entrepreneurship education project

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2019, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Advertisement

Planning and evaluating youth entrepreneurship education programs in schools: a systematic literature review

• Original Paper
• Published: 02 March 2023
• Volume 6 , pages 25–44, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Jingjing Lin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4846-6817 1 ,
• Jiayin Qin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8336-8959 2 ,
• Thomas Lyons   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4757-4146 3 &
• Tomoki Sekiguchi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4522-5249 4  

687 Accesses

3 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Despite its importance, entrepreneurship education in upper secondary education is significantly less researched than in higher education. Many entrepreneurship education review studies are conducted at the university level, while relatively few are conducted at the high school level. Existing reviews favored discussing programs’ impacts and outcomes over its designing, developing, and delivering. Adapting well-established processes described in multiple entrepreneurship education reviews, we systematically identified and synthesized thirty-year literature on entrepreneurship education in upper secondary schools using academic database search, expert consulting, and backward snowballing techniques. Results led to the development of the Youth Entrepreneurship Education Planning and Evaluation (or YEEPE) conceptual framework, which offers holistic details to the program planning and evaluating processes at pre-university levels. In addition to informing evidence-based practices, the YEEPE framework is intended to assist education researchers in positioning their research, identifying research opportunities, and elucidating their contributions to both the youth development and entrepreneurship education literature. Further research is encouraged to utilize YEEPE as a starting point for integrating other pertinent research or as a design tool to facilitate the development of entrepreneurship education programs in schools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The effect of entrepreneurship education in schools on entrepreneurial outcomes: a systematic review

Entrepreneurial entrepreneurship youth education: initiating grounded theory

Entrepreneurship programs and their underlying pedagogy in secondary education in the netherlands, availability of data and material.

Not applicable.

Code availability

Adlim, M., & Hasibuan, R. A. (2014). Integrating entrepreneurial practice in contextual learning of biotechnology for senior high school students. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11 (2), 108–119.

Google Scholar  

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Article   Google Scholar  

Allinson, C. W., Chell, E., & Hayes, J. (2000). Intuition and entrepreneurial behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9 (1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/135943200398049

Aronsson, M. (2004). Education matters—but does entrepreneurship education? An interview with David Birch. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (3), 289–292. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2004.14242224

Athayde, R. (2009). Measuring enterprise potential in young people. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33 (2), 481–500.

Athayde, R. (2012). The impact of enterprise education on attitudes to enterprise in young people an evaluation study. Education Training, 54 , 709–726.

Azizi, M., & Mahmoudi, R. (2019). Learning outcomes of entrepreneurship education: Entrepreneurship education for knowing, doing, being, and living together. Journal of Education for Business, 94 (3), 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2018.1502139

Barma, S., Laferrière, T., Lemieux, B., Massé-Morneau, J., & Vincent, M.-C. (2017). Early stages in building hybrid activity between school and work: The case of PénArt. Journal of Education and Work, 30 (6), 669–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2017.1294247

Birdthistle, N., Hynes, B., & Fleming, P. (2007). Enterprise education programmes in secondary schools in Ireland: A multi-stakeholder perspective. Education Training, 49 (4), 265–276.

Blenker, P., & Christensen, P. R. (2007). Hunting the entrepreneurial expertise: Entrepreneurs in education. In A. Fayolle (Ed.), Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education: A General Perspective (Vol. 1, pp. 43–53). Edward Elgar.

Boland, A., Cherry, G., & Dickson, R. (2017). Doing a systematic review: A student’s guide . Sage.

Bonnett, C., & Furnham, A. (1991). Who wants to be an entrepreneur? A study of adolescents interested in a Young Enterprise scheme. Journal of Economic Psychology, 12 (3), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(91)90027-Q

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brüne, N., & Lutz, E. (2020). The effect of entrepreneurship education in schools on entrepreneurial outcomes: A systematic review. Management Review Quarterly, 70 (2), 275–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-019-00168-3

Caird, S. (1990). Enterprise education: The need for differentiation. British Journal of Education and Work, 4 (1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269000900040104

Cardoso, A., Cairrão, À., Petrova, D., & Figueiredo, J. (2018). Assessment of the effectiveness of the Entrepreneurship classes in the Bulgarian secondary education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 21 (2), 1–21.

Carvalho, L., Costa, T., & Mares, P. (2015). A success story in a partnership programme for entrepreneurship education: Outlook of students perceptions towards entrepreneurship. International Journal of Management in Education, 9 (4), 444. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMIE.2015.072097

Casey, R. E. (1996). Delinquency prevention through vocational entrepreneurship: The new Smyrna beach employability skill training model for youthful offenders. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 40 (2), 60–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.1996.9944654

Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R., & Esposito, E. (2017). Environmental sustainability in the service industry of transportation and logistics service providers: Systematic literature review and research directions. Transportation Research Part d: Transport and Environment, 53 , 454–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.04.032

Chen, L., Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J.Y.-K. (2021). Online and blended entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of applied educational technologies. Entrepreneurship Education, 4 (2), 191–232.

Cheng, M. Y., Chan, W. S., & Mahmood, A. (2009). The effectiveness of entrepreneurship education in Malaysia. Education Training, 51 (7), 555–566.

Cheung, C.-K., & Au, E. (2010). Running a small business by students in a secondary school: Its impact on learning about entrepreneurship. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 13 , 45–63.

European Commission. (2004). Helping to create an entrepreneurial culture: A guide on good practices in promoting entrepreneurial attitudes and skills through education (Vol. 25). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

European Commission. (2005). Triggering a new generation of entrepreneurs: Students breathe new life into EU entrepreneurship Commission report on the success of mini-companies in Europe . Commission of the European Communities.

Douglas, E. J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2002). Self-employment as a career choice: Attitudes, entrepreneurial intentions, and utility maximization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26 (3), 81–90.

Du Toit, A., & Kempen, E. L. (2018). The potential contribution of the intended high school curriculum at exit level to the entrepreneurship education of South African youth. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22 (1), 1–16.

Duval-Couetil, N. (2013). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programs: Challenges and approaches. Journal of Small Business Management, 51 (3), 394–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12024

Elert, N., Andersson, F. W., & Wennberg, K. (2015). The impact of entrepreneurship education in high school on long-term entrepreneurial performance. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 111 , 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014.12.020

Elqadri, Z. M., Priyono, P., & Sukmaningrum, D. (2017). Testing model student entrepreneurial intentions SMK in the Yogyakarta. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 15 (8), 223–237.

Fayolle, A. (2013). Personal views on the future of entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25 (7–8), 692–701. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2013.821318

Fejes, A., Nylund, M., & Wallin, J. (2019). How do teachers interpret and transform entrepreneurship education? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51 (4), 554–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2018.1488998

Fellnhofer, K. (2019). Toward a taxonomy of entrepreneurship education research literature: A bibliometric mapping and visualization. Educational Research Review, 27 , 28–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.002

Fiet, J. O. (2001). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory. Journal of Business Venturing, 16 (2), 101–117.

Filion, L. J. (1994). Ten steps to entrepreneurial teaching. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 11 (3), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.1994.10600466

Flemming, K., & Noyes, J. (2021). Qualitative evidence synthesis: Where are we at? International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20 , 1609406921993276.

Fuchs, K., Werner, A., & Wallau, F. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in Germany and Sweden: What role do different school systems play? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15 (2), 365–381. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871736

Fumero, A., De Miguel, A., & García-Rodríguez, F. J. (2015). Promoting entrepreneurial potential in adolescents: A pilot study based on intergenerational contact. South African Journal of Business Management, 46 (3), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v46i3.97

Gartner, W. B. (1988). “Who is an entrepreneur?” is the wrong question. American Journal of Small Business, 12 (4), 11–32.

Gartner, W. B., & Vesper, K. H. (1994). Experiments in entrepreneurship education: Successes and failures. Journal of Business Venturing, 9 (3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(94)90028-0

Gendron, G. (2004). Practitioners’ perspectives on entrepreneurship education: An interview with Steve Case, Matt Goldman, Tom Golisano, Geraldine Laybourne, Jeff Taylor, and Alan Webber. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (3), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2004.14242231

Heinonen, J., & Hytti, U. (2010). Back to basics: The role of teaching in developing the entrepreneurial university. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 11 (4), 283–292.

Heinonen, J., & Poikkijoki, S.-A. (2006). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to entrepreneurship education: Mission impossible? Journal of Management Development, 25 (1), 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710610637981

Hills, G. E. (1988). Variations in university entrepreneurship education: An empirical study of an evolving field. Journal of Business Venturing, 3 (2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(88)90021-3

Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of contingency-based business planning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (3), 258–273. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2004.14242112

Ierapetritis, D. G. (2017). Entrepreneurship education at school: A case study on secondary education in Greece. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 13 (2/3), 271. https://doi.org/10.1504/WREMSD.2017.10003428

International Labour Organization. (2020). Global employment trends for youth 2020: Technology and the future of jobs . International Labour Organization.

Izquierdo, E. (2008). Impact assessment of an educational intervention based on the constructivist paradigm on the development of entrepreneurial competencies in university students [Doctoral dissertation]. Ghent University.

Johansen, V., Schanke, T., & Hyvarde, T. (2012). Entrepreneurship education and pupils’ attitudes towards entrepreneurs. In T. Burger-Helmchen (Ed.), Entrepreneurship—Born, Made and Educated (pp. 113–126). InTech. https://doi.org/10.5772/35756

Johansen, V. (2018). Innovation cluster for entrepreneurship education (No. 978–82–7356–770–3; p. 76). Eastern Norway Research Institute.

Johansen, V. (2013). Entrepreneurship education and start-up activity: A gender perspective. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 5 (2), 216–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/17566261311328864

Johansen, V. (2014). Entrepreneurship education and academic performance. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58 (3), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.726642

Johansen, V. (2016). Gender and self-employment: The role of mini-companies. Education Training, 58 (2), 150–163.

Johansen, V. (2017). Does the Company Programme have the same impact on young women and men? A study of entrepreneurship education in Norwegian upper secondary schools. Journal of Education and Work, 30 (3), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2016.1165342

Johansen, V., & Clausen, T. H. (2011). Promoting the entrepreneurs of tomorrow: Entrepreneurship education and start-up intentions among schoolchildren. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 13 (2), 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2011.040761

Johansen, V., Clausen, T. H., & Schanke, T. (2013). Entrepreneurship education and boys’ and girls’ perceptions of entrepreneurs. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 19 (2), 127–141.

Johansen, V., & Foss, L. (2013). The effects of entrepreneurship education–Does gender matter? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 20 (3), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2013.056889

Johansen, V., & Schanke, T. (2013). Entrepreneurship education in secondary education and training. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57 (4), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.656280

Johnson, C. (1988). Enterprise education and training. British Journal of Education and Work, 2 (1), 61–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269000880020106

Jones, B., & Iredale, N. (2006). Developing an entrepreneurial life skills summer school. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43 (3), 233–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290600618522

Karmokar, S., & Shekar, A. (2018). Outreach programmes using the Triple Helix model to encourage interest in Science and Technology among underrepresented youth. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 23 (1), 88–103.

Kearney, P. (1996). The relationship between developing of the key competencies in students and developing of the enterprising student. Paper Commissioned by Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Canberra .

Kibuka, G. (2010). An examination of factors that influence entrepreneurial intention of high school students in Kenya [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Kourilsky, M. L. (1995). Entrepreneurship education: Opportunity in search of curriculum . Ewing Marion Kaufmann Foundation, Kansas City, MO. Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED389347.pdf

Kourilsky, M. L., & Esfandiari, M. (1997). Entrepreneurship education and lower socioeconomic black youth: An empirical investigation. The Urban Review, 29 (3), 2052–2215. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024629027806

Kourilsky, M. L., & Walstad, W. B. (1998). Entrepreneurship and female youth: Knowledge, attitudes, gender differences, and educational practices. Journal of Business Venturing, 13 (1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00032-3

Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29 (5), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00099.x

Lackéus, M. (2015). Entrepreneurship in education: What, why, when, how . Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/BGP_Entrepreneurship-in-Education.pdf

Lautenschläger, A., & Haase, H. (2011). The myth of entrepreneurship education: Seven arguments against teaching business creation at universities. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 14 (1), 147–162.

Lewis, K., & Massey, C. (2003). Delivering enterprise education in New Zealand. Education Training, 45 (4), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910310478120

Lin, J. (2021). Review protocol for the research on Entrepreneurship education for high schoolers: Review, synthesis, and future research direction. Open Science Framework . https://osf.io/632nx

Lin, J., Qin, J., Lyons, T., Nakajima, H., Kawakatsu, S., & Sekiguchi, T. (2022). The ecological approach to construct entrepreneurship education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies . https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-12-2021-0455

Liñán, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education. Piccolla Impresa/small Business, 3 (1), 11–35.

Lourenço, F., Jones, O., & Jayawarna, D. (2013). Promoting sustainable development: The role of entrepreneurship education. International Small Business Journal, 31 (8), 841–865.

Mahadea, D., Ramroop, S., & Zewotir, T. (2011). Assessing entrepreneurship perceptions of high school learners in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 14 (1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v14i1.59

Marques, C. S., Ferreira, J. J., Gomes, D. N., & Gouveia Rodrigues, R. (2012). Entrepreneurship education: How psychological, demographic and behavioural factors predict the entrepreneurial intention. Education Training, 54 (8/9), 657–672. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211274819

Martínez-Gregorio, S., Badenes-Ribera, L., & Oliver, A. (2021). Effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship intention and related outcomes in educational contexts: A meta-analysis. The International Journal of Management Education, 19 (3), 100545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100545

McClelland, D. C. (1961). Achieving society . Simon and Schuster.

Book   Google Scholar  

McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22 (3), 276–282.

Morakinyo, A., & Akinsola, O. (2019). Leadership and entrepreneurship education as a strategy for strengthening youth community engagement in Nigeria: Lessons learnt from jumpstart project. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23 , 1–17.

Mothibi, N. H., & Malebana, M. J. (2019). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions of secondary school learners in Mamelodi. South Africa. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 25 (2), 1–14.

Mwasalwiba, E. S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives, teaching methods, and impact indicators. Education + Training., 16 , 20.

Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N., & Walmsley, A. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16 (2), 277–299. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0026

Nelson, R. E. (1977). Entrepreneurship education in developing countries. Asian Survey, 17 (9), 880–885. https://doi.org/10.2307/2643595

Nketekete, M. E., & Motebang, M. B. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in Lesotho secondary schools: Pedagogical challenges. Education, Knowledge and Economy, 2 (2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/17496890802221357

Norberg, E.-L.L. (2017). Entrepreneurship in Swedish upper secondary schools: Governing active future citizens? Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 11 (5), 547–563. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-06-2016-0020

Noworatzky, J. (2018). Experiential Learning and its Impact on Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention in Two Innovative High School Programs [Doctoral dissertation]. Northeastern University.

O’Connor, A. (2013). A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting government and economic purposes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28 (4), 546–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.07.003

Obschonka, M., Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2017). Entrepreneurship as a twenty-first century skill: Entrepreneurial alertness and intention in the transition to adulthood. Small Business Economics, 48 (3), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9798-6

Oosterbeek, H., van Praag, M., & Ijsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic Review, 54 (3), 442–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.08.002

Osgood, D. A. (2011). An entrepreneurial systems approach to dropout prevention: A student-centric approach to purposeful academic engagement among at-risk youth . Franklin Pierce University.

Othman, N., & Nasrudin, N. (2016). Entrepreneurship education programs in Malaysian polytechnics. Education+ Training .

Paquin, T. F. (1990). A school-based enterprise: The Saint Pauls, North Carolina experience. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 10 (4), 26–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687059001000406

Patel, R. (2004). Creating an enterprise culture understanding the national mission: A campaign perspective by enterprise insight . enterpriseuk.org. https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/creating-an-enterprise-culture-understanding-the-national-mission-a-campaign-perspective-by-enterprise-insight-ei

Pihie, Z. A. L., & Bagheri, A. (2010). Entrepreneurial attitude and entrepreneurial efficacy of technical secondary school students. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 62 (3), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2010.509806

Pihie, Z. A. L., & Bagheri, A. (2011). Are teachers qualified to teach entrepreneurship? Analysis of entrepreneurial attitude and self-efficacy. Journal of Applied Sciences, 11 (18), 3308–3314. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2011.3308.3314

Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 25 (5), 479–510.

Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004). Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 5 (3–4), 137–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-8545.2004.00101.x

Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., & Prescott, J. E. (2020). Advancing theory with review articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57 (2), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549

Purwana, D., Suhud, U., Puruwita, D., & Sobari, R. (2018). Do personality traits, attitude, education, and self-efficacy impact on entrepreneurial intention of vocational students? Proceedings of the 31st International Business Information Management Association Conference, IBIMA 2018: Innovation Management and Education Excellence through Vision 2020 . 31st IBIMA Conference: 25–26 April 2018, Milan, Italy.

Ratten, V., & Usmanij, P. (2021). Entrepreneurship education: Time for a change in research direction? The International Journal of Management Education, 19 (1), 100367.

Rodrigues, R. G., & Dinis, A. (2012). The effect of an entrepreneurial training programme on entrepreneurial traits and intention of secondary students. In T. Burger-Helmchen (Ed.), Entrepreneurship: Born, made and educated (pp. 77–92). InTech.

Saptono, A., & Wibowo, A. (2018). Do learning environment and self-efficacy impact on student’s entrepreneurial attitude. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 22 (4), 1–11.

Schröder, E., & Schmitt-Rodermund, E. (2006). Crystallizing enterprising interests among adolescents through a career development program: The role of personality and family background. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69 (3), 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2006.05.004

Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship , 72–90.

Sirelkhatim, F., & Gangi, Y. (2015). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic literature review of curricula contents and teaching methods. Cogent Business & Management, 2 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2015.1052034

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), 65–86.

Steenekamp, A. G., van der Merwe, S. P., & Athayde, R. (2011). Application of the Attitude Toward Enterprise (ATE) test on secondary school learners in South Africa. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 14 (3), 314–332.

Strimel, G., Kim, E., Bosman, L., & Gupta, S. (2019). Informed design through the integration of entrepreneurial thinking in secondary engineering programs. Journal of STEM Education, 19 (5), 32–39.

Sutter, C., Bruton, G. D., & Chen, J. (2019). Entrepreneurship as a solution to extreme poverty: A review and future research directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 34 (1), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.06.003

Teoh, H. Y., & Foo, S. L. (1997). Moderating effects of tolerance for ambiguity and risktaking propensity on the role conflict-perceived performance relationship: Evidence from Singaporean entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 12 (1), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(96)00035-3

Tingey, L., Larzelere-Hinton, F., Goklish, N., Ingalls, A., Craft, T., Sprengeler, F., McGuire, C., & Barlow, A. (2016). Entrepreneurship education: A strength-based approach to substance use and suicide prevention for American Indian adolescents. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 23 (3), 248–270. https://doi.org/10.5820/aian.2303.2016.248

Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14 (3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

United Nations. (2015). Population 2030: Demographic challenges and opportunities for sustainable development planning (ST/ESA/SER.A/389; p. 58). United Nations.

Wilson, F., Kickul, J., & Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self–efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (3), 387–406.

Winarno, A. (2016). Entrepreneurship Education in Vocational Schools: Characteristics of Teachers, Schools and Risk Implementation of the Curriculum 2013 in Indonesia. Journal of Education and Practice, 7 (9), 122–127.

Zabaneh, R. (2017). Purpose-driven education: Social entrepreneurship as a pedagogical tool for student success [Doctoral dissertation]. Creighton University.

Download references

This research was funded by Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Research Fellow (19F19779).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Center for IT-Based Education, Toyohashi University of Technology, Toyohashi, Japan

Jingjing Lin

Graduate School of Economics, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

Gary W. Rollins College of Business, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, USA

Thomas Lyons

Graduate School of Management, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

Tomoki Sekiguchi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jingjing Lin .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

This research claims no conflict of interest.

Consent to participate

Consent for publication, ethics approval, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Lin, J., Qin, J., Lyons, T. et al. Planning and evaluating youth entrepreneurship education programs in schools: a systematic literature review. Entrep Educ 6 , 25–44 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-023-00092-4

Download citation

Received : 13 February 2023

Revised : 13 February 2023

Accepted : 21 February 2023

Published : 02 March 2023

Issue Date : March 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-023-00092-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Systematic literature review
• Entrepreneurship education
• Upper secondary education
• Adolescents
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

HYPOTHESIS AND THEORY article

How does the entrepreneurship education influence the students’ innovation testing on the multiple mediation model.

• 1 School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China
• 2 Youth Development Research Center, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
• 3 College of Animal Science and Technology, Guangxi University, Nanning, China

This study aims to explore the multiple mediating effects of political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation. Structural equation is used to analyze data collected from 269 Chinese student entrepreneurs. Results showed that (1) there is a positive relationship between perceptions of entrepreneurship education and perceptions of innovation, (2) political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition individually play a mediating role between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation, and (3) political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition play a chain mediating effect between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Introduction

Entrepreneurship education cultivates innovative talents, which are an important driving force for future development. At present, innovation-driven development strategies place new demands on entrepreneurship education. However, most of the current research and discussion in this field focuses on the construction of teaching staff in the entrepreneurial education ecosystem ( Ruskovaara and Pihkala, 2015 ), curriculum development ( Falck et al., 2016 ), and whether entrepreneurship education can influence the Intention of entrepreneurship ( Martin et al., 2013 ; Pittaway and Cope, 2016 ). Based on the theory of social cognitive, the individual traits and environmental of learners greatly influence the realization of entrepreneurship education. In-depth study of the mechanism of entrepreneurship education, which drives innovation and development, can further improve the research on entrepreneurship education ( Baum et al., 2001 ; Morris et al., 2013 ).

Innovation is seen as an internal driver; innovation relates to an entrepreneurial mindset; thus, development of new products or entrance to new markets is the result of entrepreneurship ( Miller, 1983 ; Covin and Slevin, 1989 ). Entrepreneurship education is an important way for entrepreneurs to acquire resources, enhance innovative ability and innovative personality, and build multi-level learning channels for entrepreneurs by integrating various knowledge and value systems. From knowledge learning to skills improvement, entrepreneurship education includes general ability development and improvement of professional ability. Entrepreneurial competence, which is important for success, mainly refers to the ability to identify opportunities and develop the necessary resources and capital ( Arthurs and Busenitz, 2006 ; Kettunen et al., 2013 ), in addition to technical, financial, and legal knowledge ( Kuratko, 2005 ). Considering that entrepreneurship ability is diversified, Bacigalupo et al. (2016) build an entrepreneurial competency framework that includes opportunity identification, entrepreneurial skills that represent “resources,” action areas, and 15 competency lists. Gianesini et al. (2018) compared models and classifications of entrepreneurial abilities, arguing that entrepreneurial abilities consist of personality traits, entrepreneurial knowledge, and skills. The research on entrepreneurial ability is increasingly concerned with relevant knowledge and experience to improve skills and develop potential resources to enhance the innovation.

Entrepreneurship education is concerned with fostering creative skills that can be applied in practices, education, and environments supporting innovation ( Binks et al., 2006 ; Gundry et al., 2014 ). Student entrepreneurs use multi-party interaction to achieve knowledge iteration in the learning network; the innovation process is the result of interactions among the environment, organization, and entrepreneurs ( Anderson et al., 2014 ). Entrepreneurial ability involves adaptive behaviors and strategies to influence others’ actions in relational contexts ( Ferris et al., 2005 ; Tocher et al., 2012 ), thereby driving innovation and bringing high returns. The entrepreneurship framework by Bacigalupo et al. (2016) considers opportunity identification, entrepreneurial skills, and action as three key areas of entrepreneurial competence. Studies have shown that political skills can help entrepreneurs feel a sense of confidence and control over their work environment. They are likely to be engaged confidently in the dynamics of the environment, and effectively alter attitudes and behaviors to adapt to uncertain conditions ( Ferris et al., 2005 ), with political skills said to explain how individuals recognize opportunities ( McAllister et al., 2016 ). Student entrepreneurs with highly developed political skills can effectively integrate existing resources, accurately identify and interpret social cues from the environment, and gradually become a major force in technology and product innovation. This study selects political skills and entrepreneurial opportunities as mediators to explore how perceived entrepreneurial education influences innovation.

Theoretical Basis and Hypothesis

Social cognitive theory conceives individuals as agents and active contributors to the development of the circumstances that surround their lives ( Bandura, 2018 ). Individuals are tended to pursue their goals if they consider their own abilities and actions are capable of achieving the desired results ( Bandura et al., 2003 ). Entrepreneurship education helps improve their cognition, constantly adjust their thoughts and actions, and make their entrepreneurship more directional, coherent and meaningful. This study employs the theory of social cognition to examine how learners in entrepreneurship education can enhance their ability to identify opportunities through political skills, which in turn affects entrepreneurs’ innovative awareness, innovative ability, and innovative personality. Learning from observation ( Bandura, 1978 ) to participation ( Sims and Sinclair, 2008 ; Tavella and Franco, 2015 ), in a network ( Berkes, 2009 ; Chen and Chang, 2014 ), learning is no longer a single behavior but is implemented in a complex system of relationships. Individuals can transcend immediate circumstances, through self-guidance, shape the present toward the realization of outcomes and goals ( Bandura, 2018 ). General education focuses on the overall development of students, and the entrepreneurial curriculum system lays the foundation for the overall improvement of students’ entrepreneurial ability. From observation to participation, the social learning network provides multi-level learning channels for student entrepreneurs to continuously improve their skills in learning and practice. Therefore, entrepreneurship education might enhance the confidence of the students that he will be able to solve new and unexpected problems.

Skills are described as the ability to apply knowledge in practice, a special ability that drives innovation and development. In entrepreneurship, highly developed political skills can help student entrepreneurs accurately identify and acquire effective resources in a dynamic and complex social environment, as well as create a new combination of technology and knowledge with the support of organizations. Entrepreneur must possess the savviness to effectively understand others in the workplace and adjust their behaviors accordingly. The actual process of opportunity recognition is an interaction between individuals and their environments. Komarkova et al. (2015) argue that skills and opportunities can be used to examine entrepreneurial innovation capabilities. The prior experience and skills of entrepreneurs affect the opportunity recognition process ( Dencker et al., 2009 ; Odia and Odia, 2013 ). Highly developed political skills transform the resources and experience acquired by entrepreneurship education into the ability to identify and create new products or services; motivate the entrepreneurs to learn together; and enhance innovative awareness, innovative ability, and innovative personality. To deepen the reforms in entrepreneurship education, we have to fully consider the needs and characteristics of student entrepreneurs. Paying attention to the cultivation of students’ entrepreneurial skills is conducive to the realization of the goals of entrepreneurial education organizations, and the overall development needs of entrepreneurial activities.

The Influence of Perceived Entrepreneurship Education on Innovation

Students’ views on their entrepreneurship education are related to their perception of innovation; fostering innovation through entrepreneurship education is the primary task of universities. Innovative awareness and innovative ability are the core process of students’ innovation activities, which are also influenced by innovation personality. The educational system of universities has to provide an academic environment that may serve as a catalyst for high-technology start-ups ( Franke and Lüthje, 2004 ). If learners are constantly challenged to expand their content knowledge they will be motivated to broaden their cognitive levels ( Bandura, 1999 ), form a defense mechanism to eliminate the negative impact caused by perceived pressure ( Granieri et al., 2017 ). Entrepreneurs are made, not born, by imparting the knowledge and skills needed for a new business venture. The process of shaping the ability of student entrepreneurs is a social interaction process in which information resources are acquired and transformed in the form of observation or direct participation in entrepreneurship education. This process also involves creating new knowledge through transforming experience and putting knowledge into practice. Entrepreneurship education may change a student’s attitudes toward entrepreneurship ( Galloway and Brown 2002 ). Students’ perception and attitudes toward entrepreneurship education can determine whether students’ creativity will be expressed and constitutes a self-judgment of one’s perceived competence in generating novel ideas ( Brown and Ulijn, 2004 ; Beghetto and Kaufman, 2010 ), forming an internal, lasting, and stable innovative personality. At the same time, entrepreneurship education provides student entrepreneurs with the information, knowledge, and other resources they need, thereby forming a strong atmosphere of innovation and entrepreneurship, reducing environmental uncertainty, and creating a good environment for innovation and development. Entrepreneurship education provides a comprehensive learning management for student entrepreneurs, helping them to establish correct values and cognitive systems, enhance their perceptions of innovation and continuously integrate, and accumulate new knowledge to shape their innovative ability and personality.

Hypothesis 1 : There will be a positive relationship between perceptions of entrepreneurship education and perceptions of innovation.

Mediating Role of Political Skills

The primary objective of entrepreneurship education is to develop all essential entrepreneurial skills to meet entrepreneurial success ( Lazear, 2004 ; Audretsch et al., 2016 ). Traditional entrepreneurial knowledge learning can no longer meet the dynamic environment’s demand for entrepreneurial ability. Entrepreneurship education builds a multi-level social network and comprehensive learning management for the professional ability of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship education develops students’ entrepreneurial skills, enabling them to cope with environmental uncertainties and new challenges ( Brian and Norma, 2010 ; Seikkula-Leino, 2011 ; Premand et al., 2016 ). Ferris et al. (2000) interpret political skills from four dimensions, namely, networking ability, interpersonal influence, social astuteness, and apparent sincerity. Political skill refers to “ the ability to effectively understand others at work and to use such knowledge to influence others to act in ways that enhance one’s personal and/or organizational objectives ” ( Ferris et al., 2005 ). Politically skilled individuals have superior social astuteness, can help people better understand, and influence others in complex environments, thereby achieving personal and organizational goals ( Ferris et al., 2005 ; Munyon et al., 2015 ). Political skill helps span boundaries and make up for the shortcomings of social networks on college campuses and facilitate a successful development and usage of network ties ( Wei et al., 2012 ; Fang et al., 2015 ). Politically skilled individuals are adept at forging relationships with others who have valuable resources and locate themselves in advantageous positions within their social network ( Fang et al., 2015 ). Through social networks, individuals gain access to inaformation, role models, and mentors, establish connections and achieve the esteem and support of peers. The ability of the entrepreneur to gain the trust of others is absolutely essential ( Tocher et al., 2015 ). Since individuals are more willing to openly share knowledge and ideas with those whom they trust ( McEvily et al., 2003 ). Student entrepreneurs with political skills demonstrate problem-solving skills through specific behaviors in relational contexts ( Perrewé et al., 2005 ; Treadway et al., 2013 ). Highly politically motivated student entrepreneurs can effectively control dynamic and ambiguous environments and make them predictable ( Kacmar et al., 2013 ), and can positively influence innovation by enhancing the personal charm of entrepreneurs ( Baron and Tang, 2009 ). Entrepreneurship education provides multiple channels for student entrepreneurs to obtain resources. The human capital social network built by highly skilled student entrepreneurs enhances the ability of entrepreneurial teams to acquire resources, reduces the cost of resource acquisition, and promotes the willingness of entrepreneurs to share knowledge. With reciprocity, combining access to resources and existing resources, integration generates new knowledge and contributes positively to innovation ( Tolstoy, 2009 ). Therefore, we assumed that political skills would play a mediating role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Hypothesis 2 : Political skills play a mediating role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition

Entrepreneurs will have to engage in three important tasks, which mainly are opportunity recognition and exploitation, risk taking, and innovating ( Chandler and Hanks, 1994 ). Opportunity recognition is defined as the process of recognizing new and potentially successful ideas ( Shane and Eckhardt, 2003 ), which are influenced by individual characteristics and contextual factors. Entrepreneurship opportunity recognition is the core activity in the early stage of student entrepreneurship; it is the process of correctly understanding and judging market demand, and continuously processing related resources acquired in entrepreneurship learning to shape their innovative ability and personality. Entrepreneurial selecting promises business opportunities, devising, and executing strategies for leveraging them ( Chandler and Hanks, 1994 ). Such competence is often developed experientially through learning by doing ( Mitchelmore and Rowley, 2010 ). Social learning itself is an iterative process of learning, action, reflection, and continuous cooperation. The iterative learning process is considered to be a key component of adapting to environmental changes. In an uncertain entrepreneurial environment, opportunity recognition is becoming a major driver of entrepreneurial behavior ( Wang et al., 2013 ). Student entrepreneurs acquire resources through entrepreneurial education, identify effective knowledge from a large amount of information, integrate processing into new products or services, form new opportunities, improve opportunities for success, and contribute to team creation. We assumed that entrepreneurial opportunity recognition would play a mediating role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Hypothesis 3 : Entrepreneurial opportunity recognition has a mediating role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Multiple Mediating Role of Political Skills and Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition

Entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, skills, and behaviors together constitute entrepreneurial abilities. Enhancing skills allows entrepreneurs to discover and exploit opportunities that enable they to be more innovative ( Fillis and Rentschler, 2010 ). Political skill is instrumental in gaining access to the information, influence, and referrals necessary for success ( Fang et al., 2015 ). Politically motivated people know what they need to do to succeed, and can make the right actions at the right time to achieve their goals ( Blickle et al., 2010 ). Similarly, we contend that political skill can be used to explain how entrepreneur recognize social influence opportunities ( McAllister et al., 2016 ). High levels of political skill enable entrepreneurs to demonstrate a keen sense of society ( Brouer et al., 2011 ); the social astuteness is conducive to accurately obtaining the key resources needed for entrepreneurship in a dynamic and complex environment. The astute agility of entrepreneurs is a necessary condition for the success of opportunity recognition ( Ardichvili et al., 2003 ). The social network and interpersonal relationships help student entrepreneurs expand the scope of resource acquisition and improve the ability of resource integration. Interpersonal relationships help participants to understand and implement innovative decisions, and improve the efficiency of resource development and product innovation. The apparent sincerity helps entrepreneurs achieve knowledge sharing, and provide a basis for product or service innovation. We assumed that political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition would play a continuous intermediary role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Hypothesis 4 : Political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition play a continuous intermediary role in the associations between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation.

Hypothesized model are shown in Figure 1 . Through sharing and cooperation, entrepreneurship education is brought into social learning network from a single level, and completes the acquisition of new knowledge and skills with continuous iterations, enhancing the ability of student entrepreneurs to adapt to changes in the entrepreneurial environment. The entrepreneurial ability of entrepreneurs is considered as a resource in stimulating creativity and the ability to identify opportunities ( Kor et al., 2007 ). Political skill facilitates individuals’ accurate assessment of their work environment and the intentions of others. Driven by innovation, entrepreneurship education constantly improves the path of learning management, and is committed to the improvement of entrepreneurial skills of student entrepreneurs.

Figure 1 . Hypothesized model.

Materials and Methods

Participants.

The participants were recruited from a University located in Nanning, Guangxi Province, China. Questionnaires were distributed to 300 Chinese student entrepreneurs, and 269 valid questionnaires were collected, giving a response rate of 89.67%. Among the respondents, males accounted for 49.17% and females accounted for 50.83%, which shows a relatively balanced gender proportion. Samples from large and medium-sized cities, county-level cities, townships, and rural areas were 30.1, 24.2, 12.3, and 33.5%, respectively. The respondents were all types of students; undergraduate and lower levels accounted for 72.5%, master’s and doctoral students accounted for 27.5%, science and engineering students accounted for 56.9%, followed by economic management accounting for 18.2% and agronomy 11.2%. Among the subjects, 91.1% have been student cadres, and have social networks and interpersonal relationships.

This study selected Chinese student entrepreneurs as the survey object. The participants are involved in entrepreneurial activities such as courses, training programs, and competitions in varying degrees. The participants receive support from teachers and the school with regard to funds, use of venues, and other needs. The survey participants were able to understand the issues involved in this study, thereby meeting the requirements of empirical analysis. In March 2018, we contacted the teachers responsible for entrepreneurship in colleges and universities, to email the participation invitation of this study to their student entrepreneurs. The student entrepreneurs were informed that the data will be used only for research purposes and we will keep their personal information confidential, that participation was voluntary and that they could either refuse to participate in or withdraw from the study at any time. We ask student entrepreneurs to return a form only if they want to participate in the research. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of South China University of Technology.

To ensure the accuracy of empirical research, this study references important literature published locally and abroad, and selects maturity scales with high reliability and validity. Through in-depth interviews with entrepreneurial team members, this study combines specific scenarios of entrepreneurial education in colleges and universities, and modifies the scales of entrepreneurship education and political skills to make the measurement suitable for student entrepreneurs, finally forming the research scale. This study uses a five-point Likert scale where “1” means “completely inconsistent” and “5” means “very consistent.” The entrepreneurial team members evaluate the corresponding items based on their own real situation.

Entrepreneurship Education

The entrepreneurship education measured in this study focuses on the perspective of social cognitive from the aspects of environment, organization, and individual learning and behavior. Through interviews with responsible teachers, we can understand the main concerns related to entrepreneurship education in colleges and universities. We start from three aspects: entrepreneurial atmosphere, entrepreneurship curriculum, and entrepreneurial activities. Our main references are Franke and Lüthje (2004) and Qi (2017) . To measure the participation of individual entrepreneurs in entrepreneurship education, the education scale has a total of six items such as “A creative university campus atmosphere has inspired your entrepreneurial dream,” “Startup course learning provides the knowledge you need to start a business,” and “The university provides funding for your business, office space, and entrepreneurial tutors”. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this scale was 0.848, indicating that the scale has good reliability.

Political Skills

The political skills measured in this study are mainly based on the individual level of student entrepreneurs. Based on the work of Ferris et al. (2000) , 18 items including networking ability, interpersonal influence, social astuteness, and apparent sincerity were retained for measurement. The results show that the overall Cronbach’s α coefficient of the political skill scale is 0.955, and the scale has good reliability.

Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition

The study draws on Chandler and Hanks (1994) for the measurement of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition and Cai et al. (2014) for the recognition of entrepreneurial opportunities, and measures the ability of student entrepreneurs to identify new opportunities, with four items such as “products and services that can effectively identify customers’ needs”. The results show that the overall Cronbach’s α coefficient of the entrepreneurial opportunity recognition scale is 0.877, indicating that the scale has good reliability.

Miller (1983) was the first to come up with “proactive” innovations and believes innovativeness is one of the important dimensions of entrepreneurial firm. Covin and Slevin (1989) developed a scale to measure the dimensions of innovativeness; the measures involved a mix of traits and attitude. This study agrees with the idea of Naldi et al. (2007) that innovation has a positive relationship with initiative, improved the scale of Covin and Slevin (1989) . The higher the subjective initiative of student entrepreneurs, the more obvious is the innovation. The final innovative scale adopts the following items: “I have strong curiosity,” “I like to think and solve problems from multiple angles,” “I always have many new methods and new ideas,” and “I can absorb and apply new ideas faster.” Four items, such as that regarding the “new method,” measure the innovation awareness, innovation ability, and innovation personality of student entrepreneurs. The results show that the Cronbach’s α coefficient of the scale is 0.904, and the scale has good reliability.

Control Variables

The study controls demographic variables, such as gender and education level of student entrepreneurs, and excludes the possible effects of perceived entrepreneurial education and innovative relationships.

This study uses SPSS 22.0, AMOS 22.0, and other data analysis instruments. The analysis is divided into three steps: (1) test measurement model including model fit, reliability, and validity test; (2) descriptive statistics on each variable; and (3) we performed multi-mediation tests using the regression bootstrapping method in the PROCESS module (Model 6) developed by Hayes (2013) .

Common Method Deviation Test

This paper uses Harman’s single factor analysis to evaluate the common source variance. Exploratory factor analysis was performed without rotation. The results showed that the variance of the first factor interpretation was 21.694%, and the cumulative interpretation total variance was 50.928%. The first factor explained the variance that was less than half of the cumulative total variance. Therefore, no common method bias effect was observed between the measured variables.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

To test the discriminant validity of each variable in this study, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed on each variable using AMOS 22.0 software. The results of Table 1 showed that compared with the single-, two-, and three-factor models, the four-factor model used in this study was the most suitable. The combined effect was ideal, the fitting indexes of the four-factor model were up to standard, and the model fitting degree was good.

Table 1 . Confirmatory factor analysis results of variable discriminant validity.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations

The mean, standard deviation, and correlation coefficient of latent variables were statistically analyzed using SPSS 22.0. As shown in Table 2 , the mean and standard deviation of each variable were within the acceptable range. According to the correlation coefficient between variables, a significant correlation exists between entrepreneurship education, political skills, entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, and innovation. A significant correlation also exists between gender and entrepreneurship education, and between gender and innovation. The results of descriptive statistics and related analysis preliminarily illustrate the relationship between variables, providing a basis for further data analysis.

Table 2 . Means, standard deviations, and correlations for variables ( N = 269).

Structural Equation Model Analyses

First, the main effect was tested, with entrepreneurship education as the independent variable and innovation as the dependent variable to construct the structural equation model 1. The fitting index of model 1 meets the requirements ( χ 2 /df = 2.753, CFI = 0.959, GFI = 0.938, TLI = 0.945, IFI = 0. 959, NFI = 0.937, and RMSEA = 0.081); thus, the model fit is good. The main effect test results show that entrepreneurship education positively affects innovation ( β = 0.608, p < 0.001), and H1 is supported.

Second, models 2 and 3 were established with political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition as single mediators. The results show that the model fits well (Model 2: χ 2 /df = 1.002, CFI = 1.000, GFI = 0.905, TLI = 0.998, IFI = 0. 999, NFI = 0.957, and RMSEA = 0.003; Model 3: χ 2 /df = 1.490, CFI = 0.989, GFI = 0.958, TLI = 0.982, IFI = 0. 989, NFI = 0.966, and RMSEA = 0.043). Through process V3.1, the bootstrap method was used to repeat the sampling 5,000 times to test the mediating effect. The results are shown in Figure 2 . The mediating effect of political skills was 0.374, with 95% confidence interval [0.2983, 0.4534], excluding 0, based on the assumption that H2 was verified. The mediating effect of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition is 0.371, with 95% confidence interval [0.3021, 0.4454], excluding 0, based on the assumption H3 is verified.

Figure 2 . The unstandardized path coefficients in model testing.

Finally, the chain multiple mediation effect was tested. A correlation was observed between the two mediator variables in the political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition. The study assumes that the two variables play a mediating role in the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation. Therefore, Hayes’ multiple mediation method was used to test the mediating effect. According to process V3.1, the 95% confidence interval of the mediating effect was estimated by extracting 5,000 bootstrap samples, and the chain multi-mediation effect of political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition was tested significantly. The results are shown in Table 3 . Entrepreneurship education → political skills → innovative mediating effect is 0.240, 95% confidence interval is [0.1650, 0.3203], excluding 0, and mediating effect is significant. Entrepreneurship education → environmental opportunity recognition → innovation, the mediating effect is 0.082, the 95% confidence interval is [0.0430, 0.1314], excluding 0, and the mediating effect is significant. Entrepreneurship education → political skills → entrepreneurial opportunity recognition → innovative chain multi-mediating effect is 0.131, 95% confidence interval [0.0830, 0.1851], excluding 0, indicating that political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition are between entrepreneurial education and innovation, and H4 is verified.

Table 3 . Results of the multiple mediation model.

Research Conclusions

The study explored the impact mechanism of the influence of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation based on social cognitive theory. The structural equation model was used to simultaneously test the individual and continuous mediation roles of political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, and verify the political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition ability of student entrepreneurs. The chain-based multi-mediating role in innovative relationships provides a new path toward considering the impact of perceived entrepreneurial education on the innovation of intermediary mechanisms. The empirical research shows the following results: (1) main effect test. The results show that there will be a positive relationship between perceptions of entrepreneurship education and perceptions of innovation. (2) Intermediary effect test. The test results show that political skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition play an intermediary role in perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation, respectively. Political skills enhance the ability to identify entrepreneurial opportunities and play a continuous intermediary role in the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation.

Theoretical Implications

The findings inform our understanding of how skills acquired in the entrepreneurship education are associated with innovative awareness, innovative ability, innovative personality, and answer the question of whether entrepreneurship and innovation is perceptible. Entrepreneurship education not only provides human capital such as knowledge and skills but may also transform the attitudes and behaviors of students. For the most part, entrepreneurship education as environmental influences on changing attitudes has been overlooked ( Baron, 2006 ; Medvedeva, 2011 ). From the social cognitive theory, the research postulates that human behavior is determined by the environmental influences, and description between having capabilities and believing in those capabilities. Individuals are tended to pursue their goals if they consider their own abilities and actions are capable of achieving the desired results. Social cognitive theory conceives individuals as agents and active contributors to the development of the circumstances that surround their lives, through cognitive and motivational, humans can create visualized futures.

We adopt a unique approach in understanding how skills taught within an entrepreneurship education can influence innovation. Base on the social cognitive theory, individuals not only learn skills but also immerse themselves in the entrepreneurial community through entrepreneurship education, which is improving their ability to recognition entrepreneurial opportunities and capture real entrepreneurial opportunities through the community. Entrepreneurial ability is multidimensional and dynamic in nature ( Zahra et al., 2006 ). Skills and entrepreneurial opportunity recognition are the main components of entrepreneurial ability. Explicit political skills based on persuasion, infection, and appeal are the general abilities of entrepreneurs, while entrepreneurial opportunity recognition is the professional skill that entrepreneurs need. Structural equation modeling is used to verify political skills and entrepreneurship opportunity recognition play the multiple mediating role of the relationship between perceived entrepreneurship education and innovation, and clarifies the specific path and internal mechanism of entrepreneurial competence in the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation. The research results verify that the perceived entrepreneurial education, in the process of shaping the entrepreneurial ability from general to professional, reveals the main factors driving the development of innovation.

Managerial Implications

As the main body of learning in entrepreneurship education, students should consider their obvious campus characteristics. In student entrepreneurship, many entrepreneurial projects are based on innovative technology transformation and creativity. Innovation is the driving force for the development of entrepreneurial projects. The focus of entrepreneurship education is not on the transfer of theoretical knowledge in the classroom but on the basis of action to improve entrepreneurial professional skills ( Kassean et al., 2015 ). Through participation in learning, student entrepreneurs form a learning network in a good entrepreneurial education environment, use their influence to continuously acquire and exchange valuable resources through persuasion and collaboration, build a shared social resource network, and enhance professional skills. The effectiveness and conversion rate of innovative knowledge strengthens the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation.

The skills of entrepreneurs can be shaped ( Volery et al., 2015 ) and entrepreneurship education serves as a new incubator of innovative talents, focusing on the improvement of entrepreneurial professional ability. Social cognitive theory can be used to understand the influence of environmental factors on individual innovation awareness, innovative ability and innovative personality. Universities organize and carry out various forms of teaching practice activities; entrepreneurship education enhances the professional competence of students through social learning networks. Student entrepreneurs are regarded as executives with learning and entrepreneurial practices, their high political skills such as good interpersonal relationships, and large social networks can enhance the ability of identify opportunities. Thus, these student entrepreneurs are more likely to become core talents of entrepreneurial teams, playing a role in the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation.

Limitations and Future Study Directions

In terms of research samples, owing to the limitations of the research objects, this study only judges the evaluation of entrepreneurship education from the unilateral aspect of the student entrepreneurs and fails to collect the relevant data on the entrepreneurial education managers. Second, considering perception at different times has different influences on human behavior and choice, future studies might consider dynamic tracking from the perspective of organizational managers; research techniques are also biased toward static analysis and are characterized by lack of dynamic tracking. Furthermore, the impact of perceived entrepreneurship education on innovation is multifaceted and multidimensional. In the future, studies can increase the dimensions of research variables in entrepreneurship education and further enrich and develop the research models and conclusions. The present study only considers the mediating factors between entrepreneurial education and innovation. Thus, future research should consider incorporating intermediaries and regulatory factors into the research framework.

Ethics Statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of ethics committee of South China University of Technology with written informed consent from all subjects in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by the ethics committee of South China University of Technology.

Author Contributions

XW led the research design, data analysis, and drafted this paper. XL guided the research design and revised the manuscript substantially. JS made contributions in data analysis and paper revision. All authors approved the final version.

This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (71832003), National Social Science Fund of China (18BJL082), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2018M640786), the Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Youth Project (19YJC630106), Guangxi Higher Education Reform Project (2017JGB118), and Guangxi University Students Ideological and Political Education Theory and Practice Research project (2018LSZ038).

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., and Zhou, J. (2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. J. Manag. 40, 1297–1333. doi: 10.1177/0149206314527128

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ardichvili, A., Cardozo, R., and Ray, S. (2003). A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and development. J. Bus. Ventur. 18, 105–123. doi: 10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00068-4

Arthurs, J. D., and Busenitz, L. W. (2006). Dynamic capabilities and venture performance: the effects of venture capitalists. J. Bus. Ventur. 21, 195–215. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.04.004

Audretsch, D. B., Kuratko, D. F., and Link, A. N. (2016). Dynamic entrepreneurship and technology-based innovation. J. Evol. Econ. 26, 603–620. doi: 10.1007/s00191-016-0458-4

Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., and Van den Brande, G. (2016). EntreComp: the entrepreneurship competence framework. (Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union). doi: 10.2791/593884

Bandura, A. (1978). Social learning theory of aggression. J. Commun. 28, 12–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1978.tb01621.x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1999). “Social cognitive theory of personality” in Handbook of personality. 2nd Edn . eds. L. A. Pervin and O. P. John (New York: Guilford Press), 154–196.

Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (2018). Toward a psychology of human agency: pathways and reflections. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 13, 130–136. doi: 10.1177/1745691617699280

Bandura, A., Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Gerbino, M., and Pastorelli, C. (2003). Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy in diverse spheres of psychosocial functioning. Child Dev. 74, 769–782. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00567

Baron, R. (2006). Opportunity recognition as pattern recognition: how entrepreneurs “connect the dots” to identify new business opportunities. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 20, 104–119. doi: 10.5465/amp.2006.19873412

Baron, R. A., and Tang, J. (2009). Entrepreneurs social skills and new venture performance: mediating mechanisms and cultural generality. J. Manag. 35, 282–306. doi: 10.1177/0149206307312513

Baum, J. R., Locke, E. A., and Smith, K. G. (2001). A multidimensional model of venture growth. Acad. Manag. J. 44, 292–303. doi: 10.5465/3069456

Beghetto, R. A., and Kaufman, J. C. (2010). Nurturing creativity in the classroom: How to discourage creative thinking in the classroom . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. J. Environ. Manag. 90, 1692–1702. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001

Binks, M., Starkey, K., and Mahon, C. L. (2006). Entrepreneurship education and the business school. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 18, 1–18. doi: 10.1080/09537320500520411

Blickle, G., Wendel, S., and Ferris, G. R. (2010). Political skill as moderator of personality-job performance relationships in socioanalytic theory: test of the getting ahead motive in automobile sales. J. Vocat. Behav. 76, 326–335. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.005

Brian, J., and Norma, I. (2010). Enterprise education as pedagogy. Educ. Train. 52, 7–19. doi: 10.1108/00400911011017654

Brouer, R. L., Harris, K. J., and Kacmar, K. M. (2011). The moderating effects of political skill on the perceived politics-outcome relationships. J. Organ. Behav. 32, 869–885. doi: 10.1002/job.718

Brown, T. E., and Ulijn, J. (2004). “Innovation, entrepreneurship and culture: the interaction between technology” in Progress and economic growth . London: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Cai, L., Tang, S.-Q., Ma, Y.-L., and Gao, X. (2014). 创业学习、创业能力与新企业绩效的关系研究 [The effect of entrepreneurial learning and entrepreneurial capability on new venture performance]. Stud. Sci. Sci. 32, 1189–1197. doi: 10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2014.08.029

Chandler, G. N., and Hanks, S. H. (1994). Founder competence, the environment and venture performance. Entrep. Theory Pract. 18, 77–89. doi: 10.1177/104225879401800306

Chen, C.-M., and Chang, C.-C. (2014). Mining learning social networks for cooperative learning with appropriate learning partners in a problem-based learning environment. Interact. Learn. Environ. 22, 97–124. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2011.641677

Covin, J. G., and Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strateg. Manag. J. 10, 75–87. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250100107

Dencker, J., Gruber, M., and Shah, S. (2009). Individual and opportunity factors influencing job creation in new firms. Acad. Manag. J. 52, 1125–1147. doi: 10.5465/amj.2009.47084648

Falck, O., Gold, R., and Heblich, S. (2016). Lifting the iron curtain: school-age education and entrepreneurial intentions. J. Econ. Geogr. 17, 1111–1148. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbw026

Fang, R., Chi, L., and Chen, M. (2015). Bringing political skill into social networks: findings from a field study of entrepreneurs. J. Manag. Stud. 52, 175–212. doi: 10.1111/joms.12107

Ferris, G. R., Perrewé, P. L., Anthony, W. P., and Gilmore, D. C. (2000). Political skill at work. Organ. Dyn. 28, 25–37. doi: 10.1016/S0090-2616(00)00007-3

Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R., and Hochwarter, W. A. (2005). Development and validation of the political skill inventory. J. Manag. 31, 126–152. doi: 10.1177/0149206304271386

Fillis, D., and Rentschler, R. (2010). The role of creativity in entrepreneurship. J. Enterprising Cult. 18, 49–81. doi: 10.1142/S0218495810000501

Franke, N., and Lüthje, C. (2004). Entrepreneurial intentions of business students: a benchmarking study. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Manag. 01, 269–288. doi: 10.1142/S0219877004000209

Galloway, L., and Brown, W. (2002). Entrepreneurship education at university: a driver in the creation of high growth firms? Educ. Train. 44, 398–405. doi: 10.1108/00400910210449231

Gianesini, G., Cubico, S., Favretto, G., and Leitão, G. C. C. (2018). “Entrepreneurial competences: comparing and contrasting models and taxonomies” in Entrepreneurship and the industry life cycle . Vol. 6, eds. S. Cubico, G. Favretto, J. Leitão, and U. Cantner (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing), 13–32. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-89336-5_2

Granieri, A., La Marca, L., Mannino, G., Giunta, S., Guglielmucci, F., and Schimmenti, A. (2017). The relationship between defense patterns and DSM-5 maladaptive personality domains. Front. Psychol. 8, 1–12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01926

Gundry, L. K., Ofstein, L. F., and Kickul, J. R. (2014). Seeing around corners: how creativity skills in entrepreneurship education influence innovation in business. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 12, 529–538. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2014.03.002

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach . New York: Guilford Press.

Kacmar, K. M., Andrews, M. C., and Harris, K. J. (2013). Ethical leadership and subordinate outcomes: the mediating role of organizational politics and the moderating role of political skill. J. Bus. Ethics 115, 33–44. doi: 10.1007/s10551-012-1373-8

Kassean, H., Vanevenhoven, J., Liguori, E., and Winkel, D. (2015). Entrepreneurship education: a need for reflection, real-world experience and action. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 21, 690–708. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2014-0123

Kettunen, J., Kairisto-Mertanen, L., and Penttilä, T. (2013). Innovation pedagogy and desired learning outcomes in higher education. On the Horiz. 21, 333–342. doi: 10.1108/OTH-08-2011-0024

Komarkova, I., Gagliardi, D., Conrads, J., and Collado, A. (2015). Entrepreneurship competence: an overview of existing concepts, policies and initiatives. Jrc Work. Papers 11, 1–158. doi: 10.2791/067979

Kor, Y. Y., Mahoney, J. T., and Michael, S. C. (2007). Resources, capabilities and entrepreneurial perceptions. J. Manag. Stud. 44, 1187–1212. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00727.x

Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges. Entrep. Theory Pract. 29, 577–598. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00099.x

Lazear, E. P. (2004). Balanced skills and entrepreneurship. Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 208–211. doi: 10.1257/0002828041301425

Martin, B. C., McNally, J. J., and Kay, M. J. (2013). Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: a meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. J. Bus. Ventur. 28, 211–224. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.002

McAllister, C. P., Parker Ellen, B. III, Perrewé, P. L., and Ferris, G. R. (2016). Checkmate: using political skill to recognize and capitalize on opportunities in the ‘game’ of organizational life. Bus. Horiz. 58, 25–34. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2014.09.008

McEvily, B., Perrone, V., and Zaheer, A. (2003). Introduction to the special issue on Trust in an Organizational Context. Organ. Sci. 14, 1–4. doi: 10.1287/orsc.14.1.1.12812

Medvedeva, T. A. (2011). Developing an innovative style of thinking and innovative behavior. Syst. Pract. Action Res. 25, 261–272. doi: 10.1007/s11213-011-9221-9

Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Manag. Sci. 29, 770–791. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.29.7.770

Mitchelmore, S., and Rowley, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial competencies: a literature review and development agenda. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 16, 92–111. doi: 10.1108/13552551011026995

Morris, N. M., Kuratko, D. F., and Pryor, C. G. (2013). Building blocks for the development of university-wide entrepreneurship. Entrep. Res. J. 4, 45–68. doi: 10.1515/erj-2013-0047

Munyon, T. P., Summers, J. K., Thompson, T. W., and Ferris, G. R. (2015). Political skill and work outcomes: a theoretical extension, meta-analytic investigation, and agenda for the future. Pers. Psychol. 68, 143–184. doi: 10.1111/peps.12066

Naldi, L., Nordqvist, M., Hellerstedt, K., and Wiklund, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation, risk taking, and performance in family firms. Fam. Bus. Rev. 20, 33–47. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6248.2007.00082.x

Odia, J., and Odia, A. A. (2013). Developing entrepreneurial skills and transforming challenges into opportunities in Nigeria. J. Educ. Soc. Res. 3, 289–298. doi: 10.5901/jesr.2013.v4n3p289

Perrewé, P. L., Zellars, K. L., Rossi, A. M., Ferris, G. R., Kacmar, C. J., Liu, Y., et al. (2005). Political skill: an antidote in the role overload-strain relationship. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 10, 239–250. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.10.3.239

Pittaway, L., and Cope, J. (2016). Entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of the evidence. Soc. Sci. Electron. Publish. 25, 479–510. doi: 10.1177/0266242607080656

Premand, P., Brodmann, S., Almeida, R., Grun, R., and Barouni, M. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and entry into self-employment among university graduates. World Dev. 77, 311–327. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.08.028

Qi, W. H. (2017). 创业学习对创业意向的作用机制研究 [Research on the mechanism of entrepreneurial learning effect on entrepreneurial intention] . Jilin: Jilin University.

Ruskovaara, E., and Pihkala, T. (2015). Entrepreneurship education in schools: empirical evidence on the Teacher’s role. J. Educ. Res. 108, 236–249. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2013.878301

Seikkula-Leino, J. (2011). The implementation of entrepreneurship education through curriculum reform in Finnish comprehensive schools. J. Curric. Stud. 43, 69–85. doi: 10.1080/00220270903544685

Shane, S., and Eckhardt, J. T. (2003). “The individual-opportunity nexus” in Handbook of entrepreneurship research . ed. Z. Acs (Great Britain, England: Kluwer Academic Publishers), 161–191. doi: 10.1007/0-387-24519-7_8

Sims, L., and Sinclair, A. J. (2008). Learning through participatory resource management programs: case studies from Costa Rica. Adult Educ. Q. 58, 151–168. doi: 10.1177/0741713607309802

Tavella, E., and Franco, L. A. (2015). Dynamics of group knowledge production in facilitated modelling workshops: an exploratory study. Group Decis. Negot. 24, 451–475. doi: 10.1007/s10726-014-9398-2

Tocher, N., Oswald, S. L., and Hall, D. J. (2015). Proposing social resources as the fundamental catalyst toward opportunity creation. Strateg. Entrep. J. 9, 119–135. doi: 10.1002/sej.1195

Tocher, N., Oswald, S. L., and Shook, C. L. (2012). Entrepreneur political skill and new venture performance: extending the social competence perspective. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 24, 283–305. doi: 10.1080/08985626.2010.535856

Tolstoy, D. (2009). Knowledge combination and knowledge creation in a foreign-market network. J. Small Bus. Manag. 47, 202–220. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627X.2009.00268.x

Treadway, D. C., Breland, J. W., and Williams, L. M. (2013). Social influence and interpersonal power in organizations roles of performance and political skill in two studies. J. Manag. 39, 1529–1553. doi: 10.1177/0149206311410887

Volery, T., Mueller, S., and von Siemens, B. (2015). Entrepreneur ambidexterity: a study of entrepreneur behaviours and competencies in growth-oriented small and medium-sized enterprises. Int. Small Bus. J. 33, 111–112. doi: 10.1177/0266242613484777

Wang, Y.-L., Ellinger, A. D., and Wu, Y.-C. J. (2013). Entrepreneurial opportunity recognition: an empirical study of R&D personnel. Manag. Decis. 51, 248–266. doi: 10.1108/00251741311301803

Wei, L. Q., Chiang, F. T., and Wu, L. Z. (2012). Developing and utilizing network resources: roles of political skill. J. Manag. Stud. 49, 381–402. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00987.x

Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., and Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda. J. Manag. Stud. 43, 917–955. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00616.x

Keywords: entrepreneurship education, innovation, political skills, entrepreneurial opportunity recognition, multiple mediating effect

Citation: Wei X, Liu X and Sha J (2019) How Does the Entrepreneurship Education Influence the Students’ Innovation? Testing on the Multiple Mediation Model. Front. Psychol . 10:1557. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01557

Received: 14 January 2019; Accepted: 19 June 2019; Published: 10 July 2019.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2019 Wei, Liu and Sha. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Xiaolang Liu, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

You are using an outdated browser. This website is best viewed in IE 9 and above. You may continue using the site in this browser. However, the site may not display properly and some features may not be supported. For a better experience using this site, we recommend upgrading your version of Internet Explorer or using another browser to view this website.

- Download the latest Internet Explorer - No thanks (close this window)

• Penn GSE Environmental Justice Statement
• Philadelphia Impact
• Global Initiatives
• Diversity & Inclusion

Catalyst @ Penn GSE

• Penn GSE Leadership
• Program Finder
• Academic Divisions & Programs
• Professional Development & Continuing Education
• Teacher Programs & Certifications
• Undergraduates
• Dual and Joint Degrees
• Faculty Directory
• Research Centers, Projects & Initiatives
• Lectures & Colloquia
• Books & Publications
• Academic Journals
• Application Requirements & Deadlines
• Tuition & Financial Aid
• Campus Visits & Events
• International Students
• Options for Undergraduates
• Non-Degree Studies
• Contact Admissions / Request Information
• Life at Penn GSE
• Penn GSE Career Paths
• Living in Philadelphia
• DE&I Resources for Students
• Student Organizations
• Career & Professional Development
• News Archive
• Events Calendar
• The Educator's Playbook
• Find an Expert
• Race, Equity & Inclusion
• Counseling & Psychology
• Education Innovation & Entrepreneurship
• Education Policy & Analysis
• Higher Education
• Language, Literacy & Culture
• Teaching & Learning
• Support Penn GSE
• Contact Development & Alumni Relations
• IES Fellows
• Find a Program
• Request Info
• Make a Gift
• Current Students
• Staff & Faculty

Search form

Education entrepreneurship, master of science in education (m.s.ed.), you are here, acquire the knowledge, skills, and networks you need to create new schools, launch ed tech ventures, and drive innovation in educational organizations and corporations around the world. .

The world's first master’s degree program in Education Entrepreneurship equips you with the expertise, tools, and experiences necessary to chart new solutions in education. To accommodate your career, the accelerated program is delivered through a blend of on-campus and online weekends and summer intensives — meaning that you can continue working full-time and be based in your home community while earning your master’s degree in just 12 months. 

What Sets Us Apart

About the program.

A unique program experience designed to help you create, test, and build innovative solutions to critical problems in a rapidly changing global landscape. Coursework provides a strong foundation in education, business, design, and entrepreneurship with a focus on increasing access, equity, and impact. The capstone experience prepares you to identify a new opportunity, either for an existing or new venture, and design your own school, education program, service, or product.

Duration of program Accelerated 12-month program (summer program start) Two 10-day intensives (Summer I, Summer II) Six three-day weekends (Fall, Spring)

Culminating experience Capstone: Practical focus on a real-world venture/innovation of your choice 

• Executive-Style

Through its unique design at the intersection of education, innovation, business, and entrepreneurship, the Education Entrepreneurship master’s program empowers current and aspiring leaders with the critical academic knowledge, cross-sector tools, business skills, and entrepreneurial mindset necessary to create innovative solutions in education.

Built for working professionals seeking to innovate within an existing organization, and for education and business leaders, entrepreneurs, and others interested in building and accelerating new ventures, students develop expertise in three key domains: Education Foundations, Business Essentials, and Entrepreneurial Leadership. This curriculum is complemented with premier access to Penn GSE and Wharton startup resources and clubs, education and ed tech networks, school design labs, and professional development across the innovation ecosystem.

Across the program, students work with renowned faculty from Penn’s Graduate School of Education, The Wharton Business School, Weitzman School of Design, and the School of Engineering and Applied Science to identify emerging opportunities and create the next generation of high-impact education programs, products, and services. In the 12-month Capstone project, students work with industry leaders and entrepreneurs to identify a new opportunity for education innovation based on their own personal mission and professional goals.

Students learn and apply new knowledge, theory, and skills in three domains: Education Foundations, Business Essentials, and Entrepreneurial Leadership. For a full list of courses in the Education Entrepreneurship program, please click here .

1. Education Foundations uses leading research, case studies, simulations, EdLab site visits, and lived experience to dive deep into the connections between education philosophy, practice, culture, and innovation.

Students explore the future of teaching and learning using education theories, learning sciences, design innovation, and next-generation platforms. This domain connects students with researchers, innovators, entrepreneurs, and education leaders to understand the rapidly changing global landscape and evolving role of innovation in classrooms and institutional settings. The foundations strand also provides opportunities to meet thought leaders across the new schools’ movement and the edtech and investment landscapes. The program includes three education courses. 

2. Business Essentials explores marketing, finance, management, and operations as they pertain to organizational innovation and venture creation—both generally and in particular to schools, universities, and educational organizations.

Students learn about the financial, operational, legal, and marketing aspects of building and managing educational programs, products, and services. This domain provides students with core business skills and experiences that can be leveraged by innovators in emerging or established companies, and by entrepreneurial leaders in education and other startup environments. The program includes three business courses.

3. Entrepreneurial Leadership focuses on ideation, research, strategy and execution, and on managing areas such as technology, intellectual property, communications, and evaluation.

Students learn about how innovators and entrepreneurs influence the creation, development, and successful production of new education models. This domain explores how entrepreneurial insights are tested and developed, how competitive advantages are gained and protected, and how entrepreneurs think about social return on investments. Students examine how academic and field research can be leveraged to improve the viability, impact, and sustainability of emerging innovations. The program includes three entrepreneurship courses.

For more information on courses and requirements, visit the  Education Entrepreneurship M.S.Ed. program in the University Catalog .

The Education Entrepreneurship program is designed to fit the schedule of full-time working professionals. The program meets eight times over 12 months: seven times onsite and once virtually, and includes virtual supplemental learning opportunities between onsite sessions.   The format and schedule allow students to continue residing in their home communities and maintaining their full-time employment.

The program will provide hotel accommodations (single rooms) and meals during on-campus sessions.

Sample Cohort Schedule

2023-2024   cohort, 2024-2025   cohort*.

* 2024-2025 intensive dates subject to change. Please refer to this webpage for the most up to date schedule.

In the culminating capstone project, students identify a new opportunity—either for an existing entity or for the creation of a new venture—and implement the skills they have built in the program to launch their own education program, service, or product. Students build a business case, executing experiments that validate or invalidate key hypotheses governing the opportunity. The capstone culminates with a demo day where students pitch their ventures to a distinguished panel of judges.

The exploratory work for the capstone project begins on day one, with discovery-driven planning, ideation, and pitch practice. The second stage includes design thinking, market research, and rapid validation testing using lean methods. Designing learning environments, building venture financial models, and developing marketing plans are key elements in the third stage. In the final stage, students build integrated businesses cases for their education ventures, including financial models and pitch decks. Throughout the 12-month project, students pitch, test, iterate, pivot, and refine venture ideas through meetings with a team of mentors—including ed tech and school entrepreneurs, education intrapreneurs, business leaders, researchers, practitioners, and investors.

Project Components

At the completion of capstone project, students develop a strong business case for a real-world education solution or innovation that allows them to showcase their entrepreneurial skills and knowledge to potential employers, partners, and investors.

Common Topic Areas

• New school designs and programs
• Ed tech teaching and learning solutions
• Curriculum innovations
• New communities of practice
• Ed products and marketplaces

Sample Capstone Projects

New ventures(*) and existing entities that students strengthened through their programmatic work as both entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs:

The Arcadia School : The Arcadia Secondary School helps expatriate students in Dubai South prepare for universities and society with a holistic English approach to secondary school education.

Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership : Prepares students to change the world through an entrepreneurial mindset—a mindset of curiosity and courageous creativity.

Neverbore *:  Demystifies the process of creating student-centered, active learning environments for academically rigorous high school classrooms.

Nomad Minds *: Creates experiences which promote dialogue, understanding, and appreciation among globally interconnected local cultures.

Raise.me : Expands access to higher education, especially among low-income and first generation students, so that every student has a shot at the American Dream.

e squared Labs : Increases empathy and equity by elevating the needs, voices, and visions of youth and marginalized communities

GYE Zone : Brings real-world challenges to global high school students and prepares them for college and career readiness through youth entrepreneurship education.

Joint Degree from Wharton School (MBA) and Penn GSE (M.S.Ed.)

The M.S.Ed. in Education Entrepreneurship dual degree is an exciting opportunity for Wharton MBA students who recognize new challenges and opportunities due to the tectonic shifts underway in society, in business, and in education. Combining the masters in Education Entrepreneurship with a MBA from Wharton creates a unique, highly marketable degree. By acquiring complementary knowledge and skills in the fields of teaching and learning, ed tech, educational leadership, social impact investment, and education entrepreneurship, dual-degree students prepare themselves to take on organizational leadership roles that now almost universally include creating and managing continuous training, development, and re-skilling programs for a dynamic global workforce.

The unique program design allows Wharton students to graduate within the same two years at an incremental cost, making the dual MBA/M.S.Ed. program a strong value. This 9-course program is designed for Wharton MBA students to start during the summer semester after their first year of studies at Wharton. Students apply six elective courses and one transfer course to the Education Entrepreneurship program and complete both programs by the end of June of students' second summer at Wharton. Three quarters of the Education Entrepreneurship program tuition can be funded through the Wharton MBA.

Three Reasons this MBA Student Helped Pioneer a New Dual-Degree Program in Education Entrepreneurship

Application Process

Prospective students apply for the dual degree by submitting separate applications simultaneously to both The Wharton School and Penn GSE. A limited number of program openings may be available to enrolled 1st year Wharton MBA students. Please contact Admissions at  [email protected]  for additional information.

Program Timeline

Cohort profile.

The Education Entrepreneurship program welcomes students from all over the world with diverse backgrounds and broad interests.

Professional Backgrounds

Ready to launch or expand your social enterprise?

The Jacobs Education Impact Prize provides seed funding of up to $15,000 and network to power your start-up.

Funded by the Jacobs Foundation, the award gives select currently enrolled GSE Education Entrepreneurship students practical and financial support to develop and launch their own social impact ventures in the education sector.

As an awardee, you will receive a cash award and join the community of Jacobs Fellows —allowing you to share knowledge and experiences with a network of leaders from all over the world.

Read more about the Prize and how to apply here.

Creating What’s Possible

The first-of-its-kind Education Entrepreneurship Master's program at Penn GSE is part of the School's commitment to academic innovation.

Joint Degree Program: Penn GSE (M.S.Ed.) and Wharton School (MBA)

The M.S.Ed./MBA is a joint program sponsored by Penn GSE and the Wharton School . This dual-degree option is ideal for Wharton MBA students interested in topics related to education entrepreneurship, including pedagogy, educational leadership, scaling social impact initiatives, and the education marketplace. Admitted students complete both degrees over the course of two years.

Read more about  why students choose the joint degree program

Our Faculty

Affiliated Faculty

The Education Entrepreneurship program is an interdisciplinary learning community where theory and practice from numerous disciplines and fields intertwine with the goal of driving meaningful, positive change in education. Our faculty reflect this interdisciplinarity and come from all across the University of Pennsylvania, as well as from outside institutions, and industry. The faculty listed below currently teach within the program or are engaged as close program advisors.

Denise Dahlhoff Senior Researcher, Consumer Research, The Conference Board Doctorate, Friedrich Schiller University Jena

Rita Ferrandino Capstone Instructor M.B.A., Pennsylvania State University

Serrano Legrand Research Advisor Ed.D., University of Pennsylvania

Rebecca A. Maynard Professor Emerita of Education and Social Policy Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, Madison

Natalie Nixon President, Figure 8 Thinking Ph.D., The University of Westminster

Sharon M. Ravitch Professor of Practice Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania

Janine Remillard Professor Ph.D., Michigan State University

Howard C. Stevenson Constance Clayton Professor of Urban Education Ph.D., Fuller Graduate School of Psychology

Blair Stevenson Global Entrepreneur in Residence Ph.D. University of Oulu

What drew me to Penn was knowing that from the start I was going to work on my own educational problem—and eventually walk away with a tangible product.

Queenstar Akrong

Our graduates.

Graduates of this unique program leave with the tools necessary to create new schools and initiatives, launch education startups, fund and manage technology ventures, scale leading-edge programs, and drive innovation in educational organizations and corporations.

Our alumni have gone on to careers such as:

• Founders and founding teams of K-12 schools like Ethos Classical, Villa Bella Expeditionary School, and STEM Preparatory Academy
• Higher Education Directors of Innovation at Wharton Entrepreneurship, Arizona State University Learning Futures Collaboratory, and the Lab Student Innovation Center
• Leaders in educational technology startups like Coursalytics, Matific, Raise.me, and Tembo
• Intrapreneurs at Digital Promise and Amazon
• Teacher-preneurs at businesses like Neverbore, NomadMinds, Scholas Occurrentes, R.E.A.L Discussion, and e² labs
• Deans & CFOs of private international schools like the Arcadia School in Dubai, Vin University in Vietnam, the American College of Greece and Kings Academy Jordan
• Directors at leading nonprofits like Harlem Children’s Zone, Communities in Schools, KIPP, TFA, and the Community Engagement Building
• Directors and Deans at U.S. private schools like Springside Chestnut Hill Academy, McCallie School, Bethesda Academy, Philips Exeter Academy, and the Westminster Schools
• VPs and Directors at multinational education businesses like ACT, McGraw Hill, and the College Board
• CEOs and Directors of education policy centers and investment firms like The Center for Education Reform, and Global Silicon Valley Advisors

Meet Some of Our Alumni

Admissions & Financial Aid

Please visit our Admissions and Financial Aid pages for specific information on the application requirements , as well as information on tuition, fees, financial aid, scholarships, and fellowships.

Contact us if you have any questions about the program.

Graduate School of Education University of Pennsylvania 3700 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19104 (215) 898-6415 [email protected] [email protected]

Brad Beshara [email protected]

Please view information from our Admissions and Financial Aid Office for specific information on the cost of this program.

Penn GSE is committed to making your graduate education affordable, and we offer generous scholarships, fellowships, and assistantships.

Related News & Research

Penn GSE faculty and students to share expertise at AERA 2024 in Philly

Penn GSE alum Julee Gard protects the financial viability of small universities

Pioneering change: How Penn GSE alumni combat climate crisis

Penn GSE faculty celebrate recent and upcoming publications

A center for global education innovation, Catalyst @ Penn GSE connects people and ideas to develop new ways to advance education in novel and meaningful directions.

Center for Professional Learning

Penn GSE’s Center for Professional Learning offers Virtual Institutes, Certificate Programs, and a variety of webinars and workshops for teachers, school leaders, and community organizations.

Propelling Change: Penn GSE Education Entrepreneurship Alumni

January 23, 2020

Education Entrepreneurship Events

Stay up to date with all Education Entrepreneurship Announcements & News

Facebook Visit us on Facebook for news & events

Twitter Follow us on Twitter for stories on our faculty, alums, & students

First cohort of Jacobs Education Impact Prize Fellows receives funding to develop impact ventures

Crysti chen, cohort 6 student, is 1 of 3 penn students awarded the schwarzmann scholarship, natasha lopez, cohort 3 alum, was interviewed for her work with latinos for education, read program founder bobbi kurshan's latest thoughts on education, entrepreneurship, and innovation on her forbes blog, you may be interested in, related programs.

• Education Policy M.S.Ed.
• Learning Sciences and Technologies M.S.Ed.
• International Educational Development M.S.Ed.
• Global Education Entrepreneurship and Innovation Certificate

Related Topics

• Starting a Business
• Growing a Business
• Small Business Guide
• Business News
• Science & Technology
• Money & Finance
• For Subscribers
• Write for Entrepreneur
• Entrepreneur Store
• United States
• Asia Pacific
• Middle East
• South Africa

Copyright © 2024 Entrepreneur Media, LLC All rights reserved. Entrepreneur® and its related marks are registered trademarks of Entrepreneur Media LLC

Sponsored Content | Brand Spotlight Partner What's This?

Brand Spotlight Partner

Spotlight is brought to you by the Entrepreneur Partner Studio, which creates dynamic and compelling content for our partners. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur Spotlight partners are their own.

What Are the Top Schools for Entrepreneurship?

May 21, 2024

Choosing the right school for entrepreneurship can be a pivotal decision in a budding entrepreneur's journey. We've gathered insights from founders, CEOs, and other leading experts to share their experiences with various business and entrepreneurial programs. From Columbia University's entrepreneurial ecosystem to the dual-degree MBA/MA program at Johns Hopkins, explore the diverse perspectives and personal experiences of 17 professionals.

Columbia University

There isn't a single correct answer, but it does help to go to a school that makes it easy for students to engage in entrepreneurship and encourages them with better or easier access to resources that help them succeed. Columbia University is located in arguably the best city on the planet (New York) to network with entrepreneurs in various fields and has a very strong student population active in startups and entrepreneurship through organizations such as CORE and ADI.

Columbia organizes year-round programming to encourage entrepreneurship through competitions such as Startup Columbia, and innovative residential communities such as the Residential Incubator, where students not only get to live within a smaller community of students but also partake in organized discussions and activities with like-minded students and other university professors and employees. Columbia also has two very active sub-organizations, Columbia Engineering Entrepreneurship and Columbia Startup Lab, which serve as a resource for all members of the Columbia community.

I was also introduced to the Dorm Room Fund (DRF) through the entrepreneurship community at Columbia while working on an AI-healthcare project as a sophomore. Two years after graduating from college, DRF was instrumental in helping me kick off a successful fundraise for my current startup. One of our earliest engineering team members was also an upperclassman whom I met at one of these organized programs.

Mohnish Chakravarti , Founder & Chief Executive Officer, Rails

University of Southern California

Entrepreneurship is one of those areas where the resources a school offers outside of the classroom are at least as important as what they offer in the classroom. Schools that have strong ties to the business community and can connect their students to business mentors, advisors, and investors give them a huge leg up in starting their own businesses.

The University of Southern California is a terrific example. USC is one of the top schools for entrepreneurship in the country, and a lot of that is because of resources like the Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, which connects students to business leaders and industry professionals. As someone who has mentored and advised a number of USC students in their startup ventures, I've seen what a massive difference these kinds of resources can make in a student's entrepreneurial success!

Lisa Tsou , Startup Funding Strategist and Advisor, The Winning Pitch

Concordia University

Even though I completed a finance degree, I would say my alma mater, Concordia University's John Molson School of Business, has one of the most progressive entrepreneurial programs in Canada. It has also fostered an engineering-focused entrepreneurial program, something desperately needed in our tech-focused world. During my time over 25 years ago, I only witnessed an environment where applying theory into practice was encouraged.

Ajay Pangarkar CTDP, FCPA, FCMA , Award Winning Author, Learning Metrics, and Performance Strategist

The Open University

Did you know that The Open University educates the largest number of CEOs and entrepreneurs compared to any other educational institution?

Once you hear it, it makes sense.

Flexible studies, no entry requirements or previous qualifications needed... it seems as though it's the exact profile of an entrepreneur!

My personal story of studying with the OU has been nothing short of exceptional. I started my first undergraduate (Bachelor's Degree) at the age of 16. I had finished school, not even received my GCSE results, and been accepted to start my apprenticeship (a separate course) with immediate effect.

So, 16-year-old me had started working, part-time studying via my apprenticeship, but I was now also studying for a degree with the OU!

Later, I began to rise through the ranks within my corporate jobs thanks to my continued studies and development, and succeeded much faster than most of my peers - and I was still able to study online, after work, and on my own time!

I later started my first company, which meant that by studying online in my free time, I was still able to achieve everything I wanted to both in the business world *and* education.

The OU has been phenomenal for my professional development, and I have since gone on to complete a postgraduate (Master's Degree) and am looking at my next course to study in the fall.

Aside from the OU, there are also various online short-form courses via Udemy, Reed Courses, and even short executive courses from largely reputable institutions such as Oxford University, Cambridge University, Harvard University, and more available, which removes various barriers to entry including accessibility and qualifications, which, as we know, many entrepreneurs struggle with.

It's safe to say, the OU is quickly becoming the school for entrepreneurs!

Catalina Valentino , Chief Exec & Co-Founder, ELIXR

The University of Arizona

I believe my time spent at the University of Arizona in the McGuire Entrepreneurship Program was hands-down the best experience I had in college. The business school offers a year-long program for students to ideate and form start-ups from the ground up. My experience through the program taught me how to pitch my ideas, how to discover pain points, and provided valuable lessons through real-world building.

Now, the business idea that I crafted was a software business that I ended up not pursuing after I graduated in 2020, but there have been many success stories that came out of my class or classes before me. One that has stood out to me as of late has been WildJoy, an experience-based business that was formed on campus to showcase the amazing things happening in the state of Arizona.

With the skills and spirit that I picked up from the program, I am now working on my own businesses outside of my day job and hold the experience that I gained from the University of Arizona close to my heart. It was a time when I got to explore my ideas, pitch them to investors, and learn how to effectively communicate in a way that got people to believe in the businesses I work on.

Cameron Allen , Founder, Tech Sales, Investor

Mississippi State University

As an alumnus of Mississippi State University, I strongly recommend the Center for Entrepreneurship & Outreach at Mississippi State University in this regard. Many of my fellow graduates with successful entrepreneurial ventures currently serve the budding entrepreneurial needs in the form of angel investments. Furthermore, the center empowers creative and innovative minds to identify and capitalize on market opportunities through its extensive training programs and workshops.

Kavitha Gurrala , Assistant Professor-Operations and Marketing, Woxsen University, India

San Diego State University

The best school for entrepreneurship can vary based on individual needs, but my general recommendation is San Diego State University, particularly through its Lavin Entrepreneur Program. This program offers a unique blend of practical experience and academics, providing students with the tools to start and scale their ventures effectively. Having interacted with several alumni and being an alumnus myself, I can vouch for the hands-on approach and the valuable networking opportunities offered by the university.

Jack Perkins , Founder and CEO, CFO Hub

Harvard Business School Online

Choosing the right school for entrepreneurship is vital, and Harvard Business School Online (HBS) stands out for those focused on innovation. The program emphasizes practical applications of business theory, equipping students with the tools to start, manage, and scale ventures effectively.

My specialization in entrepreneurship and innovation at HBS taught me crucial skills such as negotiation strategies, entrepreneurial essentials, and design thinking—skills that I immediately integrated into my daily practice. More importantly, the curriculum challenges students to think critically about today's business landscape, promoting innovative thinking through a wide range of case studies. The HBS interactive platform also cultivates a community of like-minded individuals, enhancing the learning experience and broadening professional networks.

HBS was transformative for me, deepening my understanding of business dynamics and fostering my ability to identify and implement business opportunities. These lessons have been fundamental to my role as a venture capitalist and entrepreneur, shaping my approach to mentoring and investing in startups.

For those eager to transform innovative ideas into thriving businesses, Harvard Business School Online provides a robust foundation and a supportive community of aspiring entrepreneurs around the globe.

Leon Eisen , Venture partner, NetworkVC

Arizona State University

The W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University is consistently ranked as one of the top schools for entrepreneurship in the United States. This top ranking is due to its comprehensive curriculum, renowned faculty, and strong network of alumni who have successfully launched their own businesses.

As a graduate of the W. P. Carey School of Business, I can attest to the school's dedication to fostering an entrepreneurial mindset and providing students with the necessary tools to succeed in their ventures. Through courses such as Entrepreneurial Finance and Management, I gained a deep understanding of the financial and operational aspects of starting a business.

The school also offers various resources, including mentorship programs and networking events, which allowed me to connect with successful entrepreneurs and learn from their experiences. I credit my success as a business owner to the education and support I received at the W. P. Carey School of Business.

Ryan Nelson , Founder, RentalRealEstate

Baruch College

If you're thinking about the best school for entrepreneurship, it really depends on what you're looking for. I went to Baruch College in New York City, and it was awesome for a couple of reasons. First off, being in NYC is a game-changer because you're right in the thick of so many startups and tons of people hustling with their own projects. It's all about networking. The professors at Baruch made a huge difference, too. A lot of them aren't just academics; they're out there in the business world, running their own gigs or working at enterprise companies. So, the topics they teach aren't just from the textbook; it's real, practical knowledge they're sharing straight from the front lines.

Chase Williams , Managing Partner, Market My Market

University of San Francisco

One of the top schools for entrepreneurship in California is the University of San Francisco School of Management. I attended this institution for my MBA from 2004 to 2006, and it was a transformative experience that greatly influenced my career. The program excelled in blending theoretical business models with practical, real-world applications, which is crucial for any budding entrepreneur.

The faculty at USF are experienced professionals who bring a wealth of knowledge and insights from various industries. Their guidance was invaluable, particularly in areas like venture financing and startup dynamics. The opportunity to learn from such seasoned experts provided a solid foundation in understanding what it takes to launch and manage a successful business.

During my time at USF, I was able to start developing the network that would later support the launch and growth of Parachute. This network, combined with the rigorous business training I received, was instrumental in my entrepreneurial journey. The practical skills and knowledge acquired at USF have been directly applied to my role at Parachute, helping to shape the company's strategy and operations effectively.

Elmo Taddeo , CEO, Parachute

University of Rochester

Creating the right environment is crucial for promoting entrepreneurial growth and fostering innovation. This approach should be adopted in educational institutions at all levels. Reflecting on my time at the University of Rochester, I found the exposure to multiple startup competitions, such as the Hult Prize, to be exceptionally influential. Such experiences can ignite a passion for innovation and shape future entrepreneurs.

Himanshu Bhatia , CEO and Founder, Ricovr Healthcare

University of California, Los Angeles

As a graduate of the undergrad and MBA programs and currently working in venture capital, I wholeheartedly endorse UCLA as an outstanding environment to develop entrepreneurship. The school has outstanding faculty, numerous chances to gain practical experience, and a central position as a growing tech hub to provide unparalleled experiences for students.

The Business Creation Option (BCO), part of the Anderson curriculum, is a standout feature where students work in teams to launch a startup, navigating the venture from ideation to commercialization with direct mentorship from faculty and seasoned entrepreneurs. This program encapsulates the hands-on, experiential learning approach that is critical for any aspiring entrepreneur, offering a practical alternative to the traditional MBA thesis.

The Anderson Venture Accelerator—a 10,000-square-foot incubator space—provides students not just with a physical location to work on their startups but also with invaluable resources, including mentorship from Anderson alumni and access to Los Angeles' vibrant investment community. Within this ecosystem, students can prototype, pitch, and pivot their ventures with direct feedback from experts, an opportunity that is hard to find in other academic settings. This direct link to the Silicon Beach area, home to over 500 tech startups, capital firms, and entrepreneurial hubs, positions Anderson students at a strategic vantage point, allowing them to dive deep into one of the most influential tech landscapes in the world.

UCLA alumni have gone on to start numerous unicorn companies and become leaders at high-growth startups. The school's tailored approach to entrepreneurship, backed by a strong, supportive network, makes UCLA Anderson an unmatched choice for emerging entrepreneurs aiming to make a significant impact.

Jonathan Lee , VP Operations, Adamant

George Mason University

When it comes to entrepreneurship, I highly recommend George Mason University. It's located just outside of D.C., which is a huge plus. I graduated from there in 2016 with a business management degree, and I couldn't have asked for a better experience.

The entrepreneurship electives were fantastic. They gave me the chance to practice pitching and presenting ideas on a regular basis, which was invaluable. Being so close to D.C. meant we had opportunities to collaborate with big names like Y Combinator. But the real game-changer for me was the innovation lab incubator. Once my business plan was accepted, I got to work alongside other driven entrepreneurs, bouncing ideas off each other and using incredible resources like the maker space with 3D printers and other tools that helped with prototyping. By the time I graduated, I felt more confident to pursue my own startup ideas. I had a solid grasp of creating business plans, evaluating ideas, and delivering presentations that really made an impact. Its prime location near Washington, D.C., and the wealth of opportunities that come with it make GMU an ideal choice for anyone wanting more support and guidance on their startup journey.

Ben Bozzay , Founder & Senior Fullstack Developer, Tech Lockdown

Cornell University

As a Cornell alum, I can safely say that the university is one of the premier hubs for entrepreneurship nationwide. With immersive programming, deep integration with Cornell Tech in NYC, and initiatives like Entrepreneurship at Cornell, the university combines all of its reach and resources into a single ecosystem supporting business formation and value creation at scale. Many students launch startups while on campus, supported by a massive group of engaged alumni who coach, mentor, and have built funding mechanisms like Red Bear Ventures or Triphammer Ventures to invest in Cornell-founded startups. All of the above contribute to a culture of business building, inspiring students like me with an idea to make it real, make it matter, and turn it into a winning venture. I'll always be grateful that my founder journey began at Cornell.

Jamey Edwards , President & Chief Strategy Officer, Cairns Health

St. John Fisher University

Entrepreneurship is an area of study that has become increasingly popular at many universities. At St. John Fisher University in Rochester, NY, we focus not just on entrepreneurship for students interested in launching their own businesses but also on developing entrepreneurial thinking as a required core competency that is essential for any organization, regardless of size and where it is in its lifecycle.

St. John Fisher University students benefit from personal mentoring offered by our faculty and our entrepreneur-in-residence, and from our deep connectivity with the entrepreneurial ecosystem located throughout the Rochester metropolitan area. Through coursework and a number of co-curricular activities and events, students have opportunities to learn about entrepreneurship, hone their skills, develop business pitches, participate in hackathons, compete in entrepreneurial competitions, attend workshops on topics like design thinking, and more. We will soon launch a new, robust, interdisciplinary minor in entrepreneurship, which will be open to students in any major.

Daniel Connolly , Dean, School of Business, St. John Fisher University

Johns Hopkins University

The dual-degree MBA/MA in Design Leadership program at Johns Hopkins University and Maryland Institute College of Art is a phenomenal program for aspiring entrepreneurs. This program gave me a great depth and latitude of praxis to explore my interests in designing innovative healthcare technology as well as understanding the world of venture capital.

I launched my first entrepreneurial endeavor, A-Level Capital, a student-led venture capital fund powered by Johns Hopkins students and alumni, while I was attending the program. My career in venture capital only got started with the help of my incredible classmates, subject-matter expert professors, and the vibrant communities of alumni from the two institutions. Combining a business education with a design degree was the ultimate combination to learn in order to be a successful entrepreneur and investor. Plus, Johns Hopkins' mission of "business with humanity in mind" was an attribute that greatly aligned with my values, meaning I received an incredible business school education that prioritized people, the planet, and financial success.

Elizabeth Galbut , Managing Partner, SoGal Ventures

Successfully copied link

Emory students won a $10,000 prize for their AI tool. Then the university punished them.

• Emory University suspended students who created a celebrated AI-driven study tool.
• The students won $10,000 last year from a school pitch competition for the product.
• One of the students just sued the school, saying there's no evidence anyone used his product to cheat.

Emory University students created an artificial-intelligence-driven study tool last year.

Professors and students praised the program, called Eightball. The student newspaper wrote about it. The founders won a pitch competition sponsored by the school and took home $10,000. The business school highlighted them on social media .

Then at least two of the students were suspended for Eightball, which they'd already scrapped. Emory said the duo violated the school's honor code because students could use Eightball in ways that would breach it.

Benjamin Craver, a junior and history major who led marketing for the platform, sued the university on Friday. His complaint said there's no evidence any students used Eightball improperly, including to cheat.

The case highlights the tensions between universities eager to foster young entrepreneurs and administrative rules that haven't caught up to new tech.

After publication, an Emory spokesperson declined to comment, saying the university is not able to discuss pending litigation.

Expulsion, suspension

Craver, who said he had never been in trouble at Emory, partnered with a student developer last year to promote Eightball. The premise was simple: Students could upload materials to a private server not accessible to other users, then use AI to generate study materials.

Related stories

He and his cofounders won a business-school pitch competition last year, and the business school's website spotlighted them — until this week, when the page was removed, per a comparison with the archived page .

Eightball's founders marketed the program as a study tool — not something to "do their homework or be a cheat sheet," one founder said on the now defunct business-school page.

But in October, Emory told the developer that he may have violated the honor code, per Craver's lawsuit. In November, Emory told Craver that it was weighing five honor-code violations for him. He said he asked the developer to immediately shut Eightball down, which the developer did.

Craver was put on disciplinary probation for a semester by the Office of Student Conduct, and he submitted a formal written apology. At a January honor-council hearing, a Spanish professor and four undergraduates weighed a bigger punishment for Craver.

Writing that the founders built Eightball with the intent to cheat, they recommended a one-year suspension for Craver and expulsion for the developer, the lawsuit says.

They heard no evidence Eightball was used for cheating, Craver said in the lawsuit.

Craver was ultimately suspended for a semester and summer, while the developer's yearlong suspension was later reduced to a semester, he said in the lawsuit.

While Craver was preparing an appeal, Emory's venture program reached out, asking whether he'd like to participate in an accelerator for Eightball.

He lost his appeal last week. His lawsuit said the disciplinary record could stymie his plans to apply to law school: "Emory willfully and self-servingly deviated from proper Honor Code procedures to make a public example out of Ben."

Craver is seeking a jury trial and damages of at least $75,000, per the complaint.

Watch: The 10 most challenged books in the US

• Main content

• Wednesday, 29th May, 2024
• Rest of the World
• Health & Wellbeing
• Life & Style

Presidency: Tinubu Won’t Speak at Joint Sitting of N’Assembly Wednesday 4 hours ago

Kano emirate crisis takes new twist as two courts issue conflicting orders 7 hours ago, bayero constituting security risk in kano, he should be evacuated, state govt warns 22 hours ago, obi: i will accept merger 22 hours ago, latest headlines, ndlea smashes two drug cartels, recovers  cocaine, fentanyl consignments.

Police Nab Suspected Kidnapper in Kaduna, Recovers Money, Charms

REDAN Seeks Regulatory Law in Real Estate Practice, Affordable Housing

ACREeSAL Hybrid Implementation Support Mission to Examine Dryland Management, Community Climate Resilience, Others

Tinubu: fg to establish 24 skills, innovation hubs, entrepreneurship centres nationwide.

Olawale Ajimotokan  in Abuja

The federal government has said it will establish 24 skills and innovation hubs and entrepreneurship centres nationwide.

President Bola Tinubu, disclosed this yesterday in Abuja, during the commemoration of this year’s children’s day celebration.

The President, who was represented by the FCT Minister of State, Dr Mariya Mahmoud, said the administration under his watch had embarked on key transformative policies to create a conducive learning environment across the country.

He re-affirmed his administration’s commitment to all matters relating to the total well-being and development of the Nigerian child.

“Government is committed to establishing 24 skills and innovation hubs and Entrepreneurship Centres across the country.

“Also, the federal government is set to inaugurate private sector Innovation Enterprise Centres across the country to deliver on the skills acquisition programme of the government.

“The government is also building 91 Vocational Centres in secondary schools across the country to ensure that all levels of education enjoy the impact of our policy,” Tinubu said.

He said that the federal government had established the National Education Data System, approved skill development for all levels of education and teachers ‘training in digital skills.

“We are also working with the state commissioners of women affairs and the state ministries of education, State Universal Basic Education Board and Civil Society Organisations to ensure quality education and skills development for Nigerian children,” Tinubu said.

The Mandate Secretary, Women Affairs Secretariat, FCT Administration, Mrs Adedayo Benjamin-Laniyi, said the FCT would ensure that every child in the FCT has access to quality education and skills development for them to excel in life.

Earlier, the Children Parliament, Federal Capital Territory (FCT) via its Speaker, Rahama Waziri, demanded for empowerment of children with education and skills for sustainable growth and development of the country.

She said education was the bedrock of any progressive society and the tool that empowers individuals to transcend the limitations of their circumstances and achieve their full potential.

The theme of the of this year’s children’s day celebration is: “Enhancing the Total Wellbeing of the Nigerian Child through Quality Education and Skills Development”.

Related Articles

Tinubu Worries About State of Local Govts

Tinubu: Africa Must Set Up Regional Standby Forces against Coup, Terrorism, Extremism

Tinubu Names Woke New DG of NOSDRA

Ganduje: although not election period yet, we’re working to secure tinubu’s reelection.

Founded on January 22, 1995, THISDAY is published by THISDAY NEWSPAPERS LTD., 35 Creek Road Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria with offices in 36 states of Nigeria , the Federal Capital Territory and around the world. It is Nigeria’s most authoritative news media available on all platforms for the political, business, professional and diplomatic elite and broader middle classes while serving as the meeting point of new ideas, culture and technology for the aspirationals and millennials. The newspaper is a public trust dedicated to the pursuit of truth and reason covering a range of issues from breaking news to politics, business, the markets, the arts, sports and community to the crossroads of people and society.

Helpful Links

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

You can email us at: [email protected] or visit our contact us page.