Round 1 requires you to submit a 300-word abstract of an innovative credit-bearing programme, short course, module, or initiative at your institution.

The following information is required online via the EDHE website:

• Name of the initiative
• Author Name, Surname & Designation
• Author contact details
• Submitted by
• Name of University
• Contact e-mail address

The 300-word academic abstract should include:

• Title of the programme/module/initiative/project/course
• Purpose of the programme/module or initiative
• Target audience
• What problem(s) the initiative is addressing?
• The solution/approach
• How is this being implemented?
• Results/impact and benefits?
• Provide details of the formal academic credit or micro-credential associated with the initiative, including the number of credits, level (if applicable), and how these are recognised by the institution.

Submissions that don’t comply with these requirements won’t be accepted.

The following information is required online via the EDHE website:

• Author/s Title, Name, Surname, Designation
• Submitted by
• E-mail
• Phone numbers
• Date submitted
• University
• Contact name and e-mail of the university representative – (main author/s typically)

Submissions that don’t comply with these requirements won’t be accepted.

Upload your Case Study as per the required format via the EDHE website.

Required format:

• 7 000 words maximum (excluding references and appendices)
• Font: Arial
• Size: 11
• Spacing: 1.15

Cover Page:

• The title of the programme/module or initiative
• Name of University
• Author/s
• Names of participants in the initiative that need to be recognised
• Contact details and e-mail address of the university representative
• Date submitted

Case Study Headings:

Your case study must be structured under the following eleven headings. Note that these headings are designed to facilitate the potential transition of your case study into a scholarly book chapter (see From Case Study to Scholarly Book Chapter above). Please write in a clear, well-referenced academic style throughout.

1. Title and Mandate – The title and mandate of the Programme/Module or Initiative, including the targeted young entrepreneurs.
2. Credit-bearing status and credentialing – Indicate whether the Programme/Module/Initiative is credit-bearing and/or incorporates micro-credentials, badges, or other recognised forms of certification, including how these contribute to participants’ academic and entrepreneurial development.
3. Sustainability Problems – What sustainability problems is this initiative trying to address?
4. Literature Review – A concise review of the relevant scholarly literature that situates your initiative within the broader academic discourse. This section should demonstrate engagement with published research on entrepreneurship education, pedagogical theory, and/or the specific disciplinary context of your initiative. Use APA 7th edition referencing. A minimum of 10–15 scholarly sources is recommended.
5. Screening Criteria – The criteria used to screen applicants/youth entrepreneurs.
6. Inclusion Strategies – Strategies to encourage the inclusion of diverse candidates.
7. Infrastructure and Support – The infrastructure/support provided by the institution.
8. Links to Other Entrepreneurship Activities – The links to other entrepreneurship activities within the institution.
9. Ecosystem – Describe the ecosystem of the initiative.
10. Performance – The performance of the Programme/Module/Initiative so far, including any ratings by participants.
11. Challenges – The challenges that were encountered.
12. Future Plans – Plans to further develop/improve the initiative.

Guidance Note – Why a Literature Review?

A key lesson from the compilation of the first scholarly volume was that converting practice-based case studies into research-quality book chapters required substantial additional work on literature integration. By including a literature review from the outset, entrants will:

• Strengthen the academic rigour of their submission.
• Demonstrate how their initiative contributes to existing knowledge.
• Significantly reduce the editorial effort required should the case study be selected for a future scholarly publication.

The literature review is included in the 7 000-word count.

(The Annexures section below will EXCLUDE the 7 000-word count.)

Annexures

Include visuals (charts, graphs, images): these visuals should help viewers understand complex data and break up text-heavy content.

• Link to website/video footage to support the submission.
• References list (APA 7th edition).

Permissions for Visual Content

If your case study is selected for inclusion in a scholarly book, your institution’s written permission will be required before any photographs, logos, screenshots, or other institutional visual material can be published. To avoid delays:

• Obtain institutional permission in advance. Contact your university’s marketing, communications, or legal office to secure written consent for the use of all institutional images and branding included in your submission.
• Obtain consent from identifiable individuals. If photographs include students, staff, or community members, ensure you have their signed consent for publication (including in an Open Access format).
• Use high-resolution images. Academic publishers typically require a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. Low-resolution screenshots or compressed images may not be suitable for publication.
• Credit third-party content. For any visual material not created by the author(s), provide full source attribution and evidence that reproduction permission has been granted.

Securing permissions at the submission stage will streamline the publication process considerably.

Accessibility of Visual Content

All scholarly publications must comply with accessibility standards so that readers with visual or other disabilities can engage with the content. For every visual element (chart, graph, photograph, diagram, infographic) included in your case study, please provide:

• Alternative text (alt text): A concise description (one to two sentences) of what the visual shows, placed directly beneath the image or in a clearly labelled appendix. Alt text enables screen-reading software to describe visual content to readers who cannot see it.
• Descriptive caption: A numbered figure caption (e.g., “Figure 1: Participant satisfaction ratings, 2023–2025”) that identifies the visual and its relevance to the text.
• Data tables for charts/graphs: Where a chart or graph presents quantitative data, include a corresponding data table so that the underlying figures are available in text form.

These practices are consistent with the PDF/UA-1 accessibility standard adopted by Springer Nature and contribute to inclusive, high-quality scholarly output.

The top 10 case studies will be reviewed by a minimum of three international reviewers. The reviewers must be affiliated with a university.

Review Panel Criteria:

• Panel members must be affiliated with a recognised higher education institution, ensuring credibility and understanding of the academic landscape.
• Members should possess significant knowledge and experience in entrepreneurship education, including current trends, challenges, and effective teaching strategies in the field.
• Reviewers must have a background in developing, delivering, or assessing entrepreneurship courses, modules, or programmes, providing insight into best practices in teaching and learning.
• Knowledge of pedagogical theories, instructional design, and assessment methods is essential, ensuring that submissions are evaluated on effective teaching and learning practices.
• Review panellists are expected to conduct evaluations ethically and confidentially, upholding the integrity of the awards process.