New Brunswick's Experiential Learning Incentive ...

New Brunswick’s Experiential Learning Incentive Funding Application 2018-2019 UNB/Planet Hatch/CEI March 28, 2018 Name of University Faculty: Research Lead: Partner Organizations: Employer Sectors: Proposed Start/End Dates:

Faculty of Business Administration, UNB Dr. Jeffrey J. McNally Tel.: 1-506-453-5129 (Office): 1-506-262-3789 (Cell) Email: [email protected] Planet Hatch (Fredericton, NB, Canada); Centre for Entrepreneurship & Innovation, Federal University of Goiania (UFG, Goiania, Brazil) Entrepreneurship Incubators and Small Business Managers April 1, 2018 – March 31, 2019

Summary of Proposed Research: Interest in entrepreneurship education (EE) has grown exponentially for decades. From at least the early 1980s onward, governments around the world, including in Canada, have seen EE as an aid to creating: a) entrepreneurial attitudes, mindsets, and intentions; b) entrepreneurial behaviours (i.e., creating ‘more’ and ‘better’ entrepreneurs); and c) new business ventures. There is no common agreement, however, over what constitutes EE or how it should be taught, if at all. For some, EE is concerned with raising awareness about entrepreneurship – for example, with teaching students about entrepreneurs and their roles and functions in the labour market and in society in general. In contrast, other researchers, including myself, are more concerned with education through enterprise by using the new enterprise creation process to help students acquire a range of managerial and entrepreneurial competencies through the process of experiential learning. Broadly, though they are not typically thought of in this way, I propose that incubators are enterprise teaching laboratories in which clients learn about becoming entrepreneurs ‘in the trenches’, on the job, along with their cohort. Although incubators are increasingly being used by new and budding entrepreneurs, little is known about their outcomes as places of entrepreneurial learning, or even about why clients use them in the first place (compared to just starting a business), in the academic literature. In general, incubators are places where would-be entrepreneurs go to learn from one another about many aspects of starting, or re-starting, a business venture. Via educational interventions and assessments, they help new businesses define and build their initial products and services, engage in market research, and secure resources, including capital and potential employees. Incubator programs are programs of UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca

JEFFREY J. MCNALLY, PH.D. Associate Professor Faculty of Business Administration 506-453-5129 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drjeffmcnally/ Email: [email protected]

limited-duration – lasting anywhere from a few months to a few years – that help cohorts of startups with developing and launching new ventures. They also usually provide a small amount of seed capital and, for a specified rental period, a working space that is either rent-free or significantly rent-reduced. They further offer many networking opportunities, with both peer ventures and mentors, who might be successful entrepreneurs, program graduates, venture capitalists, angel investors, or even corporate executives. Finally, most programs end with a grand event, such as a “demo day” or “pitch day”, where incubator clients pitch their business ideas to a large audience of qualified investors in the hopes of gaining additional funding. To investigate the question of why incubators are used by their clients, I think it is important to examine individual information about the client, including overall motivation, beliefs and values, and learning preferences. Specifically, research has already demonstrated that human values, defined as cognitive and emotional mental processes that combine one’s cognitive beliefs with emotional attitudes that are either positive (e.g., satisfaction) or negative (e.g., anger), influence one’s motivational learning states. My research aims to extend this line of learning to incubators to address the following research questions: Do clients use incubators because they perceive a ‘value match’ between their own work-related values and those of other incubator clients? What are those work values? How do these values impact an entrepreneurial firm’s performance? How can entrepreneurship education in universities be informed by these work values? Proposed Methodology: Phase I: April – October 2018 Item Generation: A list of incubator values has already been developed using traditional itemgeneration techniques from the established management and work psychology literatures. We asked three entrepreneurship professors and three current incubator clients at the Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation (CEI) at the Federal University of Goiania, Brazil, to come up with as many work values that they think could think of, particularly as they relate to incubator usage. Then we asked another set of three incubator clients and three entrepreneurship professors to rank the list that was generated at the previous item generation stage. This process resulted in a list of 10 highly related work values as developed by the incubator clients and professors, our subject matter experts (SMEs). I think that his process, though quite time consuming, should be repeated here in Canada to ascertain similarities and differences in work values of incubator clients in Brazil and Canada. Participants and Procedure: I plan to determine clients’ work values via qualitative, structured interview processes at Planet Hatch, an incubator/accelerator in Fredericton, NB, Canada. In this interview, I will present participants (i.e., clients who have chosen to participate in this study) with UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca


a list of 10 work-related values (e.g., altruism, or helping others), as generated in Canada via the above-mentioned item generation techniques (see Figure 1). Participants will be asked to choose their top three preferred values from the 10 presented to them. On the backs of each coloured value card will be a specific work situation upon which participants will be asked to comment (see Figure 2). For example, on the back of the ‘altruism’ card, the situation is: “Karen always liked helping others. At her work, she does not hesitate to stop what she is doing to respond to the requests from her colleagues. What do you think about Karen’s attitude?” Answers are expected to be generally supportive of Karen, allowing researchers to infer that this work value is strongly and positively endorsed by the participant. At the next stage of this study, as part of the structured interview process, individual participants will be matched with one other client/participant at Planet Hatch, outside of his or her own incubated business venture, to form an interview pair. They will be each asked to present their three chosen work values and to read aloud the specific work-related situations, along with their associated questions. The responding participant’s answer to the question will be coded as either ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ by the researchers. Positive responses will be taken to infer support of the work value and will be coded positively by the researchers, while negative responses will be taken to be unsupportive and will be coded negatively.

After all possible work pairs are interviewed, a list of ‘most supported’ work values at Time 1 will be developed through the qualitative pair-matching interview process. Further, when measured at Time 2 (i.e., six months’ time post-incubator) as part of a quantitative survey measurement follow-up, participants whose values matched the list of top values generated in the pair interviews are expected to have developed competencies consistent with their values and are positively related to their firm’s performance. We expect this to be true because it is in line with learning theories, which suggest that

UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca


an individual’s values will predict their attitudes and intentions toward a stimulus, in this case the incubator experience itself, and then, in turn, their behaviours. Phase II: October 2018 – March 2019 Participants and Procedure: After the incubator-relevant work values are established in Phase I, I plan to move to an empirical examination of how these values impact clients – and potential clients – in terms of their educational preferences. To determine this, I will administer a simple online survey to current incubator clients in Canada and Brazil. In it, I will ask client-participants to indicate their preference for one of two course outlines, which were written for this study and do not currently represent any active, current courses being delivered at the university level. The ‘high values’ outline (see Appendix A) has been designed using current knowledge from the management education literature. It has already been pilot-tested with student samples at universities in the UK and in Canada, and results of these manipulation checks indicate that participants view this outline as highly ‘values-based’ particularly in terms of using current, studentcentered course design thinking. For example, the document recognizes student digital literacy and learning by including hyperlinks. In contrast, the ‘low values’ outline (see Appendix B) has been specifically developed to not be reflective of student values. For example, it is overly long, contains numerous grammar and spelling errors, and imposes unnecessarily high grading standards. It is expected that incubator clients who endorse the values identified in Phase 1 will choose the high values outline at a higher rate than those who do not endorse the value set. While not surprising, this finding will lend credence and support to the final portion of Phase 2: designing a university-level course using student values. The values identified in Phase I will be presented as a unified set to university students third and fourth year management classes as part of the final portion of Phase 2 of this study. Using ‘design thinking’ concepts from the entrepreneurship education literature, and incorporating the values, students will be asked to work in groups to ‘create’ a course either directly in or related to social entrepreneurship/innovation, a topic that is not currently taught in the Faculty of Business Administration. This will allow participants to approach their course design assignment with ‘fresh eyes’, and will require participants to use their existing knowledge about other courses, informed by their values. I developed a sample outline for a course meant to teach human resource management to budding entrepreneurs (see Appendix C).



Proposed Budget: Research Assistants: Hire one (1) graduate-level research assistant for three (3) academic terms to assist in the data collection and analysis in 2018-19. Cost: RA 10 hours/wk, $22.69/hr (UNB rate) over three (3) terms each with 12 weeks = $8,170.00 CAD Administrative & Photocopying & printing costs for surveys, coloured paper and Lab Fees: pencils, etc. Cost: $150.00 CAD Computing Fees: Two (2) inexpensive computing tablets required for data collection during incubator values interviews. Cost: $130.00 + tax per tablet = $300.00 CAD TOTAL: $8,350.00 CAD* *Note: Any level of award reflecting this amount, in full or in part, would be happily accepted and most welcomed toward the support and execution of the research in this proposal.

Concluding Remarks: I believe that both phases of this proposed longitudinal study are ‘shovel ready’ in that that the SMEgenerated list of work values in the first phase has already been developed in Brazil and is ready to be tested in a Canadian sample. Moreover, the scale instruments to be placed in the surveys, to be delivered in both the first and second phases of this study, are scales that have been previously established, containing acceptable reliability and validity values. As such, they do not need to be developed by the researchers from scratch. I believe my study directly relates to the NBELI Funding Opportunity in three ways: 1) it identifies the motivational mechanism or mechanisms of an individual’s participation as an incubator client (a first in the entrepreneurship education literature); 2) it helps identify important work values common to successful incubator clients, which can be incorporated in entrepreneurship education interventions at the university level; and 3) it provides potential direction for the values-based development of university-level courses. The first way, identifying mechanisms, is important because it helps incubator management identify potential ways to use values-based marketing to recruit their potential clients and to orient their existing clients to the values common to their institution. That is relevant because these values predict



learning outcomes potentially associated with incubators, something that has not yet been demonstrated in the academic literature. The second way, identifying values associated with entrepreneurial success (typically measured either financially or in terms of duration of the venture over time), is important to entrepreneurs and/or small business owners in terms of predicting the important skills and competencies that are associated with entrepreneurial success. Specifically, work values are predicted to influence ‘success’ behaviours via the values-based formation of positive attitudes and intentions. These competencies can be incorporated into EE interventions at the university level and developed via such experiential learning activities as values-based learning. Finally, the third way provides a direct link to values-shaped course content at the university level. That is, university students will be cued to ‘use their values’ via exposure to the values list identified by incubator clients in Phase I. These courses are expected to reflect ‘values-based’ design-thinking, and, once developed, can be deployed in the upper levels of UNB’s BBA program. Thank you for your time and consideration of my application. I am very pleased that these funds are available, as I believe they align very well with my current and future research efforts. I look forward to hearing back from you soon. Sincerely,

Dr. Jeffrey J. McNally



APPENDIX A: ‘HIGH VALUE’ SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP COURSE OUTLINE What is this Course? Offering you the driver seat of your learning journey, this course will focus on social entrepreneurship in the context of social innovation and change leadership. As your instructor, I am a learner too, and together we will apply entrepreneurial thinking – identifying and realizing opportunities – to explore social problems and their potentially innovative solutions. What are the Planned Outcomes of this Course? By the end of the course, our analytical, critical thinking, learning, and innovation skills should be higher than they were at the beginning of the course. We will talk about that more in our first meeting together. What is Our Class Schedule? Please consider this to be stable, but I reserve the right to make changes to it if necessary. Topic

Date

January 26

Introduction: Course overview, learner expectations and introductory *Hyperlink: case study* I What is social entrepreneurship? Social Entrepreneurship framework; *Hyperlink: Social value proposition*; case study II Guest speaker: Change leadership and social innovation; network with a social entrepreneur Organizational alternatives; case study III

February 2

*Hyperlink: Lean Canvas* methodology; case study IV

February 9

*Hyperlink: Business planning;* case study V; GUEST SPEAKER

February 16

Design thinking; case study VI

February 23

Change leadership framework

March 2

Managing change projects; case study VII; *Hyperlink: pitching to investors*

January 5 January 12 January 19



March 9 March 16 March 23

March Break: No classes Our perspectives on change leadership and social entrepreneurship: how we can transform our society through change leadership and social entrepreneurship Discussion of self-developed case studies I

March 30

Discussion of self-developed case studies II Conclusive summary discussion: where do we go from here? April 6 Input here will shape the development of future courses! *Note: The *hyperlinks* above are provided for reference purposes only; however, they do provide a lot of definitions and content that we will discuss in class. Try them out by clicking on the links in the table!

Do We Have to Buy a Required Textbook? No. However, the following recommendation is a good selection as an optional text. I recommend that you get a copy (or at least sharing one with a classmate J): Bielefeld, W., & Guo, C. (2014). Social Entrepreneurship: An Evidence-Based Approach to Creating Social Value. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass (available in paperback and e-book version at *Hyperlink: http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118356489.html) All additional readings, assignment details and addenda to this outline will be made available via online via social media, email, and our shared class website on D2L, so please check each one early and often (try to check each at least once before class time on class days)! How Will We be Assessed? As self-directed learner, you have plenty of choices in terms of setting the direction and selecting options within the following assessment framework, including: Type of Assessment 1) Analyze & assess one of the given case studies 2) Develop & assess your own case study 3) Lead discussion on concept, framework, or methodology


Percent/Weight

Date

20%

Mar 19

30%

Apr 6 (first version) & Apr 22 (final)

20% (2 X 10%)

Twice between Jan 12 and Apr 6


4) Course online learning journal & portfolio TOTAL

30% (10 X 2% & 1 X 10%) 100

Weekly & April 22 (take home exam)

Because we all learn differently, if necessary, we can work together to adjust the percent/weight of each type of assessment. We can also work together to make sure your selected topics work for you in your case study, discussion lead, and online journal topics. In other words, this is all negotiable! What are the Grade Ranges for this Class? A+ (4.3 GPA) 95.0 - 100% A (4.0) excellent performance 90.0-94.9% A- (3.7) 85.0-89.9%

B+ (3.3) 80.0- 84.9% B (3.0) good performance 75.0-79.9%

C+ (2.3) 65.0-69.9% C (2.0) satisfactory performance 60-64.9%

B- (2.7) 70.0-74.9%

D (1.0) minimally acceptable 50-59.9% F (0.0) failure below 50.0%

Anything Else We Should Know? Yes, a couple of things: • Academic dishonesty, including plagiarism, is not permitted in this class and can result in serious consequences. Visit *Hyperlink: http://www.nocheating.com* to learn more, because per the Academic Calendar, it is your responsibility to know the policies. • If you hand in any of your assignments late, there may be a penalty, so please try to get everything in on time per the class schedule. If you’re having trouble with a deadline, all you need to do is let me know ahead of the deadline and we can talk about extending it for you. • If you miss a class, that’s okay. We are all adults and need to live life on life’s terms. If you can’t make it to class, just let me know as much ahead of class time as you can, and it won’t be held against you (unless it happens repeatedly, of course) • I assure you, I want you to do well in this class. And doing well is straightforward: All you need to do is put in the effort and be engaged, inside and outside of class (when working on class-related assignments).



APPENDIX B: LOW VALUE SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP COURSE OUTLINE Introduction and course overview This course will focus on social entreprenurship in the context of social innovation and change leadership. Students will learn to apply entrepreneurial thinking – identifying and realizing opportunities – to exploring social problems and innovative solutions. In particular, this course will expose students to frameworks, methodologies and implementations to assess and analyez the impact, viability, and sustainability of strategies used by social enterprises; in addition, students will learn how entrepreneurs create and sustain socially oriented organizations and act as change agents in their respective communities. Finally, students will review how entrepreneurs initiate, design, and implement change strategies in organizations in the context of social innovation. Course Outcome and Objectives 1) Identify, analyze and assess solutons for social problems 2) Critically discuss, assess and apply relevant concepts, frameworks and methodologies 3) Develop course learning journal and portfolio Texts and Resources Required main texts are: Bielefeld, W., & Guo, C. (2014). Social Entrepreneurship: An Evidence-Based Approach to Creating Social Value. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass. Enterprising Non-Profits (2010). The Canadian Social Enterprise Guide. Vancouver, BC: Enterprising Non-Profits. All additional readings, assignment details and further information will be made available digitally. It is the student’s responsibility to check the university email account and online class website regularly.



Course assessment Student performance and progress in this course in regard to the learning outcomes will be assessed as follows: Type of Assessment 5) Analyze & assess one of the given case studies

Percent/Weight

Date

20%

Mar 19

30%

Apr 6 (first version) & Apr 22 (final)

20% (2 X 10%)

Twice between Jan 12 and Apr 6

30% (10 X 2% & 1 X 10%) 100

Weekly & April 22 (take home exam)

6) Develop & assess student’s own case study 7) Lead discussion on concept, framework, or methodology 8) Course learning journal & portfolio TOTAL

Handing in assignments and late policy 1. 2. 3.

4. 5.

If an assignment is handed in on time I will: a. provide written feedback, and b. assess and return the work in a timely fashion; If an assignment is not handed in on time and without accepted excuse, students need to provide the instructor with advance notice via e-mail (please provide reason – see acceptable reasons below) in order to receive credit. If an assignment is handed in up to 5 days after the due date and without an accepted excuse, a 5% penalty will be applied per day (e.g., if the paper is due on the 14th but handed in on the 16th it will be penalized by a deduction of 10%), but the paper will potentially be returned at a later date (not returned with those that were handed in on time). Late assignments must be accompanied by a one page word processed time management analysis describing why the assignment is late, what time management problems or issues led to the tardy delivery and what strategies will be used in the future to prevent recurrences; After 5 days and without accepted excuse, the paper will not be assessed, and no feedback will be provided. Excuses accepted for late papers:



• •

Medical; Extraordinary personal challenge or crisis (evaluated on a case-by-case basis) - valid if provided two days prior to the due date, if possible. These rules do not apply to take home exams, which must be handed in on time (i.e., midnight on the last day of the exam period), to allow grades to be submitted to the Registrar’s office in a timely fashion. Classroom Contribution The purpose of allocating grades to class contribution is to encourage constructive interaction, a quality that is necessary for successful career growth. In the wrkplace you will be expected to contribute in planned discussions that take place in task forces, department meetings and committees (face-to-face or virtual), as well as make impromptu contributions to informal discussions in hallways, and even in elevators. The following guidelines indicate what the instructor will consider when evaluating student contributions: Contribution Description Excellent contribution Consistently displays excellent preparation, offers relevant (substantial participation or “A” ideas, analysis and interpretation, and insightful range) conclusions. Good contribution (significant Often displays good preparation, provides views, and offers level of participation or “B” range) related analysis, facilitates some clarification of the ideas of others. Fair contribution (some Occasional discussion of readings and assignments, but contribution or “C” range) minimal analysis. Minimal or no contribution In attendance but little more, shows minimal awareness of (marginal participation or “D”) the flow of discussion. No positive contribution (“F”) Either no contribution, negative and/or impeding participation, or absent without prior email notification to instructor. Classroom Conduct: Students will be respectful and tolerant of others. Students should refrain from engaging any in-class discussions that are unrelated to the topic at hand or that are distracting to others. Laptops and/or other devices may occasionally be used for in-class purposes. However, unauthorized use of electronic devices will result in a deduction of the offending student’s classroom contribution grades.



Grading scheme: A+ (4.3 GPA) 95.0 - 100% A (4.0) excellent performance 90.0-94.9% A- (3.7) 85.0-89.9%

B+ (3.3) 80.0- 84.9% B (3.0) good performance 75.0-79.9% B- (2.7) 70.0-74.9%

C+ (2.3) 65.0-69.9% C (2.0) satisfactory performance 6064.9% D (1.0) minimally acceptable 50-59.9% F (0.0) failure below 50.0%

Course Schedule Students are required to attend class every week as per the course calendar (except for acceptable medical or compassionate grounds). The course schedule schedule will follow the outlines of the main textbooks and each session will be a mix of topical discussions (see the course overview above); presentations of new concepts, frameworks, and methodologies; guest lectures; and reviews of case studies. Also, each week students will be assigned the required reading and topic for the following week according to a fixed scheduled assigned by the instructor. Topic

Date Week1

Introduction

Week2

Social Entrepreneurship framework

Week3 Week4

Guest lectur Organizational alternatives; case study III

Week5

Lean Canvas methodology; case study IV

Wek6 Week7

Business planning; case study V

Week8 Week 9 Week 10 Week 11

TBA


Design thinking; case study VI Managing change projects; case study VII; pitching to investors March Break: No classes Discussion of self developed case studies I


Week 12 March 30 April 6

Discussion of self developed case studies II TBA Conclusive summary discussion: where do we go from here? Instructor will provide course feedback

PLAGIARISM (from 2016-2017 Undergraduate Calendar) Plagiarism includes: • • • • •

quoting verbatim or almost verbatim from any source, regardless of format, without acknowledgement; adopting someone else's line of thought, argument, arrangement, or supporting evidence (such as, statistics, bibliographies, etc.) without indicating such dependence; submitting someone else's work, in whatever form (essay, film, workbook, artwork, computer materials, etc.) without acknowledgement; knowingly representing as one's own work any idea of another. NOTE: In courses which include group work, a penalty may be imposed on all members of the group unless an act of plagiarism is identified clearly with an individual student or students.

Procedures In the case of plagiarism, the instructor must make every reasonable effort to discuss the case with the student or group and follow one of two courses of action: If the instructor is satisfied that the plagiarism was the result of a genuine misunderstanding, the instructor shall complete an academic offence incident report in a form approved by the Registrar's Office, containing the student's name and the particulars of the incident, and submit to the Registrar who shall advise the appropriate Dean, and the Chair of the student's program or Department where applicable. The Registrar shall notify the student by registered letter and/or electronic mail of the regulations governing plagiarism, the possible consequences, the student's right to appeal, the right to appear before the appropriate appeals committee (Student Standing and Promotions Committee on the Fredericton campus and Senate Student Appeals Committee on the Saint John campus), and the procedures involved. The Registrar shall make available to the student a copy of the academic offence incident report and supporting documentation. While a case of plagiarism resulting from genuine misunderstanding will not be considered a student's first offence, a second plea of ignorance by the UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca


same student in response to a subsequent allegation of plagiarism will not be accepted; similarly, a subsequent incident report indicating that the alleged plagiarism is a result of genuine misunderstanding responding will be treated as an allegation of deliberate plagiarism. A student responding to the instructor's allegation must do so in writing within three weeks of the date of the Registrar's notification. The student is urged to submit to the appropriate appeals committee a written statement regarding the case. In a first incident of plagiarism resulting from genuine misunderstanding, the instructor may permit the student to submit a genuine piece of work to be graded in place of the one plagiarized. If the student does not appeal, the time allowed for submission of work is three weeks from the date of the Registrar's letter of notification. In the case of an appeal, where the instructor's allegation is upheld, the period of time allowed for submission is as determined by the appropriate appeals committee. If, in the view of the instructor the plagiarism was deliberate, the instructor shall complete an incident report in a form approved by the Office of the Registrar, containing the student’s name and the particulars of the incident, and shall submit to the Registrar who will advise the Dean of the Faculty concerned and the Chair of the student's program or department where applicable. The Registrar shall notify the student by registered letter and/or electronic mail of the regulations governing plagiarism, the possible consequences, the student’s right to appeal, the right to appear before the appropriate appeals committee, and the procedures involved. A student appealing the charge of an academic offence must do so in writing within three weeks of the date of the Registrar's letter of notification. On receiving an incident report alleging an act of deliberate plagiarism, or on receiving an incident report alleging a second commission of plagiarism by the student which is determined viewed by the instructor to be as a result of genuine misunderstanding, the Registrar shall refer the matter for a hearing to the appropriate appeals committee. A student who wishes to respond to this allegation is urged to submit to the appeals committee a written statement regarding the case, within three weeks of the date of the Registrar’s letter of notification. The Registrar shall inform the student by registered letter or electronic mail of the referral to the appeals committee, and the wish of the Committee that the student be present when the case is heard. The appropriate appeals committee, upon the conclusion of a hearing into the case, or following the review of the written materials if the student does not appear, must make one or more of the following findings prior to proceeding to an assessment of a penalty for deliberate plagiarism. i. On hearing a case involving a first incident report alleging that a student has committed an act of deliberate plagiarism, the appeals committee must first decide whether an act of plagiarism has occurred. If the Committee so finds, the Committee must then determine whether the plagiarism was deliberate, or an act of genuine misunderstanding. If the former, the appeals committee will proceed to UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca


assess penalties in accordance with this Regulation, if the latter, the appeals committee will assess no penalty, but will direct the Registrar to note in the student’s academic file that the student has had one finding of genuine misunderstanding. ii. If the case before the appeals committee (i) follows a prior finding of plagiarism, or (ii) is a second allegation of plagiarism as a result of genuine misunderstanding, the appeals committee may not make a further finding of genuine misunderstanding in disposing of the case. The appeals committee may only make a finding that the alleged act of plagiarism was deliberate plagiarism or that the alleged act of plagiarism was not an act of plagiarism. Penalties for Deliberate Plagiarism In case of deliberate plagiarism, the penalties are: First Offence: If the student does not appeal or if, on appeal, the Committee upholds the instructor's allegation: A notation will be placed on the student's transcript of academic record concerning the academic offence. The length of time the notation appears on the student's transcript of academic record is to be decided when the penalty is imposed and will depend on the severity of the offence. The student may be required to submit a satisfactory and genuine piece of work to replace the one involving plagiarism. If the assignment is not resubmitted or is unsatisfactory, the student will receive a grade of F (zero) in the course. Note: If this penalty is assessed, the period of time allowed for the submission of the work will be determined by the Registrar in consultation with the faculty member making the charge and, where appropriate, the Committee. The student will receive a grade of F (zero) for the piece of work and, depending on the severity of the offence, may receive a grade of F for the course. Other penalties as outlined in penalties for Other Academic Offences may be imposed. Subsequent Offence: In cases where the Committee considers that the student has plagiarized again: The student will receive a grade of F for the course, and a notation of the academic offence will appear on the student's transcript of record. The length of time the notation appears on the student's transcript of academic record is to be decided when the penalty is imposed. Other penalties as outlined in penalties for Other Academic Offences may be imposed. UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK PO BOX 4400 [7 Macaulay Lane] Fredericton, NB Canada E3B 5A3 unb.ca


Additional i. Potential Course Modifications: Occasionally, the instructor may introduce additional material that is not in the course outline. You are responsible for all material from the assigned readings, even if the instructor does not cover that material in class. Therefore, if a student is absent from class for any reason, he should speak to a willing classmate to see what material, announcements, etc., you missed. ii. Policy on Missed Quizzes: The instructor typically does not schedule make-up tests. If a student misses one of the quizzes, the instructor will reweight the grades of his other quizzes toward his final grade. Documentation for missing an exam is required. If a quiz or assignment is missed without a valid reason, then the offending student may receive a grade of ‘F’ for that particular component.



APPENDIX C: SAMPLE COURSE OUTLINE ADM 48XX (FR0X) STRATEGIC INNOVATIONS IN PEOPLE MANAGEMENT What is this Course? Offering you the driver’s seat in your learning about being a modern people/talent manager, this course will focus on discussing current innovations in the field of Human Resources (HR) management, particularly new technologies and their impact on people at work. It will rely upon principles of social entrepreneurship to do so, and we will discuss the meaning of social innovation both inside and outside of ‘traditional’ workplaces to provide a framework for our learning. In a nutshell, I want to help you learn to view HR management, and people management in general, as a truly powerful, internal social innovation ‘force’ that can help you as a manager to be a ‘positive disruptor’ in your chosen place of work after you graduate. Through my lectures and formal discussions with you, I will do this in an evidence-based way through our assigned readings. I want to help you develop what is known as the ‘entrepreneurial mindset’ in your role as a manager of people at work, regardless if you plan to become an entrepreneur or to work in more ‘traditional’ corporate settings. I want to do that because the evidence from entrepreneurship education is increasingly clear that this mindset can help us shape our own performance in organizations in positive, careeraffirming ways that will help our employees be more efficient and our organizations to be more effective. I define the entrepreneurial mindset (EM) as this: Conceptually speaking, EM is the reframing of ‘problem-solving’ as ‘opportunity identification’; empirically speaking it is a specified set of knowledge, skills, and abilities (e.g., high persistence ability) that is enacted in certain situations (e.g., a triathlon) toward positive rewards (e.g., a gold medal); neuroscience speaking it is the ‘new brain’ (responsible for logical thought) interacting with the ‘old brain’ (responsible for emotions and creativity) to solve problems in innovative ways. (This is a view I share with many and is not unique to me…e.g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1X-49f3zvc) What are the Planned Outcomes of this Course? By the end of the course, our analytical, critical thinking, learning, and innovation skills should be higher than they were at the beginning of the course. We should also have better ‘idea pitching’ skills



and, as a result, improved persuasion skills, because of our major class projects (see below). We will talk about that more in our first meeting together. How Will You be Assessed? TBA Do You Have to Buy a Required Textbook? No. I will provide all the required readings (i.e., academic journal articles, book chapters, and video links) on D2L/Brightspace. However, the following recommendations are good selections as optional texts. I recommend that you get copies of them (or at least sharing one with a classmate ): Bielefeld, W., & Guo, C. (2014). Social Entrepreneurship: An Evidence-Based Approach to Creating Social Value. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass (available in paperback and e-book version at *Hyperlink: http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1118356489.html) All additional readings, assignment details and addenda to this outline will be made available via online via social media, email, and our shared class website on D2L/Brightspace, so please check each early and often - you should check your UNB email at least once before class time on class days, as chances are I have sent something out to the class! What are the Grade Ranges for this Class?* Standard UNB letter grade value will be given on all assignments, F – A+. Anything Else to Know? Yes, a couple of things: • Academic dishonesty, including plagiarism, is not permitted in this class and can result in serious consequences. • Visit http://www.unb.ca/academics/calendar/graduate/current/university-regulations/29.academic-offences.html to learn more because, per the UNB Academic Calendar, it is your responsibility to know academic dishonesty policies. • If you miss a class, that is okay; we are all adults and need to live life on life’s terms. If you cannot make it to class, just let me know as much ahead of class time as you can, and it will not be held against you (unless it happens repeatedly, of course).

