Assessing Non-University Teachers’ Self-Perception of Entrepreneurial Competence: A Study of the Teachers of the Sagrada Familia Foundation in Spain

Abstract

Different studies highlight the importance of developing entrepreneurial competence (EC) from the earliest educational levels, as well as during the teacher training stages, as they are considered to be facilitating and transforming agents in the integral development of students. The purpose of this research is to analyse the self-perceived level of knowledge and implementation of EC among active teachers from non-university centres managed by the Sagrada Familia Foundation, Spain. After designing a questionnaire based, among others sources, on EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks, an expert judgement was carried out. A total of 326 participants answered the questionnaire. The result show that more than 70% of respondents had not heard about EntreComp and EntreCompEdu; more than 50% had no knowledge of entrepreneurial education (EE); and the respondents as a whole stand out in terms of perseverance, motivation, autonomy, decision-making and teamwork; only 14–18% of respondents plan subjects that pay attention to ECs. Moreover, almost 50% of respondents state that they use participatory learning methodologies, while only 13% believe that when evaluating pupils’ performance, it is necessary to support sharing achievements and progress with internal and external agents; only a further 15% involve students in the assessment process. We must advocate and work for the development of ‘teacherpreneurs’, and start developing EC in all stages of teacher training.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship is undoubtedly an important area of knowledge and research that is still under development [1,2]. On one hand, it is seen as a key element for economic, social and sustainable growth; on the other hand, it is also vital for all-round education, creativity and innovation [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. However, while entrepreneurial education (hereafter EE) is widely studied [16], there is limited existing research on the training of future teachers [17]. This situation is at odds with the common consideration of teachers as trainers of life skills [18,19,20]. However, according to Hebles et al. [21], it seems that the number of programmes aimed at training entrepreneurs has grown in recent years. Do primary school teachers undertake the preparations needed to develop their pupils’ entrepreneurial competence (hereinafter EC)? According to Jenssen and Haara [22], the answer is a resounding ‘no’. Moreover, Deveci and Seikkula-Leino [23] stated that ‘it is widespread knowledge that entrepreneurship education in pre-service teacher training is either absent or insufficient in many countries’ (p. 108). This research is mainly focused on the training teachers need to instruct pupils in EC.

The eight key competences for lifelong learning were established as early as 2006, and they included entrepreneurship [24]. EE is described as acting upon opportunities and ideas and transforming them into (financial, cultural or social) value for others [25]. While the introduction of competence-based teaching (and learning) undeniably brought about a major change in education, not least in terms of methodology, it is no easy task to reach a consensus—which remains to be seen—on what EC is or is not, when to begin to teach EC and how to teach it. Educational authorities in different European countries are making efforts—some greater than others—to enable the development of entrepreneurship. It seems that to facilitate the acquisition of an entrepreneurial attitude among students, it is necessary to promote a type of teaching that considers errors as part of the learning process, encourages personal autonomy and prioritises weighted risk, innovation and the adoption of applicable initiatives, among other factors [10]. According to Azqueta Días de Aldaå [26], it is now possible to speak of an educational approach that aims to promote the growth of entrepreneurship potential, contributes to integral growth and is projected into all areas of life.

In 2013, the European Commission [27] devised the Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan to invite Member States to ensure that entrepreneurship was included in the curricula at all educational levels before the end of 2015. It was at that point that entrepreneurship was incorporated into the curriculum at an international level [28]. As a result, the EC became considered one of the pillars of education for young people to succeed in a changing, inclusive and critical society [29].

However, the implementation of this competence is rather complex for several reasons, including its transversal nature, as well as the lack of training among teachers, lack of resources to promote it appropriately, ineffectiveness of the methods used, inappropriate design, absence of planning and lack of evaluation [28]. Moreover, the same authors noted that EC teaching is more prevalent in secondary and university education than in primary education. This belief was confirmed by Fellnhofer and Kraus [30], who argued that more attention should be paid to EE at basic levels of education, and Uriguen Aguirre et al. [31], who suggested that EE may forge entrepreneurial attitudes if it is developed from the earliest levels of education. On a positive note, EE is in fact part of European policies, has a growing impact at different levels and seems to be becoming increasingly noticed. However, as Lackéus [2] stated, the approach to entrepreneurship in education continues to generate confusion among those involved in its design and development, since, as other authors concluded [32], ‘the implementation of entrepreneurial education initiatives driven by international policy goals is challenging’ (p. 15). It is also worth noting the proposal made by Azqueta Días de Aldaå [26], for whom EE in primary education focuses on the acquisition of entrepreneurial skills among pupils with a very different focus to the commercial one. While several studies have provided revealing data on initial teacher training in EC [33,34,35], teaching training programmes should be considered in a context where teachers play a leading role in the development of EC in terms of helping their students learn entrepreneurship. It is true that the autonomy enjoyed by some autonomous regions and their higher education institutions means that it is not always easy to influence initial teacher education [34]; however, studies show that this has already been achieved in some countries [36].

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses Development

In Spain, EC is included in various applicable laws, ranging from Organic Law 2/2006 of 3 May, on Education [37] to the current Organic Law 3/2020 of 29 December, which amended Organic Law 2/2006 of 3 May, on education [38]. Royal Decree 157/2022, of 1 March, which established the organisation of and minimum contents to be taught in Primary Education (hereinafter, Royal Decree 157/2022) [39], also includes entrepreneurship as one of the eight key competences that all pupils must achieve by the end of their basic education. These competences are defined on the basis of the Recommendation of the Council of the European Union of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning [40], and are linked to the main global challenges of the 21st century.

The main inputs (operational descriptors of EC) listed in Royal Decree 157/2022 [39] are understood as the applied dimension of EC, in other words, the skills that students should develop are featured below:

• Recognising the needs and challenges to be faced and developing original ideas, using creative skills and being aware of the consequences and effects that the ideas could generate in the environment, in order to propose valuable solutions to meet the identified needs.
• Identifying one’s own strengths and weaknesses using self-knowledge strategies and acquiring a basic knowledge of economic and financial matters, before applying them to situations and problems of everyday life in order to identify those resources that can bring original and valuable ideas into action.
• Creating original ideas and solutions, planning tasks, working with others in teams, and assessing the process conducted and the outcome obtained in order to carry out an entrepreneurial initiative, as well as considering experience as an opportunity to learn.

According to Royal Decree 157/2022 [39], students’ acquisition of EC is necessary for personal development, solving situations and problems in different areas of their lives, creating new opportunities for improvement and actively participating in society, and caring for people, the natural environment and the planet. In addition, this training will provide students with strategies that will enable them to adapt their vision to identify needs and opportunities, train their mind to analyse and evaluate their environment, create and rethink ideas and awaken a willingness to learn, take risks and face uncertainty. All of this should be performed using imagination, creativity, strategic thinking and ethical, critical and constructive reflection within the creative and innovation processes. In the same vein, entrepreneurship will help learners to make decisions based on information and knowledge and engage in flexible, collaborative work with other people, using motivation, empathy and communication and negotiation skills in order to bring ideas into action through planning and managing sustainable projects of social, cultural and economic/financial value [39].

Since the EC became one of the eight key competences for lifelong learning, efforts were made to design and develop various frameworks for its implementation and assessment. This is the case for both EntreComp and EntreCompEdu.

2.1. EntreComp

With the aim of promoting a shared vision of EC, the European Commission developed a framework known as EntreComp [41]. This framework is a way of providing people with a wide range of transversal skills and key competences such as entrepreneurship, critical thinking and problem solving, which open the door to personal fulfilment and development, social inclusion, active citizenship and employment.

EntreComp is a framework consisting of 3 competence areas, 15 competences, an 8-level progression model and a comprehensive list of 442 learning outcomes [4,42]. Figure 1 shows how this framework is represented and how all competences are interlinked, using slices of a pie chart in which each portion has a different colour: blue represents the competences in the ‘Ideas and opportunities’ area, orange represents competences in the ‘Resources’ area and green represents competences in the ‘Into action’ area. All fractions are surrounded by three rings of competence areas covering the 15 competences [4].

2.2. EntreCompEdu

The EntreCompEdu project, co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union, aims to improve teachers’ professional development through a skills-based framework that enables them to understand and improve their EC in relation to EE. The aim of this framework is to help shape a creative and entrepreneurial mindset among teachers and develop a professional EC framework based on the European EntreComp framework. The difference between the two frameworks is that EntreCompEdu focuses on those skills that primary, secondary or vocational teachers may use to facilitate EE in the classroom [34], while EntreComp focuses on the general population.

EntreCompEdu is based on six principles according to which knowledge is socially constructed through interaction and experience and acquired through an iterative process. The six principles are as follows: facilitating creative thinking throughout the learning process; seeking real-world opportunities for students to develop and apply entrepreneurial skills; promoting collaboration with a purpose both in and beyond the classroom; creating value for others outside of school or college; stimulating reflection, flexible thinking and experiential learning; and making entrepreneurial skills a visible part of learning and assessment [34].

The competence areas and competences of EntreCompEdu are presented in

Table 1. Competence areas and competences of EntreCompEdu.

Competence Area	Competences
Professional knowledge and understanding of EE	1.1. Knowing EE 1.2. Valuing EE for all 1.3. Understanding how students develop ECs
Planning and organizing entrepreneurial learning environments	2.1. Setting entrepreneurial learning objectives that are ethical and sustainable 2.2. Making connections 2.3. Creating an empowering entrepreneurial learning environment
Teaching and training	3.1. Teaching to inspire and engage students 3.2. Creating value for others 3.3. Teaching through real-world contexts 3.4. Encouraging self-awareness and self-confidence to support learning 3.5. Promoting productive working with others
Assessment	4.1. Checking and reporting on students’ progress in entrepreneurial learning 4.2. Sharing feedback on entrepreneurial learning 4.3. Celebrating progress and achievement
Professional learning	5.1. Evaluating impact 5.2. Research-informed and evidence-based practice 5.3. Building and sustaining entrepreneurial networks

Note. Adapted from [34].

.

3. The EC in Spanish Laws and Regulations

As Zangeneh et al. [43] pointed out, teachers play a key role in EE through enabling the development of creative and entrepreneurial individuals; however, teacher training is not addressed in the same way in all EU countries. According to EC/EACEA/Eurydice [44], only seven European education systems include EE as a compulsory subject in initial teacher education: Estonia, Latvia, Denmark, Austria, Slovakia, Montenegro and Turkey.

This is not the case in Spain, where the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport [45] noted that there appear to be no specific EE subjects in initial teacher education. This view can also be confirmed in the study carried out by Arruti and Paños-Castro [17] on subjects including the degrees in Primary Education, and in Order ECI/3857/2007, of 27 December, which establishes the requirements for the verification of official university degrees that enable an individual to become a qualified primary education teacher (hereinafter ECI Order) [46].

In contrast, the importance of EC for teachers was already included in the White Paper on the Bachelor’s Degree in Teaching [47], which stressed the role of sense of initiative and entrepreneurship, and in Law 14/2013, of 27 September, on the Support and Internationalisation of Entrepreneurs [48], which emphasised the need for teachers to acquire EC both in their initial training and in their lifelong training, in collaboration with the Autonomous Region authorities.

In Spain, the primary education teacher profession is regulated through the ECI Order [46]. In order to be a practising teacher, eligible candidates must hold the relevant official Bachelor’s Degree in Primary Education. Each university must draw up a report to have its degrees validated. The report must contain the objectives and competences covered in the degree, among other issues. As far as competences are concerned, Section 3 of the ECI Order sets a minimum of 12 competences that the teaching qualification must include, and which future teachers are required to develop. It is striking that none of them refers to EC. Nevertheless, each university has a range of 30 to 60 ECTS to allocate the competences and define the specialist subjects that it deems appropriate pursuant to Article 17 of Organic Law 2/2006 (section b of which refers to the EC) [37].

The specific competences listed in the ECI Order are listed according to the core subjects of basic, didactic and disciplinary training, as well as teaching practice. There are a total of 69 competences. As in the previous case, none of these competences mention the EC directly.

Arruti et al. [33] confirmed that 30% (191 out of a total of 631) of the competences to be developed in initial teacher education in primary education at Jesuit universities in Spain are related to EC, according to EntreComp and EntreCompEdu. This figure was confirmed by Paños-Castro et al. [35], who, after analysing the 68 curricula of the primary education degrees offered in Spain, concluded that of the 6262 (transversal and general) competences analysed according to the EntreComp model, 33.82% were related to entrepreneurship; however, only 3.8% of the general competences and 1.5% of the transversal competences were related to entrepreneurship.

According to Pérez García [49], one of the most complex challenges today, in addition to the lack of adequate teachers for EC training, is adapting traditional methodologies to create a more active methodology aimed at providing personalised learning. In his view, to ensure that students take on a leading role in their learning process and enable them to learn in a connected, networked, collaborative and cooperative way, it is necessary to use more active methodologies, such as project- or problem-based learning, the flipped classroom, gamification, design thinking and/or collaborative or cooperative learning. These are the educational strategies that are in demand today [50]. In fact, according to Paños-Castro [51] and Slabová [52], the acquisition of entrepreneurial skills, attitudes and knowledge requires active and participatory methodologies that train students to perform their professional duties effectively and allow them to have first-hand experiences. Pérez García [49] also stressed the need to improve assessment processes, focusing not only on adapting the final assessment, but also on the whole lifelong learning process, combining formative and summative assessment. This approach means involving students and giving them an active role throughout the process, encouraging communication, debate, collaborative work and, where possible, increasing their participation in the development of assessment tests.

Education must develop students as human beings through stimulating creativity, generating joy in learning, maintaining student curiosity and arousing interest in discovery and problem-solving. In this way, children will be able to grow healthily, develop socio-emotionally and communicate openly and efficiently in an increasingly complex and sophisticated world of (human and digital) networks [50].

The general objective of this research is to analyse the self-perceived level of knowledge and implementation of EC of active teachers (from pre-school to secondary education, including vocational training) in the non-university centres of the SAFA (Sagrada Familia) Foundation in Spain. Prior to the analysis, a questionnaire was created.

The hypotheses are as follows:

H1. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation have knowledge about entrepreneurship and EE (teacherpreneur, EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks, and EE).

H2. 

Teachers from SAFA Foundation score high regarding ECs as motivation, creativity, initiative and teamwork.

H3. 

Students from SAFA Foundation score high in at least the same ECs as the teachers.

H4. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation plan and organise creative learning environments for daily work.

H5. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation distinguish between the social, cultural and economic value that can be generated through entrepreneurial projects.

H6. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation use participatory learning methodologies based on real situations in which the main protagonist is the student.

H7. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation consider that, during the evaluation process, students should share their achievements and progress with their classmates and other agents.

H8. 

At least 50% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation previously took part in training courses on EE.

H9. 

Teachers from SAFA Foundation use a range of methodologies that contribute to the development of their students’ EC.

H10. 

At least 25% of the teachers from SAFA Foundation network with educational agents outside the educational centre to contribute to the development of EC.

The analysis carried out in this research shows the need to continue supporting, with specific actions, the development and preparation of teachers beyond their initial training. The role of the educational administration is essential for the different institutions in charge of teacher training to lay the foundations required for the education of entrepreneurial teachers, also known as ‘teacherpreneurs’, to become a reality.

The rest of this study is organised as follows. The following section presents the methodology through explaining the sample, model specification and the empirical strategy. The final three sections present empirical results followed by discussion, the main conclusions, limitations and ideas for future research.

4. Materials and Methods

To address the research objective, a literature review of CE among entrepreneur teachers, also known as ‘teacherpreneurs’, was conducted and a study of the EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks was undertaken. The literature review highlighted the difficulties in arriving at a consistent conceptualisation of EC, although the EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks represented a major step forward in this regard. Bearing in mind the general objective, this study used both frameworks and the competence-related sub-dimensions specifically established in the EntreComEdu framework as a starting point. Based on these, an ad hoc questionnaire was developed to analyse the self-perceived level of EC among non-university teachers. This method was intended to be a step forward in the development of the role of teacherpreneurs and their training as agents of educational change and transformation. A number of EC evaluation tools, which generally took into account the EntreComp framework, were also used [53,54,55,56,57,58,59].

Once the questionnaire ‘Being a teacherpreneur in the 21st century’ was designed, a test was carried out with 14 experts, all of whom were from the fields of education and entrepreneurship, with the exception of one expert who specialised in creating research methodologies. Experts included six non-university teachers and six university lecturers/researchers (three of whom were experts in research methodology, while two were professionals directly involved in the design and development of the EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks). All experts received a message with the questionnaire and were asked to indicate the relevance of the items, their clarity and the need to consider any specific aspects, dimensions or categories.

The experts made a series of recommendations, including correcting some spelling mistakes, giving participants the opportunity to answer ‘Others’ in the lists of methodologies, adding zero to the Likert scale values, reformulating some items to improve their understanding and better reflect the gradual progression between each block of items, splitting some items, removing the justification of an item, indicating what the acronym SDG stood for, adding an example in an item and reducing the number of examples proposed in an item.

In line with the experts’ judgements, the questionnaire finally encompassed nine context variables (school, province, ownership, school stage, type of centre, socio-economic level of families, gender, age and experience) and five variables to determine teachers’ self-perception of their entrepreneurial profile (knowledge and entrepreneurial awareness, planning and organisation of creative learning environments, teaching and training, evaluation and learning and professional development). The latter five variables were composed of different items, mainly with single-choice questions, although some multiple-choice questions were included to assess competence- and methodology-related items (shown in Tables 4, 5 and 10–12).

A pilot study was conducted in the first half of May 2022 to test the overall functioning of the measurement tool. Five primary school teachers with similar characteristics to the target population participated in this study. They confirmed the extent to which the questionnaire items were easy to understand and the suitability of the completion time. Data collection took place between June 2022 and July 2022 using the Qualtrics platform (an online survey application to gather responses), which guaranteed the anonymity and confidentiality of the results at all times. The time required to complete the questionnaire was around 15 to 20 min. The questionnaire was sent to potential participants through the head of education matters at SAFA Foundation.

A total of 1356 people received the questionnaire. Recipients were all active teachers in the 26 non-university training centres of the SAFA Foundation (all publicly-funded private schools), selected due to their extensive experience in promoting entrepreneurial talent and their desire to innovate and keep up to date with the latest developments in this area. Proof of this approach are the many awards and prizes that the institution receives every year, including the School of the Year Award, which was awarded to the SAFA Professional Schools of Écija-Peñaflor Foundation (Seville) by the Princess of Girona Foundation (FPdGi) in 2019.

After eliminating partial responses, a total of 326 participants answered the questionnaire. Their characteristics are listed in

Table 2. Participant characteristics.

Province	Gender	Socio-Economic Status of Families	Age	Years’ Experience	Type of Contract
Seville: 14.4% Malaga: 4.9% Jaen: 39.9% Huelva: 3.4% Granada: 1.2% Cordoba: 13.5% Cadiz: 20.6% Almeria: 2.1%	Female: 54.6% Male: 43.9% Other: 1.5%	Low: 2.5% Medium-low: 81% Medium-high: 16.6%	Under 30 years old: 13% Between 31 and 40 years old: 24.2% Between 41 and 50 years old: 30.1% Over 50 years old: 32.2%	Between 1 and 5 years’ experience: 22.7% Between 6 and 15 years’ experience: 26.7% Between 16 and 25 years’ experience: 24.5% More than 25 years: 26.1%	Permanent contract: 73.9% Permanent intermittent contract: 0.6% Temporary contract: 7.1% Project or service contract: 3.1% Supply cover contract: 7.1% Others: 8.3%

(expressed in relative frequencies):

Once the responses were received, the first step was to conduct a reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha to measure internal consistency, which was based on the average of the correlations between items. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.911, which is excellent [60]. No negative or zero values were observed in the corrected item–total correlation. Moreover, when removing the item, the Cronbach’s alpha had no improvement, as all items were lower than 0.911.

The split-half reliability (the instrument has odd-numbered items) was 0.835 using the Spearman–Brown coefficient of unequal length, which is to a good level of reliability.

5. Results

Regarding the variable ‘knowledge and entrepreneurial awareness’, as shown in

Table 3. Descriptive statistics for variable ‘entrepreneurial knowledge and awareness’.

Items on Entrepreneurial Knowledge and Awareness		Frequency	Percentage
Item 1.1	I have never heard of the term ‘teacherpreneur’, but I can imagine what it refers to	179	54.9%
	I know the meaning of the term ‘teacherpreneur’	89	27.3%
	I think I am well on my way to becoming a ‘teacherpreneur’	36	11%
	I think of myself as a ‘teacherpreneur’, although there is always room for improvement.	22	6.7%
Item 1.2	Although I have no knowledge of EE, I have an idea of what it is and its potential for my students	182	55.8%
	I share my knowledge about entrepreneurship with my students and promote EE in this way	60	18.4%
	I manage my teaching to lead my students in their development of ECs	31	9.5%
	I try my best to ensure that my students are involved and participate in the generation of valuable ideas or projects, either for themselves or their environment	53	16.3%
Item 1.3	I am not aware of the existence of the European framework on EC known as EntreComp	241	73.9%
	I know that EntreComp exists, but I do not know what it is	60	18.4%
	I know EntreComp and think it is appropriate to use it to promote EE	24	7.4%
	I know EntreComp and have used it with my students	1	0.3%
Item 1.4	I am not aware of the existence of the European framework on EC for teachers known as EntreCompEdu	240	73.6%
	I know that EntreCompEdu exists, but I do not know what it is	61	18.7%
	I know EntreCompEdu and I think it is appropriate to use it to promote EE	24	7.4%
	I know EntreComp and I have used it with my students.	1	0.3%
Item 1.5	I believe that EE should not be taught to students	17	5.2%
	I believe that EE should only be taught to students who show an interest in it	36	11%
	I believe that EE should only be taught to highly gifted and talented students	7	2,1%
	I believe that EE should be taught to all students	266	81.6%
Item 1.6	I do not think that I can take action in my discipline/subject to contribute to my students’ development of ECs	24	7.4%
	I am sure that the discipline/subject I teach could contribute to my students’ development of EE in that discipline/subject, even if I do not purposefully teach ECs	116	35.6%
	I think that I use my discipline/subject to contribute to my students’ development of ECs	91	27.9%
	I would like to further contribute to my students’ development of ECs in my discipline/subject or others fields	95	29.1%
Item 1.7	I do not believe that knowing the needs, interests and talents of students helps to determine my educational approach in the classroom	9	2.8%
	I believe that EE involves taking the needs, interests and talents of students as a starting point to plan their development of ECs	87	26.7%
	I believe that EE involves taking the needs, interests and talents of students as a starting point to decide which path to follow in order to help them develop ECs	64	19.6%
	I believe that EE involves taking the needs, interests and talents of students as a starting point to guide them in their independent development of ECs	166	50.9%

, more than half of the participants (54.9%) had never heard of the term ‘teacherpreneur’, had no knowledge of EE (55.8%), and had not heard of the EntreComp (73.9%) or EntreCompEdu (73.6%) frameworks. However, most participants agreed that entrepreneurial education should be taught to all students (81.6%), and that their discipline/subject could contribute to the acquisition of ECs.

In the same variable, participants were asked to indicate what their perception was of their own development of entrepreneurial skills. They rated themselves best in perseverance (5.21/6), motivation (5.18/6), autonomy (5.14/6) and teamwork (5.1/6), while their self-perceived weaknesses were innovation (4.31/6) and dealing with uncertainty, ambiguity and risk (4.33/6). However, the average figures for all these entrepreneurial sub-competences were high (4.78/6) (see

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for self-perceived entrepreneurial competences.

Competences	Mean	Standard Deviation
Innovation	4.31	0.980
Uncertainty, ambiguity and risk management	4.33	0.987
Leadership	4.41	1.021
Identification of opportunities	4.45	0.903
Digital competence	4.54	1.030
Creativity	4.57	1.043
Emotional intelligence	4.70	0.955
Planning and management	4.79	0.948
Self-confidence and self-efficacy	4.80	0.841
Initiative	4.84	0.974
Self-knowledge	4.85	0.823
Ethical and sustainable thinking	4.87	0.902
Decision-making	4.94	0.880
Problem-solving	5.05	0.781
Teamwork	5.10	0.833
Autonomy	5.14	0.851
Motivation	5.18	0.818
Perseverance	5.21	0.816

).

Participants were also asked to state the extent to which their students had developed ECs. As shown in

Table 5. Descriptive statistics for students’ development of entrepreneurial competences.

Competences	Mean	Standard Deviation
Uncertainty, ambiguity and risk management	4.28	1.385
Leadership	4.43	1.137
Planning and management	4.47	1.389
Identification of opportunities	4.59	1.242
Initiative	4.62	1.373
Innovation	4.67	1.236
Self-knowledge	4.68	1.287
Decision making	4.70	1.266
Problem solving	4.72	1.336
Self-confidence and self-efficacy	4.73	1.266
Perseverance	4.76	1.343
Ethical and sustainable thinking	4.78	1.231
Autonomy	4.78	1.318
Digital competence	4.81	1.164
Emotional intelligence	4.81	1.171
Creativity	4.82	1.143
Motivation	4.92	1.237
Teamwork	4.98	1.213

, they perceived that their students had mainly developed teamwork (4.98/6), motivation (4.92/6) and creativity (4.82/6). In contrast, the lowest scores were given to the management of uncertainty, ambiguity and risk (4.28/6) and leadership (4.43/6). However, their overall perception of their students’ development of ECs had a high score, namely 4.69/6.

The second variable analysed was planning and organising creative learning environments. This variable consisted of six items. As can be seen in

Table 6. Descriptive statistics for variable ‘planning and organisation of creative learning environments’.

Items on Planning and Organisation of Creative Learning Environments		Frequency	Percentage
Item 2.1	When I plan my subject, I devise plans only according to the didactic principles required to achieve the proposed objectives	73	22.4%
	I think it is appropriate to plan my subject around one or more of the ECs that I want my students to develop (identifying opportunities, creativity, innovation, ethical and sustainable thinking, etc.).	136	41.7%
	When I plan my subject, I include one or more of the ECs that I want my students to develop	71	21.8%
	My approach to teaching involves devising innovative and disruptive methods that encourage students to develop one or more ECs. This approach is intended to help them propose valuable ideas or projects that are relevant to them or their constantly evolving environment	46	14.1%
Item 2.2	When I plan my subject, I mainly take the objectives set through education legislation as a starting point.	87	26.7%
	Apart from the objectives set through education legislation, I believe that when planning my subject, I should take the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (based on ethics and values related to gender, equality, equity, social justice, respect for the environment and environmental sustainability) as a starting point	149	45.7%
	I use some of the SDGs as a basis for planning and organising my subject	42	12.9%
	My subject plan is organised with the aim to encouraging my students to base the valuable ideas or projects they propose on the ethics and values of the SDGs	48	14.7%
Item 2.3	I am not clear about the difference between the social, cultural and economic value that can be generated through entrepreneurial projects	75	23%
	I am very clear about the difference between the social, cultural and economic value that can be generated through entrepreneurial projects	107	32.8%
	I am able to offer examples of entrepreneurial ideas and projects that create social, cultural or economic value for my students and the environment in which we live	96	29.4%
	I am able to help my students design entrepreneurial actions that create social, cultural and economic value for them and our changing environment	48	14.7%
Item 2.4	I know that space and time management is an important competence, as is my students’ knowledge of the learning resources available to them	70	21.5%
	I am able to manage the use of learning space and time, classroom use and resources for my students	108	33.1%
	I manage both the learning spaces and resources available to create value for my students	69	21.2%
	I encourage my students to manage the learning spaces and resources available to them (including technology) so that they can generate ideas or projects that provide value to themselves or the changing environment in which they live	79	24.2%
Item 2.5	I am able to design innovative projects that provide added value to my students or to the changing environment in which we live	108	33.1%
	I am capable of developing innovative projects that provide added value based on real and changing challenges and needs of the environment in which we live	98	30.1%
	I manage innovative projects that provide added value based on real and changing challenges and needs of the environment in which we live	48	14.7%
	I encourage my students to develop innovative ideas or projects that provide added value based on real and changing challenges and needs of the environment in which we live, emphasising the importance of managing uncertainty, ambiguity and risk	72	22.1%
Item 2.6	I believe that it is necessary to evaluate the degree to which valuable ideas or projects were materialised and the impact they had	133	40.8%
	Whenever I can, I evaluate the degree of achievement of valuable ideas or projects and their impact	84	25.8%
	Whenever we develop a valuable idea or project, I always evaluate its degree of achievement and impact on the natural environment and our changing surroundings	48	14.7%
	I encourage my students to evaluate the degree of achievement and impact of their valuable ideas or projects through promoting their decision-making and readjustments regarding goals, priorities, resource planning, actions or any other aspect of the value creation process	61	18.7%

, 41.7% of teachers included ECs in their work plans, in addition to the Sustainable Development Goals (45.7%). The majority of teachers scored 2 out of 4 on the remaining items, i.e., they identified the difference between the social, cultural and economic value of entrepreneurial projects; were able to manage the use of learning space and time; and considered it necessary to evaluate the extent to which ideas are materialised and their impact.

The next variable analysed was education and training, which consisted of four items. With the exception of the last item, the rest were perceived to be at a low level. Participants took into account the learning climate required to motivate students, organised learning processes using examples from real-life situations and used brainstorming techniques to guide the learning process. It was noteworthy that 45.5% of teachers used participatory methods to ensure that students played a leading role in their own learning (see

Table 7. Descriptive statistics for variable ‘teaching and training’.

Items on Teaching and Training		Frequency	Percentage
Item 3.1	I believe that to create the right learning climate, there is nothing better than providing incentives to my students, such as providing appropriate rewards for their initiative, effort and achievements, celebrating good results, learning from their own and others’ mistakes and encouraging innovative ways of dealing with problems	120	36.8%
	Whenever I can and have time, I provide incentives to my students and encourage them to learn about themselves, such as through identifying their skills, strengths and weaknesses, in order to improve their learning	104	31.9%
	In my planning, I always identify specific opportunities to encourage my students to learn about themselves in order to improve their learning	35	10.7%
	When planning and motivating my students, I encourage them to self-regulate and motivate themselves to develop their skills and strengths, overcome their weaknesses and strengthen their confidence, despite any obstacles they encounter in their learning process	67	20.6%
Item 3.2	I know that my students will learn when I give them the knowledge that they need to generate ideas and projects that provide value to them or the changing environment in which they live	66	20.2%
	I organise learning processes using real-life examples from which students could generate ideas and projects that provide value to them and the changing environment in which they live	119	36.5%
	I organise learning processes that make use of real-life situations and authentic learning; students are required to respond to these situations and make consensual decisions	65	19.9%
	I encourage my students’ participation and teamwork, as well as other entrepreneurial skills, such as initiative, identifying opportunities, self-efficacy and perseverance, to ensure that they themselves create and use determination to solve real-life problems in their changing environment	76	23.3%
Item 3.3	I know creative techniques that help students generate innovative ideas	49	15%
	I occasionally use idea generation techniques to guide my students’ learning process	141	43.3%
	Creative and innovative idea generation techniques are always part of my planning within the methodology I use	54	16.6%
	I encourage my students to use creative and innovative idea-generating techniques to meet needs or solve problems that they either experience or identify in their environment in a sustainable way	82	25.2%
Item 3.4	I believe that traditional teaching methodologies are essential for learning, although I am also in favour of new methodologies	50	15.3%
	I occasionally use new student-centred teaching methodologies	69	21.2%
	I use participatory learning methods based on real-life situations in which students play the main role, such as cooperative learning, project-, problem- or challenge-based learning and solidarity-based and service learning, among others methods	149	45.7%
	I use different types of participatory learning methods to help my students develop their autonomy and entrepreneurial skills while facing real-life situations to which they have to respond.	58	17.8%

).

The next variable analysed was evaluation, which consisted of three items. The most highly rated item was the variety of techniques and strategies used by teachers (36.5%). However, a large number of teachers (36.8%) reported that they do not explicitly evaluate entrepreneurship, and 47.9% believed that when evaluating ideas and projects that provide value, it is essential that students share their achievements and progress with their classmates (see

Table 8. Descriptive statistics for variable ‘evaluation’.

Items on Evaluation		Frequency	Percentage
Item 4.1	I assess the level of development of my students’ competences using techniques that effectively measure the knowledge acquired	75	23%
	I assess the level of my students’ competences using a variety of techniques and strategies that assess their learning outcomes	119	36.5%
	I assess the level of my students’ competences using a variety of techniques and strategies that assess the application of their learning to different contexts	78	23.9%
	I involve students in the assessment of their competences from the outset, using a variety of techniques and strategies that assess the application of their learning to different contexts	54	16.6%
Item 4.2	I assess competences explicitly, but I do not focus specifically on entrepreneurship	120	36.8%
	I assess the process for developing ECs using various techniques and strategies	76	23.3%
	When assessing the development of my students’ ECs, I provide feedback that focuses on how they have managed their learning, effort, achievements and progress	80	24.5%
	In the process of evaluating the development of my students’ ECs, I help them to self-evaluate, i.e., to manage their learning, efforts, achievements and progress, and to reflect critically on their entrepreneurship learning process	50	15.3%
Item 4.3	I believe that it is essential that students share their achievements and progress with their classmates when evaluating ideas and projects that provide value.	156	47.9%
	I believe that in the evaluation of ideas and projects that provide value, it is essential that students share their achievements and progress with the actors involved in them, which include both teachers and agents outside the school	81	24.8%
	When evaluating ideas and projects that provide value, my students share their achievements and progress with actors who are involved in them, which include both teachers and agents outside the school	45	13.8%
	When evaluating ideas and projects that provide value, I support my students in managing the internal and external stakeholders with whom they share their achievements and progress	44	13.5%

).

The final variable in the questionnaire was ‘learning and professional development’, which consisted of three Likert scale items and three multiple choice questions. As shown in

Table 9. Descriptive statistics for variable ‘learning and professional development’.

Items on Learning and Professional Development		Frequency	Percentage
Item 5.1	I have never been interested in the world of EE	13	4%
	I have not completed any specific training EE, but I think it is necessary to receive training in order to help my students in their own learning processes	169	51.8%
	I recognise that I need to improve my training in EE in order to help my students in their own learning processes, which is why I am undertaking some training courses on this subject	103	31.6%
	In addition to taking training courses on EE, I am willing to engage in further training in EE based on research and other scientific evidence to help my students in their own processes	41	12.6%
Item 5.2	I was unaware that, according to current education legislation, the EC is one of the key generic competences, and I think that the development of this competence does not concern me	64	19.6%
	I know that current education legislation includes entrepreneurship as one of the key generic competences; thus, I am interested in it	171	52.5%
	As I know that current education legislation includes the EC as one of the key generic competences, I have recently taken some training courses so that I can include it in my teaching	33	10.1%
	Each new academic year, I reflect on how to improve my training and management of EE so that I can then help my students to develop their entrepreneurial skills	58	17.8%
Item 5.3	I know the main methodologies that contribute to the development of my students’ entrepreneurial skills	134	41.1%
	I evaluate the educational methodologies and practices that, in my view, contribute to the development of entrepreneurial skills, which I have used with my students	69	21.2%
	I share pedagogical methods and practices that contribute to the development of students’ entrepreneurial skills with my teaching colleagues	113	34.7%
	I network with educational actors outside my school on entrepreneurial methodologies and initiatives and educational practices that contribute to the development of students’ entrepreneurial skills	10	3.1%

, more than half of the teachers (51.8%) had not received any training in EE (first three items), and many others (31.6%) recognised that they needed to improve their training in entrepreneurship. Many teachers also emphasised that they were aware of the current education legislation, which includes entrepreneurship as one of the key generic skills, and acquainted with the main methodologies that contribute to the development of ECs.

In relation to the methodologies used with their students, the most frequently mentioned were cooperative learning (93.9%), lectures (75.5%) and problem-based learning (75.2%). The least used were design thinking (8.6%) and case studies (21.5%) (See

Table 10. Descriptive statistics for methodologies used with students.

Methodology	Frequency	Percentage
Lecturing	246	75.5%
Cooperative learning	306	93.9%
Collaborative learning	170	52.1%
Learning through doing	168	51.5%
Problem-based learning	245	75.2%
Challenge-based learning	77	23.6%
Project-based learning	207	63.5%
Case study	70	21.5%
Inquiry-based learning	82	25.2%
Experiential learning	96	29.4%
Service learning and solidarity	76	23.3%
Design thinking	28	8.6%

).

Another question that teachers were asked was which methods contributed to the development of entrepreneurship. Cooperative learning (81.6%), project-based learning (76.4%) and problem-based learning (75.8%) were considered by many participants to be the most suitable, while they believed that the least appropriate was lecturing (22.7%) (See

Table 11. Descriptive statistics for methodologies that contribute to development of entrepreneurial competences.

Methodologies	Frequency	Percentage
Lecturing	74	22.7%
Cooperative learning	266	81.6%
Collaborative learning	195	59.8%
Learning through doing	197	60.4%
Problem-based learning	247	75.8%
Challenge-based learning	190	58.3%
Project-based learning	249	76.4%
Case study	120	36.8%
Inquiry-based learning	155	47.5%
Experiential learning	165	50.6%
Service learning and solidarity-based learning	157	48.2%
Design thinking	113	34.7%

).

Finally, participants were asked to indicate the methodologies with which were acquainted in order to put them into practice. In their opinion, they performed better in cooperative learning (75.5%) and problem-based learning (67.2%), but were less familiar with design thinking (19.6%) and case studies (25.5%) and, therefore, reported that these were competences that they still needed to develop (See

Table 12. Descriptive statistics for methodologies with which participants were acquainted.

Methodologies	Frequency	Percentage
Lecturing	180	55.2%
Cooperative learning	246	75.5%
Collaborative learning	165	50.6%
Learning through doing	150	46%
Problem-based learning	219	67.2%
Challenge-based learning	125	38.3%
Project-based learning	200	61.3%
Case study	83	25.5%
Inquiry-based learning	92	28.2%
Experiential learning	107	32.8%
Service learning and solidarity-based learning	88	27%
Design thinking	64	19.6%

).

6. Discussion

As can be seen in the results section, with regard to the knowledge and entrepreneurial awareness variable, more than 50% of respondents stated that they had never heard of the term ‘teacherpreneur’, although more than 25% knew its meaning, which was defined almost a decade ago by the European Commission [61] and authors such as Keyhani and Kim [62,63]. These results are in line with the high percentage of respondents (more than 70%) who claim not to have heard of the EntreComp and EntreCompEdu frameworks (published in 2018 and 2020, respectively). This result contrasts with the results obtained by Grigg [34], who found that, of the 308 teachers who participated in the EntreCompEdu pilot project (the EC reference framework for primary, secondary and vocational education teachers), around 32% said that they had never heard of EntreComp (the EC reference framework for the general population).

In relation to EE, more than 50% of respondents stated that they had no knowledge of EE but can imagine what it means. This result differs from the opinion of more than 50% of the respondents, who considered that EE should be worked on with all students, and the result obtained by Grigg [34], who found that around 27% said that they had no previous experience in teaching EE. It is striking that, even without receiving EE training, more than 80% of those surveyed believed that this involves starting from the needs, interests and talents of the students [3] in order to guide them in the independent development of EC, and that each teacher could contribute, at least in his or her discipline, to the development of EC, as the European Commission advocates [64]. However, as Lackéus states [2], ‘infusing value creation experiences across the entire curriculum can be one of the most important contributions entrepreneurship can make to education in the future’ (p. 16).

In relation to the level of development of the ECs, the respondents as a whole scored very high (more than 4.31 out of 6) in all of them, although they stood out in perseverance, motivation, autonomy, decision-making and teamwork. Likewise, they perceived that their students, who scored more than 4.28 out of 6 in all the ECs, stood out above all in teamwork, motivation and creativity. It is no coincidence that many studies highlight these skills as being characteristic of an entrepreneurial person [7,63,65,66,67,68,69].

With regard to the variable ‘planning and organising creative learning environments’, more than 40% of respondents scored low (1 or 2 out of 4). They believed that subjects should be planned with attention paid to one or more of the EC to be developed by their students; considered that, apart from the objectives set through educational legislation, they should start from the SDGs (in fact, the EE plays a key role in the development of the SDGs [70,71]); and believed that it is necessary to evaluate the degree of achievement attained via ideas or projects of value and their impact. The issue was that only 14–18% took such action. It seems that, as Lackéus states [2], ‘we can also hope for increased acknowledgement in society that there is a problematic deficit of new and innovative value creation activity and that equipping all citizens with increased entrepreneurial competencies through entrepreneurial education is a viable strategy for alleviating this problem’ (p. 16).

Along the same lines, based on the definition devised by the Danish Foundation for Entrepreneurship [25], more than 32% of participants stated that they could clearly distinguish between the social, cultural and economic value that can be generated through entrepreneurial projects, although only 15% helped their students to design this type of entrepreneurial action. Moreover, more than 20% stated that they not only encouraged their students to generate innovative ideas or projects that add value based on real and changing challenges and needs of the environment, and stressed the importance of managing uncertainty, ambiguity and risk, but also encouraged students to manage learning spaces and resources available to them in order to generate ideas or projects of value. However, another 30% of participants, even though they believed themselves to be capable of doing so, did not put EC into practice, or if they did, their teaching was not based on the real challenges and needs of the environment. However, it is important to emphasise that, as Lackéus points outs [2], ‘students can become highly motivated and engaged by creating value to other people’, which is why it is necessary to train students’ and encourage their ‘ability and willingness to create value for other people’ (p. 6).

With regard to the teaching and training variable, almost 50% of participants stated that they used participatory learning methodologies based on real situations in which the main protagonist is the student (in line with the ideas defended by Gibb [72]; considered that to create a suitable learning climate, there is nothing better than encouraging the students; and, whenever possible, encouraged the students to devise solutions themselves). Similarly, the same percentage of respondents stated that their students learned when given the necessary knowledge to generate valuable ideas and projects, and, therefore, organise learning processes using examples from real situations. The same percentage also stated that they used creative techniques to help generate innovative ideas, using them from time to time. The above figure is still too low for teachers who delegate to students, thus promoting their autonomy, which is a method defended by authors such as Arruti [73] or Lackéus [2], who considers that ‘teachers should give their students assignments to create value (preferably innovative) to external stakeholders based on problems and/or opportunities the students identify through an iterative process they own themselves and take full responsibility for’ (p. 26).

With regard to the evaluation variable, in line with what Lackéus [2] states, almost 50% of participants stated that when evaluating ideas and projects that generate value, it is essential for students to share their achievements and progress with their classmates; however, only 13% of participants stated that they support their students in the management of internal and external agents at the educational centre, with whom they will share achievements and progress. Likewise, more than 50% consider it necessary to assess the degree of development of pupils’ competences through techniques that measure the knowledge and learning acquired, but do not explicitly assess entrepreneurship or the process of developing EC through different techniques and strategies. In any case, only around 15% involve students in the assessment process, which Pérez García [49] argues should be more widely encouraged.

As far as the learning and professional development variable is concerned, more than 50% of participants stated that they had not taken specific training courses on EE, even though they believed it is necessary to take these courses and knew that current educational legislation includes EC as one of the key generic competences. This result coincides with the lack of training referred to by Gonzalez-Tejerina and Vieira [28], but differs in part with the results of the study by Ruskovaara and Pihkala [74], who, in their research with 521 participants, highlighted that ‘196 teachers have not had any training in entrepreneurship education. A majority of the respondents, that is, 216 teachers, stated that they have attended some training sessions, and those with a great deal of training were the minority with 71 teachers’ (p. 211). After all, according to Arruti and Paños-Castro [17], in Spain, there are no specific EE subjects in the different initial teacher training programmes in primary education. In any case, as Miço and Cungu [75] pointed, ‘training teachers in entrepreneurship education helps them apply specific competences, methods, and tools to encourage confidence in learners’ own capabilities and to stimulate flexibility, leadership, and initiative’ (p. 1).

Finally, it is worth noting that more than 40% of respondents knew the main methodologies that contribute to the development of their students’ EC, but only 3% network with educational agents outside of the educational centre to contribute to the development of EC. Specifically, the methodologies that most teachers used with their students were cooperative learning, problem-based learning and project-based learning. These methods were considered by the respondents to most positively contribute to the development of EC [49]. These methods are also the ones with which teachers are most familiar, which may be why they prioritise them over others. Other methodologies that are commonly used because they are considered to contribute to the development of EC are lectures and learning through doing. The least used (with 8.6%) method is design thinking, although almost 20% of participants knew how to use it.

Regarding the hypotheses, H1, H2 and H4 to H10 are rejected, and only H3 is accepted.

7. Conclusions

In light of the above discussion, these data merely confirm the need to follow the recommendations on the appropriateness of encouraging the development of EC in primary education and all stages of teacher training [23], continuing to promote entrepreneurial teaching [76], and fostering EC in initial teacher training [77]; this approach allows teachers to facilitate its development in primary school students in an optimal manner. As part of this study, ‘a large research gap can be identified relating to the teacher’s perspective on entrepreneurship education and especially to the teacher’s working methods in entrepreneurship education at the lower school levels’ [74] (p. 205).

It is now necessary to train teachers at the lowest levels of education to think and act as innovative entrepreneurs, becoming capable of leading significant change in schools [78]. To this end, the authors propose ways in which teachers’ daily work practices can be transformed into action-oriented practice, so that they can be agents of change for the benefit of their students. We also emphasised past works on the entrepreneurial mindset and its benefits, such as taking risks and failing, creating value, reflecting on past practice, generating and implementing Ideas, encouraging innovation in the field of education, collaboration, commitment, proposing different solutions to problems that may arise, being leaders and managing projects, etc.

In fact, as Keyhani and Kim [63] claim, the competences possessed by these teachers could indeed be acquired through pre- and in-service teacher education programmes. This is a recommendation that the authors address directly to policy makers and leaders of teacher training programmes.

We must continue to advocate and work for the development of ‘teacherpreneurs’, who are a type of social entrepreneur who are ‘socially motivated and opportunity-minded individuals and risk-takers who are knowledgeable, visionary, innovative, collaborative, present in their work, resourceful, proactive, dedicated, and self-improvement oriented’ [63] (p. 3).There is no doubt that, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the world (and teachers in particular) have faced, for the first time, difficulties and uncertainties in response to which the population had to strongly demonstrate their capacity for initiative and adaptability to new situations, as well as immediate problem-solving, teamwork, generation of ideas, cooperation, empathy, responsibility and trust. It seems evident that EC needs to be at the same level as the other key competences in education systems [28].

Our research presents the situation of schools belonging to SAFA Foundation in a specific community in Spain, which is based on a mission and vision that is pro-innovation; however, these data analysed could have been contrasted with the use of other methodologies. Even so, these data reveal that although there is still much to be carried out, we have teachers who are willing and committed to progress and improvement. In addition to proposing specific actions to reach the necessary educational bodies, another interesting line of action is to replicate the study, taking into account the different communities in Spain in order to compare the data obtained in this research. However, further study should not occur before analysing the construct validity of the instrument used in order to apply it both nationally and internationally.

One of the limitations of the study is that it uses a non-probabilistic convenience sample, which means that it is only possible to make descriptive statements about the sample. For this reason, for future research, it would be interesting to increase the sample size by carrying out a simple random sampling of all primary school teachers in Spain.

Another limitation, in this case regarding the number of participants, is that the survey was sent at the end of the school year, making it more time-consuming to complete the questionnaire and removing any incentive that motivates answering it.