The role of empathy in social entrepreneurship

While commercial and social entrepreneurship have much in common, one of the most important differences is the nature of the entrepreneurial opportunity (Austin et al., 2006). Whereas commercial entrepreneurial opportunities are focused on the creation of economic value, social entrepreneurship opportunities are focused on the creation of social value – that is, some form of societal improvement.

As a result, the decision process for prospective commercial and social entrepreneurs is likely to be infl uenced by diff erent factors. In developing a theory of entrepreneurial action, McMullen and Shepherd (2006) explain the decision to act upon identified entrepreneurial opportunities is a function of the feasibility and desirability of exploitation. Assuming feasibility is constant across both types of opportunities, the desirability of pursuing a commercial opportunity or a social opportunity may also differ.

While recognizing desirability may occur for a number of reasons (for example, Cyert and March, 1963), one important consideration in the commercial entrepreneur’s decision making processes is the fi nancial impact. By comparison, a primary motivator for the prospective social entrepreneur is social value creation for the marginalized. But, why are prospective social entrepreneurs drawn to the marginalized? For centuries, the role of emotion in prosocial human action has been studied (for a brief review, see Eisenberg and Miller, 1987). While there is some debate about whether action is pursued for altruistic or egoistic reasons,1 psychologists generally agree that empathy is a major determinant of prosocial behavior in a wide range of contexts (cf Batson and Coke, 1981; Davis, 1980; Hoff man, 1984).

Empathy is defined as ‘an aff ective state that stems from the comprehension of another’s emotional state or condition, and that is congruent with it’ (Eisenberg and Miller, 1987, p. 91). In developing theoretical paths to helping behavior, Batson (1987) developed three paths by which prosocial behavior may occur. The fi rst two paths suggest egoistic motivations for helping behavior (termed reward seeking/punishment avoiding motivation and arousal reducing egoistic motivation). The third path departed from the traditional approach which viewed all intentional action as egoistic and instead presented a path where prosocial behavior occurred for altruistic motivation. This third model, termed empathetically evoked altruistic motivation, off ered a theoretical model linking empathy to prosocial behavior.

Given the increasing empirical evidence supporting the empathy- altruism hypothesis (for example, Batson and Shaw, 1991), we focus on this third path as one possible explanation for engaging social entrepreneurship. According to the model, a precipitating or instigating situation leads a person to begin to adopt the perspective of another. The perspective- taking of another is often related to one’s own self- perspective or the perspective about another’s perceived reaction to similar situations (Batson, 1991). Often, adoption of the perspective of another person takes place in times of trouble or during personal distress of another. As such, the identifi cation with another’s distress leads to a vicarious emotional response of empathy.

This empathetic response may be induced by prior experience in similar situations or a feeling of attachment to the other person (Batson, 1991; Lee and Holden, 1999); and it is related to the magnitude of the other person’s need and the strength of attachment to the other. This attachment can occur for a number of reasons including perceived similarity as well as attractiveness. In turn, this emotion- matching leads to an altruistic motivation to help another.

The basic premise of this hypothesis is that the suff ering of another leads an individual to seek to reduce suff ering for that other not for personal reasons but for altruistic reasons. The arousal of the motivational state leads the individual to embark on a hedonic calculus of the cost–benefi t analysis of helping behavior. The cost–benefi t analysis compares the magnitude of the suff ering of another with the cost associated with engaging in behavior that will reduce or eliminate the suff ering of the other. Such costs may be physical, mental, social, political or financial.

Finally, when the benefi ts outweigh the costs, the individual engages in helping behavior. Such helping behavior is thought to occur ‘if: 1.) helping is possible; 2.) the relative benefi t of helping is perceived to be positive; and 3.) the relative benefi t of helping is perceived to be more positive than the relative benefi t of having someone else help’ (Batson and Shaw, 1991). The empathy–altruism–prosocial behavior model provides an excellent theoretical explanation to understand the decision- making process of a social entrepreneur. While there may be no personal gain (fi nancial or otherwise) for the social entrepreneur, the opportunity to assist another in need represents an important foundation from which to build a theory that explains the motivations of the social entrepreneur. Given its potential importance, we now examine how the model itself may be useful for social entrepreneurship education.
Read More : The role of empathy in social entrepreneurship

The role of simulation in social entrepreneurship pedagogy

Given its infancy, the fi eld of social entrepreneurship education is still developing. To begin to educate students about social entrepreneurship, several pedagogical approaches have been suggested (see Brock et al., 2008). However, one important approach that has been overlooked is the use of a simulation. One possible reason for this neglect is that the relative infancy of the fi eld suggests that simulations specifi c to the domain may not yet have been developed. While this might be the case, it may be possible to draw upon simulations used in other fi elds to specifi cally address some of the most salient issues in the field of social entrepreneurship. One such simulation is Star- Power which has been used in a number of fi elds including management for more than three decades.

The purpose of Star- Power as a pedagogical tool is to combine the increased interest, involvement and enthusiasm of simulations, rooted in realism and face validity, with the broader experiential learning  environment (Keys and Wolfe, 1990; Kinnear and Klammer, 1987; McGrath, 1982) in which social entrepreneurship is embedded. According to the director’s instructions, Star- Power is:

A game in which a low- mobility, three tiered society is built through the distribution of wealth
in the form of chips. Once established, the group with the most wealth is given the power to
make the rules of the game. Almost without exception, they make rules which secure and
enhance their position of power. The other two groups generally consider these rules to be
unfair and often label them dictatorial, fascist or racist. Sometimes, there is an open revolt
against the top group, other times the other two groups give up and drop out. When the frustration
and confl ict reaches a certain level, the director ends the game. The experience is then
analyzed and discussed. (Shirts, 1993: 3)

The Star- Power simulation: an overview

In the simulation, students blindly select diff erent colored chips out of a bag that contains a random assortment of diff erent colored chips. The chips each have diff erent point values attached to the color of the chip. The creation of the three tiers occurs as students engage in two rounds of trading chips with other members of the class period based on pre- specifi ed rules. After the fi rst round of trading, the students are divided into three groups based upon the total point value of their fi ve most valuable chips. Each group is then provided buttons which are worn during the balance of the game.2 At the end of each trading session, each group is given three bonus chips which are allocated to individuals within their group based upon a vote from the members.

Then, points are totaled again and adjustments between tiers are made if necessary. Then, students draw chips again but this time the bags of chips provided to each of the three groups are biased with the highest group drawing from a bag containing the majority of higher value chips. After this biased drawing, a second round of trading occurs followed by a second round of awarding of bonus chips. Following this second round of trading, the group of students with the highest scores is given the power to make rules for all subsequent rounds of trading.

To increase the eff ectiveness of the Star- Power simulation, it is important to provide an opportunity for students to refl ect upon their experiences and to share these experiences with the entire class. Following the in class simulation (which can be completed in approximately 75 minutes), the students are given an assignment to write a refl ection paper for the next class session that addresses two questions:

1. How did you feel during the Star- Power simulation?
2. Why did we use this simulation in a social entrepreneurship course?

When the students return for the next class session, the entire discussion is focused around these two questions. The fi rst question addresses issues related to the emotional aspects of the diff erent groups and how these emotions motivated action. By allowing students to hear the experiences from each of the groups, they gain a broader sense of how the emotions may have differed based upon the group in which the student was located and how these emotions impacted individual action and group decision- making. The second question is used to link the learning experience of the simulation with important constructs in social entrepreneurship.
Read More : The role of simulation in social entrepreneurship pedagogy

What is The Roles of Research In Educational Psychology

Teachers who are intentional, critical thinkers are likely to enter their classrooms equipped with knowledge about research in educational psychology. Every year, educational psychologists discover or refine principles of teaching and learning that are useful for practicing teachers. Some of these principles are just common sense backed up with evidence, but others are more surprising. One problem educational psychologists face is that almost everyone thinks he or she is an expert on the subject of educational psychology. Most adults have spent many years in schools watching what teachers do. Add to that a certain amount of knowledge of human nature, and voila! Everyone is an amateur educational psychologist. For this reason, professional educational psychologists are often accused of studying the obvious (Gage, 1991).

However, as we have painfully learned, the obvious is not always true. For example, most people assume that if students are assigned to classes according to their ability, the resulting narrower range of abilities in a class will let the teacher adapt the instruction to the specific needs of the students and thereby increase student achievement. This assumption turns out to be false. Many teachers believe that scolding students for misbehavior will improve student behavior. Many students will indeed respond to a scolding by behaving better, but for others, scolding may be a reward for misbehavior and will actually increase it. Some "obvious" truths even conflict with one another.

For example, most people would agree that students learn better from a teacher's instruction than by working alone. This belief supports teacher-centered direct instructional strategies, in which a teacher actively works with the class as a whole. On the other hand, most people would also agree that students often need instruction tailored to their individual needs. This belief, also correct, would demand that teachers divide their time among individuals, or at least among groups of students with differing needs, which would result in some students working independently while others received the teacher's attention.

If schools could provide tutors for every student, there would be no conflict; direct instruction and individualization could coexist. In practice, however, classrooms typically have 20 or more students; as a result, more direct instruction (the first goal) almost always means less indvidualization (the second goal). The intentional teacher's task is to balance these competing goals according to the needs of particular students and situations.

The Goal of Research in Educational Psychology
The goal of research in educational psychology is to carefully examine obvious as well as less than obvious questions, using objective methods to test ideas about the factors that contribute to learning (Levin, O'Donnell, & ICratochwill, 2003; McCombs, 2003). The products of this research are principles, laws, and theories. A principle explains the relationship between factors, such as the effects of alternative grading systems on student motivation. Laws are simply principles that have been thoroughly tested and found to apply in a wide variety of situations.

A theory is a set of related principles and laws that explains a broad aspect of learning, behavior, or another area of interest. Without theories the facts and principles that are dscovered would be like disorganized specks on a canvas. Theories tie together these facts and principles to give us the big picture. However, the same facts and principles may be interpreted in dfferent ways by dfferent theorists. As in any science, progress in educational psychology is slow and uneven. A single study is rarely a breakthrough, but over time evidence accumulates on a subject and allows theorists to refine and extend their theories.


The Value of Research in Educational Psychology to the Teacher
It is probably true that the most important things teachers learn, they learn on the job-in internships, while student teaching, or during their first years in the classroom (Darling-Hammond, Gendler, & Wise, 1990). However, teachers make hundreds of decisions every day, and each decision has a theory behind it, whether or not the teacher is aware of it. The quality, accuracy, and useless of those theories are what ultimately determine the teacher's success. For example, one teacher may offer a prize to the student with the best attendance, on the theory that rewarding attendance will increase it. Another may reward the student whose attendance is most improved, on the theory that it is poor attenders who most need incentives to come to class. A third may not reward anyone for attendance but may try to increase attendance by teaching
more interesting lessons. Which teacher's plan is most likely to succeed? This depends in large part on the ability of each teacher to understand the unique combination of factors that shape the character of her or his classroom and therefore to apply the most appropriate theory.
Read More : What is The Roles of Research In Educational Psychology

THE ROLE OF PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING IN THE READING DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS

English Language Learners (ELL)
Children who are raised in homes where English is not the first language and/or standard English is not spoken may have difficulty with hearing the difference between similar sounding words like “send” and “sent.” Any child who is not in a home, day care, or preschool environment where English phonology operates may have difficulty perceiving and demonstrating the differences between English language phonemes. In other words, their phoneme awareness in terms of the English language will be poor. If children cannot hear the difference
between words that sound the same like “grow” and “glow,” they will be confused when these words appear in a print context. This confusion is likely to impact their comprehension.

Considerations for teaching phonological processing to ELL children include recognition by the teacher that what works for the English language speaking child from an English language speaking family does not necessarily work with students who speak other primary languages.

Research recommends that ELL children initially learn to read in their first language. It has also been found that a priority for ELL should be learning to speak English before being taught to read English. Research supports oral language development, since it lays the foundation for phonological awareness.

All phonological instruction programs must be tailored to the children’s learning backgrounds. Rhymes and alliteration introduced to ELL children should be read or shared with them in their first language, if possible. If you do not speak the student’s first language, get a paraprofessional or pull out an ELL educator to support your instruction in the first language.


Struggling Readers
Among the causes that make reading a struggle for some children (and adults) is auditory trauma or ear infections that affect the ability to hear speech. Such children need one-on-one support with articulation and perception of different sounds. When a child says a word such as “parrot” incorrectly, repeat it back as
a question with the correct pronunciation of the sounds. If the child “gets” the sound correctly after your question, this type of extra support was all that was needed. If the child still has difficulty with pronunciation, it may be necessary to consult with a speech therapist or audiologist. Early identification of medical conditions that affect hearing is crucial to reading development. Therefore, as an educator, you need to make the time to sit with struggling readers and play games such as “same or different” in order to identify those children who may be struggling due to a hearing difficulty.

The most common characteristic among children with language learning disabilities that produce delays in learning to read is weakness in either phonological or phonemic awareness. Many students with reading disabilities will have been diagnosed with some form of Dyslexia. Dyslexia is a language learning disorder that is often based on difficulties with phonological awareness and processing. Common symptoms included difficulty decoding words, poor fluency, poor writing and spelling, and sometimes comprehension difficulties, as well. These difficulties are present in spite of normal intelligence and instructional methods. Pierangelo & Giuliani (2007) describe a variety of types of Dyslexia cited by and most of them have phonemic or phonological weakness as one significant component.
Read More : THE ROLE OF PHONOLOGICAL PROCESSING IN THE READING DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS