Final Report of the Expert Group - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The main objectives of this activity were:− To make an inventory of different methods and providers of these programmes;− To offer concrete examples of student company programmes, and show how these can besuccessfully implemented;− To identify success factors, and possible obstacles and difficulties;− To highlight good practice in promoting these activities (i.e. support from national or localadministrations);− To gather information in order to estimate the rate of penetration of student companies insecondary education (e.g. number of schools and pupils participating);− To propose a strategy and relevant policy measures for increasing the application of theseprogrammes.This activity made it possible to detect different programmes across Europe, and also toidentify possible strengths and weaknesses. Raising the awareness of these methodologiesshould be another important effect of this Report. In this sense, among the primarybeneficiaries of this project would be the schools and the Ministries (Economy/Industry andEducation). The action should have a strong impact in supporting policy and decision-makingat various levels affecting secondary schools.This activity was open to EU Member States, Candidate Countries and EFTA/EEA countries.In addition to 21 EU Member States, also Romania, Turkey and Norway have decided toparticipate in this activity.An Expert Group was created for the implementation of this project. National governmentswere asked to designate an expert. Representatives from some of the main internationalnetworks promoting these programmes have been also invited to participate (the complete listof Experts appears at the beginning of this paper).The tasks of this group were: to bring together the necessary expertise; to provide informationand data on existing programmes; and, lastly, to ensure cooperation and an active involvementin the project by the national administrations of the participating countries.Experts were asked to provide both qualitative information (identification of differentproviders and programmes, examples of good practice, etc.) and quantitative data (e.g.number of schools using these programmes and number of students participating).1.3. Definition of a student companyThis survey has examined methodologies based on practical experience and interaction.This included both student companies selling real products or services and virtual or practicefirms, provided that the simulation is sufficiently realistic and that certain criteria are met.Programmes limited to virtual applications (i.e. computer simulations) that are not supportedand integrated by team-working and by interaction - within and outside the schoolenvironment - have therefore not been considered.Hence, one of the first tasks of the expert group was to agree on a number of criteria thatdefine whether a programme or methodology should be included in the scope of thisinvestigation.13
The adopted definition and related criteria are the following:A student company is a pedagogical tool based on practical experience by means ofrunning a complete enterprise project, and on interaction with the external environment(i.e. the business world or the local community).Criteria to assess whether a programme satisfies the above definition:A. Students develop a real economic activity by running their own company, although in aprotected environment and for a pedagogical purpose: i.e. student companies producingand/or selling real products or services;or:B. In case of simulation of economic activity (virtual or training firms):1) Students work in team, in an enterprise project, within the organisational structure ofa fictitious company, reproducing the functions, processes and objectives of a realfirm; they are responsible for all aspects of management of the simulated firm.and 6 :2) Interaction outside the school environment is ensured: students carry out their tasksin contact with real firms, or under the direct supervision of business people (actingas mentors, etc.), or liaising with the local community.In this Report, the expressions “student company” and “mini-company” will be used assynonyms, meaning both companies producing and selling real products or services, andvirtual or practice firms complying to the criteria described above.6 Both conditions 1 and 2 need to be satisfied14
Page 1 and 2: Enterprise and IndustryMINI-COMPANI
Page 4 and 5: Table of Contents:MEMBERS OF THE EX
Page 7: Netherlands Mr. Henk Vink Mini-Onde
Page 10 and 11: In most cases student company progr
Page 12 and 13: 1. Introduction1.1. BackgroundIt is
Page 16 and 17: 2. Programmes2.1. Basic features of
Page 18 and 19: More generally, interaction and lin
Page 20 and 21: (for instance, as regards the durat
Page 22 and 23: 3. Some examples of good practiceAs
Page 24 and 25: 5) Marketing6) Legislation7) Busine
Page 26 and 27: 1. Students (age 16) participate in
Page 28 and 29: The duration is 8 weeks, during the
Page 30 and 31: 4. The current application of progr
Page 32 and 33: 4.2. Obstacles and risk factorsOne
Page 34 and 35: i) No support or endorsement from p
Page 36 and 37: TABLE: ESTIMATED PENETRATION OF STU
Page 38 and 39: An evaluation is normally carried o
Page 40 and 41: The impact of these activities is c
Page 42 and 43: ‣ R@ - Computer mice (Estonia)In
Page 44 and 45: 6. Framework conditions, support an
Page 46 and 47: Although student company programmes
Page 48 and 49: Active promotion of these programme
Page 50 and 51: cooperate legally with other commer
Page 52 and 53: 7. ConclusionsEntrepreneurship educ
Page 54 and 55: evidence available supports the eff
Page 56 and 57: from the educational authorities in
Page 58 and 59: “School & Enterprise” should be
Page 60 and 61: ANNEX: Inventory of student company
Page 62 and 63: IfexWirtschaftsministerium Baden-W

Final Report of the Expert Group - European Commission - Europa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?