research school of engineering (rse) curriculum ... · research school of engineering (rse)...

RESEARCH SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING (RSE) CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

Meeting No.1/2017 of the RSE Curriculum Development Committee will be held on

Tuesday 14 February 2017 at 12pm in Room R212, Ian Ross Building (31).

Apologies and enquiries should be sent to: [email protected]

Supplementary Agenda Summary

S.1 UEC Scoping item 2017: Innovation Spaces on Campus Recommendation: That the Committee provide feedback on the attached paper. Attachment S.1a - UEC Scoping item 2017: Innovation Spaces on Campus: how they connect the ecosystem to promote entrepreneurship

For discussion 2

RSE Curriculum Development Committee Supplementary Agenda 1701

mailto:[email protected]

517/2017

*Item 7 UEC Scoping Item 2017: Innovation Spaces on campus: how they connect with the ecosystem to promote entrepreneurship

Purpose To provide background for Innovation Spaces and their relationship with educational programs.

Recommendations That the University Education Committee endorse for transmission to Academic Board the following recommendations: 1. To note the discussion points around innovation spaces and discuss how this relates to ANU

educational activities. 2. To provide input into the Innovation Spaces Working Group to [email protected] by 3

March 2017.

ACTION REQUIRED For discussion For decision For information For College Response

Action Item Area Responsible For the Committee to provide input on the Innovation Spaces Working Group

UEC members

Executive Summary of Issues In 2013, the Associate Deans Education proposed that UEC focus on one substantive topic in its scoping items. In 2014 the focus was on eLearning, 2015 was on learning spaces and design and in 2016, it was on the many aspects of globalisation.

The 2017 topic is on ‘the outside, looking in’, with a focus on employment, innovation and support for social, economic and cultural changes in different countries, and on the relationship of alumni to further improving our education.

The nominated topic for discussion for UEC1/2017 is ‘Innovation Spaces on campus: how they connect with the ecosystem to promote entrepreneurship’.

The ANU has developed a number of collaborative innovation spaces both internal and external to the university. Internally, the Research School of Physics has developed a student focused Makerspace (for use by the entire ANU community), the College of Business and Economics an Innovation Space and the Research School of Engineering and Computer Science has had a Design Studio in the Ian Ross Building for many years. A number of other dedicated spaces and resources are operated by Colleges and Schools targeted for use by specific courses and cohorts of students, however there is a need for a dedicated student co-working innovation space to house cross-disciplinary teams for the many entrepreneurial initiatives we facilitate.

Background As well as creating the innovation spaces outlined above, the ANU was responsible for the development of the highly successful E29 co-working space which began in demountable buildings on carpark space on the east side of campus, and is now housed at the Canberra Innovation Network. The ANU supports a broad range of entrepreneurship programs at ANU such as Techlauncher and the Masters in Innovation and Professional Practice and also more widely within the Canberra innovation ecosystem including InnovationACT and the Griffin Accelerator. ANU also co-owns Cicada Innovations, a leading incubator for advanced technology startups in Sydney.

We continue to fall behind our competitors in the Go8 who have created dedicated innovation spaces for their students, some of which run their own accelerator programs. Two examples are LAB-14 at Carlton Connect run by University of Melbourne and the Catapult Co-working space at UNSW. There is an urgent identified need for a comparative space at ANU.

The reading materials for meeting 1/2017 are: Examples of innovation spaces E29 co-working space Canberra Innovation Network InnovationACT

UEC 1/2017: Part 2 – Reports and Scoping 29 of 145

RSE CDC Agenda Item S.1

RSE CDC Supplementary Agenda

mailto:[email protected]

http://entry29.org.au/

http://cbrin.com.au/

https://www.innovationact.org/

https://griffinaccelerator.com.au/

http://cicadainnovations.com/


https://www.carltonconnect.com.au/about/lab-14/

https://www.engineering.unsw.edu.au/computer-science-engineering/alumni-industry/catapult

http://entry29.org.au/

http://cbrin.com.au/

https://www.innovationact.org/

517/2017

Griffin Accelerator LAB-14 Catapult Cicada Innovations

Relevant articles Reimagining NSW: five ways to future-proof NSW’s innovation ecosystem Innovation Through Experience: Reshaping Learning Spaces for Makers, Hackers and Co-workers (appendix A) The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University (pages 19-26) (appendix B)

Sponsor Pro Vice Chancellor of Innovation

Author Pro Vice Chancellor of Innovation

Attachments Appendix A: Innovation Through Experience: Reshaping Learning Spaces for Makers, Hackers and Coworkers Appendix B: The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University (pages 19-26). Full report available on the UEC Alliance Site.

UEC 1/2017: Part 2 – Reports and Scoping 30 of 145



https://griffinaccelerator.com.au/

https://www.carltonconnect.com.au/about/lab-14/

https://www.engineering.unsw.edu.au/computer-science-engineering/alumni-industry/catapult


http://theconversation.com/reimagining-nsw-five-ways-to-future-proof-nsws-innovation-ecosystem-62782

http://theconversation.com/reimagining-nsw-five-ways-to-future-proof-nsws-innovation-ecosystem-62782

https://alliance.anu.edu.au/access/content/group/d0b2f8d6-0ac7-4ca8-aab2-90c839fc508b/2017/Meeting%201_2017/Item%2026.1%20Appendix%20A%20UEC%201%202017%20-%20PG%20-%20Disestablishment%20_Specialisation_%20-%20CASS%20-%20CLAS-SPEC%20-%20Classical%20Studies.pdf

11

Research Summary

Innovation Through Experience

Innovation Through Experience Reshaping Learning Spaces for Makers, Hackers, and Coworkers

Key Insights

• Universal access to the Internet and breakthroughs in manufacturing have democratized innovation, creating a new driver for the economy.

• To thrive in this economy, people need opportunities to tinker (make), deconstruct (hack), and network (cowork).

• Academic institutions have an opportunity to prepare the next generation of innovators by designating learning spaces for making, hacking, and coworking.

• The most effective innovation spaces combine all three activities in one centrally located site that’s approachable to everyone.

How do people become innovators? In today’s economy, it’s often a hands-on approach. A growing community of makers, hackers, and coworkers are creating an emerging culture of “learning by doing” that is shifting how future workers learn to innovate.

As schools prepare the next generation to engage in this maker economy, they’re creating a new kind of learning space where students can engage in a combination of hands-on processes and networking to bring their ideas to life. To better understand this shift, Herman Miller researchers leveraged insights from prior Herman Miller research on the Future of Learning, toured university campuses, and interviewed education and business thought leaders.

31 of 145



Research Summary

2Innovation Through Experience

CA.

OR.

NV.

WA.

MT.

ID.

WY.

UT.CO.

N.D.

NE.

KS. MO.

IA.

IL.

WI.MN.

MI.

IN.

KY.

S.D .

N.C.

N.Y.

PA.

OH.

W.VA.

ME.

VT.

N.H.

MA.CT.

R.I.

TX.

OK.

LA.

N.M. AR.

TN.

AL. GA.

S.C.

FL.

VA.

MDDE.

N.J.

MS.

DC.

AZ.

01

02

0304

0506

13

08 09

07

11

12

10

We studied 13 maker, hacker, and coworking spaces across the United States.

While our focus was on education, the trends we noted extend into other organizations with an interest in innovation, including public libraries, museums, and corporate campuses.

The Ingredients of Innovation

Our preliminary explorations revealed that learners are seeking spaces that support a new user/learner experience. Makerspaces and hackerspaces were popping up on academic campuses, providing opportunities for empowered users to engage in a range of activities from tinkering to sharing ideas to designing, building, and developing prototypes for new products. Later in the exploration, it became evident that coworking activities share attributes with maker and hacker activities, so coworking spaces were added to the study.

Makers innovate through tinkering. The activity of making combines the Internet model of innovation with desktop manufacturing tools, resulting in much wider access to the tools needed to make things. This opens tinkering, designing, and prototyping to the novice creative and budding innovator.

With a computer, laser cutter, and 3D printer, anyone can learn to make a product in a relatively short period of time with minimal resources. The tools and activities available in makerspaces empower users to expand their creative horizons, try new projects, and build new skills in a safe environment that supports failure.

Hackers innovate through deconstruction. Hacking is a form of tinkering with a goal of understanding how something works. In today’s hackerspaces, individuals with similar interests can gather to work on projects; deconstruct and rebuild computers, electronics, and equipment; share knowledge; and collaborate on ideas, which leads to better inventions and innovations. Hackerspaces could be considered as pre-models of today’s coworking spaces.

Coworkers innovate through networking. Coworking spaces provide a shared working environment for people from different backgrounds and areas of expertise. The value of the coworking movement is in the community that is formed within shared working environments where learners and creatives work alongside each other, learn from each other, and build strong networks of knowledge and creativity.

Map of participating sites

The SHED, University of CA, Berkeley

Impact Hub

Next Space

01

02

03

04 SPARK, University of CO

Denhac05

Chicago Public Library

Detroit Public Library

06

07

Geek Group

Mount Elliott Community Maker Space

Think[Box], Case Western University

08

09

10

11 POP Shop, Cornell University

Westport Public Library12

Invention Studio, GA Tech13

Campuses

Public Libraries

Coworking Spaces

Maker/Hacker Spaces

32 of 145



Research Summary


We noted these characteristics of the spaces we studied:

• Makerspaces in public libraries had similar tools in spaces designed to attract both novices and experts. Learning the new and different were key themes in all of the makerspaces

• Stand-alone hackerspaces had a range of equipment types, but the general focus of the spaces was on enhancement of skills through learning by doing, collaborating, and exchange of ideas

• The coworking spaces in the study both aimed to build a community of like-minded, yet diverse people who shared ideas and learned from one another

Why Should We Care About Innovation Spaces?

Missed opportunities for disruptive innovation exist within many campus communities, whether the campus is higher education or corporate. Disruptive changes in technologies and global markets during the first decade of the 21st century are part of a social transformation that begins to reshape the way we think about the relationships between material production, technology, innovation, and society (Mancuso and Niessen 2014).

The opportunity to innovate is in the hands of anyone who has an interest in making, hacking, and coworking. New opportunities are emerging for academic and corporate institutions to develop models for places of innovation where an interdisciplinary community of learners and innovators can engage in and lead in a new manufacturing economy and a sustainable culture of innovation. To do this, it is important to understand how elements of maker, hacker, and coworking spaces can come together to inform a true innovation space.

What Are the Connections to Learning Theory?

Learning Theory literature tells us that thriving in a maker economy requires a capacity for lifelong learning characterized by cross-disciplinary dispositions of curiosity, resiliency, problem solving, self-direction, and self-evaluation. We also know there is a direct correlation between effective learning and the experience of constructing a meaningful product. Furthermore, it’s been shown that encounters with tools can promote self-discovery and new thinking, which support social and technological innovation.

The maker, hacker, and coworking spaces we studied support these concepts in several important ways. First, they were created specifically for hands-on learning, with tools and mentors available within the space. Secondly, they provide opportunities for like-minded and diverse people to build a community of learners. Finally, they create an environment where the teacher can become the learner and the learner can become the teacher.

We also noted some important gaps between Learning Theory and innovation spaces. While theorists suggest that the process of making is a “gateway to deeper engagement” between users from a variety of disciplines, none of the spaces we studied were located in the center of campus, where they would be accessible and approachable to students from all disciplines. At the moment, there is no established framework for planning a centrally located, on-campus innovation space that could benefit all students, and a lack of empirical evidence to support the benefits of on-campus innovation spaces may create roadblocks to future projects.

What Did the Innovation Spaces We Studied Have in Common?

In fact, each site had its own unique approach. Our findings revealed many considerations for serving the users of various maker, hacker and coworking spaces—but notably, no established framework for what maker, hacker, or coworking spaces should be.

33 of 145



Research Summary


Challenges

• Current location in an Engineering building limits the approachability of the space for other disciplines

• No evidence of a space intentionally designed for coworking

SPARK at the University of Colorado, Boulder POP Shop at Cornell University

Characteristics

• Undergraduate-developed and managed coworking space

• Space is located adjacent to campus

Challenges

• Space has limited support for product development beyond rapid prototyping

The SHED at the University of California, Berkeley

Characteristics

• An undergraduate-developed and managed maker/hacker space serving as an inspiration for the new Jacobs Institute for Design Innovation

Challenges

• Incorporating spaces that support tinkering and coworking into the new building

For those academic and corporate institutions that have little or no exposure to innovation spaces, harvesting great ideas within the institution is a place to start. Like all of the participants in the study, students, faculty, and employees have creative and constructive ideas about attributes of spaces that help them learn, create, and innovate. Studying how these ideas were developed and implemented on a small scale within a community will help leaders and planners understand how the activities might be planned, implemented, operationalized, and scaled to reach maximum potential.

What Does an Innovation Space Look Like?

A true innovation space demands:

1. Resources,

2. An interdisciplinary perspective,

3. Support for a variety of activities, and

4. Ideally, shared space for making, hacking, and coworking in one centrally located site

Each of the sites in our study offered some combination of those traits. The paragraphs below note what worked in five of the innovation spaces we studied, along with areas that could be improved for greater utilization.

The Invention Studio at GeorgiaTech

Characteristics

• Makerspaces empower students to tinker, explore, and make anything they can imagine

• Hackerspaces invite deconstruction of computers/equipment and provide more sophisticated tools to explore the sciences, engineering, and arts

• A coworking-like space supports ideation, project development discussions, collaboration on homework assignments, and the occasional chess match

Challenges

• Space limits growth potential

• Location in an Engineering building limits the approachability of the space for other disciplines

The Think[Box] at Case Western Reserve University

Characteristics

• Serving as a pilot for a new 50,000 square foot Think[Box] Innovation Center

34 of 145



Research Summary


1. Britton, L. 2012. "The makings of Makerspaces." Library Journal 20.

2. Case Western Reserve University. 2014. About Think[Box]. Accessed October 7, 2014. http://engineering.case.edu/thinkbox/about.

3. Colegrove, T. 2013. "Editorial board thoughts: Libraries as Makerspace?" Information Technology & Libraries 2-5.

4. Collaborative, Design + Engineering. 2014. The SHED. Accessed October 23, 2013. http://dec.berkeley.edu/space.html.

5. Dewey, J. 1938. Expeience and education. New York: Touchstone.

6. Dougherty, Dale. 2013. "Georgia Tech's Makerspace is a model for higher education." Makezine.com. March 28. Accessed April 7, 2014. http://makezine.com/2013/03/28/georgia-techs- makerspace- is-a-model-for-higher-education/.

7. Educause Learning Initiative. 2013. 7 Things You Should Know About Makerspaces. Monograph, Boulder: Educause. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7095.pdf.

8. Foertsch, Carsten, and Remy Cagnol. 2013. "The History of Coworking in a Timeline." Deskmag. September 9. Accessed February 21, 2014. http://www.deskmag.com/en/the-history-of- coworking-spaces-in-a-timeline.

9. Gross, M.D., and E.Y. Do. 2009. "Educating the New Makers: Cross-Disciplinary Creativity." Leonardo 210-215.

10. Gustafson, E. 2013. "Meeting Needs: Makerspaces and school libraries." School Library Monthly 35-36.

11. Hatch, Mark. 2014. The Maker Movement Manifesto. First. New York, New York: McGraw Hill Education. Accessed 2014.

12. Herman Miller Education. 2012. The Future of Learning. Monograph, Holland: Herman Miller, Inc.

13. Hlubinka, M., D Dougherty, P. Thomas, S. Chang, S. Hoefer, I. Alexander, and et al. 2013. Makerspace Playbook. Playbook, Sebastopol: Maker Media.

14. Kansara, Vikram Alexei. 2012. The Long View : Chris Anderson Says the ‘Maker’ Movement is the Next Industrial Revolution. November 6. Accessed June 22, 2014. http://www.businessoffashion.com/2012/11/the-long-view-chris-anderson-says the-maker- movement-is-the-next-industrial-revolution.html.

15. Kayler, M., T. Owens, and G. Meadows. 2013. "Inspiring maker culture through collaboration, persistence, and failure." Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013. Chesapeake: AACE. 1179-1184.

16. Kolb, D.A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

17. Kumar, Vijay. 2013. 101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your Organization. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

18. Mancuso, Marco, and Bertram Niessen. 2014. DIGICULT. Accessed June 17, 2014. http://www.digicult.it/digimag/issue-058/mark-grimes-maker-faire-africa-the- net-doing/.

19. Martinez, S.L., and G. Stager. 2013. Invent to Learn. Torrence: Constructing Modern Knowledge Press.

20. Nilsson, Elisabet M. 2011. "The making of a maker-space for open innovation, knowledge sharing, and peer-to-peer learning." Future Learning Spaces: Designs on ELearning Conference. Helsinki: Aalto University. 293-298.

21. P2P Foundation. 2007. Maker Movement.

22. Papert, S. 1986. Constructivism: A new opportunity for elementary science education. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

23. Peppler, K., and S. Bender. 2013. "Maker movement spreads innovation one project at a time." Phi Delta Kappan 22.

24. Piaget, Jean. 1976. To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York: Penguin Books.

25. POP SHOP. 2014. Come Visit. Accessed March 2, 2014. http:/popright.in/.

26. Red Hat, Inc. 2008. A Quick History of Hackers. March 15. Accessed April 6, 2014 http://www.centos.org/docs/5/html/5.2/Deployment_Guide/s1-risk-hackcrack.html.

27. Sayers, J. 2012. "Tinker-centric pedagogy in literature and language classrooms." In Collaborative approaches to the digital in English studies, by L. (Ed) McGrath, 310 Logan: Utah State University Press.

28. Schrock, Andrew Richard. 2014. "Education in Disguise: Culture of hacker and maker space." InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies 1.

29. Tenebaum, Joshua, Amanda Williams, Audrey Desjardins, and Karen Tanenbaum. 2013. "Democratizing technology: pleasure, utility, and expressiveness in DIY and maker practice." SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM. 2603-2612.

© 2015 Herman Miller, Inc. Zeeland, MichiganAll rights reserved.

35 of 145



entrepreneurshipresearch

innovation

technology

support

university

advance

assist

activities

accelerators

association

agenciescallencourage efforts

economic

scienceways

working

regionalnacie

workventure

national

opportunities

universitiesgovernments

recommendations

engagement

activelyadvisory

campus

collegescollaboration

attract

develop commercialization

conductedconducteddevelopment

encouraging

business

collaborations

community

companiescouncil

entrepreneurs

educationcreate

commerce

enhance

federal

existing

expand

industry

faculty

funding

local

growthleaders

institution

partners

industries

interest

member

students

intellectual

resources

promote

potential

new

programlocke

highermany

programs

practicesproperty

strategies

policies

talent

student

transfer

The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University: Higher Education, Innovation & Entrepreneurship in Focus

U.S. Department of Commerce

October 2013

prepared by:Office of Innovation & Entrepreneurship

Economic Development Administration

In consultation with:National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship

36 of 145



★ U.S. Department of Commerce ★ The Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Economic Development Administration ★


3

Table of Contents

Foreword ............................................................................................................................... Page 4

Remarks from NACIE Co-Chairs ......................................................................................... Page 5

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. Page 8

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. Page 9

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... Page 14

Promoting Student Innovation and Entrepreneurship .................................................. Page 19

Encouraging Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship ................................................ Page 23

Actively Supporting Technology Transfer ........................................................................ Page 27

Facilitating University-Industry Collaboration ................................................................. Page 32

Engaging with Regional and Local Economic Development Efforts ........................... Page 36

Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... Page 41

Appendix: “Deep Dives” of Selected Colleges and Universities .............................. Attached

37 of 145





19

I. Promoting Student Innovation and Entrepreneurship

The main priority of any university and college system is education. Many universities are expanding their educational curricula and programs to foster innovation and entrepreneurship. Universities increasingly offer courses and programs in entrepreneurship and related fields for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral students. Students develop a better understanding of innovation and entrepreneurship, through newly-established curricula, minors, majors, and certificate programs that cut across educational disciplines, and through educational programs that emphasize hands-on learning. Many universities are also augmenting traditional classroom instruction in novel ways. Universities are increasing educational opportunities outside of the classroom to include student housing and dormitories that directly foster the entrepreneurial spirit. Student clubs, centered on multi-dimensional entrepreneurship activities, also are on the rise. Most campuses run a variety of business plan and venture competitions that offer students support networks, such as mentors and training opportunities, to help them further develop their innovative ideas.

Courses and degree programs in innovation and entrepreneurship

Many universities are seeing an increase in student demand for innovation and entrepreneurship, broadening course and program offerings. Entrepreneurship courses and programs equip students with a wide range of valuable skills, including business-plan development, marketing, networking, creating “elevator pitches,” attracting financing (such as seed capital), and connecting with local business leaders. Some universities are offering bachelor and master’s degree programs and concentrations in innovation and entrepreneurship, expanding upon traditional Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) and Bachelor of Science (B.S.) degrees (Box 1.1). Many business schools are breaking down traditional barriers and encouraging entrepreneurship through multi-disciplinary courses and programs to students of all academic disciplines.

Box 1.1

The University of Colorado’s Innovation and Entrepreneur Degree Program

Located at the Colorado Springs campus, this program offers a Bachelor’s degree in Innovation (B.I.), which provides a unique multi-disciplinary team approach. For example, in addition to completing classes in computer science, a B.I. in Computer Science requires students to develop strong team skills, study innovation, engage in entrepreneurship, practice proposal writing, and learn business and intellectual property law.

Accreditation remains an important issue to the academic community. While many schools now offer entrepreneurship courses, many commented about the inability to develop certificates, programs, and degrees without proper guidance and standards for entrepreneurship education. Many anticipate that in the coming years the leading accreditation agencies, along with state education agencies, and the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education, will come together to address this issue, and that this will eventually lead to a great expansion of formal programs in this space.

Experiential learning

Experiential or applied learning has been increasing in popularity at universities and colleges for many years now. This type of education improves upon traditional classroom instruction—which consists mainly of lectures and fact-based memorization—by actively engaging students in innovative and entrepreneurial activities through workshops, conferences, internships, hands-on experience, and real-world projects (Box 1.2). Experiential learning in innovation and entrepreneurship has spread outside of business schools and moved into the fine arts, science, and engineering programs. Universities and colleges also support specialized internship programs focused on entrepreneurship education and technology innovation that match students directly to start-up projects, technology transfer offices, venture capital firms, and industry. This variety of educational opportunities allows students to address real-world challenges in a supportive educational environment.

38 of 145




★ U.S. Department of Commerce ★ The Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Economic Development Administration ★20

Box 1.2

Examples of Experiential Learning Opportunities

University of Illinois’ Patent Clinic provides law students the opportunity to draft patent applications for student inventors. Student-innovators with potentially patentable inventions are referred to the Patent Clinic by the Technology Entrepreneur Center (TEC) at the College of Engineering. The Patent Clinic then reviews the innovations, searches for relevant prior art, and selects one innovation for each law student. Each law student then proceeds to work with the inventors to draft a patent application on their innovation in consultation with an instructor.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s “Entrepreneurial Deli” borrows a food court metaphor to help students meet and learn from experienced young entrepreneurs. Using the tag line “Grab ‘n Go Entrepreneurship” and a speed-dating-like format, the workshops encourage students to learn first-hand about solutions to different problems that confront startup ventures from experienced entrepreneurs.

Washington University in St. Louis’ student internship program offers 25 paid internships per summer for students to work in a start-up company four days a week and attend experience learning workshops one day a week.

The University of California at San Diego’s Rady School of Business requires its management students to take a course entitled “lab to market.” In Lab to Market, MBAs create new products or services and go through the commercialization process, with advice from faculty and business mentors.

Competitive opportunities

Competitions are an excellent way to actively engage faculty and students in the learning process. As a whole, business plan competitions are geared toward teaching students how to think outside the classroom, fostering collaborations across disciplines and increasing access to businesses. Competitions provide an exciting platform for students to learn practical skills, such as how to craft a business plan, access venture funding, and pitch ideas. Sequential competitions build upon project ideas, ultimately leading to completed business plans that are ready for possible funding from investors. Universities understand this, and are transitioning away from single monetary rewards for competitions and are increasingly recognizing milestone achievements with a multitude of prizes, including non-monetary resources such as incubator space and mentorships (Box 1.3). Some universities are expanding their student team competitions to include faculty and alumni, and increasing the scope and size of the pool of resources through collaboration with industry and local partners.

39 of 145





21

Box 1.3

Examples of Business Plan Competitions

Rice University makes over $1.2 million available in cash, prizes, and in-kind resources to winners to provide seed funding to launch companies. These funds serve as seed funding for many of the winning teams.

Florida Atlantic University (FAU) provides the winner of their business plan competition with free space in the incubator for half a year.

Michigan Technology University’s business plan competition winners are rewarded with a monetary prize that goes directly to their business, instead of to the individual. The following year, the winners will highlight their business milestones that have resulted from the funding.

University of Washington has a stage-gated business plan competition comprised of different competitions throughout the school year in combination with seminars, courses, and mentorship to assist in advancing student ideas to the next level. The competitions range across disciplines and industries, bringing students together from different departments.

University of Oregon’s Venture Launch Pathway program, student teams pick from technologies from many sources included federal labs, companies, universities and technologies from other countries. The technologies that look most promising are advanced by student teams, with backgrounds in law, business, and sciences, into the international business competition circuit.

The University of Wisconsin has a 100 hour challenge in which students must purchase a product, change it, and create a public URL for outreach. They are then tested on many different aspects of entrepreneurship.

University of Louisiana—Lafayette hosts the Innov8 Lafayette program. This eight day, community-wide program includes specific activities centered on the importance of innovation. Some activities are focused on the environment, entrepreneurship, and the arts.

When discussing the role of federal agencies in this space, many universities commented on two recent actions by the Obama Administration. First, on the possible expansion of an innovative program launched by the U.S. Department of Energy in 2012. This National Business Plan contest17 provided seed funding and technical support to regional business plan contests at universities and in communities. The program connected the Department of Energy with a large group of leading entrepreneurs and innovators in the energy space for a relatively small amount of sponsorship. Many universities hoped that other agencies would also look at this model as a way to access market intelligence, cutting-edge technology solutions, and as a way to engage better with entrepreneurs and startups.

In addition, many universities are hopeful that recent guidance provided by the U.S. Department of Treasury about Program Related Investments (PRI),18 could greatly increase the amount of philanthropic investment in their student entrepreneurs. The guidance put forth by Treasury makes it easier for philanthropic entities, such as foundations and trusts, to directly invest in for-profit entities that share their mission. This will greatly expand access to philanthropic funds, in addition to traditional investor capital, to advance socially beneficial technologies in food, energy, and health.

17 U.S. Department of Energy, National Clean Energy Business Plan Competition. See http://techportal.eere.energy.gov/commercialization/ natlbizplan.html.

18 U.S. Department of the Treasury, proposed regulations for program-related investments by private foundations. See http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Examples-of-Program-Related-Investments-by-Private-Foundations-%E2%80%93-Proposed- Regulations.

40 of 145





Entrepreneurial and innovation collaboration spaces

Entrepreneurial and innovation “living spaces” are a unique trend in motivating student involvement outside the classroom setting. These spaces use the power of proximity to promote student engagement in developing innovative ideas and starting businesses (Box 1.4). Some universities are embracing the entrepreneurial dorm, whereas others are expanding this concept to promote entrepreneurial clusters, within the university and sometimes stretching into local communities. Entrepreneurial spaces facilitate student access to learning and networking opportunities with local entrepreneurs and innovators. These spaces also host a variety of student entrepreneur clubs that serve as a premier resource for aspiring student entrepreneurs and foster a community of like-minded peers. These clubs are geared toward building financial literacy and leadership skills, as well as encouraging students to pursue commercialization opportunities for innovative ideas and technologies.

Box 1.4

Examples of Living and Learning Spaces

University of Florida’s Inspiration Hall is a new, state-of-the-art live-and-learn community located within Innovation Square, only two blocks from the University of Florida and the Florida Innovation Hub. By living and learning within the Innovation Square environment, undergraduate students can interact throughout their academic program with other like-minded people: fellow students, researchers, faculty, business professionals and entrepreneurs.

Purdue University has an Entrepreneurship and Innovation Learning Community (ELC) that is made up of students interested in new business ventures that live together in Harrison Hall, many of whom also participate in the entrepreneurship certificate program.

Community college entrepreneurship

As part of the Startup America Initiative, 170 community colleges across the United States have launched entrepreneurship programs. These programs are often taking the same shape as those at larger research universities. Institutions such as Lorain Community College OH offers incubators and shared facilities for their students and regional entrepreneurs while Middlesex Community College, MA, provides seed funding for their students to launch entrepreneurial ventures. Community colleges are embracing entrepreneurship for the same reasons as their colleagues in research universities. It reflects their student desires, the changing nature of their local economies, and a change in their role in workforce training with larger companies. Many of them have expressed the desire to see entrepreneurship become a career pathway for their students similar to other career fields.

41 of 145





23

II. Encouraging Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship

A new generation of faculty on America’s campuses is striving to conduct world-class research, while working to identify the relevance of their research for solving real-world problems. To address this issue, these institutions are fostering faculty entrepreneurship through educational opportunities, acknowledging technology development, increasing transfer and commercialization achievements, and facilitating collaborative efforts. This commitment to promoting innovation pushes faculty to identify and employ available networks and resources to pursue innovation and entrepreneurship opportunities. New faculty orientations, boot-camps, and seminar events focusing on innovation and entrepreneurship are examples of some of the educational opportunities offered to faculty. Campuses are actively connecting faculty to networks of recognized entrepreneurs and industry partners, to promote cross-disciplinary efforts. Faculty tenure considerations and other rewards are on the raise, incorporating faculty contributions in innovation and technology transfer efforts, while providing the incentives to engage in R&D, technology development, and business start-up efforts.

The changing innovation culture

On trend is a shift in the hiring and retention culture across many universities. Today, institutions hire faculty who are interested not only in the advancement of their academic areas but also in pursuing commercial applications for their technologies, or engage in entrepreneurial activities that correlate with their academic disciplines. New faculty orientations often include workshops and training to help faculty navigate technology transfer offices and find the resources available to them on campus. Universities also offer faculty training in areas such as professional mentoring, prototype development, business planning, and market testing (Box 2.1). An evolving university innovation culture provides faculty with the essential information and incentives to move from a narrowly-focused scientific research tradition to a more forward-looking, comprehensive innovative process that incorporates technology development and commercialization efforts.

Box 2.1

The University of Pittsburgh Offers a Business of Innovation Commercialization Course

The Office of Technology Management and the Office of the Provost hosts an annual, seven-week course aimed at educating and motivating both student and faculty researchers in innovation development, commercialization, and entrepreneurship. The course takes participants through each step of the innovation and commercialization process, from idea conception to intellectual property protection and licensing, and all the way to early-stage market research and networking strategies. Private, individualized workshops are also offered where students can explore their own innovation ideas in a team setting.

Rewarding faculty innovation and entrepreneurship

Universities and colleges are celebrating faculty achievements in innovation and entrepreneurship. These acknowledgments include campus-wide prizes and award ceremonies that bring the faculty community together to recognize and learn about the accomplishments of their peers across academic disciplines (Box 2.2). Awards such as “Innovator of the Year” and “Faculty Entrepreneur of the Year” are popular as they reward faculty for achievements that reach beyond traditional research and teaching accomplishments. Universities and colleges are updating tenure and sabbatical leave guidelines to encourage faculty to pursue collaborative and entrepreneurial endeavors, such as launching a start-up company (Box 2.3). Some programs allow faculty time off to engage in innovation and entrepreneurial activities, without incurring any penalty towards tenure and promotion. Providing leave to pursue entrepreneurial activities increases the potential for the successful technology development and commercialization of research, while adding to faculty’s understanding of the commercialization process, enabling them to incorporate new material into student instruction. This flexibility also improves the focus of R&D efforts and facilitates public engagement by encouraging faculty to commercialize their research.

42 of 145





Box 2.2

University of Southern California

The university promotes faculty entrepreneurship and innovation by supporting, rewarding, and funding the work of faculty members. The Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies presents three faculty members with research grants totaling $11,000 as part of annual Faculty Research Awards. The Center also rewards entrepreneurial-minded faculty with the annual Greif Research Impact Award, which is given to the faculty member who has written an article that has the most effect on the area of entrepreneurship.

Box 2.3

University of Virginia

In 2010, UVA’s School of Medicine was among the first to include innovation and entrepreneurship activities among its promotion and tenure criteria. Candidates for promotion and tenure are asked to provide a report on their inventions and the patent status of those inventions; registered copyright materials; license agreements involving their technologies; and any other contributions to technology transfer-related activities, including entrepreneurship and economic development impact.

Finding the appropriate rewards and policies to promote faculty innovation is complex. Internal policies for faculty innovation performance usually are evaluated at the discretion of individual departments. For these programs to be successful in spurring innovation out of the higher educational system, universities and colleges need increased flexibility in developing faculty tenure, leave regulations, and other faculty-based policies that facilitate innovation and entrepreneurship.

Supporting collaboration

As faculty become more interested in commercialization activities, universities are providing additional resources to encourage collaboration with local communities and industries. A few universities have hired individuals, or created teams, to connect faculty with similar interests and research goals—often reaching across academic departments—to share information and experience on creating startups, licensing technology, and collaborating with industry. This cross-disciplinary effort helps share information on best practices and spurs new ideas for developing and commercializing new products.

Universities and colleges are also inviting community leaders and local entrepreneurs to become more involved in the development of technology and startup companies (Box 2.4). A few universities have developed programs to link experienced entrepreneurs with faculty to assist in the startup process, development, and longevity. In most cases, faculty returns to teach and continue research, allowing the non-university collaborative partners to take over the leadership role and continue to develop and expand the companies. Entrepreneurs also serve in a mentoring role, helping faculty to identify and further develop commercialization opportunities.

43 of 145





25

Box 2.4

The University of Cincinnati Research Institute (UCRI)

The University’s non-profit allows local, national, and international industries to partner with expert faculty and students performing sponsored research. These partnerships not only connect university experts with industry, but also facilitate the commercialization of research, and enhance cooperative and experiential learning experiences and opportunities. With the creation of the foundation outside the university, professors and other state employees remain in compliance with state restrictions on equity and revenues streams, while allowing them to be compensated for their work through income from licensing revenues and other shares.

To capitalize on the expertise of seasoned entrepreneurs, many universities are building entrepreneur-in-residence (EIR) programs. The EIRs work with university researchers, students, faculty, and staff in the development of early stage start-up companies to provide guidance and advice. EIRs help interested faculty members better understand entrepreneurship, evaluate technology for licensing, expand their network of resources, and guide them on how to start the commercialization process (Box 2.5). EIRs usually have a focus area that meets faculty needs, often have a good working knowledge of current intellectual property laws and can assist faculty in finding those ideas in their research programs that are worth commercializing. The EIR program provides mentorship opportunities that help stimulate innovative and entrepreneurial activity throughout campus.

Box 2.5

University of Nebraska Medical Center - Entrepreneur in Residence

The EIR works with licensing staff and researchers at the University of Nebraska Medical Center to help identify, evaluate, develop, and support the creation of business plans and new companies based on technology developed at UNMC. The EIR is an industry expert with scientific, entrepreneurial, managerial, and financial experience who works side by side with UNMC scientists to identify, evaluate, and support the development of new start-up companies based on technology license agreements from UNeMed.

Engaging with industry

Faculty is increasing its engagement with industry to obtain research and technology development ideas, capital, and other types of support. Many universities host events to bring faculty, industry, angel investors, and venture capitalists together for networking opportunities (Box 2.6). These events give industry an early look at R&D activities on campus, while providing faculty with networking and funding possibilities. Examples of such events include lunch-and-learn series, rapid-fire networking programs, seminars, and workshops.

Box 2.6

California Institute of Technology

The university runs a comprehensive “tech review” process for faculty, in which Caltech researchers have the opportunity to give a short presentation on a new and promising technology for commercialization to an audience of angel investors, venture capitalists, and entrepreneurial alumni. A roundtable discussion then takes place where investors provide feedback and advice on commercial development potential of the technology.

44 of 145





A common theme developing across campuses large and small is the importance of creating connections between faculty and the outside world. Programs, such as proof-of-concept, are meant to connect faculty research topics to market relevance, while externships and leave of absence policies are designed to provide faculty with the time they need to understand the latest trends and technologies in industry in their fields of science. Although the NACIE-led letter prioritized these sorts of programs, they have not grown as quickly as expected due to a combination of budgetary issues and faculty interests.

As universities provide faculty with increased educational opportunities, celebrate their innovative achievements, and enable collaboration with experienced entrepreneurs and business communities, an entrepreneurial culture is developed throughout the educational system. Students also can benefit from the on-going education and experiences of faculty. Through dedicated institutional support, faculties across academic disciplines are able to work together with each other, community entrepreneurs, and businesses to develop new technology and create start-up companies.

45 of 145





A-59

Foot Notesi. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?id=6492198ii. http://arkansasbaptist.edu/?page_id=1330iii. http://arkansasnews.com/tag/arkansas-baptist-college/iv. http://www.arkindcolleges.org/member-news/arkansas-baptist-college/news-story-headline/v. http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?id=6492198

vi. http://coba.alasu.edu/ce_intlbusiness.htmlvii. http://www.cobanetwork.com/sbdc/viii. http://www.alasu.edu/news/news-details/index.aspx?nid=736

ix. http://ui.asu.edu/whatisui/?ui=0x. http://studentventures.asu.edu/aboutxi. http://innovationchallenge.asu.edu/xii. http://theatrefilm.asu.edu/initiatives/pave/xiii. http://10000solutions.org/xiv. http://www.asu.edu/vppa/statelocal/files/2012_legislative_briefing_.pdfxv. http://entrepreneurship.asu.edu/find-funding/faculty-staff-grants

xvi. https://asunews.asu.edu/20080717_techtransferxvii. http://www.fiercebiomarkers.com/story/5m-collaboration-cv-biomarkers/2011-11-02

xviii. http://www.asu.edu/vppa/statelocal/files/2012_legislative_briefing_.pdfxix. www.forbes.com/2010/04/16/technology-incubators-changing-the-world-entrepreneurs-technology-incubator_slide_9.htmlxx. http://www.gatech.edu/vision

xxi. http://www.ece.gatech.edu/research/labs/GE_Smartgridxxii. http://www.gatech.edu/newsroom/release.html?nid=66014

xxiii. http://www.industry.gatech.edu/about/about-ical/xxiv. http://www.usg.edu/news/release/economic_impact_of_university_system_reaches_13.2_billionxxv. http://www.gatech.edu/budgetupdate/economics.html

xxvi. http://www.theeliinstitute.org/business-plan-a-case-competitions/business-plan-competitionxxvii. http://www.theeliinstitute.org/business-plan-a-case-competitionsxxviii. http://www.theeliinstitute.org/courses-in-entrepreneurship

xxix. http://www.keadworks.com/xxx. http://www.kojami.com/xxxi. http://www.theeliinstitute.org/researchxxxii. http://www.howard.edu/research/index.htmlxxxiii. http://ip.howard.edu/xxxiv. http://ip.howard.edu/current_inventions.htmlxxxv. http://smartlighting.rpi.edu/resources/PDFs/SmartLightingERC_Brochure_Web.pdf

xxxvi. http://www.quateams.com/aboutUs_news05_25.htmlxxxvii. http://www.howard.edu/calendar/main.php?calendarid=default&view=event&eventid=1196799067703&timebegin=2007-12-

06+00%3A00%3A00xxxviii. http://www.georgetownhowardctsa.org/

xxxix. http://www.bschool.howard.edu/deansmessage.htmxl. http://www.dcsbdc.org/DocumentMaster.aspx?doc=1001xli. http://www.coas.howard.edu/hucup/commdevleadership.htmlxlii. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ff0710s.pdfxliii. http://cra.gmu.edu/pdfs/researach_reports/recent_reports/Economic_Impacts_of_Howard_University.pdfxliv. http://www.lorainccc.edu/About+Us/xlv. http://www.lorainccc.edu/Academic+Divisions/Engineering+Technologies/Fab+Lab/

xlvi. Ibidxlvii. http://www.lorainccc.edu/Faculty+and+Staff/Entrepreneurship/Student+IF+Information.htmxlviii. http://www.lorainccc.edu/Business+and+Industry/At+Work+for+Business/Manufacturing/Advanced+Manufacturing.htm

xlix. http://www.lorainccc.edu/Faculty+and+Staff/Entrepreneurship/if+faculty.html. http://www.lorainccc.edu/About+Us/Press+Releases+2009/Skills-Certification.htmli. http://www.lorainccc.edu/Business+and+Industry/At+Work+for+Business/Manufacturing/Advanced+Manufacturing.htmlii. http://www.lcccproud.com/community/dr-roy-a-church-of-lorain-county-community-college-to-receive-h-peter-burg-regional-vision-

awardliii. http://www.lorainccc.edu/About+Us/Press+Releases+2011/White+House+Endorses+Launch+of+Innovation+Fund+America.htmliv. http://www.techtransfer.umich.edu/lv. http://innovate.umich.edu/u-m_programs/u-ms-entrepreneurial-ecosystem/

lvi. http://bec.umich.edu/index/lvii. http://innovate.umich.edu/u-m_programs/u-ms-entrepreneurial-ecosystem/lviii. http://www.innovationandeducation.com/about-the-authors

lix. http://www.lib.unc.edu/ncc/ref/unc/cq/kuralt.htmllx. http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/entrepreneurship.aspx

lxi. http://otd.unc.edu/lxii. http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/entrepreneurship/programs#launching

lxiii. http://www.kfpefund.com/images/uploads/UNC_Kenan-Flagler_B-School_Gets_100K_Grant_from_Z_Capital,_James_Zenni_|_|_peHUBpeHUB.pdf

lxiv. http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/programs/mba/concentrations/entrepreneurship.aspxlxv. http://otd.unc.edu/starting_a_company.php

lxvi. http://otd.unc.edu/OTDInterns.phplxvii. http://www.cednc.org/content/about+ced/10063

lxviii. http://www.ncbiotech.org/about-uslxix. http://www.sbtdc.org/about-us/lxx. http://www.ncidea.org/lxxi. http://www.unc.edu/campus-updates/innovateCarolinalxxii. http://www.pvamu.edu/pages/1865.asp

lxxiii. http://www.foc-uss.com/ideacompetition-prairieview-johnsoncontrols.htmllxxiv. http://www.nasa.gov/offices/education/programs/national/urc/group_IV/pvamu.htmllxxv. http://www.pvamu.edu/Include/research/Presentations/2010%20RAMP%20Conference.pdf

lxxvi. http://otc.tamu.edu/about/stats.jsplxxvii. http://www.pvamu.sbdcnetwork.net/prairieview/Who_we_are.asplxxviii. http://www.teex.com/teex.cfm?pageid=media&area=teex&templateid=23&storyid=1024

lxxix. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=410831lxxx. http://www.professor.rice.edu/professor/Research_Revenues.asplxxxi. http://rbpc.rice.edu/RA2011_2Column.aspx?id=787

lxxxii. http://rbpc.rice.edu/RA2011_2Column.aspx?id=782lxxxiii. http://alliance.rice.edu/rbpc.aspxlxxxiv. http://ott.rice.edu/news/NewsDetail.cfm?NewsID=21lxxxv. http://ott.rice.edu/news/NewsDetail.cfm?NewsID=13

lxxxvi. http://alliance.rice.edu/about/

46 of 145




★ U.S. Department of Commerce ★ The Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Economic Development Administration ★A-60

lxxxvii. https://www.collaborativeresearchfund.org/lxxxviii. http://www.azocleantech.com/news.aspx?newsID=6657

lxxxix. http://www.ti.com/corp/docs/webemail/2008/enewsltr/public-affairs/jul08/landing/education2.shtmlxc. http://www.rice360.rice.edu/content.aspx?id=40&linkidentifier=id&itemid=40

xci. http://www.president.usc.edu/short-bio/xcii. http://www.provost.usc.edu/senior-administration/krisztina-z-holly/xciii. http://www.marshall.usc.edu/faculty/centers/ctc/aboutxciv. http://classic.marshall.usc.edu/ecg/concentrations/entrepreneurship-program.htm#Entrepreneurship_and_Venture_Managementxcv. http://www.eclubusc.com/?page_id=41

xcvi. http://stevens.usc.edu/studentinnovatorshowcase.phpxcvii. http://www.marshall.usc.edu/faculty/centers/greif/researchxcviii. http://research.usc.edu/for-investigators/funding/usc/zumberge/

xcix. http://ami.usc.edu/launchpad.phpc. http://www.marshall.usc.edu/faculty/centers/ctc/aboutci. http://stevens.usc.edu/ideasempowered.phpcii. http://stevens.usc.edu/JNJinnovationfund.phpciii. http://news.usc.edu/#!/article/26426/USC-Has-Nearly-5-Billion-Economic-Impact

47 of 145



research school of engineering (rse) curriculum ... · research school of engineering (rse)...

Documents