Addressing progressive educational reforms: Fusing acquisition approaches and participation in Chinese entrepreneurship education

Abstract

Entrepreneurship education and pedagogic reforms advocating the increased use of progressive educational methods have been promoted by the Chinese government. In practice, this has led to a fusion of the more traditional teaching approach and more progressive approaches. This has led to calls for entrepreneurship education to be contextualized within the Chinese context, against the backdrop of the progressive pedagogic reforms. This paper addresses this by exploring how Chinese educators are responding to directives encouraging progressive pedagogic entrepreneurship education, by applying the lens of Sfard's knowledge acquisition and participation-orientation learning metaphors. Interviews were conducted with fifteen educators and analysis of their narratives of practice was undertaken to identify knowledge acquisition and participation-orientation metaphors to elicit the approaches adopted in the classroom. The results indicate that both acquisition and participation approaches are adopted by educators, but in a way that reflects the traditional and cultural heritage that values knowledge. Educators still relied heavily on the transmission-acquisition metaphor, however the encouragement to introduce more progressive practices could be observed in two ways, the constructivist acquisition metaphor, and the participation metaphor. The former appeared more developed and the latter less so, although both are desirable in the light of the education reforms.

Full text

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
Available online 10 December 2022
1472-8117/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Addressing progressive educational reforms: Fusing acquisition
approaches and participation in Chinese
entrepreneurship education
Robin Bell
a
,
*
, Jun Cui
b
a
Worcester Business School, University of Worcester, UK
b
School of Education Science, Nanjing Normal University, PR China
ARTICLE INFO
Keywords:
China
Entrepreneurship education
Learning
Metaphors of learning
Higher education
ABSTRACT
Entrepreneurship education and pedagogic reforms advocating the increased use of progressive
educational methods have been promoted by the Chinese government. In practice, this has led to
a fusion of the more traditional teaching approach and more progressive approaches. This has led
to calls for entrepreneurship education to be contextualized within the Chinese context, against
the backdrop of the progressive pedagogic reforms. This paper addresses this by exploring how
Chinese educators are responding to directives encouraging progressive pedagogic entrepre-
neurship education, by applying the lens of Sfard’s knowledge acquisition and participation-
orientation learning metaphors. Interviews were conducted with fteen educators and analysis
of their narratives of practice was undertaken to identify knowledge acquisition and
participation-orientation metaphors to elicit the approaches adopted in the classroom. The results
indicate that both acquisition and participation approaches are adopted by educators, but in a
way that reects the traditional and cultural heritage that values knowledge. Educators still relied
heavily on the transmission-acquisition metaphor, however the encouragement to introduce more
progressive practices could be observed in two ways, the constructivist acquisition metaphor, and
the participation metaphor. The former appeared more developed and the latter less so, although
both are desirable in the light of the education reforms.
1. Introduction
The Chinese state has actively encouraged entrepreneurship education in China since 2001, through the issuance of Ministry of
Education (MOE) directives and preferential policies (Zhou & Xu, 2012). The purpose of this intervention was to stimulate economic
growth to maintain China’s competitive advantage as a mass producer of competitively priced goods (Kriz, 2010), and to reduce the
developing level of graduate unemployment resulting from the massication of Higher education (HE) (Anderson & Zhang, 2015;
Zhou & Xu, 2012). Entrepreneurship education was seen as an economic driver to stimulate the economy, innovation, technology,
business development and employment, which would ultimately result in moving up the value chain and ensure a stable society.
The Curriculum Reform for Basic Education (MoE, 2001) sought to encourage progressive educational approaches which promoted
active participation, independent enquiry, practical ability, problem-solving skills, and teamwork, and reduce the previous reliance on
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: r.bell@worc.ac.uk (R. Bell), jun.cui@njnu.edu.cn (J. Cui).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
The International Journal of Management Education
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijme
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100748
Received 29 January 2022; Received in revised form 29 November 2022; Accepted 30 November 2022

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
2
the established traditional approach based on passive learning, rote memorization, and repetitive training. Whilst not explicitly stating
that it was constructivism that underpinned the new approach, it has since been considered as the dominant underlying philosophy
(Tan, 2017).
The promotion of entrepreneurship education was further illustrated through the ‘Mass Entrepreneurship and Innovation’ initiative
(State Council, 2015) which required higher education institutions (HEIs) to increase resources to entrepreneurship education and to
provide entrepreneurship education to all undergraduates (Wright, Feng, & Zheng, 2021). This led to the further development of
entrepreneurship education courses across numerous specialties, and entrepreneurship education becoming increasingly mainstream
(Cui et al., 2021; Wu & Benson, 2017).
Tan (2015) highlighted the impact that Chinese culture has on classroom culture and the expectations of learning, which in turn
impacts the introduction of progressive pedagogy; and Liguori et al. (2019) that the introduction of progressive learning approaches
into the Chinese context represented a clash between the traditional teacher-centered approach and the new student-centered pro-
gressive pedagogy This has led to some tensions and challenges within an educational system which has had a long tradition of the
transfer of knowledge and wisdom from teacher to student in education, often based on instruction, repetition, reinforcement, and
testing (Tan, 2015, 2016). Such problems may be rooted in the importation of progressive entrepreneurship education models and
methods used abroad, which may not necessarily be amenable to the traditional Chinese context (Lyu et al., 2021). For example, it may
take time for Chinese students to adapt to constructivist approaches if they have been used to transmission education (Bell, 2022; Chen
& Bennett, 2012). There is a need to go beyond the traditional v progressive divide to understand the Chinese context and Sfard’s
metaphors can offer a useful lens with which to do so. Sfard’s metaphors are a useful tool to understand practices from a research
perspective and are better suited to the Chinese context. Sfard (1998) proposed the theory of learning metaphors and posited that
learning can be classied predominantly as either acquisition-oriented or participation-oriented and advocated for the inclusion of
both types to support effective learning. Importantly, acquisition-orientated learning can be in the form of both transmission and
constructivist approaches in this theory. Sfard’s (1998) theory of learning metaphors is used in this research as a lens to view how
Chinese educators are responding to encouragement to utilize progressive pedagogic approaches in their entrepreneurship education
practice. It can provide different insights as it focuses on the learning and less on the educational delivery. Using Sfard’s metaphors
contrasts with most of the research literature in this eld which has largely focused on the teacher-centered and student-centered
approaches to entrepreneurship education.
Although several scholars have developed signature pedagogies for entrepreneurship education (e.g., Jones, 2019; Peschl et al.,
2021), these frameworks have often been developed from a Western point of view. Calls have been made for entrepreneurship edu-
cation to be contextualized in the Chinese context (Bell, 2020), and for further research into the development of our understanding of
entrepreneurship teaching approaches that are contextualized within the Chinese culture (Lyu et al., 2021). Whilst previous research
has explored both the challenges faced by educators (Bell & Liu, 2019) and students (Bell, 2020) to the adoption of progressive ed-
ucation in China, there is a dearth of research exploring the fusion and integration of progressive and traditional approaches to meet
government directives to introduce more progressive education practice (Lyu et al., 2021).
This research addresses these calls and gaps by researching, ‘How are Chinese educators responding to government encouragement
for the utilization of progressive pedagogic entrepreneurship education?’ This research question will be considered by applying the
lens of Sfard’s (1998) knowledge acquisition and participation-orientation learning metaphors to facilitate the identication of
different learning styles adopted, through the narratives of a sample of educators practice, to understand how and why entrepre-
neurship education is conducted in the Chinese classroom. In this way, this research will strengthen our theoretical understanding of
the pedagogical choices made within the dynamic cultural context of China, where there is a fusion of teaching methods and ap-
proaches (Lyu et al., 2021).
The literature review begins by briey reviewing traditional and progressive pedagogies and their use in practice, before
considering Sfard’s (1998) two metaphors of learning. It then moves on to consider entrepreneurship learning in China and the benets
that adopting Sfard’s metaphors may have in contextualizing entrepreneurship education within the Chinese context. This is followed
by the methodology section which describes the methods adopted in this research, a discussion of the results and their implications, the
conclusions of the research, and nally the limitations of the research along with future research opportunities.
2. Literature review
2.1. Traditional and progressive pedagogy
The traditional teacher-centered behaviorist approach is based on the transmission of objectivist knowledge, and learning is
equated with the form, or frequency, of observable performance (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). The process involves linear, efcient, and
functional mechanical processes (L¨
obler, 2006). It seeks to shape the learner’s growth and development in a specic direction (Bruner,
1966) and does not seek to encourage criticality or judgement (Dewey, 2013). Repetition, reinforcement, and testing are important
teaching elements in this approach. It has however, been argued that the transfer of passive knowledge can result in learners disen-
gaging or becoming merely ‘surface learners’ who are only required, and able, to repeat the information back (Bennett, 2006).
Although common in entrepreneurship education, it is widely considered limited in its usefulness, specically for the provision of
theoretical entrepreneurship knowledge and instruction (Gedeon, 2014). As a result, it is generally only considered suitable for the
teaching of the ‘about’ entrepreneurship, through the provision of factual information about entrepreneurship and the entreprenurial
process (Bell, 2021; Kakouris & Liargovas, 2021). Despite this, education may be delivered passively for expediency and may therefore
not be philosophically or pedagogically informed.
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
3
In contrast, progressive education is based on constructivism and constructivist approaches to learning. These are rooted in an
epistemology of knowledge that is based on the subjective understanding of the individual (Gergen, 2015). Constructivism is a theory
of knowledge which is based on the role of the individual in creating their own individual meaning from knowledge based on the
individual’s context and experience (Mueller & Anderson, 2014). Learning and knowledge construction is a student led, active, and
interpretive process, in which the making of meaning is dependent on previous and present knowledge (Merriam et al., 2007). The role
of the educator is to guide and enable the students to undertake their learning experience and provide time for reection. Reection
should be directed, systematic, and focused (Dewey, 1963) and represents a key part in the process to enable students to make sense of
what they have experienced, and to further develop their understanding in context (H¨
agg & Kurczewska, 2016). It has been posited
that reection situated in context can help to support and develop students’ creativity (Kakouris, 2021).
Constructivism is based on the active participation of the individual which has resulted in the creation and development of real-life
active learning approaches, independent thinking, and the framing of self-questions within the discovery process (Mathews, 2007).
Active learning places the learner with some degree of autonomy, at the centre of the process (H¨
agg & Kurczewska, 2016; Johannisson,
1991) and can involve learning through complex and diverse processes, free from imposed constraints (Hannon, 2005).
Such active learning approaches can involve a range of activities including problem-based learning, inquiry learning, discovery
learning and experiential learning. Experiential learning is considered a particularly valuable action-based approach in entrepre-
neurship education (Fuchs et al., 2008; Honig, 2004). Dewey (1963) argued that learning should not take place in isolation but instead
it begins with experience in context.
However, Lack´
eus et al. (2016) have highlighted the rifts that can be created by the multiple dualisms between perspectives,
including that between traditional and progressive education. This in turn can lead on to one-sided perspectives which prevent the
integration of the two different perspectives and the subsequent maximization of value that both can offer when used together.
Successfully bridging the gap between traditional and progressive education has not always been easy for educators and has led to
them seemingly having to navigate between the rigidity of traditional approaches and the vaguer progressive approaches to education
(Egan, 2010).
An alternative approach to investigating entrepreneurship education in China, rather than from the traditional/progressive edu-
cation perspectives, is to approach it through Sfard’s metaphors of learning (1998) which focus more on the learning. Indeed, learning
in this framework can be based on either transmission or constructivist approaches and is considered as acquisition in both cases. This
will now be considered in the next section.
2.2. Sfard’s metaphors of learning
Sfard’s (1998) two metaphor approach moves away from, and challenges, traditional views and distinctions of education i.e., the
terms traditional v progressive. The two metaphors in this approach, “that inform our thinking about learning” (Sfard, 1998, p. 5), are
described as the knowledge acquisition metaphor (subjective) and the participation metaphor (inter-subjective). The two metaphors
allow for the narrating of educational reality and practice, and can be used to inform, reect on, and review educational practice
(Sfard, 1998).
Sfard selected metaphors as an organizing principle because metaphors either explicitly, or implicitly, guide our understanding,
and can therefore be used to analyse perspectives that are visible within the discourse of teaching and learning. Importantly, meta-
phors within the narrative enable the identication of the two types of teaching. They are described below.
The knowledge acquisition metaphor considers knowledge as a property, or possession, of the individual mind, and learning as a
process through which information is transferred to the individual. Knowledge can be transmitted through traditional transmission
methods but in this scenario, can also be constructed through an individual constructivist process. This means that it encompasses both
the cognitive approaches based on transmission and the constructivist approaches which emphasize the development of ideas and the
construction of meaning. It represents the acquisition of individual knowledge, and the goal of learning is individual enrichment. The
student is a recipient or constructor of knowledge in the process, whilst the educator is the provider, facilitator, or mediator.
The participation metaphor considers knowledge as an aspect of practice, discourse, or from activity, and the focus of this metaphor
is on knowing through belonging, participating, and communicating in a community i.e., learning in context. Learning comes from
being a participant and becoming a part of the greater whole. In this scenario, the student acts as a legitimate peripheral participant
(Lave & Wenger, 1991), or apprentice, whilst the ‘educator’ acts as a full participant within the community, or the preserver of practice
of the discourse and developer of knowledge within the practice. Learning comes through community, practice, identity, and meaning
(Wenger, 1998). Knowledge is thus an aspect of cultural practice or situated learning, and is ongoing, and is developed in context (Lave
& Wenger, 1991). Situated learning occurs within authentic contexts, culture, and activity. In this case, the focus is not solely on the
delivery of knowledge, but instead on how students are prepared for becoming participants in professional practice (in entrepre-
neurship). For students, learning is rooted in contributing and engaging in the practice of their community through active participation
in certain kinds of activities (Wenger, 2018). That is, learning develops from the participation in the network of relations termed the
community of practice (Felstead et al., 2005; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Outside the HEI, in apprenticeships or work experience, for
example, students can undergo situated cognition through various forms of social constructivism and can develop and transform their
norms, values and identities through the practices and social interaction with the community of practice (Hakkarainen, 2009). In the
HEI context, this could involve working with experts, working in incubators, taking part in seminars and discussions with others led by
those from the community of practice, or working with stakeholders external to the HEI to produce something of value (Lack´
eus,
2020). This represents moving beyond simply learning by doing, but instead incorporates co-participation with others within the
community or network, leading to legitimized social learning (Taylor & Thorpe, 2004; Williams Middleton et al., 2020).
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
4
Sfard (1998) highlights that neither metaphor is right or wrong, but instead each offers different perspectives that are required to
understand learning. In addition, both are required to foster learning, and both offer advantages, whilst focusing on only one metaphor
has drawbacks. In general, since metaphors are descriptive in dening abstract ideas, over time the metaphor can become prescriptive,
reducing, or limiting the overall educational experience. This can happen when educators are well accustomed and adjusted to one
metaphor in a particular context. They may then seek to use it all the time, to the exclusion of the other. Adopting alternative met-
aphors can have benets for both the educator and the students in their learning process. A summary of Sfard’s two metaphors and how
they relate to the learning, the goal of learning, the of roles of the student and educator, the concept of knowledge, and knowing, is
provided in Table 1.
Understanding the educators’ personal metaphors for teaching can help inform future practice, since they can reect educators’
conceptions of teaching (Alger, 2009; Saban, 2006) which include the practices and strategies that are adopted within the different
contexts of teaching (Virtanen & Lindblom-Yl¨
anne, 2010).
Adopting the two metaphors approach can provide different views on learning. It can inform the intentions of what students need to
learn, the aims of studying at the institution, and the conceptualization of the roles of students and educators (Wegner & Nückles,
2015). Culture can inuence the value placed on knowledge and the role of the educator in the classroom (Tan, 2016, 2017).
Therefore, within societies which acknowledge and value the authority and wisdom of educators, societies may place greater value and
emphasis on the transmission of knowledge from the educator to the student to support students’ acquisition of knowledge.
2.3. Learning in the traditional Chinese context
Culture impacts both classroom culture, pedagogy, and practice in the Chinese context (Tan, 2016, 2017), including what is
delivered, how it is delivered, and who delivers it (Lyu et al., 2021). China has a long educational tradition of passive transmission of
objective knowledge between educator and students. This behaviorist approach to education involves the transmission of knowledge
by the educator, followed by knowledge reproduction and content mastery by the student (Tan, 2016, 2017). The educator is an
authority gure who leads the class, and students rarely challenge the information that is presented to them (Chan, 1999). Discipline
and conformity are regarded highly, resulting in a highly structured environment based on one-way communication and with less
participation compared to those in the West (Xiao et al., 2016). This approach reects Confucian tradition in which pupils seek to
achieve and match the perfection of their knowledge and skills to their master’s teaching (Tan, 2016). The educator led approach is still
considered by some Chinese educators as essential for good teaching (Tan, 2017).
The Chinese government’s directives to adopt progressive approaches has created a tension between the old ways and the new
ways. Indeed, Liguori et al. (2019) have argued that progressive education has challenged the values and the culture of the traditional
Chinese classroom, and the traditional roles of both instructors and students. Concerns have been expressed over the changes,
including the erosion of content mastery, a lack of compatibility between the two approaches, and a misalignment between the
constructivism and traditional education assessment systems (Tan, 2016). Sfard’s metaphors can provide a valuable lens in this context
because it focuses less on the delivery of education and more on the learning achieved. It is appropriate because the reforms are not
seeking wholesale or radical change but rather, changes in learning outcomes and the learning achieved i.e., entreprenurial outcomes,
whilst still valuing traditional educational values. It is an approach that can also shed light on how education prepares students for
practice i.e., for being procient participants in the practice of entrepreneurship.
The application of the two metaphors can therefore more effectively encapsulate, and provide a more appropriate lens, to view the
integration of traditional and progressive approaches, in line with the Chinese curricula reforms. Whilst others have suggested more
wholesale changes in the delivery of education, this approach may offer an alternative perspective of how the curricula reforms have
been integrated in practice, to increase student engagement in practice. Progressive education is an inherently loaded term; it suggests
progress and progression. However, viewing the classroom through Sfard’s metaphors questions the assumption that the wide scale
introduction of progressive pedagogy is necessarily the most effective approach in the Chinese context. Previous research has high-
lighted some of the difculties (and avoidance) in the introduction of progressive education in the Chinese context (e.g., Bell & Liu,
2019; Wright et al., 2021). This research provides a more nuanced understanding of the approaches, and the personal metaphors for
learning, that the educators who designed their own courses to introduce more progressive elements into their syllabi, have done in
practice. To achieve this, the research will focus on the elements within Sfard’s two learning metaphors, to identify how educators are
developing their practice in line with government encouragement for the development and inclusion of progressive practice.
Table 1
A Summary of the Two Metaphors based on Sfard (1998).
Central Tenets Acquisition Metaphor Participation Metaphor
The goal of learning Individual enrichment Enculturation into a community of practice
Learning Acquisition of something Becoming a participant
Student role Recipient and/or re-constructor Apprentice or peripheral participant
Educator role Provider, facilitator, mediator Expert participant, preserver of practice
Concept of knowledge Property, commodity, possession Aspects of practice, discourse, activity
Knowing Possessing, having Belonging, participating, communicating
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
5
3. Methodology
3.1. Data collection
Data was collected from interviews with fteen educators, equally spread across the municipalities and provinces of Beijing,
Guangxi, and Sichuan. These geographical locations are characterized by differing levels of development; however, homogeneity was
present in the level, size of institutions and disciplines taught. Additionally, the interview participants were all in charge of developing
and delivering an updated entrepreneurship course, which embedded entrepreneurship into their main eld of expertise. The courses
developed were designed to be aligned with the current curriculum reforms and the educators had the autonomy to develop the courses
and pedagogy as they deemed most effective. In-line with government encouragement, the courses sought to develop entrepreneurial
and innovative graduates and were embedded across a range of subjects. All the participants were at a similar stage, having developed
and completed the initial delivery of their entrepreneurship courses. This provided a good basis for exploring the entrepreneurship
teaching practice across the sample. The sample comprised of only Chinese educators, as at the institutions being researched entre-
preneurship education was solely delivered by local educators. This is common practice for the institutions selected, who unlike elite
tier Chinese universities have limited foreign faculty. The course material and textbooks adopted within the courses were in the local
language. All the educators in the sample taught at the undergraduate level and came from a range of departments. Table 2 summarizes
the sample.
Prior to the interviews, course outlines, handbooks, and a summary and explanation of the course was shared with the interviewer.
This provided the opportunity for the interviewer to have an initial understanding of the course and aid the discussion of the course in
the interview. The use and sharing of such documents has been identied as useful to support and aid reection of pedagogic decisions
and improve discussion of pedagogic rationale, which can become clouded by classroom practice (Nind et al., 2016).
The interviews were relatively unstructured and were focused on the educators discussing their narratives of practice, with
questioning and prompting provided by the interviewer when required to keep the conversation going. The interviews provided the
opportunity for the educators to present and explain their course and the pedagogy, approaches, and activities contained within.
Additional discussion and questions were structured around Sfard’s (1998) two metaphors. This helped to provide insight into teaching
approaches adopted, and the roles that educators and students play within the teaching and learning process. A summary of the
questions and prompts used within the interviews are included in appendix one. The interviews lasted on average 1 h and were
recorded and transcribed. The interviews were conducted in Chinese, which was the native language of the educators and the language
that the courses being discussed were taught.
The interviews were transcribed and translated into English by two translators who were specialists in business and education. The
translations were then reviewed to check conceptual equivalency (Bhalla & Lin, 1987). The data once transcribed led to a corpus of
relevant data of 45,000 words. As the metaphors are a discussive construct, there is a need to carefully listen to and review the ed-
ucators’ narratives (Sfard, 1998). Therefore, the course documents were used as a discussive aid rather than analyzed directly, as the
documents did not include the educator’s narratives, rationale, and description of practice. Reviewing the course documents and
summaries in advance helped to support deeper conversation, discussion and questioning of the course, teaching, and learning.
Additionally, it helped to support the convergence and corroboration of data and was used to ensure and improve the credibility of the
data and the results drawn (Jonsen & Jehn, 2009).
3.2. Data analysis
Analysis of the data was undertaken through a two-stage process. The rst stage involved the methodological framework of content
analysis, within which the visibility of Sfard’s (1998) conceptual metaphors were searched and identied. Such an approach offered a
way of treating and constructing interpretations of data in both a deductive and inductive manner (Chi, 1997). Analysis of the
Table 2
Sample breakdown.
Location Department Coding for in-text Quotes
1 Beijing Business B1
2 Beijing Accounting B2
3 Beijing Engineering B3
4 Beijing Philosophy B4
5 Beijing Languages B5
6 Guangxi Business G1
7 Guangxi Hospitality G2
8 Guangxi Computing G3
9 Guangxi Languages G4
10 Guangxi Science G5
11 Sichuan Business S1
12 Sichuan Accounting S2
13 Sichuan Hospitality S3
14 Sichuan Tourism S4
15 Sichuan Automation S5
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
6
educators’ approach to teaching was conducted through identifying the metaphors used within their narratives of practice. This is in
line with Sfard’s (1998) work which proposed metaphors and the language used within educator’s narratives of practice as an effective
way of analyzing practice, as it can be challenging for educators to effectively communicate their practice. This also has the potential to
reduce social desirability bias, as the focus is on what lays beneath and underpins accounts of practice, rather than simple narrative.
Within the content analysis stage, key words relating to each metaphor, as outlined by Sfard (1998), were searched for in the edu-
cator’s narratives, whilst taking into consideration the process and context in which they were spoken. These words can aid the
identication of the transmission acquisition-orientated metaphor and include knowledge, concept, conception, misconception, facts,
ideas, meaning, schema, representation, material, contents, acquisition, attainment, and from the educator’s perspective, trans-
mission, lecture, deliver, convey, and test. Words which can aid the identication of the constructivist acquisition-orientated metaphor
include construction, meaning, mentor, guide, scaffold, facilitate, mediate, and jointly nurture. Whilst the words to aid the identi-
cation of the participation-oriented metaphor include words such as the noun practice, and communication, taking part, being a part
of, being a participant, discourse, community, and doing. In this case, contextuality, situatedness, social mediation, and cultural
embeddedness are key to the learning and further help to dene the difference between what can be regarded as participation and
acquisition e.g., in the case of the participation metaphor and the constructivist-acquisition metaphor. Knowledge in the participation
metaphor cannot be separated from context and situatedness.
Identifying the underlaying metaphors within the educator’s narratives of practice, allows for the identication of teaching ap-
proaches adopted in practice. This deductive approach to identifying Sfard’s (1998) metaphors, approaches and practice was validated
and advocated by Wegner and Nückles (2015).
Once the metaphors had been identied within the transcriptions, the second stage of the data analysis process involved thematic
analysis, where the text exhibiting metaphors was coded and analyzed to identify themes as to how educators were responding to
government encouragement for the utilization of progressive pedagogic entrepreneurship education, why they adopted this approach
and the process they followed. The themes were generated and developed by adopting a data-driven inductive approach. After the
identication of the themes, they were named to accurately reect their content and narrative and the meaning within. The themes
were reviewed by the whole research team to ensure coherency and ensure that each theme accurately reected the meanings in the
data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Finally, the results were reviewed by two researchers, both familiar with entrepreneurship education and
the Chinese context, who acted as peer debriefers for the project. This step was taken to aid the interpretation of results beyond the
researcher who initially conducted the data analysis, to strengthen the validity of the ndings (Creswell, 2014).
4. Results
4.1. The acquisition metaphor approach to learning
The Sfard (knowledge) acquisition metaphor seeks to achieve the individual enrichment of learners, and learning can be achieved
through both the passive transmission of knowledge and the constructivist acquisition of knowledge. How these were utilized by the
educators will be considered separately, and a selection of the educators’ comments regarding their application are presented.
4.1.1. Knowledge acquisition through passive transmission
Many of the educators stressed the importance of students receiving knowledge to ensure they were adequately grounded in the
information they needed. The following quotes highlight the need for students to rst receive knowledge from the educators:
“An essential starting part of any learning is to understand and master the key concepts.” [G4]
“Students rst need to receive and understand knowledge, as before this they cannot engage effectively within entrepreneurial practice.”
[S2]
“The central and most important focus within our entrepreneurship curricula is to ensure that students understand the concept of
entrepreneurship. As without this student will struggle to be entrepreneurs.” [G5]
“The starting point of learning comes from understanding the topic, and this is the rst role of the teacher.” [B1]
These comments highlight educators’ views on the importance of delivering the basic facts and principles about entrepreneurship
rst. Teaching ‘about’ entrepreneurship is regarded generally as the rst stage of entrepreneurship education before learning ‘for’
entrepreneurship by developing the skills required for entrepreneurship and then learning ‘through’ entrepreneurship by learning
through engaging in entrepreneurship. Some comments suggested this was (particularly) important within their own departmental
context as students were more comfortable with this approach, such comments included:
“Students from my discipline (accounting) value knowledge, so we ensure that this is the focus (within our entrepreneurship education),
as they are more comfortable with this. Then we can build in practice." [B2]
"To ensure that students are comfortable with our entrepreneurship curricula, we start by covering the key concepts and facts as these are
essential, before moving into more practical teaching where students can take part in the entrepreneurial process in groups, supported by
and working with real entrepreneurial scenarios.” [S1]
Such comments may reect the long-standing and ingrained traditional approach to teaching, which educators feel students (and
perhaps they themselves) may be more comfortable. Tan (2016; 2017) highlighted the impact of culture on classroom culture
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
7
including the passive transmission of objectivist knowledge followed by testing and reproduction, to demonstrate content mastery. The
view that effective teaching required the inclusion of the transmission of knowledge was highlighted by comments such as:
“To be effective teachers we ensure that students understand the key concepts of entrepreneurship and innovation.” [G5]
“The teacher should enable students to acquire knowledge and then support students to apply this knowledge to be assessed and eval-
uated.” [B2]
“Good teachers enable students to effectively learn and understand the important information about the topic”. [B5]
Having ensured that students have accumulated enough knowledge and understanding about the concept of entrepreneurship there
is evidence that many educators move on to supporting students’ acquisition of knowledge through engaging in constructivist learning
approaches.
4.1.2. Knowledge acquisition through constructivism
Knowledge acquisition within Sfard’s acquisition metaphor can also be achieved through engaging in constructivist approaches in
the classroom environment. This allows students to build on the theoretical knowledge they have built up and develop their under-
standing of entrepreneurship (Bell & Bell, 2020). This was highlighted as valuable as it allowed the application of knowledge and
theory previously taught to practical and applied activities. Typical justication when referring to practical and applied activities
included:
“I start by lecturing on the topic and then give students activities where they can use and apply what I have told them” [S2]
“Social media and promotion are so important in today’s society to launch a business. Most students know and understand social media
well, but not for business, so we work with students in partnership to develop their (social media) skills with our subject knowledge.” [S1]
“We ensure that students get to apply learning in the classroom through activities.” [G4]
“Within our teaching we ensure the application of knowledge through classroom activities and learning from doing.” [S3]
Knowledge acquisition through constructivist learning was also identied commonly as valuable for developing skills to support
entrepreneurship. This was supported by statements such as:
“As a teacher we cannot simply teach students entrepreneurship and business ideas and skills, so we need to jointly nurture students’
ideation and abilities.” [B1]
“We get students doing activities in the classroom to develop entrepreneurship skills.” [B4]
“Understanding of the key foundations of entrepreneurship is important but developing skills through practice is also required.” [B1]
“It is through engagement in an activity you can apply learnt knowledge and develop skills ready for future practice.” [G4]
“Entrepreneurship is all about doing so we get students engaging with doing parts of entrepreneurship, like looking for opportunities and
designing business models.” [G3]
Constructivist approaches to knowledge acquisition were commonly identied as taking place in the classroom in a scaffolded
manner and could be identied by words such as mentoring, guidance, scaffolding and jointly nurturing. This learning includes
practical engagement with activities, it differs from the participation metaphor by commonly taking place in the classroom and is not
situated in the real-world context of entrepreneurship. Comments in relation to this approach adopting practical and applied activities
in the classroom included:
“We work with students to participate in practice relating to their being entrepreneurial in their elds. In such practice, we provide
mentoring and guidance from our experience, rather than tell students what to do.” [S5]
“Our guiding principle is to ensure that students have the knowledge required to support entrepreneurship and to develop practical skills
through participation in scaffolded and supported practice, so students can be entrepreneurs when the right opportunity arises in the
future.” [G1]
“We want to prepare students for entrepreneurship, by providing them with the required knowledge and experience of participating in the
entrepreneurial process through scaffolded activities, so that they are ready to nd and act on future entrepreneurial opportunities.”
[G5]
“I deliberately ask my students to complete some challenging tasks and activities, which they can achieve with the right guidance and
mentoring, as once they have completed these they will have learnt a lot.” [B4]
The interviews often illustrated the constructivist acquisition of knowledge, which helps students learn and develop knowledge
through constructing knowledge from experience. The inclusion of knowledge acquisition through constructivist learning suggests that
many educators are following the guidance of the MoE directive (2001) to introduce more progressive active experiential approaches
into the classroom.
It was commonly identied that educators brought together passive transmission and constructivist approaches to learning to
support knowledge acquisition.
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
8
4.1.3. Knowledge acquisition through bringing together passive transmission and constructivism
Educator comments suggested that they combined transmission-acquisition and constructivist-acquisition within their curricular to
further develop and prepare students for entrepreneurship. Comments included:
“Our goal is to provide students with the essential knowledge and experience of facets of entrepreneurship, as it is through engagement in
an activity you can apply learnt knowledge and develop skills ready for future practice.” [G4]
“Our classes require students to acquire and learn knowledge rst, and then students to apply this through tasks and activities which
simulate the process and stages of entrepreneurship.” [S5]
“The teacher should be both a purveyor of knowledge and a conductor who facilitates participation and practice, as it is important to
provide the basic knowledge, inspire and release creativity.” [B4]
“It is our duty to prepare students to be the future entrepreneurs and innovators, as this is what the country requires. To do this they need
knowledge and experience of being involved in activities to develop the required skills.” [G1]
The importance of nding the right balance between transmission-acquisition and constructivist-acquisition approaches was
identied as a consistent theme within educators’ narratives of practice, and this was summarized by three educators using the
following words:
“Finding the right balance between delivering knowledge and allowing students to develop entrepreneurial skills through practice is
essential.” [B5]
“A key role of an educator is to nd an equilibrium between students’ understanding of entrepreneurship and what they must do, and
developing skills and expertise through practice.” [G3]
“The difference between effective entrepreneurship education and less effective education is in ensuring that students understand the
ideas and key concepts and can build on these to be entrepreneurial in practice. This involves supporting students to engage and take part
in entrepreneurial activities and tasks. Finding the balance within a course is a challenge”. [S3]
The educator narratives provided strong evidence that these educators widely utilized both transmission-acquisition and
constructivist-acquisition approaches in their practice and acknowledged the importance of using both, even if nding a balance may
be challenging.
4.2. The participation metaphor approach to learning
The participation metaphor sees learning being developed and acquired through practice, discourse, and activity that results from
belonging, communicating, and participating in a community of practice. This type of learning is highly contextual with the learner
acting as a participant and becoming a part of the wider whole (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
The following quotes highlight how HEI’s have sought to achieve this goal in practice.
“To prepare our students for entrepreneurship we connect our students with business related to their major, to work on live case studies
and projects collaboratively. We believe this is the best way to develop the practical and vocational skills required to be an entrepreneur in
the student’s eld.” [G1]
“An important part of our course is to get students to work and collaborate with industry as enterprising partners. In our major (travel
and tourism), we do this by getting students to work with companies to design and present new potential tours in our city.” [S4]
“We get students to work with local bakeries and restaurants to develop and launch some products with the mentorship and support of
our faculty and partners, as to be a successful entrepreneur in our subject, you need to be not only be able to cook but be creative and
market projects.” [G2]
“We get former students to bring in examples of the problems they were working on and get students to come up with suggested solutions”
[S5]
These quotes suggest that some HEI’s are attempting to link up with local businesses and industries to provide learning through
participation to further encourage and develop the entrepreneurial spirit, skills, and behavior of students. In general, this seems to be
less developed and varied in nature, presenting different levels of participation and contact, resulting in varying levels of learning
through this type of participation activity. However, this approach does echo the concept of learning through entrepreneurship.
In summary, the results suggest that based on this research, that whilst Chinese educators still have a strong belief in, and reliance
on transmission-acquisition, the encouragement to introduce more progressive practices can be observed in two ways, constructivist-
acquisition, and through participation metaphor. The utilization of the constructivist-acquisition is more widely used and developed in
the practice of the sample, whilst the participation metaphor is less widely used in the practice of the sample, although both are
desirable in the light of educational reforms encouraging the inclusion of more progressive pedagogy.
5. Discussion
The research found that educators were commonly applying progressive pedagogy in the form of constructivist-acquisition
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
9
alongside the more traditional transmission-acquisition approaches in the narratives of their practice. The balance between the
transmission-acquisition and constructivist-acquisition approaches was stressed as being important although potentially challenging.
Constructivist-acquisition was considered important as it allowed students to develop skills and apply their learning. However, whilst
all the educators in the sample utilized transmission-acquisition and to varying degrees some form of constructivist-acquisition, there
was variation in the balance and emphasis.
Whilst some of the educators utilized participation approaches, they were less common and dependent on the subject area, student
level and industry relationships. The adoption of different balances could be attributed to localized factors, including the level and
experience of the students and the preferences of the educators. This is underpinned by Morselli (2015) who suggested that the
acquisition and participation metaphors might be more applicable to different settings, with acquisition approaches being more
suitable at lower educational levels. Therefore, where educators perceive their students are not as advanced, lacking experience, or
having limited workplace engagement, the educators might decide to emphasize acquisition approaches. In addition, a range of
external contextual factors including political, cultural, and social contexts exist which can also inuence entrepreneurship education
(Galvao et al., 2020). These factors are outside the educator’s control, and educators are commonly required to adhere to, or adapt, to
specic factors, these include in the case of this paper progressive pedagogical reforms and government directives. Additionally, it has
been highlighted that micro institutional and cohort level factors also exist and it is the job of the educator to adapt educational design
and delivery to meet the individual institutional and cohort level needs and requirements (Thomassen et al., 2020). This could explain
why whilst there was broad agreement in the fusing and importance of balancing acquisition and participation-oriented approaches,
there remained variability in their emphasis within the sample.
The Chinese educators had a strong belief in delivering knowledge rst, before introducing more constructivist-acquisition ap-
proaches i.e., a largely sequential process. Knowledge needed to be taught, or delivered, by the educators who saw the students as
apprentices to entrepreneurship. This relationship echoed the long-standing tradition of the master-pupil relationship within
Confucian tradition and the emphasis on transmission of knowledge seen within Chinese education (Tan, 2016). This aligns with the
suggestion that learners should have a grounding in the underpinning knowledge and theory, which they will be apply through
entrepreneurial activities and experience (Bell & Bell, 2020).
Educators, however, could be considered variously as ‘purveyors’, ‘providers’, ‘conductors’, enablers, and facilitators, and strongly
supported the value of learning through experience to develop entrepreneurial skills and an entrepreneurial mindset. The educators,
whilst valuing acquisition and the cultural educational legacy highly, do support the constructivist-acquisition of knowledge in the
educational setting, and in some cases through situated learning (participation metaphor) by either taking students outside of the
classroom or by bringing industry and authentic activities into the classroom, and the research points to both constructivist-acquisition
of knowledge and participation being added to the curricula being developed and adopted.
Educators talked of the value in constructivist-acquisition through encouraging participation in activities and tasks in the class-
room, supported by guidance, scaffolding and mentoring, as these encouraged nurturing ideas and developing skills. Whilst those
involved in teaching through the participation metaphor highlighted collaboration with local businesses and industry partners as being
useful for helping students to learn through active participation. Participation alongside others, engagement in the process to develop
skills, and learning the practices of the business within the industry, helps to develop their identity as an entrepreneur (Bell et al.,
2019).
Approaching Chinese entrepreneurship education using Sfard’s two metaphors offers several advantages. Firstly, the goal of the
Chinese state reforms was to encourage the use of active student engagement and participation, independent enquiry, practical ability,
problem-solving skills, and teamwork, and reduce the overreliance on the long-established traditional transmission approaches based
on passive learning, rote memorization, and repetitive training. As such, this represented a gradual change rather than a wholesale
change. In short, to introduce constructivist approaches whilst still valuing the culture and traditional educational values. The
development and inclusion of constructivist-acquisition approaches in entrepreneurship curricula has helped to accomplish this.
Sfard’s metaphors could be seen to reect and follow in practice the classic distinctions between education ‘about’, ‘for’, ‘through’ and
‘in’ enterprise (Pittaway & Edwards, 2012). Transmission-acquisition helps to provide essential knowledge about entrepreneurship,
constructivist-acquisition allows students to construct the knowledge required for entrepreneurship. Whilst the participation metaphor
supports learning through or in enterprise, depending on the context of the learning.
To effectively assess students practical and problem-solving skills requires authentic tasks, which develop and enables students to
demonstrate transferable skills and the ability to deal with contextual factors and ambiguity (Gijbels et al., 2005; Morselli & Gorenc,
2022). Such changes in learning and assessment can be challenging for educators and institutional leadership due to legitimacy
concerns about moving away from more objective assessment, in the form of tests and exams (Bell & Liu, 2019). Such changes require
educators to navigate transitions from rigid and objective traditional approaches to vaguer progressive approaches to education, an
adjustment which has been identied as challenging for educators (Egan, 2010). Additionally, students are commonly wary and may
be uncomfortable when facing new and different pedagogic processes and ways of teaching (Neergaard & Christensen, 2017). Such
changes have the potential to be particularly marked in the Chinese classroom, where education has traditionally involved passive
transmission of information. Therefore, the progressive v traditional debate has created tensions, both conceptually and in operation,
which has seemingly adversely impacted the integration of the two approaches. Adopting the two metaphors approach allows the focus
to be on the learning that is achieved as opposed to the specic ‘method’ of delivery i.e., traditional v progressive approaches. In this
way, it offers an alternative approach to the traditional v progressive approach which is adopted predominantly in current literature. It
focuses less on the delivery method used and the application, and more on the learning achieved. This approach adds nuance to
cultural and traditional legacy and how educators address the curriculum reforms within the Chinese context. Pedagogies have
previously been produced for entrepreneurship education from a Western point of view (e.g., Jones, 2019; Peschl et al., 2021) but these
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
10
are not necessarily transferable into different cultures and contexts. Indeed, calls have been made for education research into the
contextualization of education specically within the Chinese context and culture (Bell, 2020; Lyu et al., 2021). This approach adds
that nuance into both the ‘how’ and ‘why’ Chinese educators create curricula and teach students the way they do in practice.
By adopting this approach, this research challenges the view that Chinese institutions are necessarily unable or failing to integrate
the progressive pedagogic reforms, as they are failing to adopt more constructivist approaches, as proposed by some scholars (e.g.,
Wright et al., 2021). The institutions in this research are nding ways to increase participation without completely crossing the divide
from traditional to progressive teaching, as the educators are still ensuring a balance between the acquisition of knowledge and
practice. Indeed, the concept of ‘’crossing the divide and the ‘rift of dualisms’ (Lack´
eus et al., 2016) may not be a particularly useful
concept in the Chinese context, as the reforms and developments were purposely incremental and were intended to respect the
educational cultural legacy and traditional value placed on knowledge. This research does not necessarily negate the ndings and
criticisms of previous research into the integration of more progressive education into entrepreneurship education in China, but
instead provides a more sympathetic approach to understanding how and why entrepreneurship education may be applied in the way
that it is, in practice.
6. Conclusion
Entrepreneurship education has been promoted in China through progressive educational and pedagogic reforms and directives.
This has led to some borrowing of international practice and a fusion of pedagogic methods and practices adopted in the Chinese
entrepreneurship education classroom. This has led to calls within the literature to contextualize entrepreneurship education within
China to further our understanding of its development (Bell, 2020; Lyu et al., 2021). As viewed through a Western progressive v
traditional education lens, the fusion of the two approaches can be seen to have produced tensions and a lack of adherence (Li et al.,
2016; Lyu et al., 2021; Wright et al., 2021). Within this research Sfard’s (1998) two metaphor theory of learning was adopted to
provide an alternative lens focused on learning, to gain a deeper understanding of how entrepreneurship education is delivered,
specically within the Chinese context. By adopting this lens, this research explored how Chinese educators are responding to gov-
ernment encouragement for progressive entrepreneurship education.
This research has highlighted the ways in which educators have adapted their curricula to meet the new entrepreneurship curricula
requirements in China. The research found that the educators used metaphors relating to knowledge acquisition both in the form of
transmission-acquisition and constructivist-acquisition, in their narratives of practice. Although, there was variation in the emphasis
on each approach, suggesting that the type of knowledge delivered within entrepreneurship education could be considered as a
continuum rather than a categorization. The participation metaphor was seen in a limited number of cases, where educators were
directly linking with industry, to support students to participate in practice in the context of industry. Sfard’s lens helps to more
accurately reect the nuance involved in the process of achieving Chinese progressive educational reforms, whilst valuing the Chinese
educational legacy.
The research found an emphasis on constructivist-acquisition, but only after a solid grounding in the transmission of basic
knowledge that educators feel the students require before moving on. This grounding is educator led and reects the traditional
approach to education in China. In this way, educators supported the introduction of learning through constructing understanding
through experience, whilst at the same time continuing to value the traditional focus on knowledge acquisition, embedded in the social
and cultural educational legacy. Therefore, signature pedagogies which have been developed in the Western context, may be less
appropriate in other contexts. A limited number of educators incorporated both acquisition and participation metaphors although the
latter were less prevalent and more varied on a local basis, and less dened.
The ndings of this research can inform educators and policy makers, who have sought to open entrepreneurship education to a
broader range of students (Dakung et al., 2022), as to how they can approach fusing acquisition and participation approaches in
environments and contexts where there is a transition to more practical entrepreneurship education. It also offers a way to consider the
transition in the light of the specic prevailing context and culture. Achieving an initial fusion of transmission-acquisition and
constructivist-acquisition might offer a useful starting point to build on and enable the development of entrepreneurship education by
building the acceptance and legitimacy of new approaches in China. Following on from this it might be more achievable to further
introduce and develop the participation metaphors by developing links with business and industry.
This research strengthens our theoretical understanding of the pedagogical choices that are made by educators within the dynamic
cultural context of China, where there is a fusion of teaching methods and approaches (Lyu et al., 2021). The research also provides
insight for policy makers and other educators, as to how context inuences the delivery of (entrepreneurship) education, and how
educators modify and blend their approaches to achieve their, and their students aims and objectives. At an educator and administrator
level the research highlights the need to consider how acquisition and participation approaches can achieved and provides guidance as
to how these approaches have been brought together by educators going through a journey of developing their curricula to meet
progressive educational reforms.
Using Sfard’s two metaphor approach proved a useful lens to approach this research as it provided information on both the views,
and what educators are doing and striving to achieve, in the Chinese education context. This is particularly important when there
appears to be evidence of a lack of buy in and disagreements over entrepreneurship education models (Cui & Bell, 2022; Mei & Symaco,
2022; Wright et al., 2021). Whilst separating the two metaphors can be challenging, this paper offers one of the rst, if not the rst,
empirical application of Sfard’s metaphors of learning within entrepreneurship education. In line with Sfards theory, this work focuses
on learning metaphors within educator’s narratives of practice, rather than focusing on their actual practice. Future research could
further our understanding of practice by considering the utilization of acquisition and participation-oriented approaches in actual
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
11
practice. Future work could also build on this exploratory research by furthering our understanding of effective balances between
acquisition and orientation approaches and what affects and inuences this balance.
This exploratory research was based on interviews with fteen entrepreneurship educators teaching in HEIs within three provinces
in China. The size of this sample is the main limitation of this research and further research is required to conrm these initial ndings
across a larger and wider context. It should be noted that not all educators may have the same levels of commitment, or even the drive,
to introduce new practices such as the development and integration of practical experiential learning and the development of the
support and activities described within the participation metaphor. Similarly, not all educators may have had the same training and
guidance in the development of their curricula. Further research will be valuable in establishing this. It might be expected that similar
research approaches may be useful in other non-Western contexts in which contextual factors, such as culture and tradition, may play a
part in the delivery of education. Future research can also help to establish this.
Author statement
Robin Bell Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Resources; Visualization;
Roles/Writing - original draft.
Jun Cui Investigation; Validation; Methodology; Data Curation; Writing - review.
Data availability
The authors do not have permission to share data.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100748.
References
Alger, C. L. (2009). Secondary teachers’ conceptual metaphors of teaching and learning: Changes over the career span. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(5),
743–751.
Anderson, A. R., & Zhang, X. (2015). Enterprise education with Chinese characteristics; Policy, practices and uneven development in PRC. Journal of Entrepreneurship
in Emerging Economies, 7(3), 276–292.
Bell, R. (2020). Adapting to constructivist approaches to entrepreneurship education in the Chinese classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 45(8), 1694–1710.
Bell, R. (2021). Underpinning the entrepreneurship educator’s toolkit: Conceptualising the inuence of educational philosophies and theory. Entrepreneurship
Education, 4(1), 1–18.
Bell, R. (2022). Developing entrepreneurial behaviours in the Chinese classroom through value creation pedagogy. Innovations in Education & Teaching International,
59(1), 37–48.
Bell, R., & Bell, H. (2020). Applying educational theory to develop a framework to support the delivery of experiential entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small
Business and Enterprise Development, 27(6), 987–1004.
Bell, R., & Liu, P. (2019). Educator challenges in the development and delivery of constructivist active and experiential entrepreneurship classrooms in Chinese
vocational higher education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 209–227.
Bell, R., Liu, P., Zhan, H., Bozward, D., Fan, J., Watts, H., & Ma, X. (2019). Exploring entrepreneurial roles and identity in the United Kingdom and China. The
International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 20(1), 39–49.
Bennett, R. (2006). Business lecturers’ perceptions of the nature of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 12(3), 165–188.
Bhalla, G., & Lin, L. (1987). Cross-cultural marketing research: A discussion of equivalence issues and measurement strategies. Psychology and Marketing, 4, 185–216.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Bruner, J. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Chan, S. (1999). The Chinese learner – a question of style. Education +Training, 41(6/7), 294–305.
Chen, R. T.-H., & Bennett, S. (2012). When Chinese learners meet constructivist pedagogy online. Higher Education, 64(5), 677–691.
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271–315.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4 edition). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Cui, J., & Bell, S. (2022). Behavioural entrepreneurial mindset: How entrepreneurial education activity impacts entrepreneurial intention and behaviour. International
Journal of Management in Education, 20(2), Article 100639.
Cui, J., Sun, J., & Bell, R. (2021). The impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial mindset of college students in China: The mediating role of
inspiration and the role of educational attributes. International Journal of Management in Education, 19(1), Article 100296.
Dakung, R. J., Bell, R., Orobia, L. A., & Yatu, L. (2022). Entrepreneurship education and the moderating role of inclusion in the entrepreneurial action of disabled
students. International Journal of Management in Education, 20(3), Article 100715.
Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dewey, J. (2013). Essays in experimental logic. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Egan, P. K. (2010). The future of education: Reimagining our schools from the ground up. Yale University Press.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance
Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71.
Felstead, A., Fuller, A., Unwin, L., Ashton, D., Butler, P., & Lee, T. (2005). Surveying the scene: Learning metaphors, survey design and the workplace context. Journal
of Education and Work, 18(4), 359–383.
Fuchs, K., Werner, A., & Wallau, F. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in Germany and Sweden: What role do different school systems play? Journal of Small Business
and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 365–381.
Galvao, A., Marques, C., & Ferreira, J. J. (2020). The role of entrepreneurship education and training programmes in advancing entrepreneurial skills and new
ventures. European Journal of Training and Development, 44(6/7), 595–614.
R. Bell and J. Cui

The International Journal of Management Education 21 (2023) 100748
12
Gedeon, S. (2014). Application of best practices in university entrepreneurship education: Designing a new MBA program. European Journal of Training and
Development, 38(3), 231–253.
Gergen, K. J. (2015). An invitation to social construction (3 edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.
Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational
Research, 75(1), 27–61.
H¨
agg, G., & Kurczewska, A. (2016). Connecting the dots: A discussion on key concepts in contemporary entrepreneurship education. Education +Training, 58(7/8),
700–714.
Hakkarainen, K (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2),
213–231.
Hannon, P. D. (2005). Philosophies of enterprise and entrepreneurship education and challenges for higher education in the UK. The International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 6(2), 105–114.
Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of contingency-based business planning. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(3),
258–273.
Johannisson, B. (1991). University training for entrepreneurship: Swedish approaches. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 3(1), 67–82.
Jones, C. (2019). A signature pedagogy for entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 243–254.
Jonsen, K., & Jehn, K. A. (2009). Using triangulation to validate themes in qualitative studies. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International
Journal, 4(2), 123–150.
Kakouris, A. (2021). Teaching creativity in entrepreneurship: Embolden or discourage? Industry and Higher Education, 35(4), 465–470.
Kakouris, A., & Liargovas, P. (2021). On the about/for/through framework of entrepreneurship education: A critical analysis. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy,
4(3), 396–421.
Kriz, A. (2010). The challenge to rekindle China’s innovative spirit. Management Decision, 48(4), 541–561.
Lack´
eus, M. (2020). Comparing the impact of three different experiential approaches to entrepreneurship in education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior
& Research, 26(5), 937–971.
Lack´
eus, M., Lundqvist, M., & Middleton, K. W. (2016). Bridging the traditional-progressive education rift through entrepreneurship. International Journal of
Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 22(6), 777–803.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation (1st ed. edition). Cambridge England; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Liguori, E., Corbin, R., Lackeus, M., & Solomon, S. J. (2019). Under-researched domains in entrepreneurship and enterprise education: Primary school, community
colleges and vocational education and training programs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 182–189.
Li, W., Li, C., & Du, X. (2016). Ten years of entrepreneurship education at Chinese universities: Evolution, problems, and system Building. Chinese Education and
Society, 49(3), 198–216.
L¨
obler, H. (2006). Learning entrepreneurship from a constructivist perspective. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(1), 19–38.
Lyu, J., Shepherd, D. M., & Lee, K. (2021). Teaching entrepreneurship in China: Culture matters. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 27(5),
1285–1310.
Mathews, M. (2007). Constructivist pedagogy for the business communication classroom. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 4(11), 99–106.
Mei, W., & Symaco, L. (2022). University-wide entrepreneurship education in China’s higher education institutions: Issues and challenges. Studies in Higher Education,
47(1), 177–193.
Merriam, S., Caffarella, R., & Baumgartner, L. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
MoE (Ministry of Education). (2001). Jichu jiaoyu kecheng gaige gangyao [outline of the curriculum reform for basic education. available at: http://www.edu.cn/
HomePage/zhong_guo_jiao_yu/jiao_yu_yan_jiu/ji_chu/ji_chu_zhuan_ ti/ji_chu_ke_gai/. (Accessed 25 November 2017) accessed.
Morselli, D. (2015). Enterprise education in vocational education: A comparative study between Italy and Australia. Basingstoke, UK: Springer.
Morselli, D., & Gorenc, J. (2022). Using the EntreComp framework to evaluate two entrepreneurship education courses based on the Korda Method. International
Journal of Management in Education, 20(1), Article 100591.
Mueller, S., & Anderson, A. R. (2014). Understanding the entrepreneurial learning process and its impact on students’ personal development: A European perspective.
International Journal of Management in Education, 12(3), 500–511.
Neergaard, H., & Christensen, D. R. (2017). Breaking the waves: Routines and rituals in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 31(2), 90–100.
Nind, M., Curtain, A., & Hall, K. (2016). Research methods for pedagogy. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Peschl, H., Deng, C., & Larson, N. (2021). Entrepreneurial thinking: A signature pedagogy for an uncertain 21st century. International Journal of Management in
Education, 19(1), Article 100427.
Pittaway, L., & Edwards, C. (2012). Assessment: Examining practice in entrepreneurship education. Education +Training, 54(8/9), 778–800.
Saban, A. (2006). Functions of metaphor in teaching and teacher education: A review essay. Teaching Education, 17(4), 299–315.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.
State Council. (2015). Opinions on policies and measures for pushing through mass entrepreneurship and innovation (in Chinese). available at: http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/
content/2015-06/16/content_9855.htm. (Accessed 10 March 2021).
Tan, C. (2015). Education policy borrowing and cultural scripts for teaching in China. Comparative Education, 51(2), 196–211.
Tan, C. (2016). Tensions and challenges in China’s education policy borrowing. Educational Research, 58(2), 195–206.
Tan, C. (2017). Constructivism and pedagogical reform in China: Issues and challenges. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 15(2), 238–247.
Taylor, D. W., & Thorpe, R. (2004). Entrepreneurial learning: A process of co-participation. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(2), 203–211.
Thomassen, M. L., Williams Middleton, K., Ramsgaard, M., & Neergaard, H. (2020). Conceptualizing context in entrepreneurship education: A literature review.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(5), 863–886.
Virtanen, V., & Lindblom-Yl¨
anne, S. (2010). University students’ and teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning in the biosciences. Instructional Science, 38(4),
355–370.
Wegner, E., & Nückles, M. (2015). Knowledge acquisition or participation in communities of practice? Academics’ metaphors of teaching and learning at the
university. Studies in Higher Education, 40(4), 624–643.
Wenger, E (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E. (2018). A social theory of learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning. Learning theorists. In their own words (pp. 209–218). Abingdon, UK:
Routledge.
Williams Middleton, K., Padilla-Mel´
endez, A., Lockett, N., Quesada-Pallar`
es, C., & Jack, S. (2020). The university as an entrepreneurial learning space: The role of
socialized learning in developing entrepreneurial competence. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(5), 887–909.
Wright, E., Feng, S., & Zheng, Y. (2021). Unemployed graduate to the next jack ma? A counter-narrative to the entrepreneurship movement in higher education.
Higher Education, 83, 863–880.
Wu, H., & Benson, S. A. (2017). Made in China 2025 and new trends of entrepreneurship education of China: A socio-economic-educational perspective. Asian
Education Studies, 2(1), 10.
Xiao, Q., Zhu, P., Hsu, M. K., Zhuang, W., & Peltier, J. (2016). Reective learning in a Chinese MBA programme: Scale assessment and future recommendations.
Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(1), 1–22.
Zhou, M., & Xu, H. (2012). A review of entrepreneurship education for college students in China. Administrative Sciences, 2(1), 82–98.
R. Bell and J. Cui