieved August 23, 2007 from http://www.usatoday.com/educate/kauffman-presentation.htm

Wijewardena, H. & G.E. Tibbits (1999). Factors contributing to the growth of small manufacturing firms: data from Australia. Journal of Small Business Management, 37(20), 38-45.

Yamazaki, Y. & D. Kayes (2004). An experiential approach to cross-cultural learning: A review and integration of competencies for successful expatriate adaptation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3, 362-379.

Young, S., P. Dimitratos & L. Dana (2003). International business research: What scope for international business theories. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 31-42.

Zahra, S.A. & G. George (2002). International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In M. Hitt, D. Ireland, D. Sexton & M. Camp (Eds.), Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating an Integrated Mindset (pp. 255-288). Oxford: Blackwell.

Scott A. Jones, Clemson University

Diane Denslow, University of North Florida

Frank Janssen, Universite Catholique de Louvain

Dodo zu Knyphausen-Aufses, University of Bamberg

Juan Llopis, University of Alicante

Rachel Shinnar, Appalachian State University

Bryan Toney, Appalachian State University

Table 1: Summary of Collaborations

Term(s) Partner Partner Travel
 (class (class
 structure) structure)

Spring 2005 UCL (semester) UNF (semester) one-way
 (UCL to UNF)

Summer 2005 & 2006 Alicante ASU (seminar) one-way (ASU
 (seminar) to Alicante)

Fall 2005 Bamberg ASU (seminar) two-way
 (seminar)

Fall 2006 & 07 Bamberg Clemson two-way
 (seminar) (semester)