1. *8 ideas for careers and enterprise through the curriculum
The Bootleg Benchmarks*
*8 ideas for careers and enterprise through the curriculum
NC/CB - intro selves.
CB intro idea of careers and enterprise through the curriculum.
***Note - Presentation to take NO MORE than 20 minutes, then – 15 to 20 minutes discussion, then feedback.
Remember to take a register.

2. CB – intro national context

3. CB intro – how enterprise is framed – ‘short term challenge’, ‘long term competition’.

4. Issues with careers and enterprise as ‘activities.’
CB – potential side effects of this approach (link back to last years IEEC).
What are the issues with that? (back to NC).

5. NC –photo reflection.
NC – introduces the competitions research strand of the project.

6. NC highlights key research outputs and learning from paper 1 (initial identification of the assumed benefits of competitions - what is policy assuming they do?), and paper 2 (developing and testing a programme theory for competitions and identifying research from other fields which challenges or refutes their uncritical application).

7. What lies beneath? Performance prioritised over mastery.
“If they let me do the talking, we might be in with a chance…
Performance prioritised over mastery.
“Don’t say anything to spoil it…”
Forced competition ‘coercive’.
“When will this be over?”
Extrinsic rewards ‘control’.
“I could never do anything that good…”
“We never win anyway…”
Loser’s Psychology.
NC –policy and guidance assumes that kids will be challenged and inspired (but they can be discouraged and coerced), we assume that their skills developed (but performance can take priority over mastery), we assume the process will be rewarding (but the extrinsic nature of the reward and its pursuit is controlling), we assume a competition will be motivating (but not if you consistently lose).
We couldn’t find one study that controlled for winners and losers, an obvious side effect of the model.
Discouraged by peer excellence.
What lies beneath?

8. Testing the programme theory for competitions in enterprise education
The intervention resources (what is assumed to happen in policy and guidance descriptions).
The intervention components
Theories which challenge the assumptions
Intermediate outcomes (or not).
Longer term impact (or not).
Achievement Goal Theory –teams prioritise performance over mastery, goals are external (‘win’ or ‘don’t lose’) rather than internal (‘the joy of the task’).
Self Determination Theory– extrinsic rewards (such as ‘winning’) are controlling, undermine intrinsic motivation, and toxify relations.
Social Reproduction - the playing field isn’t level and social and economic inequalities between students, schools and communities are reproduced.
Social Comparison Theory– unfavourable social comparisons damage self-worth and motivation.
A challenge process and materials
Competing teams
Teacher/
business mentor support
Compete and pitch
Inspiring problems engage creativity and trigger motivation in individuals.
Competing against others triggers collaboration and connection.
Participants’ confidence built through practical support and constructive feedback.
Evaluating own and others performance is inspiring.
Young people confident, skilled and ambitious about the world of work, business and ‘start up’ (or not).
More employable and enterprising young people (or not).
More start ups and better performing businesses (or not).
Vibrant and ambitious individuals contributing to changed communities and social mobility (or not).
CB - Highlight what the realist evaluation approach has enabled –
1)To make explicit the programme theory for competitions and competitive pedagogy and to look theories which challenge the inherent assumptions.
2)To think about what’s going on beneath the surface. In realism, its not the intervention that is the change agent, it’s people’s reactions and reasoning, so now, it’s perfectly possible for an intervention to ‘work’ or not, indeed, assumption is it will have different effects for different participants at different times.
Testing the programme theory for competitions in enterprise education

9. Competitively Inclined Volunteer
Well Resourced
Competitively Disinclined Conscript
CB – started to be able to describe factors which are important in the process. Aim is to move beyond ‘what works?’ and towards ‘what works for whom, in what circumstances and why?’
NC – so this explains why you’d want an alternative or a complement to extra curricular and competitive activity. This explains why you’d want to involve teachers, who know their students and who can tailor teaching, learning and experiences for them. Which is where the BB marks come in.
Poorly Resourced
Winning – with Grace
Unmediated Losing
Combinations which may influence outcome patterns for participants in enterprise education competitions

10. CB – explain rationale and method, get them to complete it.
Questions?

11. Discuss/capture
Reactions/thoughts/experiences re: Careers and Enterprise through the Curriculum/The Bootleg Benchmarks.
Reactions/thoughts/experiences re: Challenges and competitions model of EE.
Reactions/thoughts/experiences re: What could universities be doing?
NC –capture reactions/thoughts/experiences in this.

12. Thanks! And…contact details….
Catherine Brentnall –
Nigel Culkin –
Thanks and keep in touch.