Creative Project-based learning to boost technology innovation


This paper shows the results of the application of a project-based learning methodology that blended flipped classroom and face-to-face sessions, along with creativity and lateral thinking techniques, to integrate the expected concepts and procedures of technology innovation and boost entrepreneurship among students of Master’s degree in chemical engineering. The constructive alignment between the expected learning outcomes and skills with the proposed activities and assessment methods was decisive in the design of the methodology, which tractor activity was the creation of an innovation project. The use of techniques of creativity promoted lateral thinking and originality in the definition of projects. Active methodologies provoked team engagement and collaborative learning, enhanced participation and stimulated intrinsic motivation. The grades obtained by all groups in their projects, given by external evaluators, were relevant, thus pointing out the quality and impact of their proposals. There was a general satisfaction on students, with special emphasis of the transcendence at a professional level, thus showing the potential of this methodology to boost entrepreneurship in technology innovation.


Entrepreneurship education; technology innovation; project-based learning; flipped classroom; creativity; active methodologies; collaborative methodologies; assessment


  1. Badia, J.D., Olmo-Cazevieille, F. & Navarro-Jover, J.M., 2016. On-line quizzes to evaluate comprehension and integration skills. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(2), pp.75–90.

  2. Bager, T., 2011. The camp model for entrepreneurship teaching. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(2), pp.279–296.

  3. Baker, J.W., 2000. The classroom flip: Using web course management tools to become teh guide by the side. In 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning. Jacksonville, Florida, pp. 12–15.

  4. Bates, S. & Galloway, R., 2012. The inverted classroom in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a case study. The higher education academy.

  5. Biggs, J. & Tang, C., 2007. Teaching for quality learning at University The society for Research into Higher Education, ed., Open University Press.

  6. Birdi, K., 2015. Creativity training. In P. Sparrow et al., eds. Human resource management, innovation and performance. Springer.

  7. Bonk, C.J. & Graham, C.R., 2012. The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

  8. Bono, E. De, 1989. Six thinking hats. Educational Psychology in Practice, 4(4), pp.208–215. Available at:

  9. Bransford, J.D.., Brown, A.L.. & Cocking, R.R., 2000. How People Learn., Washington DC: National Academy Press.

  10. Bujacz, A. et al., 2016. Why do we enjoy creative tasks? Results from a multigroup randomized controlled study. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, pp.188–197. Available at: [Accessed February 11, 2016].

  11. Butt, A., 2014. Student viewvs on the use of a flipped classroom approach: evidence form Australia. Business Education and Acreditation, 6(1), pp.33–43.

  12. Cooper, S., Bottomley, C. & Gordon, J., 2004. Stepping out the classroom and up the ladder of learning: an experiental learning approach to entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 18(1), pp.11–22.

  13. Corbett, A.C., 2005. Experiental learning within the process of opportunity identification and exploitation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), pp.473–491.

  14. Fayolle, A. & Gailly, B., 2008. From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education. Journal of European Industrial Training, 32(7), pp.569–593. Available at:

  15. Fischer, S., Oget, D. & Cavallucci, D., 2015. The evaluation of creativity from the perspective of subject matter and training in higher education: Issues, constraints and limitations. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 19, pp.123–135. Available at: [Accessed October 31, 2015].

  16. Gannod, G.C., Burge, J.E. & Helmick, M.T., 2008. Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering. In Proceedings of the 30th international conference on software engineering. Leipzig, Germany.

  17. Gibb, A.A., 2005. The future of entrepreneurship education. Determining the basis for coherent policy and practice. In C. C. P. Kyrö, ed. The dynamics of learning entrepreneurship in a cross cultural university context,. University of Tampere Research Centre for Vocational and Professional Education, Tampere, pp. 44–68.

  18. GIIMA, 2008. Metodologías activas, Grupo de Investigación en Metodologías Activas, Editorial UPV.

  19. Harms, R., 2015. Self-regulated learning, team learning and project performance in entrepreneurship education: Learning in a lean startup environment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 100, pp.21–28. Available at: [Accessed February 10, 2016].

  20. Helle, L., Tynjälä, P. & Olkinuora, E., 2006. Project-Based Learning in Post-Secondary Education – Theory, Practice and Rubber Sling Shots. Higher Education, 51(2), pp.287–314. Available at:

  21. Hirsch, J.E. & Buela-Casal, G., 2014. The meaning of the h-index. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14, pp.161–164.

  22. Kolb, A.Y.K.D.A. & Kolb, D. a., 2005. Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), pp.193–212.

  23. Kolb, D.A., 2014. Experiental learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, FT Press.

  24. Kolb, D.A., Boyatzis, R.E. & Mainemelis, C., 2000. Experiental learning theory: previous research and new directions. In R. . Sternberg & L. F. Zhang, eds. Perspectives on cognitive, learning and thinking styles. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  25. Kuratko, D.F., 2005. The Emergence of Entrepreneurship Education: Development, Trends, and Challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), pp.577–598. Available at:

  26. Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J. & Treglia, M., 2000. Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating an Inclusive Learning Environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), pp.30–43. Available at:

  27. Lefebvre, M.. & Redien-Collot, R., 2013. How to do things with words: the discursive dimension of experiental learning in entrepreneurial mentoring dyads. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), pp.370–393.

  28. Lowell Bishop, J. & Verleger, M., 2013. The Flipped Classroom : A Survey of the Research. Proccedings of the Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education, p.6219. Available at:

  29. Marton, F. & Säljö, R., 1976. On qualitative differences in learning. I - Outcome and process. Journal of Educational Psycology, 46, pp.4–11.

  30. Michaelsen, L.K., Davidson, N. & Major, C.H., 2014. Team-Based Learning Practices and Principles in Comparison With Cooperative Learning and Problem-Based Learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25, pp.57–84.

  31. Michalko, M., 2006. Thinkertoys: a handbook of creative-thinking techniques, Ten Speed Press.

  32. O’Flaherty, J. & Phillips, C., 2015a. The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. Internet and Higher Education, 25, pp.85–95. Available at:

  33. O’Flaherty, J. & Phillips, C., 2015b. The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, pp.85–95. Available at: [Accessed February 20, 2015].

  34. Picciano, A.G., Dziuban, C.D. & Graham, C.R. eds., 2013. Blended Learning: Research Perspectives, Volumen 2, Routledge.

  35. R.G., M. & MacMillan, I., 2000. The entrepreneurial mindset: Strategies for continuously creating opportunity in an age of uncertainty, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

  36. Rasmussen, E.A. & Sörheim, R., 2006. Action-based entrepreneurship education. Technovation, 26(2), pp.185–194.

  37. Roach, T., 2014. Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, pp.74–84. Available at: [Accessed January 17, 2016].

  38. Roehl, A., Reddy, S.L. & Shannon, G.J., 2013. The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family & Consumer Sciences, 105(2), pp.44–49. Available at:

  39. Savery, J.., 2015. Overview of problem-based learning: definitions and distinctions. In P. A. Ertmer, ed. Essential Readings in Problem-based Learning. Purdue University Press.

  40. Schullery, N.., Reck, R.F. & Schullery, S.E., 2011. Towars solving the high enrollment, low engament dilemma: a case study in introductory business. International journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1(2), pp.1–9.

  41. Solomon, G.T., Duffy, S. & Tarabishy, A., 2002. The state of entrepreneurship education in the United States: A nationwide survey and analysis. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1(1), pp.65–87.

  42. Strayer, F.., 2012. How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning environment research, 15, pp.171–193.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

The texts published in this journal, unless otherwise indicated, are subject to a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivativeWorks 3.0.Spain licence. They may be copied, distributed and broadcast provided that the author and the journal that publishes them, @tic. revista d'innovació educativa, are cited. Commercial use and derivative works are not permitted. The full licence can be consulted on Creative Commons

Editor: Servei de Formació Permanent i Innovació Educativa. Tel. 0034 961625030 | Fax. 0034 961625032 | Valencia. España

ISSN: 1989-3477 |  Depósito Legal: V5051-2008


Indexed in:


Consortial Journals