iii THE IMPACT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATIONS ON...

iii

THE IMPACT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATIONS ON

ENTREPRENEURIAL CAPACITY AND SELF-EMPLOYMENT

MUDASHIR GAFAR OLAIYA

HP110079

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the

Doctor of Philosophy in Real Estate and Facilities Management

Faculty of Technology Management and Business

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

SEPTEMBER, 2015

vii

ABSTRACT

Real Estate Management (REM) practice is being increasingly challenged, as a result of the

economic recession, encroachment of quacks and allied professionals as well as the

technological revolution of the contemporary knowledge-based economy. This implies that

conformist approach to the REM training might not be enough to guarantee REM students

employment prospect. More so, the issue of graduates’ employability in the job market is

becoming more competitive in Malaysia. However, entrepreneurship education (EE)

introduced in the Malaysian Higher learning institutions with the intention of boosting the

employability of the graduates. In spite of the above initiative, impact assessment of the EE

is still ambiguous, particularly, in the REM discipline. Hence, an absence of a common

assessment framework to evaluate diverse EEs registered in the literature. Therefore, the

research aimed to assess perception of the REM students on the impact of entrepreneurship

education on the entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention and to propose an

Objective-based Entrepreneurship Education Assessment Model (OBEEAM). The research

employed quantitative research approach and ex-post research design. Hence, purposive

sample technique applied to collect data on the sample size of 437 REM students through a

cross-sectional survey in the four Malaysian public universities. SPSS 22.0 and Structural

Equation Modeling tools of analysis were used to analyse, data collected, proposed

OBEEAM and test of the nine research hypotheses empirically. The findings indicated a

positive impact of entrepreneurship education on the perception of REM students’

entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention as a career option. Despite, the skills

of creativity and innovation in the idea development, risk taking proficiency and practical

workshop practice were somewhat weak. Therefore, the need for more practical initiative

exercises such as extended entrepreneurship teaching in the core courses and across the

years of REM programmes recommended. This could provide the innovation required for

the development of dynamic future real estate-entrepreneurs in Malaysia. The research’s

novelty is the proposed multidirectional OBEEAM that had integrated the core values and

drivers of entrepreneurship teaching and self-employment intention; it could be adopted,

adapted and implemented for the assessment of EEs in any academic field of studies.

viii

ABSTRAK

Cabaran terhadap perlaksanaan Pengurusan Harta Tanah (Real Estate Management)

(REM) kian meningkat kesan dari kemelesetan ekonomi, pencerobohan penyamar

professional bersekutu dan revolusi teknologi terhadap ekonomi kontemporari

berasaskan pengetahuan. Hal ini menunjukkan pendekatan sedia ada terhadap latihan

REM tidak menjamin prospek kerjaya graduan REM. Tambahan pula peluang kerjaya

graduan dalam dunia pekerjaan menjadi semakin sengit di Malaysia.

Walaubagaimanapun, Pendidikan Keusahawanan (Entrepreneurship Education) (EE)

diperkenalkan dalam institute pengajran Malaysia bertujuan untuk meningkatkan

peluang pekerjaan graduan. Berikutan inisiatif ini, penilaian kesan EE masih tidak jelas

khususnya dalam bidang REM. Ketiadaan penilaian kerangka asas untuk menilai

kepelbagaian EE diterangkan dalam kajian literator. Dengan itu, kajian ini bertujuan

menilai persepsi siswazah REM mengenai kesan pendidikan keusahawanan terhadap

kapasiti keusahawanan dan nicit berkerja sendiri bertujuan menghasilkan Model

Penilaian Pendidikan Keusahawanan Berobjektif (Objective-based Entrepreneurship

Education Assessment Model) (OBEEAM). Kaedah kuantitatif dan ex-post digunakan.

Kajian cross-sectional dilaksanakan terhadap 437 orang siswazah dalam jurusan REM di

4 buah universiti awam di Malaysia. SPSS 22.0 dan structural equation modeling

digunakan untuk menganalisis data serta memperkenalkan OBEEAM dan ujian sembilan

hipotesis kajian secara empirik. Hasil kajian menunjukkan kesan positif EE terhadap

persepsi siswazah REM tentang kapasiti keusahawanan dan niat bekerja sendiri sebagai

pilihan kerjaya walau bagaimanapun, kemahiran kreativiti dan inovasi dalam

pembangunan idea, kemahiran mengambil risiko dan amalan praktikal bengkel adalah

agak lemah. Oleh itu, keperlun latihan inisiatif praktikal seperti pembangunan lanjutan

pengajaran keusahawanan dalam kursus teras program REM dicadangkan. Ini akan

menyediakan inovasi bagi pembangunan dinamik usahawan hartanah di Malaysia pada

masa hadapan. Penemuan baru dalam kajian ini ialah cadangan berbilang arah

OBEEAM yang mengintegrasi kan nilai asas dan panduan pengajaran keusahawanan

dan niat bekerja sendiri; ia boleh diguna pakai, disesuaikan dan dilaksana untuk

penilaian EE dalam semua bidang akademik.

ix

CONTENTS

DECLARATION OF THESIS STATUS i

EXAMINERS’ DECLARATION ii

TITLE iii

STUDENT’S DECLARATION iv

DEDICATION v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT vi

ABSTRACT vii

ABSTRAK viii

CONTENTS ix

LIST OF TABLES xvii

LIST OF FIGURES xxii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxiv

LIST OF APPENDICES xxvi

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Background of the Research 1

1.3 Statement of the Research Problem 7

1.4 Research Questions 12

1.5 Research Aims and Objectives 13

1.6 Scope of the Research 14

1.7 Significance of the Research 14

1.8 Research Methodology 16

1.9 Definition of Terms 17

1.11 Organisation of the Thesis 19

1.12 Structure of the Thesis 20

1.13 Summary and Links 20

x

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 21

2.2 Definitions of Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneur 21

2.2.1 Definition of Entrepreneurship Education 24

2.2.2 Definition of Entrepreneurial Capacity 24

2.2.3 Definition of Self-employment Intention 25

2.2.4 Concept of Entrepreneurship Intention 26

2.3 Process of Entrepreneurship Education 27

2.4 Important of Entrepreneurship Education 31

2.5 Models of Entrepreneurship Education 33

2.6 Issues and Challenges in Entrepreneurship Education 35

2.6.1 Aims and Objectives for Entrepreneurship

Education

39

2.6.2 Course Content for Entrepreneurship Education 41

2.6.3 Teaching Methods for Entrepreneurship Education 43

2.6.4 Course Assessment Methods for Entrepreneurship

Education

46

2.6.5 Complexity of Learning Process in

Entrepreneurship Education

48


CHAPTER 3 DEVELOPMENT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN MALAYSIA

3.1 Introduction 51

3.2 Historical Development of Entrepreneurship in Malaysia 51

3.3 Development of Entrepreneurship education and Economic

Policy in Malaysia

55

3.3.1 Integration of entrepreneurship education in the

Malaysian HLIs

57

3.4 Past Researches on Entrepreneurship Education in Malaysia 59

3.5 Entrepreneurship Education’s Impact Assessment 62

xi

3.5.1 Concept of Entrepreneurship Education’s Impact

Assessment

62

3.6 Past Assessment Model for Entrepreneurship Education’s

Impact

64

3.6.1 Vesper and Gartner’s Assessment Criteria Model 64

3.6.2 Assessment Model of Entrepreneurship Opportunity

Pursuit

65

3.6.3 Fayolle’s Assessment Level Model of


66

3.6.4 Fayolle’s Theory of Planned Behaviour Assessment

Model

67

3.7 Current Debate on Entrepreneurship Education Assessment 69

3.7.1 Gaps from the Past Impact Studies on


70

3.8 Entrepreneurial Capacity (Skills and Competence) 72

3.8.1 Concept of Entrepreneurial Capacity 72

3.9 Students’ Self-Employment Intention 76

3.9.1 Concept of Self-Employment Intention 76

3.10 Past Research on Entrepreneurship Education and Self-

employment Intention Outcome

78

3.11 An Overview of Real estate Management Profession 84

3.11.1 Real Estate Management Education in Malaysia 86

3.11.2 Current Challenges in the REM Profession 88

3.11.3 Importance of Entrepreneurship in REM Education 89

3.11.4 Connection and Disconnection between Real Estate

Management and Entrepreneurship Education

91

3.12 Professional-Based Approach to Entrepreneurship Education 93

3.13 Development of Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis of

the Research

96

3.13.1 Entrepreneurial Event Model 98

3.13.2 Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) 100

xii

3.13.2.1 Relevance of Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) 102

3.14 The Proposed Research Theoretical Assessment Model 104

3.14.1 Discussion on the Research Theoretical Assessment

Framework

106

3.14.2 Research Hypotheses 109

3.14.2.1 Entrepreneurship Education 109

3.14.2.2 Entrepreneurial Capacity 111

3..14.2.3 Self-Employment Intention 112


CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 Introduction 116

4.2 Research Philosophy 117

4.2.1 Positivism Research Approach 117

4.2.2 Interpretivism (Phenomenological) Research Approach 118

4.2.3 Justification for Positivism Research Approach 119

4.3 An overview of Research Design 121

4.4 Choice of Research Approach: Quantitative or Qualitative

Research? 122

4.5 Choice of Research Strategy 124

4.5.1 Survey-Based Research 124

4.6 Research Population 125

4.6.1 Research Sample Selection 125

4.6.2 Research Sample Frame 126

4.6.3 Research Sample Size 127

4.6.4 Research Sampling Procedure 128

4.7 Research Questionnaire 128

4.7.1 Questionnaire Scales of Measurement Development 129

4.7.2 Questionnaire Structure 130

4.7.3 Variables in Questionnaire 131

4.7.3.1 Entrepreneurship Education 131

4.7.3.2 Course Content 131

xiii

4.7.3.3 Teaching Methods 132

4.7.3.4 Assessment Methods 132

4.7.3.5 Entrepreneurial Capacity 132

4.7.3.6 Attitude to Business Reality 133

4.7.3.7 Perceived Value Creation 133

4.7.3.8 Subjective Norms 134

4.7.3.9 Self-employment Intention 134

4.7.3.10 Demographic Variable 135

4.7.4 Questionnaire Pre-Test 135

4.7.5 Research Pilot Study 136

4.8 Research Data Collection Procedure 136

4.9 Statistical Analysis 137

4.9.1 Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-IBM) 137

4.9.2 Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) 140

4.9.3 Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) using

Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

140

4.9.3.1 Validity Test 142

4.9.3.2 Structural Equation Modelling Structural Procedure 143

4.10 Summary and Link 145

CHAPTER 5 DATA ANALYSIS, RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION


5.2 Data Analysis Process 147

5.3 Demographic of Respondents 147

5.4 Descriptive Analysis 151

5.4.1 Entrepreneurship Education 151

5.4.2 Course Content 153

5.4.3 Teaching Methods 155

5.4.4 Assessment Methods 158

5.4.5 Entrepreneurial Capacity 160

5.4.6 Attitude to business Reality 161

xiv

5.4.7 Perceived Value Creation 163

5.4.8 Subjective Norms 164

5.4.9 Self-Employment Intention 166

5.5 Multivariate Data Analysis 169

5.6 Outliers 169

5.7 Multicollinearity and Singularity 170

5.8 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 171

5.9 Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) 173

5.9.1 Entrepreneurship Education Measurement Model 175

5.9.2 Measurement Model for Course Content 177

5.9.3 Measurement Model for Teaching Methods 179

5.9.4 Measurement Model for Assessment Methods 181

5.9.5 Measurement Model for Entrepreneurial Capacity 183

5.9.6 Attitude to Business Reality’s Measurement Model 185

5.9.7 Measurement Model for Perceived Value Creation 187

5.9.8 Measurement Model for Subjective Norms 189

5.9.9 Measurement Model for Self-Employment Intention 191

5.10 The Assessment of Reliability Analysis for the Constructs 193

5.11 The Validity Analyses for the Entire Constructs 194

5.11.1 Convergent validity analysis 194

5.11.2 Discriminant validity analysis 195

5.12 Multicollinearity Evaluation for the Constructs 197

5.13 Analysis for Structural Equation Modelling 198

5.14 Analysis for Mediator in the Research Assessment Model 205

5.15 Discussion on the Research Findings based on the Set

Objectives 206

5.15.1 Research Objective 1 207


5.15.2.1 Hypothesis 1 210

5.15.2.2 Hypothesis 1a 211

5.15.2.3 Hypothesis 1b 212

xv

5.15.2.4 Hypothesis 1c 213



5.15.3.2 Hypothesis 2a 217

5.15.3.3 Hypothesis 2b 218

5.15.3.4 Hypothesis 2c 219





5.16 Summary and Link 225

CHAPTER 6 RESEARCH SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION


6.2 An overview of the research 226

6.3 Summary of the Research Findings 228

6.3.1 Research Question 1 (Obj. 1) 228






6.4 Synopsis and Contribution of Objective-Based

Entrepreneurship Education Assessment Model (OBEEAM)

244

6.5 The Contributions of the Research 246

6.5.1 The Theoretical Contributions of the Research 247

6.5.2 The Practical Contributions of the Research 248

6.5.3 Professional Contributions of the Research 249

6.5.4 Policy Contributions of the Research 250

6.6 The Limitations of the Research 251

xvi

6.7 Areas of Recommendations for Future Research 252

6.8 Overall Conclusion 253

REFERENCES 254

APPENDIX A a

APPENDIX B b

APPENDIX C c

VITA d

xvii

LIST OF TABLES

1.1 Percentage Distribution of Employed Graduates in Different

Industries in Malaysia

5

1.2 Selected list of public universities in Malaysia for the research 14

2.1 Trends of entrepreneurship taxonomy 23

2.2 Hynes’ process model of entrepreneurship education 29

2.3 Challenges in Entrepreneurship Education 37

2.4 Various Course Content of Entrepreneurship Education 41

2.5 Entrepreneurship Teaching Process 44

2.6 Different between Traditional and Entrepreneurial Teaching

Methodological Approaches

45

2.7 Entrepreneurship Education Learning Process 49

2.8 Strength and Weakness of Vesper’s Model 64

3.1 List of Entrepreneurship Education’s Facilities 58

3.2 Strength and Weakness of Vesper’s Model 65

3.3 Assessment Levels of Entrepreneurship Education 67

3.4 Pro and cons of Fayolle’s theory of planned behaviour’s model 68

3.5 Entrepreneurial Capacities Components (European Commission 75

3.6 Authors’ Contribution to the Entrepreneurship Self-employment

Intention

78

3.7 Notable contributors to the impact assessment of

entrepreneurship

82

3.8 Connection and disconnection of REM professional standards

and entrepreneurial quality to practice

92

3.9 List of Research Hypotheses 114

4.1 Research Philosophy Paradigms 118

4.2 Characteristic Purpose of Qualitative and Quantitative research 123

xviii

4.3 Scale of items used and sources of adoption for this research 129

4.4 Research’s Scale of Items 130

4.5 Percentage Distribution of the Questionnaires 136

4.6 Research Constructs’ Reliability Test 139

4.7 Research Constructs’ Normality Test 139

4.8 Scale of interpretation measurement 140

4.9 Category of Goodness-of-fit index and level of acceptance 144

5.1 Respondents’ in selected universities 148

5.2 Respondents’ Gender 148

5.3 Respondents’ Ethnicity 149

5.4 Students’ Entrepreneurship Education Participation and Work

Experience

150

5.5 Perception on Entrepreneurship Education’ Objective 152

5.5a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for EE’s Objectives Scale 153

5.6 Perception on the Course Content Scale 154

5.6a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Course Content Scale 155

5.7 Perception on the Teaching Methods Scale 156

5.7a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Teaching Methods Scale 157

5.8 Perception on the Assessment Methods Scale 158

5.8a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Assessment Methods Scale 159

5.9 Perception on Entrepreneurial Capacity Scale 160

5.9a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Attitude to Business Reality

Scale

162

5.10 Perception on Attitude to Business Reality Scale 162

5.10a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Attitude to Business Reality

Scale

162

5.11 Perception on Value Creation Scale 163

5.11a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Perceived value Creation

Scale

164

5.12 Perception of Subjective Norms Scale 165

5.12a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Subjective Norms Scale 165

xix

5.13 Perception on Self-Employment Intention Scale 166

5.13a Corrected Item-Total Correlation for Self-Employment Intention

Scale

168

5.13b Multicollinearity Test of the Research Variables 170

5.13c Exploratory Factor Analysis for the Research Constructs 171

5.13d KMO and Bartlett’s Test 172

5.13e Goodness-of-fit Index and Level of Acceptance 174

5.14 Initial Measurement Model for Entrepreneurship Education 176

5.14a Final Measurement Model for Entrepreneurship Education 177

5.15 Initial Measurement Model for Course Content 178

5.15a Final Measurement Model for Course Content 179

5.16 Initial Measurement Model for Teaching Methods 180

5.16a Final Measurement Model for Teaching Methods 181

5.17 Initial Measurement Model for Assessment Methods 182

5.17a Final Measurement Model for Assessment Methods 183

5.18 Initial Measurement Model for Entrepreneurial Capacity 184

5.18a Final Measurement Model for Entrepreneurial Capacity 185

5.19 Initial Measurement Model for Attitude to Business Reality 186

5.19a Final Measurement Model for Attitude to Business Reality 187

5.20 Initial Measurement Model for Perceived Value Creation 188

5.20a Final Measurement Model for Perceived Value Creation 189

5.21 Initial Measurement Model for Subjective Norms 190

5.21a Final Measurement Model for Subjective Norms 191

5.22 Initial Measurement Model for Self-Employment Intention 192

5.22a Final Measurement Model for Self-Employment Intention 193

5.23 Research Constructs’ Unidimensionality and Reliability Scores 194

5.24 Convergent Validity of Research Constructs 195

5.25 Correlation Matrix for the Entire Research Constructs 198

5.26 Goodness-of-fit Indices for First, Second and Final Structural

Measurement Model

203

5.27 The Standardized Regression Weights and Its Significance for

the Entire Path in the OBEEAM

204

xx

5.28 The Summary of the Tested Hypotheses in this Research 204

6.1 REM Core Courses, Entrepreneurship Education and

Improvements for Entrepreneurial Reorientation

229

6.2 Students’ Suggestions on the Entrepreneurship Teaching in REM

Programmes in the Malaysian Public Universities

237

6.3 Improvement on the Entrepreneurship Drivers for the

Development of Future Real Estate-Entrepreneurs

239

6.4 Hypothetical Embedment of Entrepreneurship Concepts in the

REM Core Courses Structure (Property Management and

Valuation)

242

xxi

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013 -2025 2

1.2 Principal statistics of graduates in the labour force and

employment competitiveness rate, Malaysia

3

1.3 Percentage distribution of unemployed graduates by selected

field of study in Malaysia, 2012

5

1.4 Organisation of the thesis 19

1.5 Structure of the Thesis 20

2.1 Cognitive Theory for Entrepreneurship Education Assessment 30

2.2 Model of Entrepreneurship Education 35

2.3 Interconnectivity of the Challenges in Entrepreneurship

Education

38

2.4 Common Objectives of the Entrepreneurship Education 39

2.5 Purpose of Entrepreneurship Education 40

2.6 Pedagogies for Entrepreneurship Learning Scale 43

2.7 Quadrants of Teaching Methods 44

3.1 MOHE Implementation Plan (MOHE-IP) for Development of

Innovative Human Capital at Tertiary Level

55

3.2 Linking entrepreneurship education, attitude, perception and

intention to self-employment

63

3.3 Entrepreneurship Opportunity Pursuit Model 65

3.4 Fayolle’s Theory of Planned Behaviour Assessment Model 68

3.5 Three Components of Entrepreneurial Capacity 74

3.6 Entrepreneurship Event Model 98

3.7 Theory of Planned Behaviour 101

3.8 Research Theoretical Assessment Framework 105

xxii

4.1 A Nested Research Methodology 116

4.2 Philosophical Research Paradigm Positioning for Current

Research

120

4.3 An Overview of the Research Design 122

4.4 Research sampling process within the research population 126

4.5 Preliminary Statistical Process for Multivariate Analysis 138

4.6 Structural Equation Modelling Statistical Procedure 144

5.1 Percentage Distribution of the Respondents in Selected

Universities

148

5.2 Percentage Distribution of Respondents’ Gender 149

5.3 Percentage Distribution of Respondents’ Ethnicity 149

5.4 Percentage Distribution of Students’ Entrepreneurship Education

Participation and Work Experience

150

5.5 Initial Measurement Model for Entrepreneurship Education 175

5.5a Final Measurement Model for Entrepreneurship Education 176

5.6 Initial Measurement Model for Course Content 177

5.6a Final Measurement Model for Course Content 178

5.7 Initial Measurement Model for Teaching Methods 179

5.7a Final Measurement Model for Teaching Methods 180

5.8 Initial Measurement Model for Assessment Methods 181

5.8a Final Measurement Model for Assessment Methods 182

5.9 Initial Measurement Model for Entrepreneurial Capacity 183

5.9a Measurement Model for Entrepreneurial Capacity 184

5.10 Initial Measurement Model for Attitude to Business Reality 185

5.10a Final Measurement Model for Attitude to Business Reality 186

5.11 Initial Measurement Model for Perceived Value Creation 187

5.11a Final Measurement Model for Perceived Value Creation 188

5.12 Initial Measurement Model for Subjective Norms 189

5.12a Final Measurement Model for Subjective Norms 190

5.13 Initial Measurement Model for Self-Employment Intention 191

5.13a Final Measurement Model for Self-Employment Intention 192

xxiii

5.14 Validity test of the sub-constructs of Entrepreneurship Education 196

5.15 Validity test of the sub-constructs of Entrepreneurial Capacity 196

5.16 Correlation for the Entire Research Constructs 197

5.17 First Structural Measurement Model for Entire Research

Constructs and Goodness-of-fitness for OBEEAM

199

5.18 Second Structural Measurement Model for Entire Research

Constructs and Goodness-of-fitness for OBEEAM

200

5.19 Third (Final) Structural Measurement Model Presents

Unstandardized Regression Coefficient for Entire Research

Constructs

201

5.20 Third (Final) Structural Measurement Model Presents

Standardized Regression Coefficient for Entire Research

Constructs

202

5.21 The procedure for Testing Mediation in the Research Model 205

6.1 Integration of the Proposed OBEEAM and Entrepreneurship

Drivers for the Development of Dynamic Future Real-Estate

Entrepreneurs in the Malaysian Public Universities

241

xxiv

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABREVATIONS

ABR - Attitude to Business Reality

AGFI - Adjusted Goodness-of-fit Index

AM - Assessment Methods

AMOS - Analysis of Moment of Structure

BOVAEAM Board of Valuers Appraisers and Estate Agents, Malaysia

CC - Course Content

CFA - Confirmatory Factor Analysis

CFI - Comparative Fitness Index

Chisq/Df - Chi-square statstic/Degree of Freedom

CR - Critical Ratio

Df - Degree of Freedom

EC - Entrepreneurial Capacity

EE - Entrepreneurship Education

EFA - Exploratory Factor Analysis

GFI - Goodness of Fit Index

H1 to H3 - Hypothesis (number)

HLIs - Higher Learning Institutions

MI - Modification Index

MIEA Malaysian Institutes of Estate Agents

MOHE - Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia

MOE Ministry of Education

NFI - Normed Fit Index

OBEEM - Objecytive-Based Entrepteneurship Education Assessment Model

PBC - Percieved Behaviour Contol

P-value - Probability Value

xxv

PVC - Perceived Value Creation

REM - Real Estate Management

RMSEA - Root Mean Square Error of Approximate

SD - Standard Deviation

SE - Standard Error

SEI - Self-Employment Intention

SEM - Structural Equation Modeling

SMC - Squared Multiple Correlations

SN - Subjective Norms

SPSS - Statistical Parkage for Social Science

TLI - Tucker Lewis Index

TM - Teaching Methods

TPB - Theory of Planned Behaviour

UiTM - Universiti Technologi Mara, Malaysia

UM - Universiti Malaya

UTHM - Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia

UTM - Universiti Technologi Malaysia

α - Cronbach’s Alpha

β - Standardized estimate

z - Critical Ratio value

≤ - Less than

≥ - Greater than

xxvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A List of abbreviations in the thesis

Appendix B Research questionnaire

Appendix C Evidence of research publication from this study

Appendix D VITA

1

CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the background, the rationale for the research as well as the

statement of the research problem. The aim and objectives outlined in accordance

with the research questions. The research hypotheses postulated to give a clear

direction for the study. In addition, the research’s scope, significant and methodology

were briefly discussed. Finally, definitions of terms, thesis structure outlined and

concluded with the summary and links for the next chapter.

1.2 Background of the Research

Since the independence in 1957, Malaysian higher education has developed

enormously and the last two decades have witnessed tremendous reformation in the

educational sector. The transformation was in response to the global forces and

trends in local socio-economic status (Othman et al., 2015). In an effort to reposition

the Malaysian higher learning institutions (HLIs), the New Economic Model (NEM);

Economic Transformation Plan (ETP); Government Transformation Plan (GTP);

National Higher Education Strategic Plan (NHEAP 2007–2010) and; National

Higher Education Action Plan (NHESP beyond 2020) were formulated

(Grapragasem et al., 2014). The educational strategic plans as enablers within the

context of national economic policies were drafted with the connotation of

entrepreneurship education in the HLIs and as a change driver of growth for the

Malaysian economy. This is to inspire creativity and fosters innovation; provides the

2

necessary skills to the graduating students of HLIs as to facilitate competence and

capacities required to compete in the modern labour market, locally and globally.

The outcomes of those policies in the HLIs have transformed Malaysia into an

education hub especially in the region of South East Asia which has provided a

major stream of income to the national GDP. In fact, the recent Malaysian Education

Blueprint 2013–2025 focused on eleven shift plans that is primarily to develop

“holistic, enterprising and balanced graduates” with all-embracing lifelong talents

who can act entrepreneurially in the current competitive economy (Malaysia, 2014).

Despite the remarkable shift of the Malaysian economy from a production-

based to knowledge-based with emphasis on entrepreneurship education integration

across the HLIs, the impact has not been entirely satisfactory because government

expectations is far from the current reality with less than 2 percent of the graduates

that were attracted to venture into entrepreneurship activities immediately after

graduation as presented in Figure 1.1 (Othman et al., 2015; Azlan, 2009; Cheng et al.

2009). More so, the proliferation of HLIs has also increased the number of graduates

tremendously to the extent that the Malaysian 20 public universities and over 500

private universities and colleges enrolled more than 1.2 million students. Today, over

150,000 graduates are injected into the saturated labour market yearly (MOHE, 2010;

Ahmad & Xavier, 2012).

Source: Adapted from Jusoh, 2015; Othman et al., 2015; Ghadi, et al., 2015

Figure 1.1: Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013 -2025 (MOE, 2015)

Holistic,

Entrepreneurial and

Balanced Graduates

By setting out the MOE’s vision of

developing all round graduates with both

capacities and knowledge for uplifting values driven Malaysian economy

53,000 graduates remain unemployed six months upon graduation (Chan & Yang, 2015).

Only 2% of the nation’s graduates are self-employed or are running their own businesses

(Othman et al., 2014).

Only 42% of Malaysians see entrepreneurship

as a good career choice (Othman et al., 2015)

45% of the recent graduates earned below RM

1,500 per month in 2013 (Ehambaranathan et

al., 2015).

Entrepreneurship critical thinking and

teamwork are the skills and capacities

students feel they lack the most (Kuldas et al.,

2015; Ghadi, et al., 2015).

Topmost problem employers complained

about graduates are poor attitude and

communication skills (Cheong et al., 2015)

WHY

IT

MATTER?

3

Moreover, it is every student’s aspiration to go to higher learning institutions

(HLIs), get a higher degree in order to get into a profession and a career upon

graduation. Education has been documented to be a key to employment. Globally,

education is observed as a mean out of poverty in the underdeveloped nations while

for the developing and developed nations, and education functions as a way to

increase employment. In the past, students of HLIs have enjoyed higher employment

rates compared to individuals with lower levels of educational qualification (MOHE,

2011) but now it is an idea of the yesteryears. Graduates’ employment problem is

progressively becoming a genuinely concerned all over the world (Wu, 2010;

Livanos, 2010; Azlan, 2009), and Malaysia is not excluded. Figure 1.2 presented the

yearly increase in the Malaysian graduates’ job competitiveness. Though, the 3.1

percent unemployment rate in Malaysia is noticeably low when compared to other

nations, yet, it is not an issue to be neglected. The reason is that graduates are future

labour force who will become the driving force for the creation of new businesses,

employment opportunities and innovation for a productive high-income economy.

Figure 1.2: Principal Statistics of Graduates in the Labour Force and Unemployment

Rate, Malaysia (Malaysian Department of Statistics, 2012)

However, the number of the graduating students entering the labour market is

on the increase from 231,800 to 2.10 million in 2012 (DOS, 2013). Hence,

universities graduates recorded a higher rate of unemployment compared to the lower

levels of education in Malaysia (DOS, 2013). The reasons for the graduates’

unemployment are the mismatch between the graduates’ knowledge and labour

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

19

82

19

83

19

84

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

92

19

93

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Nu

mb

er (

'00

0)

Labour Force Employed rate Unemployed rate

4

market skills demand (Ahmad, 2014). This was further exacerbated by graduates

lacking entrepreneurial capacity such as critical thinking, creative skills and

competence, and English language skills that are extremely important in the current

job market (Md Yusof et al. 2009: Norshima, 2009).

In Malaysia, reasons documented to be responsible for the graduates’

unemployment in the literature are as follows: first is the uncertainty in the global

and national economy that has been contributing to the shrinking job market for the

graduates. Particularly now, when the number of jobs created is not matching the

rising numbers of graduates (Azlan, 2009; Edree, 2011). Second, public sector’s

employment shrinkage and rising competitive labour market in the private sector

have forced some companies to scale back their graduate recruitment (Yen, 2012).

Lastly, education expansion is also a contributing factor (Ahmad, 2013). Cheng et al.

(2011) reported that the rapid expansion of HLIs in Malaysia to the number of

twenty public universities with over 500 private universities and colleges has

increased the number of graduates. To buttress this point is the lacks of

entrepreneurship capacity among the HLIs graduates together with the competitive

labour market is promoting the graduates employment problem (Ahmad & Xavier,

2012; Ahmad, 2013).

The employment issue has compelled the Ministry of Higher Education

(MOHE) to conduct the Graduate Tracer Study each year attempting to trace the

destinations of the graduates’ job employment and identify the degree of graduates’

job competitiveness in the Malaysian labour market. The report showed that 24

percent of the graduates have not found a job after six months of graduating (MOE,

2013). More so, management and construction related field of studies have the

highest competitive employment opportunity (see Figure 1.3).

In Figure 1.2, social science and management related disciplines recorded to

have the highest (39.4%) unemployment challenge and these were the disciplines

with entrepreneurship component in their core course structure. More so,

entrepreneurship teaching is an integral part of every field of studies in Malaysia

today (MOHE, 2010). Next were engineering, constructions and technical related

disciplines (construction, real estate management and architecture) with 21.7 percent.

Though, numbers of graduates that are unemployed are not mentioned in the report.

5

Figure 1.3: Percentage Distribution of Unemployed Graduates by Selected Field of

Study in Malaysia, 2012 (Department of Statistics, 2012; Ahmad, 2013).

As showed in Figure 1.3, REM profession falls within the occupational groups

with the highest competitive employment opportunity in Malaysia. In the same

document, one of the core industries in Malaysia with the least graduates’

employment percentage is the real estate industry (see Table 1.1). In fact, this is a

critical issue because the REM students need to be gainfully employed even before

acquires their professional practice licence.

Table 1.1: Percentage Distribution of Employed Graduates in Different Industries in

Malaysia (Malaysia Department of Statistics, 2013)

S/no Industries (Industri) %

1. Manufacturing 13.2

2. Construction 5.7

3. Information and communication 4.5

4. Financial and insurance 7.1

5. Real estate 1.3

6. Scientific professional and technical activities 6.5

7. Public administration and defence 8.8

8. Education 26.0

9. Human health and social works 5.7

In addition, it was observed in the literature that REM profession is one of the

disciplines facing employment challenges as a result of recent bust of the global real

estate markets (Wyman, Seldin & Worzala, 2011). More so, it is the most encroached

in the built environment (D’Arcy & Taltavull, 2009; Ashen & Gambo, 2012).

Likewise, McFarland and Nguyen (2010) reported that unregistered property

Social Science;

Management and Law

39.4%

Engineering,

Construction

Management and Manufacturing

21.7%

Science, Mathematics

and Computing

17.9%

Health and welfare

6.4%

Art and Humanities

6.3%

Education 3.7%

Services

3% Agriculture, Forestry,

Fishing and Veterinary

1.4% General programs

0.4%

Real Estate Management Zone

6

managers and quacks pose more threats than other allied professionals invasion such

as lawyers; engineers; architect/builders; bankers/economist and so on (Sahu, &

Menon, 2011; Hashim, Sapri & Achu, 2013; Olawande & Adebayo, 2012).

Consequently, Liu et al. (2007) extensive literature identified areas of

challenges in the employability of the REM professionals in practice. First,

globalization and technological revolution have generated enormous opportunities

but also create significant economic pressure and employment competition by way of

threats to the profession (Hannah et al., 2009). Other challenges are in the

intermediate context at the corporate level associated with changing client attitudes,

business values in professionalism and specialism. In fact, all command new

knowledge of entrepreneurship and innovation by diversity in the core valuation and

project management practice (Poon, 2012; 2013a; Wyman, Seldin & Worzala, 2011).

Moreover, government, professional body and public expect universities to

produce graduates that can create jobs not job seeker (MOE, 2013). To this effect,

Malaysian HLIs are currently in the middle of entrepreneurship, innovation and

commercialisation era (Gibb & Haskins, 2014). This implies that age of conformist

teaching in the tertiary institutions are over (Jano, Janor, Nor, Ahmad & Shaaban,

2014; Aronowitz, 2000); HLIs are now seen as a “knowledge factory” where art,

science and technical students were branded for entrepreneurship culture (Yusof et

al., 2014; Cheng, 2011; Etzkowitz, et al., 2000). The culture of entrepreneurship

suggested in the training of every discipline, with REM profession no exemption.

Now that economic opportunities are getting more competitive, Malaysian real estate

industries are not excluded (Jaffar & Aziz, 2014; Sahu & Menon, 2011).

Since, compulsory entrepreneurship education is introduced into every

discipline in the Malaysian HLIs (MOHE, 2010). The majority of scholars provided

empirical survey of positive impact of the entrepreneurship educations on the

students of business major (Yusof, Siddiq & Nor, 2014; Cheng, 2011; Wu & Li,

2010) and engineering programs (Ismail et al., 2010; Mwasalwiba, 2010) with little

or none in the REM field of study in Malaysia. At the same time, most of the past

empirical studies focused on the students’ interest in entrepreneurship, while few

assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education on the perception of students’

entrepreneurial capacity (competence and skills) and the inclination toward self-

employment, particularly, in the REM discipline (Gafar, et al. 2013). On this

7

account, there is need for more empirical studies in this area (Hoxley & Poon, 2012;

Tu et al., 2009; Oosterbeek et al., 2010; Poon & Brownlow, 2014).

More so, the recent 2013 - 2025 Malaysian educational policy focused on

students of HLIs with the position to develop value educational formation with the

entrepreneurial skills, talent-oriented and capacities for self-reliance (MOE, 2015).

On the same account, the purpose of the entrepreneurship education inclusion into

REM discipline is to serve as a platform to offer all students the opportunities to

appreciate and to act entrepreneurially after graduation (Mok, 2013). Despite, the

critical issues are developing ways on how to improve educational standard,

innovative teaching and assessment methods which could lead to new breed of

entrepreneurial minded graduates (Ernest et al., 2015; Fayolle, Linan & Moriano,

2014; Linan, & Fayolle, 2015). Besides, 21st century’s competitive economy

demands innovative REM graduates with the capacity to think out of the box (Gafar

et al., 2014; Mcfarland & Nguyen, 2010; Poon, 2014a).

On realizing the prime position entrepreneurship occupies in the socio-

economic and political development, and particularly for the accomplishment of the

Malaysian vision 2020. This research aimed to assess the perception of REM

students towards the impact of entrepreneurship education on their entrepreneurial

capacity and self-employment intention. This research builds on the Fayolle’s

assessment model of entrepreneurship education (Fayolle, et al., 2006). The research

further employed a validated Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) with a

comprehensive research methodology and used structural equation modelling (SEM)

statistical tool of analysis. The outcome of this research could provide the

implications to advance the entrepreneurial quality of the REM graduates in

Malaysia.

1.3 Statement of the Research Problem

The review of relevant literatures have found a wealth of literature dealing with the

issue of graduates’ employability in the job market is becoming more competitive

(Ahmad & Xavier, 2012; Ismail et al., 2011; Yasin et al., 2011; Ismail et al., 2010).

This is due to the belief that HLIs academic training prepares students to work for

other people, and most of these jobs are white collar corporate types (Azlan, 2009;

8

Ahmad, 2013). However, professions in the built environment are more challenged

in the present competitive economy (Jaffar &Aziz, 2014). In fact, economic

recession and technological advancement have impacted more negatively on these

professions in the past few years and real estate management profession is no

exception (Oni & Adebayo, 2012; Sahu & Menon, 2011).

In Australia, Dixon (2011) and Lim et al. (2014) stated that the number of

young graduates of REM employed to sell and buy property have falling by

approximately 2,000 in the last 12 months. In United Kingdom (UK), barely 60

percent of real estate graduates employed within six months after graduation

(Sterling, Maxey & Luna, 2013). Of these percentages, not up to 15 percent were

employed in government establishments, whereas, in the past, the sources of

employment have always been in the public sectors. Hence, barely 16 percent were

chartered surveyors, and the larger percentages compete in the competitive larbour

market (Morgan, 2014; Olawande & Adebayo, 2012). In China, less than 10 percent

of its real estate surveyors graduates work in the public sectors (McGinley, 2010). In

Netherlands, the number of employed real estate surveyors increased from 9,673 to

9853 in year 2005 to 2006 and for the years 2007 to 2008, the employment statistics

dropped to 9,300 (Dijkman, 2008). The reports showed that the chance to get a job as

graduates of REM in Netherlands is more competitive and more preference is given

to the experienced surveyors (Dijkman, 2008).

In Malaysia, Board of Valuers, Appraisers and Estate Agents, Malaysia

(BOVAEAM) and Malaysian Institute of Estate Agency (MIEA) noted that the

employment and job prospect is more challenged by the invasion of allied

professionals and illegal agents. In fact, these invaders were becoming more

organised with corporate identities (MIEA, 2014), and this called for registration of

all negotiators. Currently, over 11,500 negotiators who have little or no background

in REM have registered barely within three months. In addition, it was observed that

out of the twenty-two real estate agency companies in Johor – Malaysia, only eight

of such companies were founded by real estate management background

professionals (MIEA, 2014). At the same time, it was observed in the just concluded

37th

MIEA annual dinner and national real estate awards night that only five of them

have the educational qualification in REM. By implication, the future employment

9

outlook for the REM students may experience more competition if they are not

proactive and prepare to take control of their professional practices after graduation.

In fact, the theme of recently completed 7th

IRERS International Real Estate

Research Symposium (2014) centred on unlocking the potential of REM profession

(INSPEN, 2014). Hence, notable scholars have suggested entrepreneurship teaching

for stimulating creativity and innovation development in the HLIs and as a solution

for graduates’ employment problem in the job market (Poon & Brownlow, 2015;

2014; Poon, 2012a; Whitehead, 2012).

According to Begley (2011) and Kalette (2009) era of educating students for

public sector employment is past, more so, job opportunities in the public sectors are

saturated in most countries. In this instance, larger percentage of the real estate

surveyors now compete with other allied professionals and quacks who constantly

encroach and practice in real estate agency and property management (Hannah et al.,

2009; Dent & Whitehead, 2013; Olawande & Adebayo, 2012).

To overcome this occurrence, Poon (2014; 2014a) stated that REM students

need to be more entrepreneurially inclined in their program structure rather than

depending on conventional educational system. Focus should be more on the

property valuation which has low fee and less job prospect in the contemporary mass

housing era (Wyman, Seldin & Worzala, 2011; Gilbertson & Preston, 2005).

As observed in the literature, D’Arcy and Taltavull (2009) and Ashen and

Gambo (2012) reported that REM profession is one of the most encroached

professions in the built environment as supported by McFarland and Nguyen (2010).

Likewise, quacks pose more threats than other allied professionals invasion such as

lawyers; engineers; architect/builders; bankers/economist and so on (Sahu, & Menon,

2011; Tu et al., 2009; Dent & Whitehead, 2013). The professional encroachment in

addition with the current economic downturn of nations positioned employability of

the REM graduates in the job market to be more competitive (Sahu, & Menon, 2011;

Dent, & Whitehead, 2013).

In addition, scholars have argued on the need to change and stop defending an

outdated REM educational system (Poon & Brownlow, 2015; Whitehead, 2012).

Sahu and Menon (2011) stressed that lack of repositioning the profession against the

challenges of the new era has created opportunities for other professionals in the built

industry to exploit. More so, Hefferan and Ross (2010) noted that change is constant,

10

the world is dynamic, and failure to face millennium reality may create more

challenges on the way real estate management students’ preparation for the future.

In fact, apprehension about the REM education has been growing in recent

years (Sahu & Menon, 2011). This phenomenon is fuelled by the current information

revolution; economic recession; changing socio-cultural realities; market

globalization; all would pose unique challenges to the REM profession (Hannah, et

al., 2009; Poon, 2014).

Poon and Brownlow (2014) and Manning and Roulac (2001) acknowledged

that neglect of “commercial awareness and value creation” in the training of young

REM students has a significant negative impact on their employability and job

performance after graduation. Poon (2012) noted that REM practice is inherently

entrepreneurial in nature and that its education structure believed to be more

entrepreneurially incline. More so, business and management, marketing and

networking are components of REM training (Poon & Brownlow, 2014). The issue is

to what extent REM students’ inherent background in the business related courses

mediates the relationship between their participation in entrepreneurship education

and intention to be self-employed.

In the same vein, Dent and Whitehead (2013) added that most of REM

programmes in the HLIs emphasised on the principles of valuation, property

management and estate agency which are all in the context of managing business

rather than focusing on value creation in the context of creating and innovating

business. Poon (2014) and Hannah et al. (2009) reaffirmed that in this 21st century

and beyond, the practice and teaching of REM will experience more changes than

before. This implies that orthodox educational training for the REM graduating

students may not support the skills and competence required to survive in the labour

market. Moreover, scholars have stressed that value creation is the driver of the

current global economy. More so, Real Estate Management's marketplace is value

driven and failure to face the reality of the modern age can create more hurdles on

the way REM students’ capacity building for the future.

On a practical note, new approach demands new strategies as against the

perception of those who still see REM practice in the traditional perspective. The

modern age demand dynamic graduates who can take up the role of an entrepreneur;

business expert; social reformer and; user’s advocate (Hefferan & Ross, 2010).

11

According to D’Arcy & Taltavull (2009), stated that the existing models of teaching

and practice may not be sufficient to sustain the young REM graduates in the future

without entrepreneurial innovation and infusion of new entrepreneurial concept into

the professional practices. The current job market is highly competitive, and

approach to prepare students of REM is to pay more attention to entrepreneurship

and e-commerce in order to survive the economic turbulence (Jayantha, 2012).

To this extend, entrepreneurship educational programs are now available at

most of the HLIs in Malaysia as an attempt to increase employment prospect after

graduation. Regardless of the fact that Malaysian universities were categorised into

research, comprehensive and focus, the integration and implementation of the

compulsory entrepreneurship subject as a course cut across every field of study

(Zakaria et al., 2011; Yusoff et al., 15). More so, the core value of entrepreneurship

teaching is to provide the entrepreneurial skills to the students in order to establish

and manage their businesses and to consider self-employment as a career option on

completion of their studies. Despite, Malaysian students of HLIs are still weak in the

entrepreneurship capacity to connect academic teaching with practices after

graduation, likewise, REM disciplines (Azlan, 2009; Jain & Ali, 2013; Wilson

Rangga, et al., 2011; Poon, 2012; Mohammed et al., 2012).

In addition, it has been observed that literature pertaining to impact of

entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial capacity (skills and competence)

on the part of the graduating students is still a topic of utmost interest in Malaysia

(Cheng et al., 2009; Ismail et al., 2010; MOHE, 2010). Research into the REM’s

entrepreneurship program is still few (Egwuatu, 2013; Gafar et al., 2013b).

Research shows that to ascertain the performance of any entrepreneurship

education program in Malaysia, it is important to assess its impact on the targeted

graduating students (Fayolle, Linan & Moriano, 2014; Cheng et al., 2009). So it

worthwhile to conduct this research, whose result could identify the gaps in the

teaching of entrepreneurship education’s course content, teaching and assessment

methods in the Malaysian public universities. In the same vein, the research could

discover the disconnection between the teaching of REM core courses and

entrepreneurship education.

Moreover, notable scholars have been arguing on the issue of disconnection

between core value of real estate core courses and entrepreneurship idea

12

“commercial awareness” (Poon, 2014; Poon, 2012; Tu et al., 2009). For instance, in

the REM’s students completing core course (property valuation, property and

facilities management, feasibility/viability appraisals and land economic), how to

inculcate better understanding of the entrepreneurial capacities concept within the

aforementioned core courses is attempted. This is to stimulate and enhance the REM

students’ understanding of broad areas of entrepreneurship application in their core

training and possibility of linking both entrepreneurship teaching and real estate

management practices (Poon, 2012; Tu et al., 2009). Therefore, this deems the

research valuable to conduct as to close the gap that may exist.

Nevertheless, attempt to solve these problems could only be achieved through a

constant impact assessment of the entrepreneurship education program on the REM

students’ entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention. A research of this

nature is to guaranty value of the investment and to identify problem areas and

implications for improvement in the entrepreneurship education teaching in the REM

programs in the Malaysia’s HLIs.

Therefore, the questions of utmost interest in this research are - what is the

impact of entrepreneurship education on the perception of REM students’

entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention? The outcome of this

research is believed to develop an Objective-Based Entrepreneurship Education

Assessment Model (OBEAM) which could provide ways on how to develop dynamic

future real estate entrepreneurs among the Malaysian REM graduating students.

1.4 Research Questions

1. What is the current status of the entrepreneurship education of REM students

of the Malaysian public universities?

2. To what extent is entrepreneurship education provided by the Malaysian

public universities impact the perception of REM students’ entrepreneurial

capacity?

3. Does the level of REM students’ entrepreneurial capacity have impact on their

intention toward self-employment?

13

4. Does the current level of REM students’ participation in the entrepreneurship

education have impact on their intention toward self-employment as a career

option?

5. Does REM students’ entrepreneurial capacity perception mediate relationship

between entrepreneurship education and self-employment intention?

6. Is existing pedagogical approach use to deliver entrepreneurship education

adequate in facilitating the development of more dynamic future real-estate

entrepreneurs in the Malaysian public universities?

1.5 Research Aims and Objectives

The aim of the research is to assess the perception of REM students toward the

impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial capacity and self-

employment intention in the Malaysian public universities. Specifically, the

objectives of the research are as follows:

1. To identify the current status of the entrepreneurship education of REM

students of the Malaysian public universities.

2. To analyse the relationship between perception of REM students on

entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial capacity.

3. To determine the relationship between REM students’ entrepreneurial capacity

and self-employment intention as a career option.

4. To determine the relationship between entrepreneurship education and self-

employment intention.

5. To evaluate the mediating role of the REM students’ entrepreneurial capacity

in the relationship between entrepreneurship education (exogenous variable)

and self-employment intention (endogenous variable).

6. To propose an Objective-Based Entrepreneurship Education Assessment

Model (OBEEAM) that connects entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial

capacity and self-employment intention with a view to propose ways on how

to develop more dynamic future real-estate entrepreneurs in Malaysian public

universities.

14

1.6 Scope of the Research

The research scope is within the geographical boundary of Malaysia and the precise

subject of study focused on the academic impact of entrepreneurship education on

the students’ entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention. This research

focused on the Malaysian public universities that offered entrepreneurship education

program and Real Estate Management as a degree of study. The selected universities

were formatted in the Table 1.1 and the set criteria for the university’s selection are

as follows:

The university must be founded and funded by the Malaysian Government.

It must be accredited by both government agencies (MOHE) and professional

bodies and establishment entrepreneurship education as a subject course in the

university curriculum structure is a vital requirement.

Lastly, the targeted respondents were the second year REM students been the

class stipulated for compulsory entrepreneurship education.

Table 1.2: Selected List of Public Universities in Malaysia for the Research

S/No Name of University Year Established Ownership

1 Universiti Malaya 1905 Government

2 Universiti Technology, Mara. 1972 Government

3 Universiti Technology Malaysia. 1973 Government

4 Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. 2000 Government

The predetermined interest is to establish the perception of REM students

toward the impact of entrepreneurship education on the entrepreneurial capacity and

self-employment intention. The future research could establish the real-life impact.

1.7 Significance of the Research

In this era of globalisation and competitiveness, an understanding of the critical

knowledge of the current level of impact of entrepreneurship education program on

the students’ entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention has a great

significance to the Malaysian government, education policy makers and educational

15

stakeholders (Bagheri & Lope Pihie, 2013; Islam et al., 2013; Azlan, 2009; Buang et

al., 2009). In Malaysia today, to develop self-motivated graduates that can create job

and compete favourably in the current competitive larbour market both locally and at

international level is one of the core objectives of MOE and for the attainment of

vision 2020 (Kok & Tan, 2011; Pihie & Akmaliah, 2009).

Hence, the critical focus of this research is to investigate the perception of

REM students toward the impact of entrepreneurship education program on the

entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention and to develop an Objective

Based Entrepreneurship Education Assessment Model (OBEEAM). It is certain that

among other things the research findings could serve as implications for innovative

pedagogical approach for the development of dynamic REM graduates who can take

up the role of an entrepreneur; business leader; social reformer and; user’s advocate.

Hence, it shall provide wealth of knowledge for the development of future

entrepreneurs through the entrepreneurship education and suggestions for future

research.

In addition, the outcome of this research could assist educational policymaker

to understand the strengths; weaknesses; opportunities and threats of the current

entrepreneurship education delivery in the public universities in Malaysia. Hence, it

will certainly serve as a multi-source feedback for educators and students in the

respective surveyed universities. This could stimulate educational policy

improvement, budgetary planning and innovative curriculum design for the REM

programs of study in the Malaysian HLIs.

More so, the research is designed to contribute to the theoretical and empirical

understanding of connection(s) and disconnection(s) between REM’s core courses

structure and entrepreneurship ideas and in what way(s) can entrepreneurship

education close the gap. Therefore, an Objective-Based Entrepreneurship Education

Assessment Model (OBEEAM) is to provide a strategic approach to inform more

entrepreneurship ideas in the REM core course structure (valuation and property

management), improve the course content, teaching and assessment methods to

impact entrepreneurship ideas on the REM students in Malaysia.

It is observed in the literature and practice that graduates of REM are exposed

to the concept of entrepreneurship education, despite; they are weak in

entrepreneurial capacity to connect academic teaching with practice and disposition

16

toward self-employment (Poon, 2014; Poon & Brownlow, 2014; Hefferan & Ross,

2010). It was also established that attitude and intention toward behaviour are driven

by perception and such can be influenced through an effective entrepreneurship

education (Heuer & Kolvereid, 2014). Based on the outlined research objectives, the

outcome of this research could be used to tailor REM’s entrepreneurship education

programmes aimed at students to enhance the possibility of new job creation. In a

nutshell, this research’s outcomes and suggestions could be transferred, adapted and

adopted for other disciplines in the built environment in the HLIs in Malaysia.

Finally, the research’s findings shall surely contribute immensely to the

theoretical and empirical knowledge of the entrepreneurship education and validate

previous self-employment intention studies.

1.8 Research Methodology

The research employed Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behaviour to assess the

perception of REM students toward the impact of entrepreneurship education on the

entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention in the Malaysia public HLIs.

Hence, research methodology approach used was a cross-sectional survey,

which was conducted on a purposive sample from February 2013 to April 2014. The

research population was REM’s students in the four Malaysian public universities

that are offering degree programs in REM with an integrated entrepreneurship

education program in their course structure. Purposive sampling was drawn from the

aforementioned targeted population. Selected sample were the second-year students

of the REM who participated in entrepreneurship education program in selected

universities (see Section 1.7 and Table 1.2).

In addition, questionnaires were distributed to the respondents through a self-

administered method. An ex-post survey conducted on the second years REM

students, who just completed participation in a compulsory entrepreneurship

education programs. The purpose is to establish empirical answers to the

predetermined research questions, objectives and to test the set hypotheses. The data

collected were analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS)

version 22.0, Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) software with structural

equation modelling (SEM) as a tool of analysis.

17

The research data analyses were conducted in three stages. First, respondents’

characteristic and descriptive statistics of the research variables examined. Second,

data analysis involved a series of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to

specify, test and revise the measurement models of the research’s variables

sequentially. The research’s data analysis finally, examined the simultaneous

estimations of the measurement and structural model of the proposed Objective-

Based Entrepreneurship Education Assessment Model (OBEEAM) using structural

equation modelling (SEM). This was to determine the current level of impact that

entrepreneurship education program had on the REM students’ entrepreneurial

capacity and self-employment intention. In summary, a comprehensive research

methodological process: selection and justification of research instrumentation used

for the research were presented in chapter four of this thesis report.

1.9 Definition of Terms

In the context of this research, the outlined terminologies and abbreviation were

defined as follows:

Perception: This is defined as understanding or knowledge gained by

perceiving something. For instance, knowledge gained by perceiving impact of

entrepreneurship education impact (Gafar et al., 2013).

REM: This is the abbreviation for real estate management as a discipline of

study in the Malaysia universities (Gafar et al., 2013).

Student: This is someone studying at a university in order to enter a particular

profession. In the case of this research, it is that someone studying in the

Malaysia public universities in order to graduate into real estate management

profession (Gafar et al., 2013).

Impact: This is defined as a measure of effect of one thing’s action (tangible or

intangible) on another. For example, effect of entrepreneurship education on

the REM students’ self-employment intention (Fayolle et al., 2006).

Entrepreneurship Education: This is a formal teaching process to inculcate

entrepreneurial capacities such as idea, skills, and opportunity recognition on

the students for the purpose of developing their own growth-oriented business

18

(Alberti, et al. 2004). This definition fitted the purpose of this research because

the main objective of entrepreneurship education is for value-oriented business

creation which promotes self-employment.

Entrepreneurial Capacity: This is the students’ efficacy in the skills and

competences to develop and create new venture which practically depend on

their institutive ability on business knowledge and venture creation (Linan,

2008). In the context of this research, it is outlined in two folds (students’

business reality and students’ value creation).

Business Reality Capacity: This is the development of students’ entrepreneurial

acumen as awareness and competency measurement in the following areas:

basic business start-up, business planning, business finance, idea development,

responsibility of an entrepreneur, problem recognition and solution

development, and writing business proposal (Cheng, et al., 2009).

Value Creation Capacity: This is the student’s ability to innovate, create value

for the future through adaptation for change in the competitive labour market.

stated that students’ entrepreneurial acumen are such as creativity and

innovation in business start-up; new products and services development;

business management talent; risk loving, flexibility and dynamism, all

associated with entrepreneurial value creation capacity (Hills, et al., 2005).

Self-Employment: In the context of this research it’s a situation whereby a

person (student) works for himself or herself rather than working for an

employer that pays a salary. A self-employed individual is a self-serving

individual who create a business and operates it to earn his/her income directly

(Shapero & Sokol, 1982).

Intention: This is an attitudinal state of mind, wish and determination of a

student to carry out and to attain a specific goal. And, self-employment

intention is defined as students’ values, attitude of self-efficacy which predicts

his/her feasibility and desirability of self-employment as a career option after

graduation.

19

1.10 Organisation of the Thesis

This research was conducted and breakdown into five stages of a research outline

plan as illustrated in Figure 1.4 below.

Figure 1.4: Stages of the Research Plan

Define Research Problem from Pre-conceived

Knowledge, Experience and Preliminary Studies

Study and Compile related literature

Develop Research Questions, Objectives and Hypotheses

Deductive Approach

Survey Research

Research Design and Methodology

Stage 1

Stage 2

Development of Research Framework

Inductive Approach

Questionnaire Development Define Target Population

and Sampling Methods Pilot Study

Review and Finalise

Questionnaire

Conduct Survey Data

Collection

Process, Analyse and Interpret Data

using AMOS (SEM)

Report Research Findings, Conclusion and Future

Research Area

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 5

20

1.11 Structure of the Thesis

As structured from the above introduction, further organisations of the chapters in

this thesis are as presented in figure 1.5.

Figure 1.5: Structure of the Thesis

1.12 Summary and Links

This chapter sets the introduction for the research as relates to the background of the

study, statement of problem, research questions, aim and objectives and hypotheses.

The reviewed of related literature presented in the next chapter with the goal of

developing appropriate directions that are relevant to the research issue under focus.

Chapter One

Research Background; Statement of Problem; Research Questions; Aims and

Objectives; Hypotheses; Research’s Scope, Significance and Methodology were

briefly discussed

Chapter Two

1. Literature review on entrepreneurship and its education as related to the research

problem.

2. Past impact studies on the entrepreneurship education in the global and Malaysia

context.

3. Research gaps established.

4. Need for entrepreneurship content in Real Estate Management.

5. Concept and foundation theories of entrepreneurial behaviour.

6. Development of theoretical assessment framework for the research.

Chapter Three

1. Research methodological approach in connection to choice of research

philosophy and research strategy.

2. Positivism; Survey research; Purposive sampling technique; Questionnaire

development; Pilot test and data collection.

Chapter Four

1. Research data analysis process (descriptive & multivariate using AMOS -SEM).

2. Research findings of a survey conducted at four Malaysian public universities

that award REM degree.

3. Interpretation of the statistical analyses.

1. Discussion on research finding according to research objectives and hypotheses.

2. Summary of the research findings. Chapter Five

Presented in this is the Overall research summary; Limitation; Conclusion on

suggestions and recommendation for future research direction. Chapter Six

21

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presented the review of existing literature on the entrepreneurship

education, entrepreneurial capacity and self-employment intention. The discourse on

the REM is based on students’ educational need for a sustainable self-employment as

a career in a highly competitive economic driven society.

A critical literature review on the general definitions, concepts and

classification of entrepreneurship education as a subject of study discussed. The

impact of entrepreneurship education and research’s gaps established. Brief

discussion on the key components of the research, starting with the conceptual

definition of key research variables (entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial

capacity and self-employment intention) presented.

2.2 Definitions of Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneur

The meaning of entrepreneurship is best found, first within the earliest definition of

entrepreneurship by Cantillion cited in Sinnot and Gorman (2008). Thus,

understanding of entrepreneurship meaning is to explain the foundation and concept

of entrepreneurship and who is an entrepreneur?

In 1980s, the word “entrepreneurship” grows to be the business buzzword

which is corresponding to “professionalism”, promoted above the managerial

buzzword of the 1970s (Drucker, 1982; Krueger & Carsrud, 1993). Entrepreneurship

has metamorphosed in fold such as social entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship. The

22

quality of entrepreneurship on the parts of individual determination and ambition to

become entrepreneurs was afterward extended to the concept of “intrapreneurship” or

entrepreneurship ideology adopted by big and medium organisation. At the same

time, wealth creation, freedom and autonomy are the reasons for individuals wanting

to become entrepreneurs. Even, big and medium organizations become

“entrepreneurial” is to grow more competitive advantages over their numerous big or

smaller competitors with the possible capacity for innovation and flexible to changes

(Gries & Naude, 2009).

On the concept of entrepreneurship, Gedeon (2010) define entrepreneurship as

a multi-directional word, though, it is homogeneity in meaning. Ahmad (2013)

further defined entrepreneurship as a process through which opportunities to create

new future goods and services are discovered, evaluated and explored. However, the

last few decades witnessed large volume of literature on entrepreneurship, simply

because of its undeniable contribution to small medium scale enterprise

development, job creation and innovation, and onward economic progression of

many nations (Tajudin et al., 2014).

However, entrepreneurship is documented worldwide as a facilitator of

economic growth (Kuratko & Audretsch, 2009) and that the wealth of every

homeland depends greatly on the establishment of regional businesses (Acs &

Audretsch, 2010). Eesley and Roberts (2012) held that nations that grow more

entrepreneurial talent among her populace (students) are liable to succeed in her

future economic advancement.

Regarding who is an entrepreneur? Kuratko (2013) stated that the facilitator

and creator of entrepreneurship is a person who created the wealth and assumed

economic risk, time and resourcefulness, and then, exert energetic commitment for

developing value from existing or new products and services is called entrepreneur.

Alongside, Jones and Spicer (2009) stated that establishing a common ground on

who is an entrepreneur is still contentious among commentators, even though, their

contributions have built up a wealth of knowledge in the literature. Hence, an

entrepreneur is recognised as the innovator of the new knowledge era who is role

models of our social affluence. In fact, he/she possesses a distinctive character of

creativity/innovation and risk loving attributes (Watson, 2012).

23

Therefore, an entrepreneur is an economy’s pivotal figure, a risk lover with a

strong determination for success in an uncertainty situation and self-employment

could be in any form as entrepreneurship. This is because the ground-breaking

entrepreneurs in the recent time were renowned individuals who have transformed

the economic landscape in all consciousness for innovation and new entrepreneurial

resourcefulness. Those entrepreneurs have developed remarkable innovative

transformation beyond any profession and impactful attainment. Table 2.1 presented

commentators’ summary on the entrepreneurship taxonomy concept in the literature.

Table 2.1: Trends of entrepreneurship taxonomy (Jones & Spicer, 2009)

Focus and period Viewpoint Commentator

1. Who is an entrepreneur do?

1700 - 1950 From economic opinion

Cantillion and

Schumpeter

2. What is an entrepreneur do?

1960 - 1980 From behavioural opinion Drucker (1982)

3. What incentives needed by entrepreneurs

1985 – 1989?

From a management and human

resources perception

Krueger and

Carsrud (1993)

4. What are entrepreneurial activities and skills

to execute them 1990 – 1994?

From an entrepreneurial

perspective.

Vesper & Gartner

(1997)

5. Entrepreneurial idea, risk-taking propensity,

identifying opportunity to business start-up

1995 - 1999

From a psychological opinion

(how and what entrepreneurs’

thinks)

Ajzen (1991; 2002)

6. Entrepreneurship and economic development

2000 - 2003 From economic perspective

Adnan (2004);

Krueger (2000)

7. Entrepreneurial behaviour and intention

development in HLIs 2003 - 2006

From sociology and psychology

perspectives

Luthje and Franke

(2003)

8. Entrepreneurship teaching development 2006

– to date

From different field of art,

social science and mgt. Fayolle et al. (2006)

On the account of the above, it is believed that the current universities’ mission

is to prepare students of HLIs for entrepreneurial knowledge and with a strong focus

to promote across-the-board entrepreneurial capacity and innovation development.

To drive at this point, most universities have seen the important of drafting

entrepreneurship teaching into the HLIs worldwide, particularly, in Malaysia. In fact,

the Malaysian government has recognised the imperativeness to develop

entrepreneurial minded graduates and for the unemployment reduction. In addition,

entrepreneurship teaching is now a compulsory core course for all the Malaysian

students of HLIs.

Despite, ascertain the current status of the entrepreneurship reorientation of the

students of HLIs, particularly, in the Malaysian public universities is still contentious

(Cheng et al., 2009; Othman et al., 2012; Ismail et al., 2012; Yusoff et al., 2015).

24

Therefore, it is in the interest of this research to assess the current status of

entrepreneurial development among the Malaysia students of HLIs. Particularly to

provide the improvement require in the educational systems for strengthen the

culture of entrepreneurship. This research could contribute a better understanding of

how to develop more potential future entrepreneurs, since; youth empowerment is

the vital agenda in the Malaysian government policy, as stated in the new educational

policy (2013-2025).

2.2.1 Definition of Entrepreneurship Education

Entrepreneurship education is defined as a formal teaching process to inculcate

entrepreneurial skills on the students. It is recognized as a stimulus for wealth

creation, self-employment intention and it contributes significantly to the nations’

economic expansion (Fayolle et al., 2006; Li & Liu, 2011). Recognizing the

significant role to the economic development, government have intensified its effort

in promoting entrepreneurship education among the HLIs.

Previous researches have shown that entrepreneurship education is a training

subject similar to any other program of study and therefore it can be educated

(Mwasalwiba, 2010). For instance, an individual is neither born nor predestined to be

an entrepreneur. Empirical findings have showed that entrepreneurs can be created

through effective education, training and the nurturing process (Fayolle et al., 2006;

Matlay, 2008). More so, Drucker (1994) and Watson (2012) stated that negative

perception on the entrepreneurship is not correct because it’s not the supernatural,

it’s not mysterious and it’s not heredity. In fact, it is a discipline just like any other

discipline and it can be learned.

2.2.2 Definition of Entrepreneurial Capacity

The combination of related knowledge, skills and competence as well as attitude

require of an individual to acquire for venture creation is termed as entrepreneurial

capacity. Early exposure to entrepreneurship teaching by way of practical activities

have inculcated the tacit knowledge and skills that were found to positively impact

students’ intention and behaviour to venture into business start-up. In another word,

254

REFERENCES

Achtenhagen, L. & Johannisson, B. (2013). The making of an intercultural learning

context for entrepreneuring. International Journal of Entrepreneurial

Venturing, 5(1), pp. 48-67.

Acs, Z. J. & Audretsch, D. B. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of entrepreneurship

research. New York: Springer.

Adnan Alias (2004). Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship, McGraw Hills.

Adnan, Y. M., Daud, M. N., Alias, A. & Razali, M. N. (2012). Importance of Soft

Skills for Graduates in the Real Estate Programmes in Malaysia. Journal of

Surveying, Construction and Property, 3(2), pp. 38-49.

Ahmad, F., Baharun, R. & Rahman S. (2004). Interest in entrepreneurship: An

Exploratory Study on Engineering and Technical Students in Entrepreneurship

Education and Choosing Entrepreneurship as a Career, U.T.M. Available at:

http://eprints.utm.my/2668/1/71790.pdf

Ahmad, N. H., Ramayah, T., Wilson, C. & Kummerow, L. (2010). Is entrepreneurial

competency and business success relationship contingent upon business

environment?: A study of Malaysian SMEs. International journal of

entrepreneurial behaviour & research, 16(3), pp. 182-203.

Ahmad, S. Z. & Xavier, S. R. (2012). Entrepreneurial environments and growth:

evidence from Malaysia GEM data. Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship, 4(1),

pp. 50-69.

Ahmad, S. Z. (2013). The need for inclusion of entrepreneurship education in

Malaysia lower and HLIs. Education+ Training, 55(2), pp. 191-203.

Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M. M., Ahmad, Z., Shaukat, M. Z., Usman, A., Rehaman, W. &

Ahmed, N. (2010). Determinants of students’ entrepreneurial career intentions:

evidence from Business Graduates. European Journal of Social

Sciences, 15(2), pp. 14-22.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and

Human Decision Processes, 50(2), pp. 179–211.

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioural control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and

Theory of Planned Behaviour. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32 (4),

pp. 665–683.

Alberti, F., Sciascia, S. & Poli, A. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: notes on an

ongoing debate. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual International

Entrepreneurship Conference, University of Napoli Federico II, Italy, Vol. 4,

pp. 71-81.

http://eprints.utm.my/2668/1/71790.pdf

255

Arge, K. & Hjelmbrekke, H. (2010). Value enhancing processes in building and real

estate value creation – Value capture. International Conference: Delivering

value to the community, pp. 122–135.

Ariff, M. & Abubakar, S. Y. (2003). Strengthening entrepreneurship in

Malaysia. Malaysian Institute of Economic Research, Kuala Lumpur.

Armitage, C. J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour:

A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40: pp. 471-499.

Aronowitz, S. (2000). The knowledge factory: Dismantling the corporate university

and creating true higher learning. Beacon Press, UK.

Ashen, M. J. & Gambo, M. J. (2012). Re-strategising the Real Estate Profession in

the Nigeria towards the attainment of vision 20:2020. International Journal of

Economic development research and Investment, 3 (2): pp. 14-20.

Athayde, R. (2012). The impact of enterprise education on attitudes to enterprise in

young people: an evaluation study. Education+ training, 54(8/9), pp. 709-726.

Autio, E., H. Keeley, R., Klofsten, M., GC Parker, G. & Hay, M. (2001).

Entrepreneurial intent among students in Scandinavia and in the

USA.Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 2(2), pp. 145-160.

Awang, Z (2012). Structural Equation Modelling Using Amos Graphic. Penerbit

Press, universiti Technologi Mara.

Awang, Z. (2010). Research Methodology for Business and Social Science. Ahah

Alam: Universiti Teknologi MARA Publication Centre (UPENA).

Awang, Z. (2014). Research Methodology and Data Analysis. Penerbit Press,

Universiti Technologi Mara.

Azlan, A. B. (2009). Getting more graduates to become entrepreneurs. Malaysian

Insider Daily Publication. Available : http://skorcareer.com.my/unemployment

Bae, T. J., Qian, S., Miao, C. & Fiet, J. O. (2014). The Relationship Between

Entrepreneurship Education and Entrepreneurial Intentions: A Meta‐Analytic

Review. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(2), pp. 217-254.

Bagheri, A., Lope Pihie, Z. A. & Krauss, S. E. (2013). Entrepreneurial leadership

competencies among Malaysian university student entrepreneurial leaders. Asia

Pacific Journal of Education, 33(4), pp. 493-508.

Balan, P. & Metcalfe, M. (2012). Identifying teaching methods that engage

entrepreneurship students. Education+ Training, 54(5), pp. 368-384.

Béchard, J. P. & Grégoire, D. (2005). Entrepreneurship education research revisited:

The case of higher education. Academy of Management Learning &

Education, 4(1), pp. 22-43.

Bell, E. & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: an exploratory

content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18(1), pp. 63-77.

http://skorcareer.com.my/unemployment

256

Bird, B. (1998). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for intention.

Academy of Management Review, 13, pp. 442–453.

Blaikie, N. (2nd ED) (2009). Designing Social Research. Cambridge, UK: Polity

Press.

Blenker, P., Dreisler, P., Færgemann, H. M. & Kjeldsen, J. (2013). A framework for

developing entrepreneurship education in a university context. International

Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 5(1), pp. 45-63.

Blenker, P., Korsgaard, S., Neergaard, H. & Thrane, C. (2011). The questions we

care about: paradigms and progression in entrepreneurship education. Industry

and Higher Education, 25(6), pp. 417-427.

Boge, K. (2013). Learning to think- outside the box, Learning by Developing – New

Ways to Learn Proceedings of Conference on Creativity. Interdisciplinary

Studies Journal, 2(3), pp. 26-36.

BOVAEAM (2013). Melanggar undang-undanghaarta tanah Malaysia (Contravening

the real estate laws of Malaysia and professional practices), seminar organised

at Sime Darby Convention Centre, Bukit Kiara, Kuala Lumpur.

Brown, B., Chui, M. & Manyika, J. (2011). Are you ready for the era of ‘big data’.

McKinsey Quarterly, 4, pp. 24-35.

Brown, C. (1999). "Teaching new dogs new tricks: The rise of entrepreneurship

education in graduate schools of business." DIGEST 99 (2): pp. 1-4.

Brush, C. G., Duhaime, I. M., Gartner, W. B., Stewart, A., Katz, J. A., Hitt, M. A. &

Venkataraman, S. (2003). Doctoral education in the field of entrepreneurship.

Journal of Management, 29(3), pp. 309-331.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.

Buang, N. A. & Yusof, Y. M. (2006). Motivating factors that influence class F

contractors to become entrepreneurs. Buang, N. A. & Halim, L., (2011).

Malaysia, U. K. Development of entrepreneurial science thinking model for

malaysian science and technology education. Jurnal Pendidikan, 31, pp. 107-

121.

Buang, N. A., Halim, L. & Meerah, S. T. (2010). Improving lecturers’ facilitative

approach in the problem-based learning method of GR6223 course through

action research: The case of Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 2(2), pp. 3832-3835.

Buang, N. A., Halim, L. & Meerah, T. S. M. (2009). Understanding the thinking of

scientists entrepreneurs: Implications for science education in Malaysia.

Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2), pp. 3-11.

Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural Equation Modelling With AMOS: Basic Concepts,

Applications and Programming 2nd

Edition. New York Routledge.

257

Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts,

applications, and programming. Routledge.

Carey, C. & Matlay, M. (2012). Emergent issues in enterprise education. Industry &

Higher Education, 25(6), pp. 441-50.

Chan, J. K. L. & Quah, W. B. (2012). Start-up factors for small and medium-sized

accommodation businesses in Sabah, Malaysia: push and pull factors. Asia

Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 17(1), pp. 49-62.

Chan, S. J., & Yang, C. H. (2015). The Employment of the College Graduate:

Changing Wages in Mass Higher Education. In Mass Higher Education

Development in East Asia (pp. 289-306). Springer International Publishing.

Charney, A. & Libecap, G. D. (2001). The economic contributional entrepreneurship

education: An evaluation with an established program. Advances in the Study

of Entrepreneurship, Innovation & Economic Growth, 12, pp. 1-45.

Cheng, M. Y. (2011). University technology transfer and commercialization: the case

of Multimedia University, Malaysia. Academic Entrepreneurship in Asia: The

Role and Impact of Universities in National Innovation Systems, 289.

Cheng, M. Y., Chan, W. S. & Mahmood, A. (2009). The effectiveness of

entrepreneurship education in Malaysia. Education + Training, 51(7), pp. 555-

566.

Cheong, K. C., Hill, C., Fernandez-Chung, R., & Leong, Y. C. (2015). Employing

the ‘unemployable’: employer perceptions of Malaysian graduates.Studies in

Higher Education, (ahead-of-print), 1-18.

Collis, J. & Hussey, R. (2003). Business research. Basingstoke NH NH: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Cooper, S. C., Bottomley J. & Gordon, J. (2004). Stepping out of the classroom and

up the ladder of learning: An experiential learning approach to

entrepreneurship education. Industry & Higher Education, 18 (1), pp. 11-22.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed

Methods Approaches (2nd

Ed.). London: SAGA publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods approaches. Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (4th

Ed) (2012). Educational Research Planning, Conducting, and

Evaluating, Quantitative, and Qualitative research. Pearson publication. US.

Cruz, N. M., Rodriguez Escudero, A. I., Hernangomez Barahona, J. & Saboia Leitao,

F. (2009). The effect of entrepreneurship education programmes on satisfaction

with innovation behaviour and performance. Journal of European Industrial

Training, 33(3), pp. 198-214.

258

D’Arcy, E. & Taltavull, P. (2009). Real estate education in Europe: Perspectives on

decade of rapid change. Journal of European Real Estate Research 2(1), pp.

69-78.

David, M. & Sutton, C. (ED) (2011). Social Research. London: SAGA publications.

De Jorge-Moreno, J., Laborda Castillo, L. & Sanz Triguero, M. (2012). The effect of

business and economics education programs on students' entrepreneurial

intention. European Journal of Training and Development, 36(4), pp. 409-425.

De Vaus, D. A. (5th

ED) (2002). Surveys in Social Research. London: UCL Press.

Dent, M. & Whitehead, S. (Eds.). (2013). Managing Professional Identities:

Knowledge, Performativities and the'New'Professional (Vol. 19). Routledge.

Dickson, P. H., Solomon, G. T. & Weaver, K. M. (2008). Entrepreneurial selection

and success: does education matter?. Journal of small business and enterprise

development, 15(2), pp. 239-258.

Dijkman, M. (2008). Europe Real Estate Yearbook 2008: Assets, Industry Trends,

Market Players. Real Estate Publishers, Netherlands .

Ding, L., Velicer, W. F. & Harlow, L. L. (1995). Effects of estimation methods,

number of indicators per factor, and improper solutions on structural equation

modeling fit indices. SEM: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2(2), pp. 119-143.

Dixon, P. (2011). Future of Real Estate and Property Marketing – Global trends and

property outlook for Australia, Available at: http//www.globalchange.com

DOS, (2013). Statistics of Graduates in the Labour Force Malaysia, Department Of

Statistics, Malaysia.

Douglas, E. J. & Shepherd, D. A. (2002). Self-employment as a career choice:

attitudes, entrepreneurial intentions, and utility maximization.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(3), pp. 81-90.

Dutta, D. K., Li, J. & Merenda, M. (2011). Fostering entrepreneurship: impact of

specialization and diversity in education. International Entrepreneurship and

Management Journal, 7(2), pp. 163-179.

Duval‐Couetil, N. (2013). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education

programs: Challenges and approaches. Journal of Small Business Management,

51(3), pp. 394-409.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., & Haghighi, S. (2010). Development of an

assessment instrument to examine outcomes of entrepreneurship education on

engineering students. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2010

IEEE (pp. T4D-1). IEEE.

Edree, (2011). Malaysia and the growing unemployment issue. The Edge Financial

Daily. Retrieved June 15, 2012 from http://edree.wordpress.com/

http://edree.wordpress.com/

259

Edwards, M., Sánchez-Ruiz, L. M., Tovar-Caro, E. & Ballester-Sarrias, E. (2009).

Engineering students' perceptions of innovation and entrepreneurship

competences. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2009. FIE'09. 39th

IEEE (pp. 1-5). IEEE.

Eesley, C. E. & Roberts, E. B. (2012). Are You Experienced or Are You Talented?:

When Does Innate Talent versus Experience Explain Entrepreneurial

Performance?. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(3), pp. 207-219.

Egwuatu, U. S. (2013). The pedagogy and practice of real estate management in

Nigeria: entrepreneurial perspectives. Sheffield Hallam University: Ph.D.

Thesis.

Ehambaranathan, E., Chalapati, S., & Murugasu, S. (2015). The Determinants of

Income towards Brain Drain–The Case of Malaysians in New

Zealand.International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social

Sciences,5(1), 212-225.

Elia, G., Margherita, A., Secundo, G. & Moustaghfir, K. (2011). An" activation"

process for entrepreneurial engineering education: The model and application.

Journal of Enterprising Culture, 19(02), pp. 147-168.

Ernest, K., Matthew, S. K. & Samuel, A. K. (2015). Towards Entrepreneurial

Learning Competencies: The Perspective of Built Environment Students.

Higher Education Studies, 5(1), p20.

Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C. & Terra, B.R.C. (2000), The future of the

university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to

entrepreneurial paradigm, Research Policy, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 313-30.

European Commission (2011). Entrepreneurship Education: Enabling Teachers as a

Critical Success Factor. A report on Teacher Education and Training to prepare

teachers for the challenge of entrepreneurship education. Final Report,

Bruxelles.

Fan, C., Chang, P. & Xie, R. H. (2015). Statement of the Main Challenges of the

Real Estate Market in China. In Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 1079, pp.

1199-1202.

Fayolle, A. & Degeorge, M. (Eds.) (2006). International entrepreneurship

education: issues and newness. Edward Elgar Publishing, USA.

Fayolle, A. & Gailly, B. (2008). From craft to science: Teaching models and learning

processes in entrepreneurship education. Journal of European Industrial

Training, 32(7), pp. 569-593.

Fayolle, A. & Gailly, B. (2013). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on

Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Intention: Hysteresis and Persistence. Journal of

Small Business Management.

Fayolle, A. & Liñán, F. (2014a). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions.

Journal of Business Research, 67(5), pp. 663-666.

260

Fayolle, A. & Toutain, O. (2013). Four educational principles to rethink ethically

entrepreneurship education. rEviSta dE Economía mundial, 35, 21-45.

Fayolle, A. (2006a). Teaching Entrepreneurship to non-business students: Insights

From Two Dutch Universities. Chapter submitted for “Teaching

Entrepreneurship in Europe”. Retrieved November 30, 2012 from

http://www.rug.nl/staff/m.j.brand/handbook_fayol_2007_brand_et_al.pdf

Fayolle, A. (2007a). Entrepreneurship and new value creation: the dynamic of the

entrepreneurial process. Cambridge University Press.

Fayolle, A. (2013). Personal views on the future of entrepreneurship education.

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25(7-8), pp. 692-701.

Fayolle, A., Gailly, B. & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of

entrepreneurship education programmes: a new methodology. Journal of

European Industrial Training, 30(9), pp. 701-720.

Fayolle, A., Gailly, B. & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2007). 10 Towards a new methodology to

assess the entrepreneurship teaching programmes. Handbook of Research in

Entrepreneurship Education: A general perspective, 1, pp. 187.

Fayolle, A., Linan, F., & Moriano, J. A. (2014b). Beyond entrepreneurial intentions:

values and motivations in entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship

and Management Journal, 10(4), pp. 679-689.

Fiet, J. O. (2001). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory. Journal of

Business Venturing, 16(2), pp. 101-117.

Fiet, J. O. (2001a). The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship. Journal of

Business Venturing, 16(1), pp. 1-24.

Fitzsimmons, J. R. & Douglas, E. J. (2011). Interaction between feasibility and

desirability in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business

Venturing, 26(4), pp. 431-440.

Florida, R. (2012). The connection between creativity and entrepreneurship. The

Atlantic Cities Place Matters, Retrieved from: www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-

and-economy/2012/08/creativity

Florin, J., Karri, R. & Rossiter, N. (2007). Fostering entrepreneurial drive in business

education: An attitudinal approach. Journal of Management Education, 31(1),

pp. 17-42.

Fretschner, M. & Weber, S. (2013). Measuring and understanding the effects of

entrepreneurial awareness education. Journal of Small Business Management,

51(3), pp. 410-428.

Fretschner, M. (2014). Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior in Entrepreneurship

Education Research. In Becoming an Entrepreneur, SensePublishers, pp. 249-

277.

http://www.rug.nl/staff/m.j.brand/handbook_fayol_2007_brand_et_al.pdf

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/08/creativity

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/08/creativity

261

Gafar, M., Kasim, R. & Martin, D. (2013a). Entrepreneurial Idea Development to

Business Start-Up: Teaching Methodological Approach. Journal of Research &

Method in Education, Vol. 1 (4), pp. 46-55.

Gafar, M., Kasim, R. & Martin, D. (2014a). Is the Impact of Entrepreneurship

Education as Remarkable as the Demand? Proceeding of International

Conference on the Emerging Trends in Scientific research, pp. 130-144.

Gafar, M., Kasim, R. & Martin, D. (2014b). Diversity of Entrepreneurship Education

within facilities management Philosophy: An Agent of Transformation,

Proceeding of IIBIMA 7th

IRERS International Real Estate Research

Symposium Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Gafar, M., Kasim, R. & Martin, D. (2014c). Impact of Entrepreneurship Education

on the Students’ Entrepreneurial Value Creation. Proceeding of International

Conference on Global Trends in Academic Research, Bali, Indonesia.

Gafar, M., Kasim, R. & Martin, D. J. (2013b). Development of FM entrepreneurship

assessment model to examine effect of entrepreneurship education the real

estate management students. International Conference of Technology

Management, Business and Entrepreneurship, (1)1, pp. 401-418.

Galloway, L., Anderson, M. & Brown, W. (2006), “Are engineers becoming more

enterprising? A study of the potentials of entrepreneurship education”,

International Journal of cont. Engineering Education and Lifelong learning,

Vol. 16, No. 5, pp. 355-364.

Galuppo, L. A. & Tu, C. (2010). Capital markets and sustainable real estate: what are

the perceived risks and barriers?. The Journal of Sustainable Real Estate, 2(1),

pp. 143-159.

Garavan, T. N. & O'Cinneide, B. (1994a). Entrepreneurship Education and Training

Programmes:: A Review and Evaluation–Part 1. Journal of European

industrial training, 18(8), pp. 3-12.

Garavan, T. N. & O'Cinneide, B. (1994b). Entrepreneurship education and training

programmes: A review and evaluation-Part 2. Journal of European Industrial

Training, 18(11), pp. 13-21.

Gedeon, S. (2010). What is entrepreneurship?. Entrepreneurial Practice Review,

1(3).

Gerba, D. T. (2012). The Context of Entrepreneurship education in Ethiopian

Universities. Management Research review, 35(3-4), pp. 225-244.

Ghadi, I. N., Bakar, K. A., & Njie, B. (2015). Influences of critical thinking

dispositions on critical thinking skills of undergraduate students at a Malaysian

Public University. Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 3(2), 23-31.

Gibb, A. (2005). Towards the Entrepreneurial University, Entrepreneurship

Education as a lever for change, National Council for Graduate

Entrepreneurship. Policy paper, 3, pp. 1-46.

262

Gibb, A. (2011). Concepts into practice: meeting the challenge of development of

entrepreneurship educators around an innovative paradigm: The case of the

International Entrepreneurship Educators’ Programme (IEEP). International

Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17(2), pp. 146–165.

Gibb, A. A. & Haskins, G. (2014). The university of the future: an entrepreneurial

stakeholder learning organization? Handbook on the Entrepreneurial

University, 25.

Gibb, A. A. (2007). Enterprise in Education. Educating Tomorrow’s

Entrepreneurs. Pentti Mankinen, pp. 1-19.

Gilbertson, B. & Preston, D. (2005). A vision for valuation. Journal of Property

Investment & Finance, Vol. 23, pp. 123-140.

Gries, T. & Naudé, W. (2009). Entrepreneurship and regional economic growth:

towards a general theory of start-ups. Innovation–The European Journal of

Social Science Research, 22(3), pp. 309-328.

Guerrero, M., Rialp, J. & Urbano, D. (2008). The impact of desirability and

feasibility on entrepreneurial intentions: A structural equation model.

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(1), pp. 35-50.

Guthrie, G. (2010). Basic research methods: An entry to social science research.

SAGE Publications India.

Hair, J. F. (2011). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Saddle River:

Prentice Hall

Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet.

The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), pp. 139-152.

Halim, L., Meerah, T. S. M. & Buang, N. A. (2010). Developing pre-service science

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through action research.Procedia-

Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, pp. 507-511.

Hamidi, D., Wennberg, K. & Berglund, H. (2008), “Creativity in entrepreneurship

education”, Journal of small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 15

No. 2, pp. 304-320.

Hannah, J., Kavanagh, J., Mahoney, R., & Plimmer, F. (2009). Surveying: A

Profession Facing a Global Crisis?. Survey Review, 41(313), pp. 268-278.

Hashim, H. A., Sapri, M. & Achu, K. (2013). Factors affecting the involvement and

appointment of unregistered property manager. Proceeding of International

Conference on Business and Economic Research (ICBER 2013), Indonisaia.

Havnes, P. A. & Skjekkeland, L. M. B. (2007). Evaluating Entrepreneurship

programmes–objectives and measurement dilemmas. Journal of Enterprising

Culture, 15(04), pp. 339-370.

Hefferan, M. J. & Ross, S. (2010). Forces for change in property education and

research in Australia. Property Management, 28(5), pp. 370-381.

263

Henry, C., Hill, F. & Leitch, C. (2005a). Entrepreneurship education and training:

can entrepreneurship be taught? Part I. Education+ Training, 47(2), pp. 98-

111.

Henry, C., Hill, F. & Leitch, C. (2005b). Entrepreneurship education and training:

can entrepreneurship be taught? Part II. Education+ Training, 47(3), pp. 158-

169.

Heuer, A. & Kolvereid, L. (2014). Education in entrepreneurship and the Theory of

Planned Behaviour. European Journal of Training and Development, 38(6), pp.

506-523.

Hill, F., Henry, C. & Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: can

entrepreneurship be taught? Part II. Education+ Training, 47(3), pp. 158-169.

Hills, G. E. (1988). Variations in university entrepreneurship education: an empirical

study of an evolving field. Journal of business venturing, 3(2), pp. 109-122.

Hindle, K. & Cutting, N. (2002). Can Applied Entrepreneurship Education Enhance

Job Satisfaction and Financial Performance? An Empirical Investigation in the

Australian Pharmacy Profession. Journal of Small Business

Management, 40(2), pp. 162-167.

Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling:

Guidelines for determining model fit. Articles, 2.

Hussain, J. G., Scott, J. M. & Matlay, H. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship

education on succession in ethnic minority family firms. Education + Training,

52(8/9), pp. 643–659.

Hussey, J. & Hussey, R. (1997). Business research: A practical guide for under-

graduate and postgraduate students.

Hynes, B. (1996). Entrepreneurship education and training-introducing

entrepreneurship into non-business disciplines. Journal of European Industrial

Training, 20(8), pp. 10-17.

Hytti, U. & Kuopusjärvi, P. (2004). Evaluating and Measuring Entrepreneurship and

Enterprise Education: Methods. Tools and Practices, Small Business Institute,

Turku School of Economics and Business Administration, Turku.

Hytti, U. & O'Gorman, C. (2004). What is “enterprise education”? An analysis of the

objectives and methods of enterprise education programmes in four European

countries. Education+ Training, 46(1), pp. 11-23.

Hytti, U., & Kuopusjärvi, P. (2007). 15 Evaluating entrepreneurship education: play

of power between evaluators, programme promoters and policy makers.

Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education: Contextual

perspectives, 2, 244.

264

Hytti, U., Stenholm, P., Heinonen, J. & Seikkula-Leino, J. (2010). Perceived learning

outcomes in entrepreneurship education: The impact of student motivation and

team behaviour. Education+ Training,52 (8/9), pp. 587-606.

Ibiyemi, A. O. & Adenipekun, M. T. (2013). Self Study Approach to Self Discovery

and Motivational Training for Real Estate Professionals in Nigeria.

International Journal of Science and Modern Engineering, 1(9), pp. 1-7.

Ibrahim, A. B. & Soufani, K. (2002). Entrepreneurship education and training in

Canada: a critical assessment. Education+ Training, 44(8/9), pp. 421-430.

INSPEN (2014). Unlocking the potential of real estate, International Real Estate

Research Symposium.

Islam, R., Hamid, A., Shukri, M. & Abd Manaf, N. H. (2013). Enhancing graduates’

employability skills: A Malaysian case. In: Academy of International Business

(MENA) : Third Annual Conference, Egypt, 1(1), pp. 1-17.

Ismail, A., Abdullahi, A. K. & Othman, A. T. (2010). Acceptance of

Entrepreneurship Culture Module at the Malaysian Institutes of Higher

Learning: A Gender Perspective. Research Journal of International Studies,

1(15), pp. 46-54.

Ismail, M., Khalid, S. A., Othman, M., Jusoff, H. K., Rahman, N. A., Kassim, K. M.

& Zain, R. S. (2009). Entrepreneurial intention among Malaysian

undergraduates. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(10),

p54.

Ismail, N., Jaffar, N., Khan, S. & Leng, T. S. (2012). Tracking the cyber

entrepreneurial intention of private universities students in Malaysia.

International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 17(4), pp. 538-

546.

Ismail, R., Yussof, I. & Sieng, L. W. (2011). Employers’ Perceptions on graduates in

Malaysian services Sector. International Business Management, 5(3), pp. 184-

193.

Jaafar, M., Abdul-Aziz, A. R., Maideen, S. A. & Mohd, S. Z. (2011).

Entrepreneurship in the tourism industry: Issues in developing countries.

International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30(4), pp. 827-835.

Jaffar, A. R. & Aziz, N. A. (2014). Diversifying Employment Opportunities of Urban

Planning Graduates in the Period of Uncertainty. International Journal of Built

Environment and Sustainability, 1(1).

Jain, R., & Ali, S. W. (2013). A Review of Facilitators, Barriers and Gateways to

Entrepreneurship: Directions for Future Research. South Asian Journal of

Management, 20(3).

Jano, Z., Janor, H., Nor, M. J. B. M., Ahmad, R. & Shaaban, A. (2014). A

Qualitative Content Analysis of e-Strategies for Research, Innovation and

Commercialization: A Case of Global Bodies, Malaysian Ministries and

265

Research University. In Government e-Strategic Planning and

Management (pp. 305-321). Springer New York.

Jayantha, W. M. & Chiang, Y. H. (2012). Key Elements of Successful Graduate Real

Estate Education in Hong Kong: Students' Perspective. Journal of Real Estate

Practice and Education, 15(2), pp. 101-128.

Johannisson, B. (1991). University training for entrepreneurship: Swedish

approaches. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 3(1), pp. 67-82.

Jones, & Iredale, (2010). Enterprise education as pedagogy. Education + Training,

52(1), pp. 7–19.

Jones, A. & Jones, P. (2011). “Making an impact”: a profile of a business planning

competition in a university. Education + Training, 53(8/9), pp. 704–721.

Jones, C. & English, J. (2004). A contemporary approach to entrepreneurship

education. Education+ Training, 46(8/9), pp. 416-423.

Jones, C. & Matlay, H. (2011). Understanding the heterogeneity of entrepreneurship

education: going beyond Gartner. Education+ Training, 53(8/9), pp. 692-703.

Jones, C. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: revisiting our role and its purpose.

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 17(4), pp. 500–513.

Jones, C. (2011a). Teaching Entrepreneurship to Undergraduates, Edward Elgar,

Cheltenham.

Jones, C., & Penaluna, A. (2013). Moving beyond the business plan in enterprise

education. Education+ Training, 55(8/9), pp. 5-15.

Jones, C., & Spicer, A. (2009). Unmasking the entrepreneur. Edward Elgar.

Jones, C., Matlay, H. & Maritz, A. (2012). Enterprise education: for all, or just

some?. education+ Training, 54(8/9), pp. 813-824.

Kabongo, J. D. & McCaskey, P. H. (2011). An examination of entrepreneurship

educator profiles in business programs in the United States. Journal of Small

Business and Enterprise Development, 18(1), pp. 27–42.

Kailer, N. (2007). Evaluation of entrepreneurship education: planning problems,

concepts and proposals for evaluation design. Handbook of Research in

Entrepreneurship Education: Contextual perspectives, 2, 221.

Kaklauskas, A., Zavadskas, E. K., Bagdonavicius, A., Kelpsiene, L., Bardauskiene,

D. & Kutut, V. (2010). Conceptual modelling of construction and real estate

crisis with emphasis on comparative qualitative aspects

description.Transformations in business & economics, 9(1), pp. 42-61.

Kalette, D. (2009). Grads Face Scarcity of Jobs. National Real Estate Investor.

Kasim, R. & Hudson, J., (2006). FM as a social enterprise, Facilities, 24(7), pp. 292-

299.

266

Keat, O. Y., Selvarajah, C. & Meyer, D. (2011). Inclination towards entrepreneurship

among university students: An empirical study of Malaysian university

students. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(4), pp. 206-

220.

Kirkwood, J. (2009). Motivational factors in a push-pull theory of

entrepreneurship. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 24(5), pp.

346-364.

Kleysen, R. F. & Street, C. T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of

individual innovative behavior. Journal of intellectual Capital, 2(3), pp. 284-

296.

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling.

Guilford press.

Kolvereid, L. & BULLVAG, E. (1996). Growth intentions and actual growth: The

impact of entrepreneurial choice. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 4(01), pp. 1-

17.

Kolvereid, L. & Isaksen, E. (2006). New business start-up and subsequent entry into

self-employment. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(6), pp. 866-885.

Kolvereid, L. & Moen, O. (1997). Entrepreneurship among business graduates: does

a major in entrepreneurship make a difference?. Journal of European industrial

training, 21(4), pp. 154-160.

Kolvereid, L. (1996a). Organizational Employment Versus Self-Employment:

Reasons for Career Choice Intentions. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice,

20(3): pp. 23- 31.

Kolvereid, L., Iakovleva, T. & Stephan, U. (2011). Entrepreneurial intentions in

developing and developed countries. Education+ Training, 53(5), pp. 353-370.

Krueger Jr, N. F., Reilly, M. D. & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of

entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of business venturing, 15(5), pp. 411-432.

Krueger, N. F. & Carsrud, A. L. (1993). Entrepreneurial intentions: applying the

theory of planned behaviour. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 5(4),

pp. 315-330.

Kuldas, S., Hashim, S., & Ismail, H. N. (2015). Malaysian adolescent students' needs

for enhancing thinking skills, counteracting risk factors and demonstrating

academic resilience. International journal of adolescence and youth, 20(1), 32-

47.

Kuratko, D. (2013). Entrepreneurship: Theory, process, and practice. Cengage

Learning.

Kuratko, D. F. & Audretsch, D. B. (2009). Strategic entrepreneurship: exploring

different perspectives of an emerging concept. Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 33(1), pp. 1-17.

267

Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development,

trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), pp. 577-

598.

Lautenschläger, A. & Haase, H. (2011). The myth of entrepreneurship education:

seven arguments against teaching business creation at universities. Journal of

Entrepreneurship Education, 14, pp. 147-161.

Lee, L. & Wong, P. K. (2003). Attitude towards entrepreneurship education and new

venture creation. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 11(04), pp. 339-357.

Lee, L. & Wong, P. K. (2007). Entrepreneurship Education—A Compendium of

Related Issues (pp. 79-105). Springer US.

Lee, S. M., Lim, S. B., Pathak, R. D., Chang, D. & Li, W. (2006). Influences on

students attitudes toward entrepreneurship: a multi-country study. The

International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2(3), pp. 351-366.

Lei, P. W. & Wu, Q. (2007). Introduction to structural equation modelling: Issues

and practical considerations. Educational measurement: issue and Practice,

26(3), pp. 33-43.

Lewis, J., Hart, M. & Anyadike-Danes, M. (2009). The effect of business or

enterprise training on opportunity recognition and entrepreneurial skills of

graduates and non-graduates in the UK. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship

Research, 29(23), 1.

Li, Z. & Liu, Y. (2011). Entrepreneurship education and employment performance:

An empirical study in Chinese university. Journal of Chinese

Entrepreneurship, 3(3), pp. 195-203.

Libecap, G. D. (2001). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education : An Evaluation of

the Berger Entrepreneurship Program at the University of Arizona ,, pp. 1985–

1999.

Lim, G. C., Nguyen, V. H. & Chua, C. L. (2014). Review of the Australian Economy

2013–14: The Age of Austerity?. Australian Economic Review, 47(1), pp. 1-12.

Lim, S. (2005). Impact of Entrepreneurship Education : A Comparative Study of the

U.S and Korea, pp. 27–43.

Linan, F. & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and Cross‐Cultural application of a

specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship

Theory and Practice, 33(3), pp. 593-617.

Liñán, F. & Nabi, G. (2010). Considering business start-up in recession time: The

role of risk perception and economic context in shaping the entrepreneurial

intent. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 19(6),

pp. 633-655.

Linan, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education. Piccolla

Impresa/Small Business, 3(1), pp. 11-35.

268

Linan, F. (2008). Skill and value perceptions: how do they affect entrepreneurial

intentions?. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(3), pp.

257-272.

Linan, F. Rodríguez-Cohard, J. C., & Rueda-Cantuche, J. M. (2011). Factors

affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: a role for education. International

entrepreneurship and management Journal, 7(2), pp. 195-218.

Lorz, M. (2011). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial

Intention, Ph.D thesis dissertation

Lorz, M., Mueller, S. & Volery, T. (2013). Entrepreneurship education: a systematic

review of the methods in impact studies. Journal of Enterprising Culture,

21(02), pp. 123-151.

Luthje, C. & Franke, N. (2003). The ‘making’of an entrepreneur: testing a model of

entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&D Management,

33(2), pp. 135-147.

Malaysia (2014). The Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015. Kualar Lumpur: Pertakan

National, 2010.

Malaysia (2014). The Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010. Kualar Lumpur: Pertakan

National, 2010.

Malaysia. (2006a). Developing Soft Skill Competency for Malaysian Institute of

Higher Education. Putrajaya: Ministry of Higher Education.

Manning, C. & Roulac, S. (2001). Where can real estate faculty add the most value at

universities in the future? Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education,

30(2), pp. 17-34.

Matlay, H. & Carey, C. (2007). Entrepreneurship education in the UK: a longitudinal

perspective. Journal of small Business and Enterprise Development, 14(2), pp.

252-263.

Matlay, H. (2005). Entrepreneurship education in UK business schools: Conceptual,

contextual and policy considerations. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise

Development, 12(4), pp. 627-643.

Matlay, H. (2006). Researching entrepreneurship and education: Part 2: what is

entrepreneurship education and does it matter? Education+ Training, 48(8/9),

pp. 704-718.

Matlay, H. (2008). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial

outcomes. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), pp.

382-392.

Matlay, H., & Carey, C. (2006). Impact of entrepreneurial education on graduates in

the UK: Conceptual and contextual implications. Proceedings of 36th

Conference on Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Small Business, pp. 624-630.

269

McFarland, M. & Nguyen, D. (2010). Graduate Real Estate Education in the US: The

Diverse Options for Prospective Students. Journal of Real Estate Practice and

Education, 13(1), pp. 33-53.

McGaghie, W. C., Bordage, G. & Shea, J. A. (2001). Problem statement, conceptual

framework, and research question. Academic Medicine, 76(9), pp. 923-924.

McStay, D. (2008). An investigation of undergraduate student self-employment

intention and the impact of entrepreneurship education and previous

entrepreneurial experience. School of Business Bond University, Australia,

Published, Thesis.

Md Yusof, A.B., Rohan, J. & Yong Z ulina, Z. (2009). An overview of graduate

employability of recent graduates: Some facts and figures. Seminar on

employability. The Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia, Putrajaya, 21-22

July2009. Received from http://www.alumni.upm.edu.my/employability.

Menzies, T. V. & Paradi, J. C. (2003). Entrepreneurship education and engineering

students-Career path and business performance. The International Journal of

Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 4(2), pp. 121-132.

MIEA (2014). Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents. Available at:

http://miea.com.my/site/ index.php?cat

MOE (2013). Quick Facts 2013, Malaysia Educational Statistics. Educational

Planning and Research Division, ministry of education Malaysia. Available at:

http://emisportal.moe.gov.my/emis/emis2/emisportal2/doc/fckeditor/File/Quick

facts_2013/quickfacts2013.pdf

MOE (2015). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025, Ministry of Education

Malaysia.

Mohamad, N., Lim, H. E., Yusof, N., Kassim, M. & Abdullah, H. (2014). Estimating

the choice of entrepreneurship as career: The case of universiti Utara

Malaysia. International Journal of Business & Society, 15(1), pp. 89-98.

Mohamad, S., Tukiran, Z., Hanifa, R. M., Ahmad, A. & Som, M. M. (2012). An

Evaluation of Assessment Tools in Outcome-based Education: A Way

Forward. Journal of Education & Vocational Research, 3(11), pp. 32-51.

Mohamed, Z., Rezai, G., Nasir Shamsudin, M. & Mu'az Mahmud, M. (2012).

Enhancing young graduates' intention towards entrepreneurship development

in Malaysia. Education+ Training, 54(7), pp. 605-618.

MOHE, (2010). Implementation Plan for Development of Innovative Human Capital

at Tertiary Level. Available : www.mohe.gov.my/portal/penerbitan/MOHE

MOHE, (2012).Graduate Tracer Study Report, Ministry of Education, Malaysia.

Available : www.mohe.gov.my/portal/penerbitan/MOHE

http://www.alumni.upm.edu.my/employability

http://miea.com.my/site/

http://www.mohe.gov.my/portal/images/utama/penerbitan/MOHE

http://www.mohe.gov.my/portal/images/utama/penerbitan/MOHE

270

Mok, K. H. (2013). The quest for an entrepreneurial university in East Asia: impact

on academics and administrators in higher education. Asia Pacific Education

Review, 14(1), pp. 11-22.

Morgan, R. (2014). Unemployment hits 12.3% - highest in 20 years. Australian

economy and Housing category publication, Available at:

http://www.whocrashedtheeconomy.com

Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: a review of its objectives,

teaching methods, and impact indicators. Education+ Training, 52(1), pp. 20-47.

Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: a review of its objectives,

teaching methods, and impact indicators. Education+ Training, 52(1), pp. 20-

47.

Nabi, G. & Linan, F. (2011). Graduate entrepreneurship in the developing world:

intentions, education and development. Education+ Training, 53(5), pp. 325-

334.

Nizam Zainuddin, M. & Rozaini Mohd Rejab, M. (2010). Assessing “ME

generation's” entrepreneurship degree programmes in Malaysia. Education+

Training, 52(6/7), pp. 508-527.

Nor, A. R. M. (2009). Statistical Methods in Research. Petaling Jaya: Pearson

Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.

Norshima Z., S.D.N. (2009). “Are graduates to be blamed? Unemployment of

Computer Science Graduates in Malaysia”. Retrieved from

aabss.org/journal2008/AABSS2008Article6NORSHIMAZSHAH. Pdf. On 15

September 2012.

O'Connor, A. & Greene, F. (2012). Is there an association between business and

entrepreneurship education and differing entrepreneurial groups in Australia?:

Evidence from GEM Australia. Small Enterprise Research, 19(1), pp. 5-15.

Odu, O. K. (2010). Skills Acquisition in Nigerian Education System: Problems and

Prospects in Technical Education. Journal of Qualitative Education, 6 (1) pp.

20-26.

OECD. (2000). From initial education to working life - On the Effectiveness of

Higher Education in Malaysia, Malaysia Education and Society, 48 (1), pp. 28–

36.

Okolie, U. C., Elom, E. N., Ituma, A., Opara, P. N., Ukwa, J. N., Inyiagu, E. E. &

Ndem, J. U. (2014). Influence of Entrepreneurship Education on Students

Attaining Business Development Awareness and Skills Acquisition in Nigeria.

IOSR-Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 4(3), pp. 37-

44.

Olawande, O. A. & Adebayo, A. M. (2012). Challenges facing sustainable Real

Estate Marketing and practice in Emerging Economy: Case Study of Nigeria.

International Journal of Marketing studies, Vol. 4(1), pp. 58-67.

http://www.whocrashedtheeconomy.com/

271

Oni, A. O. & Adebayo, M. A. (2012). Challenges facing sustainable Real estate

marketing and practice in emerging economy: Case study of

Nigeria.International Journal of Marketing Studies, 4(1), p58.

Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M. & Ijsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of

entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation.

European Economic Review, 54(3), pp. 442–454.

Othman, A., Haiyat, U. & Kohar, A. (2014). University-Industry Technology

Commercialization in Malaysia: Opportunities and Challenges. World Applied

Sciences Journal, pp. 167-184.

Othman, J., Arokiasamy, L., Ismail, M. & Ahmad, A. (2011). Predictors of

academics' career advancement at Malaysian private universities. Journal of

European Industrial Training, 35(6), pp. 589-605.

Othman, N., & Othman, N. H. (2015). Relationship between Entrepreneurial

Intentions and Entrepreneurial Career Choice Behavior among University

Students.

Othman, N., Hashim, N. & Ab Wahid, H. (2012). Readiness towards

entrepreneurship education: Students and Malaysian universities. Education+

Training, 54(8/9), pp. 697-708.

Othman, N., Othman, N. H. & Ismail, R. (2012). Impact of Globalization on

Entrepreneurship Education and Entrepreneurial Skills in Higher Education

Institutions. International Proceedings of Economics Development &

Research, 36.

Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS Survival Manual 4th

edition: A step by step guide to data

analysis using SPSS version 18. Crows Nest. New South Wales: Allen &

Unwin.

Penaluna, K., Penaluna, A. & Jones, C. (2012). The context of enterprise education:

insights into current practices. Industry and Higher Education, 26(3), pp. 163-

175.

Peterman, N. E & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise education: Influencing students’

perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 28(2),

pp. 129-144.

Pihie, L. & Akmaliah, Z. (2009). Developing future entrepreneurs: A need to

improve science students’ entrepreneurial participation. The International

Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change Management, 9(2), pp. 45-58.

Pihie, L. & Akmaliah, Z. (2009a). Entrepreneurship as a career choice: An analysis

of entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intention of university students. European

Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), pp. 338-349.

Pihie, L., Akmaliah, Z., Bagheri, A., Sani, A. & Haslinda, Z. (2009). Learning style

of university students: Implications for improving entrepreneurial learning

272

paradigm. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 4(4),

pp. 129-142.

Pihie, L., Akmaliah, Z., Sani, A. & Salleh, A. (2008). Science and Engineering

Students: are they entrepreneurial?. The International Journal of

Learning,15(7), pp. 105-110.

Pihie, Z. A. L. & Bagheri, A. (2011). Teachers’ and Students’ Entrepreneurial Self-

efficacy: Implication for Effective Teaching Practices. Procedia-Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 29, pp. 1071-1080.

Pittaway, L. & Edwards, C. (2012). Assessment: examining practice in

entrepreneurship education. Education+ Training, 54(8/9), pp. 778-800.

Pittaway, L., Hannon, P., Gibb, A. & Thompson, J. (2009). Assessment practice in

enterprise education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &

Research, 15(1), pp. 71-93.

Poon, J. & Brownlow, M. (2014). Students’ views on the incorporation of

commercial awareness in real estate education. Property Management, 32(4),

pp. 326-351.

Poon, J. & Brownlow, M. (2015). Development of students’ commercial awareness

within the curriculum of professionally accredited courses: a case study of

property courses. Education+ Training, 57(4).

Poon, J. (2012). Use of blended learning to enhance the student learning experience

and engagement in property education. Property management, 30(2), 129-156.

Poon, J. (2012a). Real estate graduates' employability skills: The perspective of

human resource managers of surveying firms. Property Management, 30(5),

pp. 416-434.

Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students'

learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), pp. 271-

288.

Poon, J. (2013a). An examination of a blended learning approach in the teaching of

economics to property and construction students. Property Management, 31(1),

pp. 39-54.

Poon, J. (2014). A cross-country comparison on the use of blended learning in

property education. Property Management, 32(2), pp. 154-175.

Poon, J. (2014). Engaging sustainability good practice within the curriculum and

property portfolio in the higher education sector (No. eres2014_101). European

Real Estate Society (ERES).

Poon, J. (2014a). A cross-country comparison on the use of blended learning in

property education. Property Management, 32(2), pp. 154-175.

Poon, J., Hoxley, M. & Fuchs, W. (2010), “Real estate education: a comparative

study of Employers’ requirements and graduate self perceptions”, Proceedings

273

of Construction and Building Research (COBRA) Conference, Paris, France, 2-

3 September.

Qunlian, H. (2011). The major difficulties and countermeasures of current university

graduates' entrepreneurship in China. Journal of Chinese


Rabianski, J. S. & Black, R. T. (2002). Education in the Real Estate profession.

REAL ESTATE ISSUES-AMERICAN SOCIETY OF REAL ESTATE

COUNSELORS, 28(2), pp. 20-26.

Rae, D. & Woodier-Harris, N. R. (2013). How does Enterprise & Entrepreneurship

Education influence postgraduate students’ career intentions in the New Era

economy?. Education+ Training, 55(8/9), pp. 13-31.

Rae, D. (2010). Universities and enterprise education: responding to the challenges

of the new era. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 17(4),

pp. 591-606.

Rae, D. (2012). Action learning in new creative ventures. International Journal of

Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 18(5), 603-623.

Raposo, M. & do Paço, A. (2011). Special issue: entrepreneurship and education—

links between education and entrepreneurial activity. International

Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(2), pp. 143-144.

Rauch, A. & Hulsink, W. (2014). Putting Entrepreneurship Education where the

Intention to Act Lies: An Investigation into the Impact of Entrepreneurship

Education on Entrepreneurial Behavior. Academy of Management Learning &

Education, amle-2012.

Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A. & Swartz, E. (1998) Doing research in

business and Management: An Introduction to Process and Method. London:

Sage Publications.

Rideout, E. C. & Gray, D. O. (2013). Does Entrepreneurship Education Really

Work? A Review and Methodological Critique of the Empirical Literature on

the Effects of University‐Based Entrepreneurship Education. Journal of Small

Business Management, 51(3), pp. 329-351.

Robinson, P. B., Stimpson, D. V., Huefner, J. C. & Hunt, H. K. (1991). An attitude

approach to the prediction of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship theory and

practice, 15(4), pp. 13-31.

Robledo, J. L. R., Arán, M. V., Sanchez, V. M. & Molina, M. Á. R. (2015). The

moderating role of gender on entrepreneurial intentions: A TPB perspective.

Intangible Capital, 11(1), pp. 92-117.

Rostamnezhad, S., Zarei, H. & Jalali, M. (2014). Identifying the role of technological

entrepreneurship on economic development. Journal of Science, Engoineering

and Technology, 15(1), pp. 13-23.

274

Sahu, S. R. & Menon, S. (2011). Recessionary challenges in real estate business.

Asia Pacific Journal of Research in Business Management, 2(1), pp. 206-215.

Sambasivan, M., Abdul, M. & Yusop, Y. (2009). Impact of personal qualities and

management skills of entrepreneurs on venture performance in Malaysia:

Opportunity recognition skills as a mediating factor. Technovation, 29(11), pp.

798-805.

Sandhu, M. S., Sidique, S. F. & Riaz, S. (2011). Entrepreneurship barriers and

entrepreneurial inclination among Malaysian postgraduate students.

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17(4), pp.

428-449.

Sapaat, M. A., Mustapha, A., Ahmad, J., Chamili, K. & Muhamad, R. (2013). A

Classification-Based Graduates Employability Model for Tracer Study by

MOHE. In Digital Information Processing and Communications, pp. 277-287.

Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Saunders, M. N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2011). Research methods

for business students, 5/e. Pearson Education, India.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill A. (2007). Research Methods for Business

Students. (4th

Edition). London: Prentice Hall.

Segal, G., Borgia, D. & Schoenfeld, J. (2005). The motivation to become an

entrepreneur. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research,

11(1), pp. 42-57.

Seikkula-Leino, J. (2006). Promoting entrepreneurship in the Finnish comprehensive

school. In The Internationalizing Entrepreneurship Education and Training

Conference. Innovative Formats for Entrepreneurship Education Teaching, São

Paulo, Brazil, 609-624. McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from:

http://scholar.google.com.my

Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). Curriculum reform and entrepreneurship education.

Publications of the Finnish Ministry of Education, pp. 1-28.

Seikkula-Leino, J., Ruskovaara, E., Ikavalko, M., Mattila, J. & Rytkola, T. (2010).

Promoting entrepreneurship education: the role of the teacher? Education +

Training, 52(2), pp. 117–127.

Sexton, M. (2003). A supple approach to exposing and challenging assumptions and

PhD path conference, Lisbon. Retrieved from:

http://www.research.scpm.salford.ac.uk/bf2003/sexton_keynote.pdf

Shakir, R. (2009). Soft skills at the Malaysian institutes of higher learning. Asia

Pacific Education Review, 10(3), pp. 309-315.

Shane, S. & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of

research. Academy of management review, 25(1), pp. 217-226.

http://scholar.google.com.my/

http://www.research.scpm.salford.ac.uk/bf2003/sexton_keynote.pdf

275

Shapero, A. & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimension of entrepreneurship, in Kent,

C., Sexton, D., and Vesper, K., Edition. The encyclopaedia of

Entrepreneurship, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 72-90.

Shariff, M. N. M. & Saud, M. B. (2009). An attitude approach to the prediction of

entrepreneurship on students at institution of higher learning in Malaysia.

International Journal of Business and Management, 4(4), pp. 129-137.

Shepherd, D. A. & DeTienne, D. R. (2005). Prior knowledge, potential financial

reward, and opportunity identification. Entrepreneurship theory and practice,

29(1), pp. 91-112.

Shinnar, R., Pruett, M. & Toney, B. (2009). Entrepreneurship education: attitudes

across campus. Journal of Education for Business, 84(3), pp. 151-159.

Sinnott, E. & Gorman, W. O. (2008). An Exploration of Female Undergraduates’

Attitudes Towards and Perceptions of Entrepreneurship. Research exercise

presented to: Centre for Entrepreneurship Waterford Institute of Technology.

Smith, J. A., Flowers, P. & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological

analysis: Theory, method and research. Sage.

Smith, W. L., Schallenkamp, K. & Eichholz, D. E. (2007). Entrepreneurial skills

assessment: an exploratory study. International Journal of Management and

Enterprise Development, 4(2), pp. 179-201.

Solesvik, M., Westhead, P., Matlay, H. & Parsyak, V. N. (2013). Entrepreneurial

assets and mindsets: benefit from university entrepreneurship education

investment. Education+ Training, 55(8/9), pp. 2-20.

Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S. & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programmes

raise entrepreneurial intention of science and engineering students? The effect

of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4),

pp. 566-591.

Sterling, S., Maxey, L. & Luna, H. (Eds.). (2013). The sustainable university:

Progress and prospects. Routledge.

Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Multivariate analysis of variance and

covariance. Using multivariate statistics, 3, pp. 402-407.

Tajudin, A., Aziz, R. A., Mahmood, R. & Abdullah, M. H. (2014). The Relationship

between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance of SMEs in

Malaysia. International Journal of Management Excellence, 2(3), pp. 221-226.

Tesfom, G., Birch, N. J. & Tessema, M. T. (2013). Perceptions of real estate agents

on the role of professional training in ethical decision making. International

Journal of Business Governance and Ethics, 8(4), pp. 348-375.

Thompson, J. (2010). ‘Entrepreneurship enablers’–their unsung and unquantified role

in competitiveness and regeneration. Local Economy, 25(1), pp. 58-73.

276

Thompson, P. & Kwong, C. (2014). Compulsory School Based Enterprise Education

as a Gateway to an Entrepreneurial Career. Retrieved from:

http://isbe.org.uk/content/assets/Enterprise_Education-_Caleb_Kwong, 1-20.

Tu, C. C., Weinstein, M., Worzala, E. & Lukens, L. (2009). Elements of successful

graduate real estate programs: Perceptions of the stakeholders. Journal of Real

Estate Practice and Education, 12(2), pp. 105-121.

Van Der Veen, M. & Wakkee, I.A.M. (2004), Understanding Entrepreneurship in

Watkins, D. S. (Eds.) Annual Review of Progress in Entrepreneurship Research

2: 2002-2003, Brussels: European Foundation for Management Development,

pp. 114-152.

Van Gelderen, M., Brand, M., van Praag, M., Bodewes, W., Poutsma, E. & Van Gils,

A. (2008). Explaining entrepreneurial intentions by means of the theory of

planned behaviour. Career Development International, 13(6), pp. 538-559.

Vanevenhoven, J. (2013). Advances and challenges in entrepreneurship

education. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), pp. 466-470.

Vesper, K. H. & Gartner, W. B. (1997). Measuring progress in entrepreneurship

education. Journal of Business venturing, 12(5), pp. 403-421.

Vincett, P. S. & Farlow, S. (2008). “Start-a-Business”: an experiment in education

through entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise

Development, 15(2), pp. 274–288.

Von Graevenitz, G., Harhoff, D. & Weber, R. (2010). The effects of

entrepreneurship education. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,

76(1), pp. 90-112.

Walter, S. G., Parboteeah, K. P. & Walter, A. (2013). University Departments and

Self‐Employment Intentions of Business Students: A Cross‐Level Analysis.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(2), pp. 175-200.

Watson, G. (2012). The DNA of an Entrepreneur, Retrieved June 24, 2012, from

http://www.DNAofanEntrepreneur.com

Weber, J. W. & Englehart, S. W. (2011). Enhancing business education through

integrated curriculum delivery. Journal of Management Development, 30(6),

pp. 558-568.

Weber, R. (2012). Evaluating Entrepreneurship Education. Springer.

Weinstein, M. (2002). Examination of Top Real Estate MBA Programs: Implications

for Improving Education for Practioners. ARES Conference Captiva Island, FL.

Wilson Rangga A.J, Ahmad Ariffian B, Shamree Liew, S. & Abu Zarin H. (2011).

The Embedment of Soft Skills in Real Estate Curriculum. Proceedings of 2011

International Conference on Sociality and Economics Development, Jun 17-19,

Kuala Lumpur.

http://isbe.org.uk/content/assets/Enterprise_Education-_Caleb_Kwong

http://www.dnaofanentrepreneur.com/

277

Wilson, A. J. & Ariffian, B. A. (2012). The Acquisition of Soft Skills in Real Estate

Program via Industrial Training. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65,

781-786.

Wilson, F., Kickul, J. & Marlino, D. (2009). Gender, entrepreneurial Self‐Efficacy,

and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship

Education1. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 31(3), pp. 387-406.

Wu, L. & Li, J. (2010). Perceived value of entrepreneurship: A study of the cognitive

process of entrepreneurial career decision. Journal of Chinese


Wu, S. & Wu, L. (2008). The impact of higher education on entrepreneurial

intentions of university students in China. Journal of Small Business and

Enterprise Development, 15(4), pp. 752-774.

Wyer Jr, R. S. & Wyer Jr, R. S. (Eds.). (2013). Stereotype Activation and Inhibition:

Advances in Social Cognition (Vol. 11). Psychology Press.

Wyman, D., Seldin, M. & Worzala, E. (2011). A new paradigm for real estate

valuation? Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 29(4/5), pp. 341-358.

Yaacob, M., Mansor, A. Z., Idris, F., Said, M. & Mohsin, M. (2012). Integrating

generic competencies (GCS) into university's compulsory courses: perspectives

of lecturers in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Journal of Institutional

Research South East Asia, 10(2).

Yasin, A. Y., Mahmood, N. A. A. & Jaafar, N. A. (2011). Students’ Entrepreneurial

Inclination at a Malaysian Polytechnic: a Preliminary investigation,

International Education Studies. 4(2), pp. 198-207.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (applied social research

methods). Series, 4th. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Yusof, M., Abdul-samad, Z., Hassan, F., Darus, Z., Mohamed, M. & Zaharim, A.

(2010). Academic entrepreneurship and innovation in higher education: An

integrated framework for Malaysian universities. Journal of Advance

Educational Technologies, 1(1), pp. 263-274.

Yusof, M., Siddiq, M. S. & Nor, L. M. (2014). 10. The role of academicians in

technology entrepreneurship. Handbook of Research on Techno-

Entrepreneurship: How Technology and Entrepreneurship are Shaping the

Development of Industries and Companies, 195.

Yusoff, M. N. H. B., Zainol, F. A., & Ibrahim, M. D. B. (2014). Entrepreneurship

Education in Malaysia’s Public Institutions of Higher Learning—A Review of

the Current Practices. International Education Studies, 8(1), p17.

Yusoff, W., Fauziah, W. & Mohammed Lame, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship

development programme in higher learning institution: A case study of

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. International Conference on

Technology Management, Business and Entrepreneurship, Melaka - Malaysia.

278

Zahariah, M.Z., Amalina, M.A. & Erlane, K.G. (2010). Entrepreneurship intention

among Malaysian business students. Canadian Social Science, 6(3), pp. 33-44.

Zaidatol, Akmaliah, L. P. & Afsaneh, B. (2009). Developing Future Entrepreneurs:

A need to improve science student’s Entrepreneurial participation.

International journal of Knowledge, Culture and Change management, Vol. 9

(2). pp. 45-58.

Zainuddin & Rejab (2012). Entrepreneurship – Born, made and Educated, Publisher,

InTech, Croatia.

Zhang, Y., Duysters, G. & Cloodt, M. (2013). The role of entrepreneurship education

as a predictor of university students’ entrepreneurial intention.International

Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, pp. 1-19.

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E. & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in

the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of applied psychology,

90(6), 1265.

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E. & Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to

entrepreneurial intentions and performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of

Management, 36(2), pp. 381-404.

iii THE IMPACT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATIONS ON...

Documents

Transcript of iii THE IMPACT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATIONS ON...