我国大学创业教育的理论与实践研究
|
摘要
创业教育是使受教育者能够在社会经济、文化、政治领域内进行创新,开辟或拓展新的发展空间,并为他人和社会提供机遇的探索性行为的教育活动。以美国为代表的创业教育已进入成熟阶段,其标志是:理念已普及,系统化的教育、教学、实践体系已形成,创业型人才已从大学中源源产生,并取得了显著的创业效果。我国的创业教育刚刚起步,在研究中正处于由概念解析、渊源探讨、重要性阐述向教育、教学、实践体系构建的原则、方法、路径和模式探讨的过渡之中。
当前,制约我国创业教育发展的因素主要有:囿于创业管理的“创业学”教育;匮乏的教育资源;有待确定的“创业学”的学科归属;创业教育理念的“范式”和实践的“规制”尚未出现。要迅速地改变这种滞后的局面,认识提升和思想发动须先行,迫切需要对大学创业教育的观念、理念与实践模式进行研究、梳理与推广。
创业教育来源于以知识、个人和社会为本位的大学教育观的共生与流变,特别是以杜威为代表的美国实用主义教育观直接导致了美国创业教育的繁荣。我国大学的创业教育在教育部的推动与社会日益沉重的就业压力下,快速起步,当前正处于感性发动的阶段,创业教育的观念正在沿着知识教育→素质教育、就业教育→择业教育、创新教育→创业教育这种既分又合的路径形成。
创业教育的理念在创业教育的观念中孕育,它反映着创业教育的理想、追求和信念,是最稳定、最核心的要素,揭示出创业教育的内在逻辑、存在的终极价值与理想追求,它必须回答“创业教育是什么”的实然性问题,也必须回答“创业教育为什么”的应然性问题。根据苏格拉底、柏拉图、亚里士多德、黑格尔的理念论和洪堡、纽曼、艾略特、赫胥黎、赫钦斯、克尔的高等教育理念,沿着感性的创业教育→知性的创业教育→理性的创业教育的逻辑,本研究将创业教育理念体系的“研究纲领”设定为:以激发主体性的“精神学范式”为内核,以主体性培养的“知识论结构”为中介,以主体性实现的“行为学要求”为目标,它们共同构成创业教育理念体系的主干。其中,“精神学范式”解答了创业者的价值问题,是对创业教育“必然的解读”;“知识论结构”与“精神学范式”和“行为学要求”一起,共同提供了创业者所需的各种知识,是创业教育“实然的领悟”;“行为学要求”与“精神学范式”的有机结合,又为创业者的理想实现提供了“应然的追求”。而高等教育中个人本位与社会本位的价值观、实用主义和行为学的建构主义形成了理念体系的“辩护带”。
创业教育理念研究的价值在于指导创业型人才的培养,成就创业者之“人本身”的自由发展与社会的全面进步。为此,本研究提出了创业教育的活动目标与素质目标,开展渗透性、普及性、重点性与专业性的创业教育课程体系与实践要求,探究了政府与高校实施创业教育的保障措施,政府、高校与社会“三位一体”的评价系统,并根据研究型、教学型和职业教育型大学的特点,分别提出了“在基础研究与跨学科教育基础上开展创业学的研究与教育”、“由成熟知识传授为起点,通过创业精神教育,共同作用于创业的知识与能力教育”和“由专业基本知识、单项技术传授与职业道德、创业精神教育相结合,共同作用于专业领域的创业技能教育”这三种各有倚重的创业教育模式,以及相应的课程选择与项目选择。并指出研究型大学创业教育的目标是创业项目的产业化和构建国家创新体系,教学型大学是创业项目的市场化和推动区域经济发展,而职业教育型大学则是创业项目的企业化和促进社区繁荣。
创业教育的提出、探索是大学发展的内在逻辑。它推动着大学由知识生产向知识应用转型,也成为大学迅速地向社会中心迁移的实现方式。创业教育的实践是时代发展和社会进步的客观要求,在当前我国快速的社会转型中,大学要保持其应有的引领地位,必须以制度创新为前提,以知识与技术创新为动力,以解决社会发展的关键问题为己任,以培养大批的创业者为目的。中国的大学应通过课程的综合化、知识的资本化、大学的创业化来构建创业型大学的教育平台,取得创业型大学的市场认可,实现创业型大学的梦想。
Entrepreneurship education is an exploring educational activity, which enables educatees to innovate, develop or expand in the socioeconomic, cultural and political fields, and also provide opportunities to others and the society. The United States, as a representative in entrepreneurship education, is at its mature stage. The symbolic characteristics are: entrepreneurship education logos are prevalent, systematized education, teaching and practices are completed, generations of entrepreneurial talents have graduated from universities and gained remarkable achievements. Entrepreneurship education in China is at its early stage. The researchers are in the middle of the transition from analysis of concepts, discussion of origins, and demonstration of significance to the discussion of principles, means, paths and patterns of educational, pedagogical and practical system construction.
Presently, main factors restraining the development of entrepreneurship education in China include the followings:“entrepreneurship education”is confined to entrepreneurial management and its categorization is not defined, educational resources are scarce, the“spiritualism paradigm”of entrepreneurship education and the rules of practices are not born yet. To change the lagging situation rapidly, awareness exaltation and ideology arousal are needed first. Investigation, coordination and generalization of concepts, logos, and practice models of entrepreneurship education in China’s universities are required immediately.
Entrepreneurship education originates from the intergrowth and evolution of university educational values, in which knowledge, individual and society are basis. In particular, the educational view of American Pragmatism represented by Dewey resulted the prosperity of entrepreneurship education in American. Under the promotion of the Ministry of Education and the increasing pressure of severe social employment situation, entrepreneurship education in China’s universities is at perceptual stage of cognition. The ideas of entrepreneurship education are emerging following the divisional and combinational path of transformation from knowledge to ability-orientated education, from employment to career education, and from innovation to entrepreneurship education.
The logos of entrepreneurship education originate from its concepts. The logos not only reflect the ideals, pursuits, and beliefs of entrepreneurship education, which are the most stable and core elements, but also reveal the internal logic, ultimate value and ideal pursuits of entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, the logos must answer two questions: the realistic question of“what is entrepreneurship education?”and the intrinsic question of“what is entrepreneurship education for?”According to the logos of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Hegel and the advanced teaching theory of Humboldt, Newman, Eliot, Huxley, Hutchins, and Kerr, along with the transformation logic of entrepreneurship education from perceptual stage of cognition to knowability and from knowability to rationality, the“essential research points”of the logos of entrepreneurship education are as the followings:“spiritualism paradigm”of subject arousal as inner core,“epistemology structure”of subject cultivation as intermediary, and“ethological requirement”of subject realization as object. These three elements constitute the main stream of logos of entrepreneurship education. Among other things,“spiritualism paradigm”answers the value of entrepreneurship and is“inevitable explanation”to entrepreneurship education.“Epistemology structure”and“spiritualism paradigm”together with“ethological requirement”jointly provide the necessary knowledge required by entrepreneurs and is“solid insight”of entrepreneurship education. The engagement of“ethological requirement”and“spiritualism paradigm”provides“reasonable pursuits”for the realization of entrepreneurs’dreams. However, in the higher education, personal value and social value, pragmatism and the constructivism of ethnology form a“buffer zone”of the system of logos.
The value of studying the logos of entrepreneurship education is to direct cultivation of entrepreneurial talents, and for entrepreneurs to achieve their own free development and progress of the overall society. Therefore, the study puts forward the activity and quality goal of entrepreneurship education, establishes penetrable, popular, important, and professional curriculum and practice requirements, and investigates safeguard mechanism of entrepreneurship education implemented by the government and the university, and“trinity”evaluation system of government, university, and society. Based on characteristics of research, teaching, and vocational education universities, the study proposed three entrepreneurship education models with different emphasis, and associated selection of courses and projects. The three models are“conducting entrepreneurial research and entrepreneurship education based on fundamental research and inter-discipline education”,“starting with teaching mature knowledge, improving entrepreneurship education knowledge and ability–orientated education through entrepreneur daring education”, and“promoting skills of entrepreneurship education in specialized fields by combining basic knowledge of specialize fields, individual technology accomplishment and professional ethics along with entrepreneur daring education”. The study also indicates that for research-type university, the objective of entrepreneurship education is to industrialize entrepreneurial projects and establish a national innovative system. For teaching-type university, the goal is to marketwise entrepreneurial projects and promote the development of regional economy. And for vocational-type university, the objective is to enable entrepreneurial projects running like enterprise and stimulate the community prosperity.
The presentation and exploration of entrepreneurship education are inner demand of university development. It impels universities transforming form knowledge production to knowledge application and is a realistic mode for university education to move towards the society. Practices of entrepreneurship education are the objective requirements of epoch and society development. For universities in China, in order to keep one’s leading position during the current rapid social transformation, it has to have institutional innovation as premise, have knowledge and technology innovation as power, solve key problems of social development as responsibility, and cultivate a large number of entrepreneurs as objective. Universities in China should through curricular integration, knowledge capitalization, and their own implementation of entrepreneurship to construct entrepreneurial universities, gain the market recognition and realize the dreams of entrepreneurial universities.
当前,制约我国创业教育发展的因素主要有:囿于创业管理的“创业学”教育;匮乏的教育资源;有待确定的“创业学”的学科归属;创业教育理念的“范式”和实践的“规制”尚未出现。要迅速地改变这种滞后的局面,认识提升和思想发动须先行,迫切需要对大学创业教育的观念、理念与实践模式进行研究、梳理与推广。
创业教育来源于以知识、个人和社会为本位的大学教育观的共生与流变,特别是以杜威为代表的美国实用主义教育观直接导致了美国创业教育的繁荣。我国大学的创业教育在教育部的推动与社会日益沉重的就业压力下,快速起步,当前正处于感性发动的阶段,创业教育的观念正在沿着知识教育→素质教育、就业教育→择业教育、创新教育→创业教育这种既分又合的路径形成。
创业教育的理念在创业教育的观念中孕育,它反映着创业教育的理想、追求和信念,是最稳定、最核心的要素,揭示出创业教育的内在逻辑、存在的终极价值与理想追求,它必须回答“创业教育是什么”的实然性问题,也必须回答“创业教育为什么”的应然性问题。根据苏格拉底、柏拉图、亚里士多德、黑格尔的理念论和洪堡、纽曼、艾略特、赫胥黎、赫钦斯、克尔的高等教育理念,沿着感性的创业教育→知性的创业教育→理性的创业教育的逻辑,本研究将创业教育理念体系的“研究纲领”设定为:以激发主体性的“精神学范式”为内核,以主体性培养的“知识论结构”为中介,以主体性实现的“行为学要求”为目标,它们共同构成创业教育理念体系的主干。其中,“精神学范式”解答了创业者的价值问题,是对创业教育“必然的解读”;“知识论结构”与“精神学范式”和“行为学要求”一起,共同提供了创业者所需的各种知识,是创业教育“实然的领悟”;“行为学要求”与“精神学范式”的有机结合,又为创业者的理想实现提供了“应然的追求”。而高等教育中个人本位与社会本位的价值观、实用主义和行为学的建构主义形成了理念体系的“辩护带”。
创业教育理念研究的价值在于指导创业型人才的培养,成就创业者之“人本身”的自由发展与社会的全面进步。为此,本研究提出了创业教育的活动目标与素质目标,开展渗透性、普及性、重点性与专业性的创业教育课程体系与实践要求,探究了政府与高校实施创业教育的保障措施,政府、高校与社会“三位一体”的评价系统,并根据研究型、教学型和职业教育型大学的特点,分别提出了“在基础研究与跨学科教育基础上开展创业学的研究与教育”、“由成熟知识传授为起点,通过创业精神教育,共同作用于创业的知识与能力教育”和“由专业基本知识、单项技术传授与职业道德、创业精神教育相结合,共同作用于专业领域的创业技能教育”这三种各有倚重的创业教育模式,以及相应的课程选择与项目选择。并指出研究型大学创业教育的目标是创业项目的产业化和构建国家创新体系,教学型大学是创业项目的市场化和推动区域经济发展,而职业教育型大学则是创业项目的企业化和促进社区繁荣。
创业教育的提出、探索是大学发展的内在逻辑。它推动着大学由知识生产向知识应用转型,也成为大学迅速地向社会中心迁移的实现方式。创业教育的实践是时代发展和社会进步的客观要求,在当前我国快速的社会转型中,大学要保持其应有的引领地位,必须以制度创新为前提,以知识与技术创新为动力,以解决社会发展的关键问题为己任,以培养大批的创业者为目的。中国的大学应通过课程的综合化、知识的资本化、大学的创业化来构建创业型大学的教育平台,取得创业型大学的市场认可,实现创业型大学的梦想。
Entrepreneurship education is an exploring educational activity, which enables educatees to innovate, develop or expand in the socioeconomic, cultural and political fields, and also provide opportunities to others and the society. The United States, as a representative in entrepreneurship education, is at its mature stage. The symbolic characteristics are: entrepreneurship education logos are prevalent, systematized education, teaching and practices are completed, generations of entrepreneurial talents have graduated from universities and gained remarkable achievements. Entrepreneurship education in China is at its early stage. The researchers are in the middle of the transition from analysis of concepts, discussion of origins, and demonstration of significance to the discussion of principles, means, paths and patterns of educational, pedagogical and practical system construction.
Presently, main factors restraining the development of entrepreneurship education in China include the followings:“entrepreneurship education”is confined to entrepreneurial management and its categorization is not defined, educational resources are scarce, the“spiritualism paradigm”of entrepreneurship education and the rules of practices are not born yet. To change the lagging situation rapidly, awareness exaltation and ideology arousal are needed first. Investigation, coordination and generalization of concepts, logos, and practice models of entrepreneurship education in China’s universities are required immediately.
Entrepreneurship education originates from the intergrowth and evolution of university educational values, in which knowledge, individual and society are basis. In particular, the educational view of American Pragmatism represented by Dewey resulted the prosperity of entrepreneurship education in American. Under the promotion of the Ministry of Education and the increasing pressure of severe social employment situation, entrepreneurship education in China’s universities is at perceptual stage of cognition. The ideas of entrepreneurship education are emerging following the divisional and combinational path of transformation from knowledge to ability-orientated education, from employment to career education, and from innovation to entrepreneurship education.
The logos of entrepreneurship education originate from its concepts. The logos not only reflect the ideals, pursuits, and beliefs of entrepreneurship education, which are the most stable and core elements, but also reveal the internal logic, ultimate value and ideal pursuits of entrepreneurship education. Furthermore, the logos must answer two questions: the realistic question of“what is entrepreneurship education?”and the intrinsic question of“what is entrepreneurship education for?”According to the logos of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Hegel and the advanced teaching theory of Humboldt, Newman, Eliot, Huxley, Hutchins, and Kerr, along with the transformation logic of entrepreneurship education from perceptual stage of cognition to knowability and from knowability to rationality, the“essential research points”of the logos of entrepreneurship education are as the followings:“spiritualism paradigm”of subject arousal as inner core,“epistemology structure”of subject cultivation as intermediary, and“ethological requirement”of subject realization as object. These three elements constitute the main stream of logos of entrepreneurship education. Among other things,“spiritualism paradigm”answers the value of entrepreneurship and is“inevitable explanation”to entrepreneurship education.“Epistemology structure”and“spiritualism paradigm”together with“ethological requirement”jointly provide the necessary knowledge required by entrepreneurs and is“solid insight”of entrepreneurship education. The engagement of“ethological requirement”and“spiritualism paradigm”provides“reasonable pursuits”for the realization of entrepreneurs’dreams. However, in the higher education, personal value and social value, pragmatism and the constructivism of ethnology form a“buffer zone”of the system of logos.
The value of studying the logos of entrepreneurship education is to direct cultivation of entrepreneurial talents, and for entrepreneurs to achieve their own free development and progress of the overall society. Therefore, the study puts forward the activity and quality goal of entrepreneurship education, establishes penetrable, popular, important, and professional curriculum and practice requirements, and investigates safeguard mechanism of entrepreneurship education implemented by the government and the university, and“trinity”evaluation system of government, university, and society. Based on characteristics of research, teaching, and vocational education universities, the study proposed three entrepreneurship education models with different emphasis, and associated selection of courses and projects. The three models are“conducting entrepreneurial research and entrepreneurship education based on fundamental research and inter-discipline education”,“starting with teaching mature knowledge, improving entrepreneurship education knowledge and ability–orientated education through entrepreneur daring education”, and“promoting skills of entrepreneurship education in specialized fields by combining basic knowledge of specialize fields, individual technology accomplishment and professional ethics along with entrepreneur daring education”. The study also indicates that for research-type university, the objective of entrepreneurship education is to industrialize entrepreneurial projects and establish a national innovative system. For teaching-type university, the goal is to marketwise entrepreneurial projects and promote the development of regional economy. And for vocational-type university, the objective is to enable entrepreneurial projects running like enterprise and stimulate the community prosperity.
The presentation and exploration of entrepreneurship education are inner demand of university development. It impels universities transforming form knowledge production to knowledge application and is a realistic mode for university education to move towards the society. Practices of entrepreneurship education are the objective requirements of epoch and society development. For universities in China, in order to keep one’s leading position during the current rapid social transformation, it has to have institutional innovation as premise, have knowledge and technology innovation as power, solve key problems of social development as responsibility, and cultivate a large number of entrepreneurs as objective. Universities in China should through curricular integration, knowledge capitalization, and their own implementation of entrepreneurship to construct entrepreneurial universities, gain the market recognition and realize the dreams of entrepreneurial universities.
引文
[1]劳动和社会保障部部长田成平,在十届全国人大五次会议的记者发布会上提供的数据, 2007. 3. 14
[2]第一财经日报, http://www. sina. com. cn, 2007. 3. 14
[3]中国青少年中心专题研究报告, http://www. sina. com. cn, 2007. 2. 9
[4]侯定凯.创业教育——大学致力于培养企业家精神.华东师范大学, 2000
[5]张健,姜彦福等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003(1)
[6]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[7]杰弗里·蒂蒙斯,小丝蒂芬斯·皮内利著.周伟民,吕长春译.创业学.人民邮电出版社, 2005(7): 210~212
[8]劳剑东,李湛.论创业投资的治理结构与风险控制机制.当代经济科学, 2001(5)
[9]李鸿雁.大学生创业浅谈.中国大学生就业, 2006(15)
[10]张健,姜彦福等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003(1)
[11]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[12]张帏,高建.斯坦福大学创业教育体系和特点的研究.科学学与科学技术管理, 2006(9)
[13]陈茉.国外高校创业教育的演进特质.教育评论, 2006(6)
[14]牛泽民,熊飞.北京航空航天大学学报·社会科学版, 2003(3)
[15]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[16]盛春辉,李守强.试论高等院校创业教育体系的构建.教育研究, 2006(8)
[17]韦进.适应与超越之间:大学生创业教育.中国高教研究, 2004(4)
[18]陶金国.在课程教学中实施创业教育.中国高等教育, 2003(22)
[19]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育.合肥工业大学学报·社会科学版, 2002(2)
[20]徐静姝.适应高新技术发展要求,开展研究生创业教育.广西青年干部学院学报, 2004(2)
[21]朱军,符涛.新世纪高校实施创业教育刍议.重庆工学院学报, 2002(2)
[22]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育.合肥工业大学学报·社会科学版, 2002(2)
[22]张桂春,张琳琳.“创业教育”思想的生成与流变.辽宁师范大学学报·社会科学版, 2004(7)
[23]毛建国.职业学校创新教育与创业教育的关系.教育发展研究, 2004(3)
[24]房欲飞.大学生创业教育的内涵及实施的意义.理工高教研究, 2004(4)
[25]毛建国.职业学校创新教育与创业教育的关系.教育发展研究. 2005(3)
[26]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[27]曹威麟,李德才.中国高校的创业教育.现代教育科学, 2002(3)
[28]杨丽.加强创业教育,把素质教育引向深入.河南教育学院学报·哲学社会科学版, 2004(2)
[29]宋振文.实现创业教育与理想信念教育的相互促进.中国轻工教育, 2006(1)
[30]谢树平.关于创业教育课程设计与实施的思考.职业技术教育·教科版, 2002(7)
[31]黄耀华,徐亮.高校创业教育的新视角.南昌大学学报·人社版, 2003(11)
[32]郭必裕.对构建大学生创业评价体系的思考.黑龙江高教研究, 2003(4)
[33]王永友.创业教育实践体系的基本框架构建.黑龙江高教研究, 2004(11)
[34]时鹏程,许磊.试论创业学研究的三个层次.外国经济与管理, 2006(5)
[35]邱安昌,杨一川,王月梅.创业教育探究.松辽学刊·人文社会科学版, 2002, 8(4)
[36]席升阳.中国创业学学科体系探讨.自然辩证法研究, 2004(5)
[37]胡乐乐编译.欧盟计划促进中小学与大学的商业精神.基础教育参考, 2006(5): 17
[38]张海燕.海外高校的创业教育.中国职业技术教育, 2006(6)(下旬刊)
[39]张帏,高建.斯坦福大学创业教育体系和特点的研究.科学学与科学技术管理, 2006(9): 147
[40]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2): 79
[41]熊飞,邱菀华.美国创业学发展及其对中国的借鉴.科学学研究,增刊2006(8): 133
[42]王长宇.美国大学创业教育课程设置探析.中国民族教育,2006 (7-8 ) 72
[43]学生在教师指导下积极从事科研工作,积极参与工业企业资助的长期和短期项目
[44]陈浩凯,徐平磊.印度和美国的创业教育模式对比与中国的创业教育.中国高教研究, 2006(9)
[45]房欲飞.大学创业教育在英国.上海教育, 2006 (6)(下旬刊): 41
[46]房欲飞.大学创业教育在英国.上海教育, 2006 (6)(下旬刊): 41
[47]张海燕.海外高校的创业教育.中国职业技术教育, 2006(6)(下旬刊)
[48]黄进,胡甲刚.“三创教育”论纲.武汉大学学报·社会科学版, 2003(7)
[49]常建坤,李时椿.美国的创业教育及其启示,光明日报, 2005. 12. 28
[50]衣俊卿.对高等学校开展创业教育的理性思考.中国高等教育, 2004(10)
[51]陈建华.论知识经济时代的学校知识教育.宁波大学学报(教育科学版), 2003(10)
[52]瞿葆奎.智育卷·教育学文集[C].北京:人民教育出版社, 1993: 238-240
[53]黎军,张大玲.对素质教育概念与特征的研究.西南交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2005(3)
[54]彭汉庆,吕全国.职业教育就是就业教育的理论和实践误区.内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2005(9)
[55]大学生就业难的结构性因素.第一财经日报. http://www. sina. com. cn. 2007. 3. 14
[56]李秀梅.大学生择业教育论析.齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2003(9)
[57]赵尚松.近年来“创新教育”研究综述.巢湖学院学报, 2005(1)
[58]席升阳.亚里士多德的范畴说.自然辩证法研究, 1997(10)增刊: 92
[59]席升阳.黑格尔哲学与易学异同盖析.河南师范大学学报·哲学社会科学版, 1995(7): 11
[60]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3): 4
[61]黑格尔.小逻辑[M].商务印书馆, 1982: 56
[62]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3): 6
[63]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3)
[64]代表人物之一是王康, 1981年始任中国人才研究会理事长,他致力于人才学的研究,并成功将“人才学”作为一个独立学科列入“国家标准代码”)
[1]郁义鸿,李克能,罗博特·D·希斯瑞克.创业学.上海:复旦大学出版社, 2000
[2]刘道玉.创业与人生设计.武汉:湖北教育出版社, 2002. 9(第1版)
[3]戴维·雷著.董成茂译.创业企业家.中国对外翻译出版公司, 2000
[4]张竹筠译.美国的创业教育.北京航空航天大学创业管理培训学院内部资料, 2003
[5]彭钢.创业教育学.浙江:江苏教育出版社, 2001
[6]张赞平,陈广禄.创业指南.北京:专利文献出版社, 2000
[7]林钧敬.知识创业.北京:高等教育出版社, 2001
[8]姜彦福,高建,程源,邱琼.全球创业观察2002中国报告.北京:清华大学出版社, 2003
[9]卢旭东.创业学概论.浙江:浙江大学出版社, 2002
[10]宋克勤.创业成功学.北京:经济管理出版社, 2002
[12]曹随,王燕梅.中国大众创业学.北京:中国经济出版社, 2004
[13]阿玛尔,毕海德等.创业精神.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2000
[14]付国清,李军.创业启动.北京:科学出版社, 2004
[15]尚志平.职业指导与创业教育.北京:高等教育出版社, 2000
[16]王艺荣.求职与创业.北京:机械工业出版社, 2001
[17]陈冠伦,肖万春.个人创办私营公司全过程操作.北京:中国工人出版社, 2003
[18]韩庆祥.你也能创业.北京:经济科学出版社, 2003
[19]陈德智.创业管理.北京:清华大学出版社, 2001. 8(第1版)
[20]陈颖健等.新思维范式.北京:科学技术文献出版社, 2003
[21]汪海东.综合思维方式论.北京:人民出版社, 1999
[22]多湖辉,王彤译.创造性思维.北京:中国青年出版社, 2002
[23]李光等.创业导论.武汉:武汉大学出版社, 2003
[24]张鑫华.创业第一步.北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2003
[25] [美]杰弗里·蒂蒙斯,周伟民译.创业者.北京:华夏出版社, 2002
[26]王立平.中关村人力资源研究.北京:中国经济出版社, 2003
[27]王忠明.中小企业创业.北京:经济科学出版社, 2000. 5(第1版)
[28]王永友.创业学概论.哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[29]杨华初.创业投资理论与应用.北京:科学出版社, 2003. 1(第1版)
[30]朱炎.创业管理.北京:经济科学出版社, 2000. 9(第1版)
[31]许玫.创业利益论.上海:复旦大学出版社, 2003
[32]盛立军.现代创业管理.北京:中国金融出版社, 2002. 4(第1版)
[33]袁勇志.创新行为与创新障碍.上海三联书店, 2003. 4(第1版)
[34]甘华鸣.创业.北京:中国国际广播出版社, 2002. 6(第1版)
[35]王长远.创业造饭碗——家庭财富创造思路.北京:中国经济出版社, 2002. 1(第1版)
[38]卢锋.商业世界的经济学观察.北京:北京大学出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[37]陈宝庭,刘金华.经济伦理学.沈阳:东北财经大学出版社, 2001. 3(第1版)
[38] [美]杰斯汀·隆内科,卡罗斯·莫尔,威廉·彼迪著.郭武文等译.创业机会.北京:华夏出版社, 2002. 1(第1版)
[39] [美]纳生·阿森.陈奎宁主译.美国创业宝典.长春:吉林人民出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[40] [美]雅各布·明塞尔著.张风林译.人力资本研究.北京:中国经济出版社, 2001. 9(第1版)
[41] [美]威廉·A·萨尔曼,阿马尔·拜德,霍华德·史蒂文森等编写.李风云,边晓梅,孟天山译.创业企业融资.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2003. 7(第1版)
[42]乔法容,朱金瑞.经济伦理学.北京:人民出版社, 2004
[43]尹海刚,刘彦敏.知本创业:由创新而超速创富.北京:企业管理出版社, 2001. 8
[44]张应杭.企业伦理学导论.浙江:浙江大学出版社, 2002. 9
[45]周祖城.管理与伦理.北京:清华大学出版社, 2000. 6
[46]宋希仁.道德观通论.北京:高等教育出版社, 2000. 7
[47]王艺荣.求职与创业.北京:机械工业出版社, 2001
[48]欧晓峣,蒋璟萍.大学生创业教育讲座.北京:知识出版社, 2002
[49]北京市教育委员会.创业教育.北京:科学出版社, 2001
[50]钟联萍.创业策划.北京:中国纺织出版社, 2002
[51]钟朋荣.谁为中国人造饭碗.北京:中国经济出版社, 1999
[52]席升阳等.创业哲学,创业心理学,创业伦理学,创业经济学,创业管理学,创业环境学,创业人才学,创业法学,创业实务,大学生创业.北京:中央党校出版社, 2005. 2
[53]王海珍.谈高等教育中的创业教育.高等理科教育, 2002(4)
[54]曹威麟,李德才.中国高校的创业教育.现代教育科学, 2002(3)
[55]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育,合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版), 2002. 4
[56]张桂春,张琳琳.“创业教育”思想的生成与流变.辽宁师范大学学报(社科版), 2004. 7
[57]潘剑峰.加强创业教育,培养大学生创业能力.中国高教研究, 2002(2)
[58]车治荣. 21世纪创业教育与人才培养.中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2003. 8
[59]杨艳萍.创业教育课程化的框架设计.长沙铁道学院学报(社会科学版), 2004(3)
[60]王永友.创业教育实践体系的基本框架构建.黑龙江高教研究, 2004(11)
[61]郭必裕.对构建大学生创业评价体系的思考.黑龙江高教研究, 2003(4)
[62]刘晓梅.对研究生创新教育的几点思考.大连理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2004. 6
[63]刘永根.高校创业教育的误区与超越.高教论坛, 2004. 8(4)
[64]黄耀华,徐亮.高校创业教育的新视角.南昌大学学报(人社版), 2003. 11
[65]曹巍等.创新与创业:国内外高校创业教育状况述评.煤炭高等教育, 2004. 7
[66]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[67]张健,姜彦福,雷家.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003. 1
[68]张树军,刘泰强,郝培峰.创新创业教育培养模式探讨.辽宁教育研究, 2003(1)
[69]朱继洲.创新教育与创业教育.大学教育科学, 2004(2)
[70]于崇智.创业教育与高校教改.华东交通大学学报, 2004. 6
[71]房欲飞.大学生创业教育的内涵及实施的意义.理工高教研究, 2004. 8
[72]刘洋.高等学校实施创业教育的研究与探索.现代教育科学, 2004(2)
[73]李大公,姚美珍.试论高校创业人才培养.生产力研究, 2002. 3
[74]谢树平.关于创业教育课程设计与实施的思考.职业技术教育(教科版), 2002(7)
[75]张健等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003. 1
[76]于崇智.创业教育与高校教改.华东交通大学学报, 2004. 6
[77]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[78]冯炜,申恩平.企业家创业动因和障碍的主成分分析模型.沈阳工业大学学报, 2003. 4
[79]夏林.中国企业家队伍建设中存在问题及对策.改革与理论, 2003. 9
[80]席升阳.中国创业学学科体系探讨.自然辩证法研究, 2004. 5
[81] Carolyn Brow. Entrepreneurial Education Teaching Guide[EB/L]. http: //www. celee. Edu, 2000
[82] What is Enterprise Education [EB/OL]. http: //www. curriculum. du. au/ enterprise /inform htm #what is
[83] Jeffry A. Timnons:‘New Venture Creation’, Irwin McGraw-Hill, 1994
[84] Paul D Reynolds:“The Entrepreneurial Process”, QUORUM BOOKS, 1997
[85] Low, M. B The Adolescence of Entrepreneurship Research: Specification of Purpose [J]. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 2001, 25 (4): 17-25
[86] Katz, J. , The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education, Journal of business Venturing, 2003(18): 283-300
[87] H. H, Stevenson, M. J. Roberts and H. Grousbeck, New Business Ventures and the Entrepreneur, Irwin, 1989
[88] Kourilsky, M. L.. Entrepreneurship education: Opportunity in search of curriculum. Kansas City, MO: Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, 1995: 1-21 (c96001)
[89] Noll, C. L.. Planning curriculum for entrepreneurship education. Business Education Forum, 1993, February , 47(3): 3-6 (c96070)
[90] North Georgia Technical Institute. Entrepreneurial education planning for success syllabus. Clarkesville, GA: North Georgia Technical Institute, 1999
[91] Leitch C. M. , Harrison R. T.: A process model for entrepreneurship education and development International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 1999, 5(3): 8-10
[92] Garavan, Thomas N, O'Cinneide, Barra: Entrepreneurship Education and TrainingProgrammes: A Review and Evaluation-Part 1, Journal of European Industrial Training, August 1994, 18(8): 3-12
[93] Yujiro, Hayami. Development Economics from the Poverty to the Wealth of the Nations. Oxford University Press, 1997
[94] Christopher J. Lucas: American Higher Education: A History. New York: Martin’s Press, 1994
[95] Clak Kerr. The Great Transformation in Higher Education. State University of New York Press, 1991
[96] John Henry Cardinal Newman. The Idea of a University: Defined and Illustrated. Loyola University Press, 1987
[97] Vesper. K. H. , Gaitner. W. B.. Measuring progress in entrepreneurship education J. Bus. Venturing, 1997, 12(5)
[98] George T. Solomon & Lloyd W. Fernald, Jr. Trends in Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship Education in the United States Entrepreneurship Theory & Practicy 1991 spring
[99] Peter Robinson & Max Haynes Entrepreneurship Education in America’s Major Universities Entrepreneurship Theory & Practicy 1991 spring
[100] Joyce Ann Shotick, The Impact of Children's Theater on The Comprehension of Fundamental Economic Concepts Journal of Entrepreneurship Education Vvolume 1, number 1, 1997
[101] John Breen & Sue Bergin Educating Entrepreneurs: Looking at universities Australian CPA 1999/August
[102] Fiet J. F The Theoretical Side of Teaching Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 2000
[103] Arthur K. Fischer, June M. Freund, Jane H. Crouch: Developing The Entrepreneurial Spirit Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1997(1)
[104] Gerald E Hills Variations In University Entrepreneurship Education: An Empirical Study Of An Evolving Field Journal of Business Venturing, 1988
[105] Lisa F. Borstadt, Ron S. Lee, Sandra One Feather, Educating Native Americans About Free Enterprise Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1997(1)
[106] Low, M. B. and I. C. MacMillan, Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges, Journal of Management, 1988, 14(2): 139-161
[107] Shane, S. and S. Venkataraman, The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research, Academy of Management Review, 2000, 25(1):217-226
[108] Bhave, M. P. A process model of venture creation, Journal of Business Venturing, 1994, 9(3): 223-242.
[109] Herron, L. and H. J. Sapienza, The entrepreneur and the initiation of new venture launch activities, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 1992, 17(1): 49-55
[110] Gartner, W. B. , K. G. Shaver, and E. J. Gatewood, Doing it yourself: Career attributions of nascent entrepreneurs, in: P. D. Reynolds, Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, Babson College, Wellesley, Mass, 2000: 13-24
[111] Brush, C. G. , P. G. Greene, M. M. Hart, and H. S. Haller, From initial idea to unique advantage: The entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base, Academy of Management Executive, 2001, 15(1): 64-78
[112] Swedberg, R Entrepreneurship: The social science view, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
[113] Baumol, W. J. Entrepreneurship: productive, unproductive and destructive, Journal of Political Economy, 1990, 98(5): 893-921
[114] Gimeno, J. , T. B. Folta, A. C. Cooper, and C. Y. Woo, Survival of the fittest? Entrepreneurial human capital and the persistence of underperforming firms, Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42: 750-783
[115] Singh, R. P. , A comment on developing the field of entrepreneurship through the study opportunity recognition and exploitation, The Academy of Management Review, 2001, 26(1): 10-12
[116] Westhead, P. and M. Wright, Novice, portfolio and serial founders: Are they different?, Journal of Business Venturing, 1998, 13(3): 173-204
[117] Wu, C.-F.. A Study of the Adjustment of Ethical Recognition and Ethical Decision-Making of Managers-to-be Across the Taiwan Strait Before and After Receiving a Business Ethics Education, Journal of Business Ethics, 2003, 45(4): 291-307
[118] Peppas, S. C. and B. A. Duskin. Ethical Perspectives: Are Future Marketers any Different?, Teaching Business Ethics, 2000, 4(2): 207-220
[119] Economist. Doing Well by Doing Good, Econo-mist, 2000, 355(8167): 65-67
[120] The American Assembly of Colleges and Schools of Business. Standards for Business Accreditation, 1993: 17
[121] Flanagan, O.. Varieties of Moral Personality. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 1991
[2]第一财经日报, http://www. sina. com. cn, 2007. 3. 14
[3]中国青少年中心专题研究报告, http://www. sina. com. cn, 2007. 2. 9
[4]侯定凯.创业教育——大学致力于培养企业家精神.华东师范大学, 2000
[5]张健,姜彦福等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003(1)
[6]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[7]杰弗里·蒂蒙斯,小丝蒂芬斯·皮内利著.周伟民,吕长春译.创业学.人民邮电出版社, 2005(7): 210~212
[8]劳剑东,李湛.论创业投资的治理结构与风险控制机制.当代经济科学, 2001(5)
[9]李鸿雁.大学生创业浅谈.中国大学生就业, 2006(15)
[10]张健,姜彦福等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003(1)
[11]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[12]张帏,高建.斯坦福大学创业教育体系和特点的研究.科学学与科学技术管理, 2006(9)
[13]陈茉.国外高校创业教育的演进特质.教育评论, 2006(6)
[14]牛泽民,熊飞.北京航空航天大学学报·社会科学版, 2003(3)
[15]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[16]盛春辉,李守强.试论高等院校创业教育体系的构建.教育研究, 2006(8)
[17]韦进.适应与超越之间:大学生创业教育.中国高教研究, 2004(4)
[18]陶金国.在课程教学中实施创业教育.中国高等教育, 2003(22)
[19]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育.合肥工业大学学报·社会科学版, 2002(2)
[20]徐静姝.适应高新技术发展要求,开展研究生创业教育.广西青年干部学院学报, 2004(2)
[21]朱军,符涛.新世纪高校实施创业教育刍议.重庆工学院学报, 2002(2)
[22]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育.合肥工业大学学报·社会科学版, 2002(2)
[22]张桂春,张琳琳.“创业教育”思想的生成与流变.辽宁师范大学学报·社会科学版, 2004(7)
[23]毛建国.职业学校创新教育与创业教育的关系.教育发展研究, 2004(3)
[24]房欲飞.大学生创业教育的内涵及实施的意义.理工高教研究, 2004(4)
[25]毛建国.职业学校创新教育与创业教育的关系.教育发展研究. 2005(3)
[26]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[27]曹威麟,李德才.中国高校的创业教育.现代教育科学, 2002(3)
[28]杨丽.加强创业教育,把素质教育引向深入.河南教育学院学报·哲学社会科学版, 2004(2)
[29]宋振文.实现创业教育与理想信念教育的相互促进.中国轻工教育, 2006(1)
[30]谢树平.关于创业教育课程设计与实施的思考.职业技术教育·教科版, 2002(7)
[31]黄耀华,徐亮.高校创业教育的新视角.南昌大学学报·人社版, 2003(11)
[32]郭必裕.对构建大学生创业评价体系的思考.黑龙江高教研究, 2003(4)
[33]王永友.创业教育实践体系的基本框架构建.黑龙江高教研究, 2004(11)
[34]时鹏程,许磊.试论创业学研究的三个层次.外国经济与管理, 2006(5)
[35]邱安昌,杨一川,王月梅.创业教育探究.松辽学刊·人文社会科学版, 2002, 8(4)
[36]席升阳.中国创业学学科体系探讨.自然辩证法研究, 2004(5)
[37]胡乐乐编译.欧盟计划促进中小学与大学的商业精神.基础教育参考, 2006(5): 17
[38]张海燕.海外高校的创业教育.中国职业技术教育, 2006(6)(下旬刊)
[39]张帏,高建.斯坦福大学创业教育体系和特点的研究.科学学与科学技术管理, 2006(9): 147
[40]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2): 79
[41]熊飞,邱菀华.美国创业学发展及其对中国的借鉴.科学学研究,增刊2006(8): 133
[42]王长宇.美国大学创业教育课程设置探析.中国民族教育,2006 (7-8 ) 72
[43]学生在教师指导下积极从事科研工作,积极参与工业企业资助的长期和短期项目
[44]陈浩凯,徐平磊.印度和美国的创业教育模式对比与中国的创业教育.中国高教研究, 2006(9)
[45]房欲飞.大学创业教育在英国.上海教育, 2006 (6)(下旬刊): 41
[46]房欲飞.大学创业教育在英国.上海教育, 2006 (6)(下旬刊): 41
[47]张海燕.海外高校的创业教育.中国职业技术教育, 2006(6)(下旬刊)
[48]黄进,胡甲刚.“三创教育”论纲.武汉大学学报·社会科学版, 2003(7)
[49]常建坤,李时椿.美国的创业教育及其启示,光明日报, 2005. 12. 28
[50]衣俊卿.对高等学校开展创业教育的理性思考.中国高等教育, 2004(10)
[51]陈建华.论知识经济时代的学校知识教育.宁波大学学报(教育科学版), 2003(10)
[52]瞿葆奎.智育卷·教育学文集[C].北京:人民教育出版社, 1993: 238-240
[53]黎军,张大玲.对素质教育概念与特征的研究.西南交通大学学报(社会科学版), 2005(3)
[54]彭汉庆,吕全国.职业教育就是就业教育的理论和实践误区.内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2005(9)
[55]大学生就业难的结构性因素.第一财经日报. http://www. sina. com. cn. 2007. 3. 14
[56]李秀梅.大学生择业教育论析.齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2003(9)
[57]赵尚松.近年来“创新教育”研究综述.巢湖学院学报, 2005(1)
[58]席升阳.亚里士多德的范畴说.自然辩证法研究, 1997(10)增刊: 92
[59]席升阳.黑格尔哲学与易学异同盖析.河南师范大学学报·哲学社会科学版, 1995(7): 11
[60]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3): 4
[61]黑格尔.小逻辑[M].商务印书馆, 1982: 56
[62]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3): 6
[63]席升阳.开放与封闭:黑格尔系统思想探析.自然辩证法研究, 2002(3)
[64]代表人物之一是王康, 1981年始任中国人才研究会理事长,他致力于人才学的研究,并成功将“人才学”作为一个独立学科列入“国家标准代码”)
[1]郁义鸿,李克能,罗博特·D·希斯瑞克.创业学.上海:复旦大学出版社, 2000
[2]刘道玉.创业与人生设计.武汉:湖北教育出版社, 2002. 9(第1版)
[3]戴维·雷著.董成茂译.创业企业家.中国对外翻译出版公司, 2000
[4]张竹筠译.美国的创业教育.北京航空航天大学创业管理培训学院内部资料, 2003
[5]彭钢.创业教育学.浙江:江苏教育出版社, 2001
[6]张赞平,陈广禄.创业指南.北京:专利文献出版社, 2000
[7]林钧敬.知识创业.北京:高等教育出版社, 2001
[8]姜彦福,高建,程源,邱琼.全球创业观察2002中国报告.北京:清华大学出版社, 2003
[9]卢旭东.创业学概论.浙江:浙江大学出版社, 2002
[10]宋克勤.创业成功学.北京:经济管理出版社, 2002
[12]曹随,王燕梅.中国大众创业学.北京:中国经济出版社, 2004
[13]阿玛尔,毕海德等.创业精神.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2000
[14]付国清,李军.创业启动.北京:科学出版社, 2004
[15]尚志平.职业指导与创业教育.北京:高等教育出版社, 2000
[16]王艺荣.求职与创业.北京:机械工业出版社, 2001
[17]陈冠伦,肖万春.个人创办私营公司全过程操作.北京:中国工人出版社, 2003
[18]韩庆祥.你也能创业.北京:经济科学出版社, 2003
[19]陈德智.创业管理.北京:清华大学出版社, 2001. 8(第1版)
[20]陈颖健等.新思维范式.北京:科学技术文献出版社, 2003
[21]汪海东.综合思维方式论.北京:人民出版社, 1999
[22]多湖辉,王彤译.创造性思维.北京:中国青年出版社, 2002
[23]李光等.创业导论.武汉:武汉大学出版社, 2003
[24]张鑫华.创业第一步.北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2003
[25] [美]杰弗里·蒂蒙斯,周伟民译.创业者.北京:华夏出版社, 2002
[26]王立平.中关村人力资源研究.北京:中国经济出版社, 2003
[27]王忠明.中小企业创业.北京:经济科学出版社, 2000. 5(第1版)
[28]王永友.创业学概论.哈尔滨:哈尔滨工程大学出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[29]杨华初.创业投资理论与应用.北京:科学出版社, 2003. 1(第1版)
[30]朱炎.创业管理.北京:经济科学出版社, 2000. 9(第1版)
[31]许玫.创业利益论.上海:复旦大学出版社, 2003
[32]盛立军.现代创业管理.北京:中国金融出版社, 2002. 4(第1版)
[33]袁勇志.创新行为与创新障碍.上海三联书店, 2003. 4(第1版)
[34]甘华鸣.创业.北京:中国国际广播出版社, 2002. 6(第1版)
[35]王长远.创业造饭碗——家庭财富创造思路.北京:中国经济出版社, 2002. 1(第1版)
[38]卢锋.商业世界的经济学观察.北京:北京大学出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[37]陈宝庭,刘金华.经济伦理学.沈阳:东北财经大学出版社, 2001. 3(第1版)
[38] [美]杰斯汀·隆内科,卡罗斯·莫尔,威廉·彼迪著.郭武文等译.创业机会.北京:华夏出版社, 2002. 1(第1版)
[39] [美]纳生·阿森.陈奎宁主译.美国创业宝典.长春:吉林人民出版社, 2003. 3(第1版)
[40] [美]雅各布·明塞尔著.张风林译.人力资本研究.北京:中国经济出版社, 2001. 9(第1版)
[41] [美]威廉·A·萨尔曼,阿马尔·拜德,霍华德·史蒂文森等编写.李风云,边晓梅,孟天山译.创业企业融资.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2003. 7(第1版)
[42]乔法容,朱金瑞.经济伦理学.北京:人民出版社, 2004
[43]尹海刚,刘彦敏.知本创业:由创新而超速创富.北京:企业管理出版社, 2001. 8
[44]张应杭.企业伦理学导论.浙江:浙江大学出版社, 2002. 9
[45]周祖城.管理与伦理.北京:清华大学出版社, 2000. 6
[46]宋希仁.道德观通论.北京:高等教育出版社, 2000. 7
[47]王艺荣.求职与创业.北京:机械工业出版社, 2001
[48]欧晓峣,蒋璟萍.大学生创业教育讲座.北京:知识出版社, 2002
[49]北京市教育委员会.创业教育.北京:科学出版社, 2001
[50]钟联萍.创业策划.北京:中国纺织出版社, 2002
[51]钟朋荣.谁为中国人造饭碗.北京:中国经济出版社, 1999
[52]席升阳等.创业哲学,创业心理学,创业伦理学,创业经济学,创业管理学,创业环境学,创业人才学,创业法学,创业实务,大学生创业.北京:中央党校出版社, 2005. 2
[53]王海珍.谈高等教育中的创业教育.高等理科教育, 2002(4)
[54]曹威麟,李德才.中国高校的创业教育.现代教育科学, 2002(3)
[55]汪宜丹.论研究生的创业教育,合肥工业大学学报(社会科学版), 2002. 4
[56]张桂春,张琳琳.“创业教育”思想的生成与流变.辽宁师范大学学报(社科版), 2004. 7
[57]潘剑峰.加强创业教育,培养大学生创业能力.中国高教研究, 2002(2)
[58]车治荣. 21世纪创业教育与人才培养.中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2003. 8
[59]杨艳萍.创业教育课程化的框架设计.长沙铁道学院学报(社会科学版), 2004(3)
[60]王永友.创业教育实践体系的基本框架构建.黑龙江高教研究, 2004(11)
[61]郭必裕.对构建大学生创业评价体系的思考.黑龙江高教研究, 2003(4)
[62]刘晓梅.对研究生创新教育的几点思考.大连理工大学学报(社会科学版), 2004. 6
[63]刘永根.高校创业教育的误区与超越.高教论坛, 2004. 8(4)
[64]黄耀华,徐亮.高校创业教育的新视角.南昌大学学报(人社版), 2003. 11
[65]曹巍等.创新与创业:国内外高校创业教育状况述评.煤炭高等教育, 2004. 7
[66]向东春,肖云龙.美国百森创业教育的特点及其启示.现代大学教育, 2003(2)
[67]张健,姜彦福,雷家.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003. 1
[68]张树军,刘泰强,郝培峰.创新创业教育培养模式探讨.辽宁教育研究, 2003(1)
[69]朱继洲.创新教育与创业教育.大学教育科学, 2004(2)
[70]于崇智.创业教育与高校教改.华东交通大学学报, 2004. 6
[71]房欲飞.大学生创业教育的内涵及实施的意义.理工高教研究, 2004. 8
[72]刘洋.高等学校实施创业教育的研究与探索.现代教育科学, 2004(2)
[73]李大公,姚美珍.试论高校创业人才培养.生产力研究, 2002. 3
[74]谢树平.关于创业教育课程设计与实施的思考.职业技术教育(教科版), 2002(7)
[75]张健等.美国创业学术研究及其对我们的启示.外国经济与管理, 2003. 1
[76]于崇智.创业教育与高校教改.华东交通大学学报, 2004. 6
[77]张平.创业教育:高等教育改革的价值取向.中国高教研究, 2002(12)
[78]冯炜,申恩平.企业家创业动因和障碍的主成分分析模型.沈阳工业大学学报, 2003. 4
[79]夏林.中国企业家队伍建设中存在问题及对策.改革与理论, 2003. 9
[80]席升阳.中国创业学学科体系探讨.自然辩证法研究, 2004. 5
[81] Carolyn Brow. Entrepreneurial Education Teaching Guide[EB/L]. http: //www. celee. Edu, 2000
[82] What is Enterprise Education [EB/OL]. http: //www. curriculum. du. au/ enterprise /inform htm #what is
[83] Jeffry A. Timnons:‘New Venture Creation’, Irwin McGraw-Hill, 1994
[84] Paul D Reynolds:“The Entrepreneurial Process”, QUORUM BOOKS, 1997
[85] Low, M. B The Adolescence of Entrepreneurship Research: Specification of Purpose [J]. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 2001, 25 (4): 17-25
[86] Katz, J. , The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education, Journal of business Venturing, 2003(18): 283-300
[87] H. H, Stevenson, M. J. Roberts and H. Grousbeck, New Business Ventures and the Entrepreneur, Irwin, 1989
[88] Kourilsky, M. L.. Entrepreneurship education: Opportunity in search of curriculum. Kansas City, MO: Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, 1995: 1-21 (c96001)
[89] Noll, C. L.. Planning curriculum for entrepreneurship education. Business Education Forum, 1993, February , 47(3): 3-6 (c96070)
[90] North Georgia Technical Institute. Entrepreneurial education planning for success syllabus. Clarkesville, GA: North Georgia Technical Institute, 1999
[91] Leitch C. M. , Harrison R. T.: A process model for entrepreneurship education and development International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 1999, 5(3): 8-10
[92] Garavan, Thomas N, O'Cinneide, Barra: Entrepreneurship Education and TrainingProgrammes: A Review and Evaluation-Part 1, Journal of European Industrial Training, August 1994, 18(8): 3-12
[93] Yujiro, Hayami. Development Economics from the Poverty to the Wealth of the Nations. Oxford University Press, 1997
[94] Christopher J. Lucas: American Higher Education: A History. New York: Martin’s Press, 1994
[95] Clak Kerr. The Great Transformation in Higher Education. State University of New York Press, 1991
[96] John Henry Cardinal Newman. The Idea of a University: Defined and Illustrated. Loyola University Press, 1987
[97] Vesper. K. H. , Gaitner. W. B.. Measuring progress in entrepreneurship education J. Bus. Venturing, 1997, 12(5)
[98] George T. Solomon & Lloyd W. Fernald, Jr. Trends in Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship Education in the United States Entrepreneurship Theory & Practicy 1991 spring
[99] Peter Robinson & Max Haynes Entrepreneurship Education in America’s Major Universities Entrepreneurship Theory & Practicy 1991 spring
[100] Joyce Ann Shotick, The Impact of Children's Theater on The Comprehension of Fundamental Economic Concepts Journal of Entrepreneurship Education Vvolume 1, number 1, 1997
[101] John Breen & Sue Bergin Educating Entrepreneurs: Looking at universities Australian CPA 1999/August
[102] Fiet J. F The Theoretical Side of Teaching Entrepreneurship Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 2000
[103] Arthur K. Fischer, June M. Freund, Jane H. Crouch: Developing The Entrepreneurial Spirit Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1997(1)
[104] Gerald E Hills Variations In University Entrepreneurship Education: An Empirical Study Of An Evolving Field Journal of Business Venturing, 1988
[105] Lisa F. Borstadt, Ron S. Lee, Sandra One Feather, Educating Native Americans About Free Enterprise Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1997(1)
[106] Low, M. B. and I. C. MacMillan, Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges, Journal of Management, 1988, 14(2): 139-161
[107] Shane, S. and S. Venkataraman, The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research, Academy of Management Review, 2000, 25(1):217-226
[108] Bhave, M. P. A process model of venture creation, Journal of Business Venturing, 1994, 9(3): 223-242.
[109] Herron, L. and H. J. Sapienza, The entrepreneur and the initiation of new venture launch activities, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 1992, 17(1): 49-55
[110] Gartner, W. B. , K. G. Shaver, and E. J. Gatewood, Doing it yourself: Career attributions of nascent entrepreneurs, in: P. D. Reynolds, Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, Babson College, Wellesley, Mass, 2000: 13-24
[111] Brush, C. G. , P. G. Greene, M. M. Hart, and H. S. Haller, From initial idea to unique advantage: The entrepreneurial challenge of constructing a resource base, Academy of Management Executive, 2001, 15(1): 64-78
[112] Swedberg, R Entrepreneurship: The social science view, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000
[113] Baumol, W. J. Entrepreneurship: productive, unproductive and destructive, Journal of Political Economy, 1990, 98(5): 893-921
[114] Gimeno, J. , T. B. Folta, A. C. Cooper, and C. Y. Woo, Survival of the fittest? Entrepreneurial human capital and the persistence of underperforming firms, Administrative Science Quarterly, 1997, 42: 750-783
[115] Singh, R. P. , A comment on developing the field of entrepreneurship through the study opportunity recognition and exploitation, The Academy of Management Review, 2001, 26(1): 10-12
[116] Westhead, P. and M. Wright, Novice, portfolio and serial founders: Are they different?, Journal of Business Venturing, 1998, 13(3): 173-204
[117] Wu, C.-F.. A Study of the Adjustment of Ethical Recognition and Ethical Decision-Making of Managers-to-be Across the Taiwan Strait Before and After Receiving a Business Ethics Education, Journal of Business Ethics, 2003, 45(4): 291-307
[118] Peppas, S. C. and B. A. Duskin. Ethical Perspectives: Are Future Marketers any Different?, Teaching Business Ethics, 2000, 4(2): 207-220
[119] Economist. Doing Well by Doing Good, Econo-mist, 2000, 355(8167): 65-67
[120] The American Assembly of Colleges and Schools of Business. Standards for Business Accreditation, 1993: 17
[121] Flanagan, O.. Varieties of Moral Personality. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 1991