Artivate:	
  A	
  Journal	
  of	
  Entrepreneurship	
  in	
  the	
  Arts	
  
	
  
Volume	
  1,	
  Issue	
  2	
  
http://artivate.org	
  
	
  
p.	
  1	
  
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  

EDITOR’S INTRODUCTION
Gary Beckman, North Carolina State University
This issue focuses on arts entrepreneurship pedagogy from a variety of perspectives.
Readers will see not only the integration of topics not presently considered in the literature, but
also how the field can accommodate a diverse set of inputs. When speaking about arts
entrepreneurship, most consider students as the recipients of our efforts. Educators, however, can
benefit from an interdisciplinary examination of what it is we teach and how we might do so.
Joseph Robert’s Infusing entrepreneurship within non-business disciplines: Preparing
artists and others for self-employment and entrepreneurship, is a somewhat reflective account on
many years of teaching arts entrepreneurship. As one of the field’s most prolific and dedicated
educators, Roberts discusses not only his experience in the classroom but the impact of the
Coleman Fellows Program on the field. Frameworks for educating the artist of the future:
Teaching habits of mind for arts entrepreneurship, authored by Linda Essig, is an examination
and extrapolation of Howard Gardner’s Five Minds for the Future. Augmented with the work of
Tom Duening , and Arthur Costa and Bena Kallick, Essig constructs a broader, “mind-based”
pedagogy for arts entrepreneurship education.
Possibly most challenging is Gordon Shockley and Peter Frank’s Dostoevsky’s “The
Grand Inquisitor”: Adding an ethical component to the teaching of non-market
entrepreneurship. Perhaps the first article published to address questions of ethics in arts
entrepreneurship teaching, the authors employ both literary criticism and social entrepreneurship
research as modes of examination. This work will certainly push the limits of our pedagogical
inquiry.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________	
  
Copyright	
  ©	
  2012,	
  the	
  author