An Education Agenda for TSE

The research agenda outlined above aligns with the need for an education agenda. Here, education is much more than a traditional focus on teaching and learning but encompasses the full range of formal and informal opportunities for knowledge co-creation, sharing and personal and professional reflexivity. Social entrepreneurship education has been around for some time, and there are innovative approaches to problem solving and information sharing that dissolve traditional boundaries between teacher and learner (Heady, Rickey, & Ogain, 2011; Jones, Warner, & Kiser, 2010). However, tourism higher education programs have not yet embraced the topic of TSE with any vigor. It is a relatively new phenomenon within tourism education, but other reasons contribute to its absence in tourism curricula. For example, tourism is a complex multidisciplinary field and innovation can be impeded by an already crowded curriculum where subjects and majors are delivered in silos. There are few academics with expertise and knowledge to be able to teach tourism social entrepreneurship but many who may be able to teach social entrepreneurship from a wider lens—and we require their input, expertise and engagement. TSE also requires alternative pedagogies with a deeper more grounded and situated style of experiential and values-based learning as well as design thinking approaches (Beckman & Barry, 2007; Meyers & Nulty, 2009; Owen, 2006). These are often difficult to deliver in institutions where the economic bottom-line dictates large class sizes and mass modes of delivery. Moreover, competition and standardization of curricula have meant that there is little room to innovate across programs and disciplines (which is an inherent requirement if

TSE is to deliver blended value across economic, social and environmental domains). As a result, any introduction of TSE education is likely to be driven by innovative and visionary intrapreneurs within higher education institutions, or innovative start-up labs and incubators that choose to work outside the boundaries of formal higher education (e.g. the School for Social Entrepreneurs: www.the-sse. org; kaospilot: www.kaospilot.dk; Tiimiakatemia: http://www.tiimiakatemia.fi/en/; THNK: http://www.thnk.org/).

So what would tourism social entrepreneurship education look like? The research agenda above identifies areas of knowledge that might be included in a TSE curriculum:

• • Conceptual and theoretical aspects of social entrepreneurship and social innovation, and its application in tourism
• • Operational aspects of TSE—business models,
• • Relational characteristics between entrepreneurs, communities, governments and business over time and across multiple scales;
• • Individual characteristics, qualities, behaviors and motivations of entrepreneurs;
• • Contextual factors and influences on TSE
• • Tracking performance of TSE, metrics, monitoring and evaluation.

The skills and competencies delivered in a TSE curriculum will vary depending upon, for example, the skills of staff, the mission of the institution, the resources available and so on. However, at a minimum, we envisage skills and competencies would include the ability for learners to work collaboratively in groups, and intercultural and interdisciplinary communication skills. Learners (we avoid the term ‘students’ because in knowledge co-creation, boundaries between teachers and students are dissolved and we all become learners in one way or another) should develop the skills to appreciate problem complexity, and to recognize and let go of taken-for-granted assumptions, worldviews and interpretations of cause and consequence. Learners should also be challenged to critically reflect on their own position, the limits of their own knowledge and the TSE field more generally, to appreciate what is not known and to find ways to overcome these constraints. This is not an easy task—identifying what one doesn’t know—but this challenge inevitably enables learners to unlock their creativity, sharpen their thinking and problem solving skills and to employ innovative thinking (Meyer & Land, 2003). In the creative thinking process, and through processes of interaction and shared knowledge building, it is possible to identify the values to be incorporated into solutionbuilding. In this way, learners can also appreciate notions of global citizenship and ethical values they wish to incorporate in TSE. Many of these ideas have been articulated in various TEFI (Tourism Education Futures Initiative) publications (e.g. Dredge & Schott, 2014; Dredge, Schott, et al., 2015).

Owen (2007: 22) captures many of the skills and competencies in the personal qualities that learners need to develop:

• • Sensitivity to the subtleties of various sensations and impressions;
• • A questioning attitude that seeks new and original answers;

• • A broad education, where questions not answers are the focus, and curiosity is more important than rote learning;
• • Asymmetrical thinking, or the ability to embrace chaotic, non-systemized learning as opposed to balanced symmetrical, logical thinking;
• • Personal courage to think for oneself, to listen to impulses, emotions and thoughts;
• • Sustained curiosity to seek what is unknown and to disregard the structures created by current hegemonic thinking;
• • Time control, or working in the moment unbound by clocks and deadlines, and to use time as a resource to think and create;
• • Dedication, or the desire to drive change, do something, and overcome obstacles.

Similarly Sherman (2011) suggests the following key competencies for social entrepreneurs:

• • Leadership: the ability to take initiative to act to solve problems (rather than complaining about what is wrong).
• • Optimism: having the confidence to achieve a bold vision even when others doubt. A belief in having control to change your own circumstances.
• • Grit: a combination of perseverance, passion, and hard work—the relentless drive to achieve goals.
• • Resilience in the face of adversities, obstacles, challenges, and failures: the ability to rise to the occasion when things fall apart;
• • Creativity and innovation: seeing new possibilities and thinking in unconventional ways. Seeing connections and patterns.
• • Empathy: putting oneself in the shoes of others, and imagining perspectives other than your own.
• • Emotional and social intelligence: excellence in connecting with others and building strong relationships.

Moreover, TSE education should be designed to serve new audiences, not just traditional higher education markets. The capacity to get involved in TSE education should not be dictated by formal educational achievements, diplomas or entry scores. Ideally, TSE education should have porous boundaries in terms of who participates; it should recognize that knowledge resides in different actors, in different contexts. Consequently the best learning community is one that encourages active participation from diverse participants. Community actors, entrepreneurs, policy actors, students enrolled in formal higher education programs, and tourism researchers can all learn from one another. Whether higher education institutions are the most appropriate places to provide education and training in TSE is an important question. Universities are currently subject to significant neoliberal pressures, they answer to higher education policy and not necessarily to the needs of society (Dredge, Airey, & Gross, 2015). Universities can be resistant to change, and there is a tendency for academics and administrators to attribute the actions needed to change society to external parties. We must unlock our own activism as conscious actors and take responsibility to be the change-makers we ideally want TSE learners to be. TSE is a unique opportunity and context to progress in achieving this. Higher education programs might consider adding TSE to the curriculum—or even modeling the entire curriculum around the concept—but they also need to reach out beyond the boundaries of academia to engage in other knowledge spaces. Such a TSE education program would attract the brightest higher education students who are eager to learn how to activate and influence tourism’s contribution to social change, especially among the millennials (cf. Donnison, 2007).

The divide between ‘developed’ and ‘developing countries’ poses a particularly sensitive yet important area in relation to TSE education and research. Typically it is believed that TSE activities are carried out by developed-world entrepreneurs in destinations that are less developed and are more in ‘need’ of help. However, such perspectives are inaccurate if not harmful. Many chapters in this book (chapters “Knowledge Dynamics in the Tourism-Social Entrepreneurship Nexus”, “Heroic Messiahs or Everyday Businessmen? The Rhetoric and the Reality of Social Entrepreneurship in India”, “Guludo Beach Lodge and the Nema Foundation, Mozambique”, “Adventure Alternative and Moving Mountains Trust: A Hybrid Business Model for Social Entrepreneurship in Tourism”) show there are many lessons the Global North can learn from the Global South. Our position is that we should avoid such distinctions and labels, learning can occur from South to North, within countries, and across sectors. A focus on what can be learned, what insights and lessons are available, is essential.