ENTR 1200: Introduction to Entrepreneurship

(Update: See below the video for a design note update as of August 1, 2021).

Over the past few weeks, I have been working on a preliminary design strategy for the upcoming ENTR 1200 course: Introduction to Entrepreneurship (ENTR). I decided to publish my design notes using Genially, a web application I have seen but yet to try out myself. The ENTR 1200 design note describes the general design approach along with the justification for each design decision. Keep in mind the design strategy for this course is iterative and subject to change. Please feel free to follow the link below to interact with and view my design note.


In addition, I have also created a brief video presentation summarizing the key highlights of my ENTR 1200 design note. Please watch the video below and feel free to leave a comment.


Background music courtesy of https://www.bensound.com/


Design Note Update (August 1, 2021)

Due to the sheer size of the ENTR 1200 course design, the project is slowly shifting from the design phase to the development phase, one part at a time. Multimedia production, including video, narration, H5P gamification, and learning activity development, is scheduled to begin Monday, August 2nd, and will continue for the coming weeks. However, much of the raw course content (text only) is complete, except for editing. Thus far, the iterative design phase has resulted in four distinct parts to the course: (1) What is entrepreneurship? (2) what are the characteristics of successful entrepreneurs? (3) how to build an entrepreneurial plan, and (4) course reflection. The current course design reflects the original design objectives: Develop an interactive ENTR course that fosters learning through experience, student choice, and constructivist exploration. Therefore, for the LRNT 527 assignment three and four submissions, Part 1 of the ENTR 1200 course design will be the focal point to minimize the scope of the course design to fit with the assignment criteria. 

Navigating the Draft 

The Part 1 draft consists of a Miro mind map and a Google document script which display the course content and multimedia plan but do not yet feature embedded content in Pressbooks. Once Part 1 development is complete, all multimedia presentations will be instantiated in Pressbooks pages, with each learning module representing one page in Pressbooks. 

The Miro mind map, which began as a conceptual brainstorm, now features the entire course design. All of the Part 1 design elements are in the mind map, along with the associated theoretical and conceptual rationale. Using a mindmap to plot the overall course design has been especially useful since the course design is deeply rooted in theory. For example, the visual display of the conceptual framework, alongside the curriculum and assessment design trees has positively influenced design creativity and productivity, enabling more complex and thought-out design schemes.  In addition to the mind map, viewers can locate the content and multimedia plan in the Google document link below. The content is raw and unedited for the most part but does reflect the general direction of the module deliverables in Part 1. Most of the multimedia and assessment plans are featured in red text, while the content, much of it being open source, is in black text. A variety of media is instantiated throughout Part 1, with associated cue/finish points and identification tags (ID tags) (e.g., videos 1, 2, etc.) to assist documentation and file management efforts throughout development. Further, ID tags have been created for learning activities such as challenges, multiple-choice questions, etc., to help file management efforts. 

Design Summary 

After much design iteration and serious head-scratching, the part 1 design can be best summarized through the macro-and micro-level perspectives. 

Marco Scale

On the macro scale of the entire course design, two primary instructional design frameworks underpin the ENTR 1200 conceptual framework: Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (2002) and Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (1984). In part 1, learners activate prior knowledge and experience by recalling past entrepreneurial ventures via various learning activities (see the Google Document for details). Suppose a learner does not possess any previous ENTR experience. In that case, the module takes them through a new experience to generate a foundation for learning to assist with later knowledge acquisition (see Merrill, 2002, p.46). In part 2, learners participate in “deliberate practice” (Matsuo, 2015, p.448) while acquiring new information via multimedia “demonstrations” (Merrill, 2002, p.47), including H5P gamification, interactive video, and reading resources. Still, as development moves forward, there will likely be other technologies integrated into the course design as well. The principles behind Kolb’s experiential learning (1984) and the concept of student engagement underpins much of the rationale behind incorporating gamified elements into this part of the course. Part 3 follows Merrill’s (2002) concept of “application” (p.49) and Kolb’s (1984) “active experimentation” (p.447) by challenging learners to apply their new knowledge to a real-world application by attempting to create an entrepreneurial plan. Through an H5P simulation, the course will provide learners with an ENTR mentor that walks them through building an entrepreneurial plan from start to finish. Lastly, part four encourages learners to “integrate” (Merrill, 2002, p.50) their newfound ENTR knowledge by reflecting on their learning experience and connecting it to specific elements in their personal and professional lives. 

Micro Scale

The design of Part 1 primarily follows Merrill’s First Principles of Instruction (2002) and leans heavily on the reflection aspect of Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (1984). First, in the activation stage, learners experience what Kolb (1984) terms a “concrete [learning] experience” (see Matsuo, 2015, p.444). For this design project, a concrete learning experience can comprise any learning experience that encourages knowledge acquisition, whether rote or meaningful (Mayer, 2021). Learners either recall a prior ENTR experience (as noted earlier) or participate in a new adventure via an H5P branching scenario. Second, learners experience various content demonstrations and gamified learning activities to understand core concepts while also completing observational reflections by chronicling their learning experiences via personal journals to identify learning strengths and weaknesses (Kolb, 1984). By reflecting on their learning experience, learners understand what they need to do or avoid to complete upcoming learning activities and challenges (Matsuo, 2015). Third, learners again reflect on their learning experience, but this time to assimilate a plan of action for completing the final stage of the module: “Active experimentation” (Matsuo, 2015, p.444). For example, at the end of Part 1, learners create a presentation through a format of their choosing (written, video, etc.) to activate the core lessons from each learning module. Learner’s “abstract conceptualizations” (Matsuo, 2015, p.444) from the earlier reflection activity inform their approach in the Part 1 final assignment, which influences performance (Kolb, 1984). 

The rationale for this framework design is as follows: (1) Prepare learners for optimized learning experiences, (2) show learners how to do things, as opposed to just talking about what they need to do or learn, (3) help learners develop a learning style or approach which optimizes their long- and short-term learning outcomes, and (4) integrate new knowledge into transferable, real-life skills. 


Please note that each module within Part 1 will vary in design. For instance, Modules 2 and 3 of Part 1 emphasize the constructivist approach by having learners seek out valuable resources which help them prepare for the challenge activity at the end of part 1. That said, the learning activities for Modules 2 and 3 are not yet concrete, which leads me to seek help from my academic peers:

Question: What learning activities do you feel would be beneficial in Modules 2 and 3? 

For example, Module 2 includes stories of entrepreneurs, while Module 3 primarily consists of terms and definitions (one paragraph each). How might this learning content come to life instead of simply presenting static content and everyday learning activities at the end of each section (boring!). Please keep in mind that the typical ENTR learner, based on my research, requires personal trait development in innovation, problem-solving, and creativity to succeed in third and fourth-year ENTR studies. 

I thank everyone in advance for your insight and design ideas!


Miro Mind Map

Google Document Script



Branch, R. M. (2008). Instructional design: the ADDIE approach. Springer. Retrieved from https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/book/10.1007%2F978-0-387-09506-6

Center for Applied Special Technology. (n.d.) The UDL guidelines. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Irby, J., Brown, G., Lara-Alecio, R., & Jackson, S. (2013). The handbook of educational theories. Information Age Publishing Inc. https://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=awIoDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq= the+handbook+of+educational+theories&ots=l3O-Z-G8Mn&sig=U0uGjvzxeCZUgXPYe HNs8947uR4#v=onepage&q=the%20handbook%20of%20educational%20theories&f=fa lse

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235701029_Experiential_Learning_Experience_As_The_Source_Of_Learning_And_Development

Kouprie, M., & Visser, F. S. (2009). A framework for empathy in design: Stepping into and out of the user’s life. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 437–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820902875033

Matsuo, M. (2015). A Framework for facilitating experiential learning. Human Resource Development Review, 14(4), 442–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484315598087

Mayer, R. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd edition). Cambridge University Press. UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316941355

Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development50(3), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505024

Nieuwenhuizen, C., & Groenewald, D. (2008). Entrepreneurs’ learning preferences: A guide for entrepreneurship education. Acta Commercii, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/ac.v8i1.76

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (n.d.). Student agency for 2030. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/student-age ncy/Student_Agency_for_2030_concept_note.pdf

University of Detroit Mercy. (n.d.). What is spiral curriculum? College of Engineering and Science. https://eng-sci.udmercy.edu/academics/engineering/electrical-computer/spiral-curriculum.php

University of Texas Arlington. (n.d.). Introduction to open pedagogy. UTA Libraries. https://libguides.uta.edu/openped

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *