Next Article in Journal
Survey of Personalized Learning Software Systems: A Taxonomy of Environments, Learning Content, and User Models
Next Article in Special Issue
Entrepreneurship Education: Examining Long-Term Effects of a Practical Program Implemented in Children
Previous Article in Journal
The Inequities Embedded in Measures of Engagement in Science Education for African American Learners from a Culturally Relevant Science Pedagogy Lens
Previous Article in Special Issue
Developing Entrepreneurial Society: Have We Ignored the Opportunities of Preschool Education?
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Education Sciences
Volume 13
Issue 7
10.3390/educsci13070740
education-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

How Effective Is Entrepreneurship Education in Schools? An Empirical Study of the New Curriculum in Spain

by
Margarita Núñez-Canal
1,
Roberto Sanz Ponce
2,*,
Arantxa Azqueta
3 and
Elisabet Montoro-Fernández
4
1
Department of Business Administration, ESIC Business & Marketing School, ESIC University, 28223 Madrid, Spain
2
Department of General Didactics, Theory of Education and Technological Innovation, Catholic University of Valencia, 46001 Valencia, Spain
3
Department of Didactics and School Organization, UNIR-International University of La Rioja, 26006 Logroño, Spain
4
Department of Communication and Education, Loyola Andalucia University, 41103 Seville, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci. 2023, 13(7), 740; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070740
Submission received: 20 June 2023 / Revised: 12 July 2023 / Accepted: 18 July 2023 / Published: 19 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Entrepreneurship Education Creating Impact for Societies: Known Worlds and New Frontiers)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This research analyzes the results of an entrepreneurship education program focused on knowledge and attitudes in 1036 students of secondary education, high school, and vocational training, differentiated into two groups, control and experimental. It analyzes the outcomes after incorporating entrepreneurship content into the school curriculum and participating in a program of entrepreneurial potential, which develops creativity, leadership, personal control, achievement motivation, and problem-solving. Non-parametric statistics were used to assess the influence of the acquisition of entrepreneurial knowledge on the gender, age, school ownership, and socio-educational level of the parents. This study shows that students with a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship improve their entrepreneurial knowledge and that the impact is more significant if they participate in the specific program. The results are not significant for the variables gender, school type, and parents’ level of education, but they are significant for age and school level. The effectiveness of including content on entrepreneurship in the curriculum and the specific program is ratified. It is proposed to reinforce education in entrepreneurial knowledge that strengthens the students’ identity and future entrepreneurial intention.

1. Introduction

Since the Lisbon European Council in 2000 included among its strategic purposes the promotion of an entrepreneurial culture, education systems have followed several objectives: emphasizing non-formal learning [1], increasing university–enterprise relationships [2], developing entrepreneurial competence in curricula [3], and promoting transversal contents in different non-business university degrees and creating entrepreneurial in campus activities [4]. While the majority of research on entrepreneurship education concentrates on university [5] or pre-university levels [6], there is an increasing interest in exploring the role of entrepreneurial education at the school level. A number of studies suggest that it is important to introduce entrepreneurship education before tertiary education [7,8].
In response to the challenges posed by globalization and digitalization, there has been a growing impulse towards entrepreneurship in education. European policies have encouraged this trend in its member states. In the Spanish case, it has becomes an objective of the educational system since 2006 [9,10,11].
Entrepreneurial competence is recognized as having a “sense of autonomy and entrepreneurship”, being one of the eight key competencies for lifelong learning since 2018 in the EU [12]. In addition, the European Framework for Entrepreneurial Competence: EntreComp, aims to provide a reference framework and a standard conceptual model to identify the elements that make up this competence and facilitate its inclusion in education systems [13,14]. It is worth noticing that entrepreneurial competence is part of the curriculum in Spain within Organic Law 3/2020.
The need to renew knowledge and boost entrepreneurial activity is increasing interest in improving entrepreneurial and financial skills at an early age [15,16]. Indeed, since 2012, OECD-driven financial competency has been incorporated into the PISA exams [17]. An education that understands these competencies and empowers young people to have initiatives, make decisions, and develop projects that promote collective socio-economic improvements is an educational priority [18]. Equipping students with these tools will help them in their personal [19] and professional development [20,21] and contributes to the innovation and economic progress of society [22]. These skills are essential in times of digital revolution and changes in the labor market [23].
The inclusion of entrepreneurship education in school curricula has occurred gradually, either as a subject or as a transversal competence, in all educational stages [24,25], although it has a more substantial presence in secondary and higher education. However, teaching entrepreneurship is a challenging task due to its multifaceted and complex nature [26]. Furthermore, its philosophical trend in education is still uncertain [27]. Thus, recent reviews demonstrate the rise and multiple approaches to entrepreneurship education: educational levels, disciplines, tools, resources, content, assessment, pedagogies, etc. [28]. Implementation in the classroom has been heterogeneous [29] and usually generates some uncertainty [8]. The literature detects the need to improve teacher training because they have a crucial role in its implementation [30,31,32], the use of appropriate methodologies [33,34,35], and the need to correctly evaluate it [36,37,38].
In order to ensure positive results for students, it is essential to evaluate formal educational initiatives. This research on entrepreneurial education is based on consolidated theoretical backgrounds that define the influence of attitudes on entrepreneurship education, using intention models and the theory of planned behavior [39,40,41], as well as theories of human capital and its connection to entrepreneurial intentions [5,6].
It is crucial to evaluate attitudes and knowledge that focus on business management, legal issues, and strategic vision to establish an entrepreneurial spirit. This analysis has yet to be carried out due to the recent incorporation of these materials into the educational school curriculum. Strengthening students’ identity and future entrepreneurial intention is crucial because the absence of it restricts the potential for creating entrepreneurial endeavors [42,43]. Moreover, it is important to explore different methods to ensure their success [42,44]. As part of the research, two groups of students were compared: those who only followed the entrepreneurial new curriculum and those who also participated in a specific training program. This program aimed to enhance the students’ entrepreneurial potential by providing training on personal indicators crucial for an entrepreneurial mindset. The results of both groups were evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the program.
This study provides empirical evidence demonstrating the positive impact of an entrepreneurial potential training program and curricula content on entrepreneurial knowledge among 1036 students. We seek to evaluate the influence that personal factors such as attitudes towards entrepreneurship may have on students’ learning process. Certain variables such as creativity, leadership, personal control, achievement motivation, and problem-solving are measured to verify [37]. Reference article consists of three main sections. Firstly, a review of the theoretical framework of the curricular contents of entrepreneurship education is presented to establish the working hypotheses. We will explore how entrepreneurial competence is a combination of various skills and knowledge that can be enhanced through an educational program to improve the entrepreneurial abilities of students. Moreover, this study delves into how sociodemographic factors impact the development of entrepreneurial skills. In Section 2, we will explain the methodology used to collect and analyze data from two separate groups (control and experimental). Additionally, the research findings will be presented according to the three levels of hypothesis testing: (1) the overall correlation between entrepreneurial attitude and entrepreneurial knowledge; (2) the observations regarding the curricular contents and students’ entrepreneurial knowledge in different groups; and (3) the impact of sociodemographic variables on entrepreneurial knowledge acquisition. Finally, we will discuss the results and compare them with the previous literature from similar studies. We will also establish recommendations for educational policy, describe the limitations of the study, and suggest possible future lines of work.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Entrepreneurial Competence: Attitudes

Entrepreneurship encompasses a variety of motivations and goals that have global significance, including social impact, commercial success, and environmental sustainability [45]. This broad vision of entrepreneurship in the educational context has gained widespread consensus in the literature about entrepreneurship education [46]. The personal and motivational aspects are completed with the necessary knowledge of the entrepreneurial discipline from an institutional, legal, and technical perspective for this activity to develop.
Entrepreneurial competence combines knowledge, attitudes, and skills that inspire people to undertake projects addressing unmet needs or opportunities [47]. This competence considers cultural elements and external factors as key determinants in enhancing the ability to recognize and create opportunities, enabling the transformation of ideas into action. Ultimately, this contributes to a more dynamic and competitive society [48].
In short, cultivating an entrepreneurial skillset requires a multifaceted approach that involves developing specific personality traits and attitudes and the necessary knowledge to initiate and oversee projects from start to finish. This holistic approach is essential for establishing a robust entrepreneurial identity.
Moreover, this competence is framed in a whole perspective, in which the moral [19,49] and personal [50] dimensions acquire particular relevance. This competence is composed of different elements that intertwine and complement each other in a complex way, aimed at strengthening initiative and personal autonomy in the realization of entrepreneurial projects. Along these lines, all theories that study entrepreneurial competence are based on intention models and the theory of planned behavior [39,40] to predict entrepreneurial behaviors [41], which are derived from prior attitudes towards entrepreneurship [51], favorable sociocultural environment [52], cultural values [53], and social models [54]. Therefore, education emerges as a determining element [55].

2.2. Entrepreneurial Competence: Knowledge

Having the right blend of personality traits, attitudes, and knowledge is crucial for successfully launching and managing entrepreneurial projects. This comprehensive approach is vital in establishing a strong entrepreneurial identity [56]. The literature defines three dimensions of entrepreneurship: the “know-why” (understanding the importance and values of entrepreneurial activity), the “know-how” (possessing the necessary skills to carry out a project), and the “know-what” (having knowledge of the economic context, management, and business creation) [4]. Therefore, apart from personal attitudes and skills, knowledge encompasses economic and practical aspects crucial for equipping students with the entrepreneurial human capital required before embarking on an entrepreneurial journey [5,57].
In order to fully develop human potential, it is essential to acquire basic knowledge in legal, strategic, and managerial aspects, in addition to non-cognitive skills [37]. Understanding lawful knowledge involves comprehending the legal and administrative structure of a business undertaking, aligned with various legal concepts, and its operations within the boundaries of institutional and market regulations. Having strategic knowledge means having the foresight to provide a product or service that gives a competitive advantage [58]. This enables one to focus on a particular audience, thereby increasing the likelihood of being chosen over competitors [32,42]. Managerial knowledge pertains to the comprehension of business management and administration functions, as explored by the pioneers of this field [59]. There are multiple activities encompassed in administrative functions, including the production of goods or services, as well as commercial and financial functionality. Additionally, there are transversal functions that are essential to any executive role, such as planning, organization, direction, and team coordination. It should be noted that having financial literacy is not just important for the technical aspects of business, but it is also a crucial skill for making informed decisions throughout life [60]. Therefore, the combination of knowledge, skills, and attitudes are crucial elements in shaping an individual’s entrepreneurial identity. This foundation is based on theories regarding human capital and its connection to entrepreneurship [61].

2.3. Entrepreneurial Competence and Sociodemographic Variables

Researchers have conducted extensive studies on how various factors influence entrepreneurial intention. One particular area of focus is the impact of gender, where the data display a noticeable imbalance, but there is also evidence of a correction in the discrepancy. According to the last studies in 2018, there was a percentage of 46.9% of women entrepreneurs, so there is a gradual reduction in the gender gap [20]. In addition, the GEM Global Spain report reveals that in the last two years, female entrepreneurship has increased by 10%, while the gap has been reduced to 6.5% [62].
When it comes to analyzing entrepreneurial curriculum implementation, there may be differences between privately held schools and state-owned schools. Previous investigations have observed that the promotion of entrepreneurial competence in educational centers in Spain has been more prevalent in private institutions, whether through their own programs or the incorporation of the subject in the curriculum. This trend has been observed in comparison to state-owned centers [63]. Studies internationally conducted confirm that students attending private schools exhibit 10% higher levels of entrepreneurial intention than their public school peers [64].
Finally, regarding the parents’ educational level, research has revealed that parents with experience in the business industry tend to have children with a stronger inclination toward entrepreneurship. This suggests a positive correlation between parents involved in the business world and their children’s entrepreneurial aspirations [64].

2.4. Implementation of a Training Program for Entrepreneurial Potential

Research on entrepreneurial competence supports the idea that it is possible to teach it at the school level, provided there is a natural inclination towards entrepreneurship and a supportive environment [53]. This predisposition, known as “entrepreneurial potential,” allows individuals to develop the necessary skills to shape their entrepreneurial identity while acknowledging the impact of external factors [65]. These capabilities allude to the personal dimension of the subject and his or her attitudes [36,66]. The effectiveness of entrepreneurial education relies on the mixture of personal and contextual factors that contribute to entrepreneurial potential. In order to evaluate the potential for entrepreneurship, a specialized program called the “Program for Entrepreneurial Potential” has been created and implemented in targeted schools to observe attitudes and behaviors.
The program includes a variety of resources, methodologies, and materials tailored for entrepreneurial education. It aims to develop the entrepreneurial potential of students, thus shaping their entrepreneurial identity through indicators widely validated by the literature [51]: creativity, leadership, personal control, achievement motivation, and intuition for problem-solving [67]. According to research, creativity is the skill of producing original ideas and finding solutions to problems [68]. Leadership, on the other hand, involves leading and directing others toward a shared objective. Additionally, personal control refers to the ability to regulate one’s emotions and thoughts. Achievement motivation refers to the level of dedication towards achieving a set goal, while intuition for problem-solving denotes the ability to confront uncertain situations with assertiveness. Ultimately, the program empowers teachers with autonomy to implement activities and resources, resulting in positive outcomes [69].
The program offers four overarching goals and 137 specific objectives, which are divided among each indicator. A total of 50 activities (10 for each indicator) are included to cultivate entrepreneurial skills and emphasize personal indicators of entrepreneurship. The program follows a humanistic approach to entrepreneurial education.

3. Materials and Methods

Education plays a crucial role in the development of human capital. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct empirical studies to assess the effectiveness of various components of the educational process. Following the research line of evidence-based education, we have conducted a quantitative analysis in order to give light on new curriculums and specific training programs at the school level. In this section, we will explain the hypotheses and the design of the methodology, including the instruments and the compositions of the groups for testing the efficacy of the programs and the new curriculum. Furthermore, the hypotheses are discussed.

3.1. Development of Hypotheses

Based on the scientific literature, several hypotheses have been put forward to evaluate the impact of the program of entrepreneurial potential on students, as well as the updated curriculum on entrepreneurship for secondary education, vocational training, and high school students.
The hypotheses are grouped into three levels of verification to study the relationship of the entrepreneurial attitude, hereinafter referred to as ATE, with entrepreneurial knowledge, hereinafter referred to as CON, as follows:
(1)
Based on the previous literature grounded in entrepreneurial intention theoretical models and the theory of planned behavior [39,40,41], we have formulated two hypotheses to test the overall correlation between entrepreneurial attitude (ATE) and entrepreneurial knowledge (CON).
Hypothesis 1.
Before the educational intervention of the entrepreneurial potential program, students with higher attitudes toward entrepreneurship have higher entrepreneurial knowledge.
Hypothesis 2.
Students who receive a specific educational program of entrepreneurial potential increase entrepreneurial knowledge and attitudes.
(2)
In order to examine the various relationships between the entrepreneurial knowledge (CON) of students in the experimental and control groups, we have proposed two hypotheses. These hypotheses are based on the concepts of entrepreneurship-specific human capital [5,57,61], previous research on the effects of entrepreneurship education [6,51], and studies on curriculum content and teaching methods [67].
Hypothesis 3.
Curricular contents on entrepreneurship improve entrepreneurial knowledge, as a whole and in each of its factors, regardless of whether the students have taken a specific program on entrepreneurial potential.
Hypothesis 4.
Students who have received a specific program on entrepreneurial potential increase their entrepreneurial knowledge, as a whole and in all its variables, more than those who have not received it.
(3)
Finally, in order to examine the connections between the dependent variables and entrepreneurial knowledge, we have formulated a hypothesis based on research into entrepreneurship education and factors such as gender, type of school, and parents’ socio-educational background [62,63,64,70,71]. The hypothesis is as follows.
Hypothesis 5.
The acquisition of entrepreneurial knowledge is related to other variables such as the gender of the students, the ownership of the schools, the educational level of the parents, or the level of education the students attend.

3.2. Instruments

Two measurement instruments were used to test the hypotheses:
(1)
The Basic Business Knowledge Scale (CON) is composed of 18 items distributed in three dimensions: business management knowledge (9 items), legal knowledge (5 items), and strategic knowledge (6 items). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is adequate, ranging from 0.76 to 0.83 for each dimension [42].
(2)
The Attitude Toward Enterprise Test (ATE-S), Spanish version, is composed of 22 items distributed in five dimensions: creativity (4 items), personal control (5 items), achievement motivation (5 items), leadership (4 items) and intuition for problem-solving (4 items) and with α = 0.853 [37].

3.3. Description of the Sample

The surveys were conducted using stratified probability sampling during the 2021–2022 academic year. When analyzing the data, we considered the location (Autonomous Community), student level, school ownership, and gender of the students. Forty-one educational centers participated from Andalusia, the Community of Madrid, Castilla-León, Valencian Community, Castilla-La Mancha, La Rioja, Basque Country, and Navarre. The participants were split into two groups from the same educational center. One group served as the control and did not participate in the program, while the other was the experimental group, which underwent specific program training for entrepreneurial potential. Participation in the research was voluntary, and they were informed about the research objective, procedures, and the anonymized treatment of the data. A total of 1036 students participated, 440 in the control group (42.5%) and 596 in the experimental group (57.5%) (Table 1).
The process complies with ethical and legal standards of anonymity and data protection.

3.4. Models and Studies Conducted

The statistical tests have been performed for data analysis and hypothesis testing. Non-parametric statistics are used to analyze the data, compare the groups at different times and evaluate whether there are significant differences. Wilcoxon tests with Lilliefors correction are used for related or independent samples, and the Kruskal-Wallis test is used to compare more than two groups. The measure of effect is obtained using the confidence interval for the medians (95%). In the statistical tests, those in which the p-value < 0.05 will be considered significant. The Chi2 test is used to analyze the dependence of two variables. When necessary, simple correspondence analysis is used to analyze dependence. Finally, to move from a numerical scale to an ordinal scale by intervals, the following criterion has been used: Qi/i∈{1,2,3} being each of the three quartiles for each of the sections of the variable (Table 2).
The checks are performed using the statistical program R software version 4.3.0. All the results are in the development of the following relationship analysis model (Figure 1).
The variables compared are entrepreneurial knowledge (CON).
The results of the analyses of the described tests are shown below.

4. Results

To establish a relationship between ATE.PRE and CON.PRE, a linear regression model cannot be used due to the failure to meet the normality condition for the residuals. Therefore, the Chi2 test is utilized to test Hypothesis 1. Before the educational intervention of the entrepreneurial potential program, students with more attitudes toward entrepreneurship have greater entrepreneurial knowledge.
An analysis is performed on the relationship between the two variables which have been divided into three tracts. The contingency table and the Chi2 contrast yield the following results (Table 3 and Table 4).
The test shows a p-value = 0.00005304 < 0.05, so the independence of both variables is rejected. Therefore, the dependence relationship between them is analyzed by means of correspondence analysis (Figure 1).
In Figure 2, it is illustrated that there is a correlation between students who have high ATE.PRE and CON.PRE scores. It should be noted that this correlation has not been verified for students who fall under the middle and low score categories. To summarize, Hypothesis 1 is supported insofar as pre-intervention data shows that students possessing strong entrepreneurial attitudes also exhibit notably higher levels of knowledge.
Regarding Hypothesis 2, it suggests that students who undergo a targeted educational program on entrepreneurial potential will exhibit an increase in their entrepreneurial knowledge and attitudes (measured by ATE.POST and CON.POST in the experimental study). However, a linear regression model could not be fitted, so we recoded ATE.POST and CON.POST using a three-stage criterion. The descriptive analysis of both variables, as well as the contingency table with the corresponding result of applying the Chi2 contrast for both variables, gives the following results (Table 5 and Table 6).
When the p-value is less than 0.05 in a Chi2 test, such as p-value = 0.0000, it indicates that the variables are not independent. This means that there is a relationship between the variables, and a correspondence analysis, shown in Figure 3, can be conducted.
Figure 3 shows how the scores of the three tranches: high, medium, and low of the CON.POST variables are associated respectively with the high, medium, and low scores of the ATE.POST variable, thus confirming Hypothesis 2.
In relation to Hypothesis 3, it has been observed that the inclusion of entrepreneurship-focused curricular content enhances overall entrepreneurial knowledge (CON) and knowledge of individual factors (business management, legal framework, and strategy). This improvement has been noted regardless of whether the students have participated in a specific entrepreneurial potential program (CON.PRE with CON.POST). To further analyze the potential increase in knowledge and any differences between the experimental and control groups, thorough checks have been conducted. To analyze paired samples, we utilize the Wilcoxon test. Upon observing the control group (as displayed in Table 7), it is evident that all comparisons between the before and after groups exhibit significant differences with a p-value of 0.000, which is less than 0.05.
Research has shown that students who did not take part in the entrepreneurial potential program still displayed a significant increase in their overall entrepreneurial knowledge, including each of its individual factors. The same analysis is shown below for the experimental group (Table 8), with an equally significant result for the knowledge variable and each of its factors (p < 0.000).
In summary, after conducting the tests, it has been confirmed that Hypothesis 3 is applicable to both groups—those who received training on entrepreneurial potential through the program and those who only learned through the official curriculum. The differences between the groups were significant in all cases. The study has also shown that the curricular subject has a significant impact on the knowledge acquired by students, regardless of whether or not they took the specific program.
Regarding Hypothesis 4, it is believed that students who participated in the entrepreneurial potential program will have a greater increase in entrepreneurial knowledge compared with those who did not participate (both in the control and experimental groups). Various analyses will be conducted to determine the extent of this increase in knowledge among the different groups. The goal is to determine whether the increase in knowledge is particularly significant among students who completed the specific program. The results in entrepreneurial knowledge are compared using the Wilcoxon test in the two groups before (CON.PRE) and after (CON.POST) (Table 9).
Based on the result p = 0.10037, it appears that both groups begin at the same level. However, a significant difference is observed at a later time (POST), so we will examine this difference more closely. Upon comparing the factors of the knowledge dimension (CON) in both groups after the program (POST), we can see that there is a significant difference in all of them (as shown in Table 10). This confirms Hypothesis 4.
Finally, tests are being conducted to validate the fifth hypothesis, which states that the acquisition of entrepreneurial knowledge is linked to various factors such as the gender of students, educational center ownership, parents’ education level, and students’ education level. The purpose is to determine if the increase in knowledge of students following a specific program is impacted by other variables.
Table 11 compares the scores obtained by men and women for entrepreneurial knowledge (CON) and its factors. It was found that there are no significant differences between genders for the CON variable and its dimensions.
To compare more than two groups, we applied the Kruskal-Wallis test (Table 12). The difference between the groups is not significant, neither for the variable CON nor for the three factors according to center ownership.
In order to assess the influence of parental education, we utilized the categories of no degree, primary school, secondary school, vocational training, high school, and university. The resulting contingency table is displayed below (Table 13).
It is important to mention that there is a high number of missing values in both variables: 146 for the mother’s education and 172 for the father’s. Additionally, the majority of the clustering is focused on the university level. With this condition, a new variable is constructed, which will be called Parents.Edu and is defined in 3 levels of grouping (Table 14).
The Kruskal-Wallis test is used to compare the levels. As can be seen (Table 15), the p-values are very tight for the overall variable and for the factors. A large number of missing values is likely to have introduced trends, as the non-responses may not follow a random pattern. Therefore, the results are considered inconclusive.
After analyzing the data, the Kruskal-Wallis test was utilized to compare the educational levels (secondary, basic, or higher vocational training and higher education) of the four groups of students. Based on the findings, it appears that a significant relationship may exist between the CON variable and the educational level as a whole (as indicated in Table 16). However, further examination of the results by factors shows that this relationship is not confirmed, particularly in the case of the strategy factor. Consequently, it can be inferred that while there may be some correlation between the students’ overall entrepreneurial knowledge and their educational level, this relationship appears not to be valid when examining the factors.
As a result, Hypothesis 5 cannot be confirmed for the variables of sex, tenure, and parents’ level of education. Nevertheless, it is clear that educational level has an impact on the entrepreneurial knowledge variable and its corresponding factors.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Attitude toward Entrepreneurship, Learning, and Knowledge Acquisition

Upon initial analysis, the findings validate that students exhibiting an attitude towards entrepreneurship observe an expansion in their knowledge, irrespective of whether they underwent training on entrepreneurial potential. This outcome aligns with the literature on entrepreneurial human capital. References [5,61] state that both attitude and specific education contribute to the creation of such capital. The main results of this research show a significant correlation between attitude and knowledge, which is supported by theories of entrepreneurial intention [41]. The findings reinforce the importance of including entrepreneurship material in educational programs to achieve learning goals. This is because possessing both knowledge and skills is essential for entrepreneurial competence [13,32]. Research by Nabi et al. [4] highlights that a positive attitude toward entrepreneurship enhances the effectiveness of entrepreneurship education. This result confirms the need to incorporate entrepreneurship content in the curriculum to meet educational objectives because both knowledge and behaviors constitute entrepreneurial competence [13,32]. As per prior research [4], having a positive outlook toward entrepreneurship can enhance one’s proficiency in learning entrepreneurship. This is because a pre-existing inclination towards entrepreneurship is connected to entrepreneurial intentions and knowledge [37]. Our data analysis and hypothesis confirmation have shown that having a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship can be a contributing factor to one’s acquisition of knowledge. [40].

5.2. A Comprehensive Skill Program and a New Curriculum to Build Strong Entrepreneurial Identities

Furthermore, our studies have shown that targeted educational interventions can nurture a positive attitude toward entrepreneurship. Research has shown that the program for entrepreneurial potential, which aims to develop both entrepreneurial skills and academic content, is compelling. Additionally, certain personality traits have been identified as beneficial for acquiring knowledge in this field. When delving into the different factors of entrepreneurial knowledge, we observe an increase in the results as a whole and in each factor, both in the students who have only taken the subjects and in those who have also received the program on entrepreneurial potential. Despite being in a pilot phase, as pointed out by González-Tejerina and Vieira [8], we have found that the curricular contents evaluated under the current educational system (Organic Law 3/2020) are effective and have a positive impact on students’ competence.
This study is noteworthy for its method of assessing knowledge based on the current entrepreneurial curriculum and its correlation with student attitudes. The results demonstrate that natural inclination plays a vital role and should be considered when determining students’ potential for optimal outcomes. It is imperative to further investigate this avenue of research to determine the most appropriate curriculum for each stage of development. The findings support the notion that building a strong entrepreneurial identity requires more than just developing specific abilities, attitudes, and expertise. It also involves comprehensive training focused on the relevant subject matter [50]. Encouraging creativity through an entrepreneurial approach should be a top priority for primary schools [24,72]. As students continue their education, acquiring a comprehensive grasp of entrepreneurial knowledge and abilities becomes more crucial. By nurturing a resourceful mindset towards entrepreneurship early on, students can form a diverse set of skills that will benefit them in all areas of life. Insufficient coverage of business management, legal, and strategic aspects can hinder the acquisition of knowledge necessary for developing complete entrepreneurial competence [43].

5.3. Gender, School Ownership, and Parents’ Level of Education and Entrepreneurial Education

However, regarding gender, the findings indicate that there are no remarkable disparities observed when assessing the attainment of entrepreneurial knowledge. This confirms the trend observed in recent years where the gap in gender is narrowing [33], although the GEM report does confirm that there is still a difference when measuring across the population the entrepreneurial attitudes of individuals, being higher in men [62]. The results are in line with Wilson et al.’s [73] and Díaz and Jiménez’s [71] findings, which indicate that there is no noticeable difference in entrepreneurial self-efficacy or entrepreneurial intention between genders. Moreover, Wilson et al. [70] claimed that the effects of entrepreneurship education on graduate students were higher in women than in men. The current debate on the gender gap in entrepreneurial intention is highly relevant. Research suggests that the gap does not exist at school levels and is built up throughout life. Therefore, it is likely that sociocultural or environmental factors play a significant role in shaping entrepreneurial intention in adulthood. This approach opens up the possibility of new studies on entrepreneurial education and gender.
No differences were found in terms of the type of schools’ center ownership (state-owned, subsidized, and private schools), which contrasts with the previously obtained results in Spain by Ladeveze and Núñez-Canal [63]. Both studies confirm that private centers are more focused on providing entrepreneurial education, which results in better outcomes for students in terms of their entrepreneurial knowledge. It appears that the analyzed results suggest the adoption of a uniform curriculum across all centers, which may explain the observed trend. In the past, entrepreneurial activities were often only pursued if a particular school or its teachers expressed an interest in them. However, entrepreneurship has now been incorporated into the official curriculum, ensuring that all schools, regardless of ownership, offer courses and instructors devoted to this field. The result shows the positive influence of educational policies that remove socio-economic disparities in purchasing power. This guarantees that every student has equitable access to this form of education. The research on center ownership differentiation is valuable for guiding educational policies. However, the current findings are preliminary, and more studies are required to draw concrete conclusions.
Upon examining the parents’ level of education, no significant distinctions were detected. This discovery opposes the PISA program’s [73] findings, which suggest that a family’s socio-economic and cultural status influences the financial literacy of youth. Consequently, it is necessary to delve further into this variable for a more in-depth analysis.
In conclusion, this study confirms that the curricular contents provided in secondary, higher education, and vocational training are effective in developing entrepreneurial potential. It also shows that there is no gender gap in entrepreneurial education during the school stage. As a result, educators should consider the importance of including entrepreneurship content in educational programs to achieve learning objectives. This can be completed by fostering a positive attitude towards entrepreneurship, creating an environment that encourages it, using role models and real-life examples, and equipping students with the necessary knowledge and competence. Additionally, it is important to highlight comprehensive training that covers specific abilities, as well as business management, legal, and strategic aspects of entrepreneurship. This study emphasizes the importance of reinforcing entrepreneurial knowledge in education to enhance students’ identity and future entrepreneurial intention.

6. Limitations and Foresight

For the collection of data, due to the pandemic, reaching out to schools was delayed during the initial phase of the study, leading to some obstacles in the project.
Although the sample size is adequate, more than a thousand students and proportional among the school population participating would be possible to increase the sample size to deepen the analyses, as well as to extend it to the international level. It would also be appropriate to complete the research with a qualitative analysis that would provide balance and depth to the investigation. Furthermore, to improve our understanding of how entrepreneurship education affects students, we need long-term studies on their potential and achievements. We should also delve into sociocultural factors such as gender, the education system, and policies. Comparative studies across different countries and systems would help evaluate different curricula. Additionally, we should evaluate new methods that promote creativity and interdisciplinary programs for analyzing entrepreneurial intentions.
It should be noted that there is little research that relates the influence of attitude on the improvement of knowledge, so this research may open future lines to test the effectiveness of educational policies, as well as to improve the understanding of entrepreneurial competence and its implementation in the curriculum.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; methodology, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; formal analysis, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; investigation, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; writing—original draft preparation, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; writing—review and editing, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F.; funding acquisition, M.N.-C., R.S.P., A.A. and E.M.-F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by MCIN I+D+i PID2019-104408GB-I00, grant number MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, and the APC was funded by €30.250.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or ethics committee) of the UNIVERSIDAD DE SEVILLA (protocol code ABG21 and date of approval 7 April 2021) for studies involving humans.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. European Comission. Entrepreneurship in Higher Education, Especially in Non-Business Studies; European Comission: Brussels, Belgium, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  2. Rome Ministerial. Communiqué. Eur. High. Educ. Area 2020, 19, 1–8.
  3. Eurydice. La Educación Para el Emprendimiento en los Centros Educativos en Europa; Oficina Publicaciones Unión Europea: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  4. Nabi, G.; Walmsley, A.; Liñán, F.; Akhtar, I.; Neame, C. Does entrepreneurship education in the first year of higher education develop entrepreneurial intentions? The role of learning and inspiration. Stud. High. Educ. 2018, 43, 452–467. [Google Scholar]
  5. Martin, B.C.; McNally, J.J.; Kay, M.J. Examining the formation of human capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. J. Bus. Ventur. 2013, 28, 211–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Nabi, G.; Liñán, F.; Fayolle, A.; Krueger, N.; Walmsley, A. The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: A systematic review and research agenda. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2017, 16, 277–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Floris, M.; Pillitu, D. Improving entrepreneurship education in primary schools: A pioneer project. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2019, 33, 1148–1169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. González-Tejerina, S.; Vieira, M.J. La formación en emprendimiento en Educación Primaria y Secundaria: Una revisión sistemática. Rev. Complut. Educ. 2021, 32, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de Mayo, de Educación; Boletín Oficial del Estado: Madrid, Spain. 2006. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/lo/2006/05/03/2/con (accessed on 11 July 2023).
  10. Ley Orgánica 8/2013, de 9; de Diciembre, para la Mejora de la Calidad Educativa; Boletín Oficial del Estado: Madrid, Spain. 2013. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/lo/2013/12/09/8 (accessed on 11 July 2023).
  11. Ley Orgánica 3/2020, de 29 de Diciembre, por la que se Modifica la Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de Mayo, de Educación; Boletín Oficial del Estado: Madrid, Spain. 2020. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/lo/2020/12/29/3 (accessed on 11 July 2023).
  12. Consejo de la Unión Europea. Recomendación del Consejo de 22 de Mayo de 2018 relativa a las competencias clave para el aprendizaje permanente (2018/C 189/01). D. Of. Unión Eur. 2018, 189/1, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bacigalupo, M.; Kampylis, P.; Punie, Y.; Van den Brande, G. EntreComp: The Entrepreneurship Competence Framework; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  14. McCallum, E.; Weicht, R.; McMullan, L.; Price, A. EntreComp into Action—Get Inspired, Make It Happen: A User Guide to the European Entrepreneurship Competence Framework; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dare, S.E.; van Dijk, W.W.; van Dijk, E.; van Dillen, L.; Gallucci, M.; Simonse, O. The effect of financial education on pupils’ financial knowledge and skills: Evidence from a Solomon four-group design. J. Educ. Res. 2020, 113, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Vieira, L.; Meirelles, D.A.; Emmendoerfer, M. Organizational Support for Entrepreneurial Orientation: The Perception of Professionals from Early Childhood Education Centers in Brazil. J. New Approaches Educ. Res. 2023, 12, 100–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Molina-Marfil, J.A.; Marcenaro, O.D.; Martín-Marcos, A. Financial literacy and educational systems in the OECD: A comparative analysis using PISA 2012 data. Rev. Educ. 2015, 369, 80–103. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lackéus, M. Pedagogía de Creación de Valor: Un Manual para el Aprendizaje Significativo en la Escuela; Círculo Editorial Azteca: Mexico City, México, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  19. Azqueta, A.; Naval, C. Educación para el emprendimiento. Rev. Española Pedagog. 2019, 77, 517–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Peña, M.A.; Pegalajar, M.C.; Montes, A.M. El reto de la educación en emprendimiento en la universidad: Percepciones del estudiantado de educación. Rev. Investig. Educ. 2023, 41, 205–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Santana-Vega, L.E.; González-Morales, O.; García, L.F. Emprendimiento y adolescencia. J. New Approch. Educ. Res. 2016, 5, 131–138. [Google Scholar]
  22. Aparicio, S.; Hughes, M.; Audretsch, D.; Urbano, D. Incentivizing knowledge institutions for entrepreneurship and society. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2023. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lane, M.; Saint-Martin, A. The impact of Artificial Intelligence on the labour market: What do we know so far? OECD Soc. Employ. Migr. Work. Pap. 2021, 25, 1–61. [Google Scholar]
  24. Arruti, A.; Paños-Castro, J. Análisis de las menciones del grado en Educación Primaria desde la perspectiva de la competencia emprendedora. Rev. Complut. Educ. 2019, 30, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Colther, C.M.; Fecci, E.; Cayun, G.; Rojas-Mora, J. Enseñanza de la cultura emprendedora en la universidad: El caso de la Universidad Austral de Chile. Form. Univ. 2020, 13, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mueller, S.; Anderson, A.R. Understanding the entrepreneurial learning process and its impact on students’ personal development: A European perspective. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2014, 12, 500–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Azqueta, A.; Sanz-Ponce, R. Educación emprendedora y filosofía de la educación. Cuest. Pedagógicas 2021, 30, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Thomassen, M.L.; Williams Middleton, K.; Ramsgaard, M.B.; Neergaard, H.; Warren, L. Conceptualizing context in entrepreneurship education: A literature review. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2019, 26, 863–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Azqueta, A. Análisis del concepto ‘emprendedor’ y su incorporación al ámbito educativo. Teoría Educ. Rev. Interuniv. 2019, 31, 57–80. [Google Scholar]
  30. De la Torre, T.; Rico, I.L.; Escolar, C.; Palmero, C.; Jiménez, A. La figura del profesor como agente de cambio en la configuración de la competencia emprendedora. Rev. Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2016, 86, 131–144. [Google Scholar]
  31. López-Belmonte, J.; Pozo-Sánchez, S.; Fuentes-Cabrera, A.; Rodríguez-García, A.M. Análisis del desempeño docente en la educación para el emprendimiento en un contexto español. Aula Abierta 2019, 48, 321–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ruskovaara, E.; Pihkala, T. Teachers implementing entrepreneurship education: Classroom practices. Educ. Train. 2013, 55, 204–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Paños, J. Educación emprendedora y metodologías activas para su fomento. Rev. Electrónica Interuniv. Form. Profr. 2017, 20, 33–48. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ruiz-Rosa, I.; Gutiérrez-Taño, D.; García-Rodríguez, F.J. El Aprendizaje Basado en Proyectos como herramienta para potenciar la competencia emprendedora. Cult. Educ. 2021, 33, 316–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Trull-Oliva, C.; Janer-Hidalgo, Á.; Corbella-Molina, L.; Soler-Masó, P.; González-Martínez, J. On educators’ methodological strategies to contribute to youth empowerment. Educ. XX1 2022, 25, 459–483. [Google Scholar]
  36. Athayde, R. The impact of enterprise education on attitudes to enterprise in young people: An evaluation study. Educ. Train. 2012, 54, 709–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bernal, A.; Cárdenas, A.R.; Athayde, R. Test de potencial emprendedor: Adaptación al español (ATE-S). Bordón Rev. Pedagog. 2021, 73, 19–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pepin, M.; St-Jean, E. Assessing the impacts of school entrepreneurial initiatives: A quasi-experiment at the elementary school level. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2019, 26, 273–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1991, 50, 179–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Steinmetz, H.; Knappstein, M.; Ajzen, I.; Schmidt, P.; Kabst, R. How Effective are Behavior Change Interventions Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior? A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Z. Psychol. 2016, 224, 216–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Krueger, N. The Impact of Prior Entrepreneurial Exposure on Perceptions of New Venture Feasibility and Desirability. Entrep. Theory Pract. 1993, 18, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bernal, A.; Cárdenas, A.R.; Montoro-Fernández, E. Basic business knowledge scale for secondary education students. Development and validation with Spanish teenagers. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0235681. [Google Scholar]
  43. Wang, S.M.; Yueh, H.P.; Wen, P.C. How the new type of entrepreneurship education complements the traditional one in developing entrepreneurial competencies and intention. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Baggen, Y.; Lans, T.; Gulikers, J. Making entrepreneurship education available to all: Design principles for educational programs stimulating an entrepreneurial mindset. Entrep. Educ. Pedagog. 2022, 5, 347–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zahra, S.A.; Gedajlovic, E.; Neubaum, D.O.; Shulman, J.M. A typology of social entrepreneurs: Motives, search processes and ethical challenges. J. Bus. Ventur. 2009, 24, 519–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Awaysheh, A.; Bonfiglio, D. Leveraging experiential learning to incorporate social entrepreneurship in MBA programs: A case study. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2017, 15, 332–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Ladeveze, N.L.; Núñez-Canal, M. Noción de emprendimiento para una formación escolar en competencia emprendedora. Rev. Lat. Comun. Soc. 2016, 71, 1068–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Kyrö, P. The conceptual contribution of education to research on entrepreneurship education. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2015, 27, 599–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Bernal, A.; Cárdenas, A.R. La formación de emprendedores en la escuela y su repercusión en el ámbito personal. Una investigación narrativa centrada en el Programa EME. Rev. Española Pedagog. 2014, 257, 125–143. [Google Scholar]
  50. Bernal, A.; Liñán, F. The personal dimension of an entrepreneurial competence: An approach from the Spanish basic education context. In A Research Agenda for Entrepreneurship Education; Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham, UK, 2018; pp. 262–280. [Google Scholar]
  51. Fayolle, A.; Gailly, B. From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 2008, 32, 569–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bygrave, W.; Minniti, M. The Social Dynamics of Entrepreneurship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2000, 24, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Krueger, N.; Liñán, F.; Nabi, G. Cultural values and entrepreneurship. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2013, 25, 703–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sánchez-García, J.C. Aprendizaje social e intenciones emprendedoras: Un estudio comparativo entre México, España y Portugal. Rev. Latinoam. Psicol. 2009, 41, 109–119. [Google Scholar]
  55. Gibb, A.A. Enterprise Culture and Education. Int. Small Bus. J. Res. Entrep. 1993, 11, 11–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Santos, S.C.; Caetano, A.; Curral, L. Psychosocial aspects of entrepreneurial potential. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 2013, 26, 661–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Unger, J.M.; Rauch, A.; Frese, M.; Rosenbusch, N. Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. J. Bus. Ventur. 2011, 26, 341–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Porter, M.E. The Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  59. Pryor, M.G.; Taneja, S. Henri Fayol, practitioner and theoretician—Revered and reviled. J. Manag. Hist. 2010, 16, 489–503. [Google Scholar]
  60. Garg, N.; Singh, S. Financial literacy among youth. Int. J. Soc. Econ. 2018, 45, 173–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Davidsson, P.; Honig, B. The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. J. Bus. Ventur. 2003, 18, 301–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Global GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report: Adapting to a “New Normal”; GEM: London, UK, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  63. Ladeveze, N.L.; Núñez-Canal, M. Papel del profesor motivado en la educación emprendedora en España. Rev. Empresa Humanismo 2018, 21, 7–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Falck, O.; Woessmann, L. School competition and students’ entrepreneurial intentions: International evidence using historical Catholic roots of private schooling. Small Bus. Econ. 2013, 40, 459–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Bernal, A. Identidad emprendedora. In Hacia un Modelo Educativo; Tirant lo Blanch: Valencia, Spain, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  66. Bernal, A.; Cárdenas, A.R. Evaluación del potencial emprendedor en escolares. Una investigación longitudinal. Educ. XX1 2017, 20, 73–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Sirelkhatim, F.; Gangi, Y. Entrepreneurship education: A systematic literature review of curricula contents and teaching methods. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2015, 2, 1052034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Liñán, F.; Rodríguez-Cohard, J.C.; Rueda-Cantuche, J.M. Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: A role for education. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2011, 7, 195–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Sommarström, K.; Oikkonen, E.; Pihkala, T. The School and the Teacher Autonomy in the Implementing Process of Entrepreneurship Education Curricula. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wilson, F.; Kickul, J.; Marlino, D. Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: Implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2007, 31, 387–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Díaz-García, M.C.; Jiménez-Moreno, J. Entrepreneurial intention: The role of gender. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 2010, 6, 261–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Peña, J.V.; Cárdenas, A.; Rodríguez, A.; Sánchez, E. La cultura emprendedora como objetivo educativo: Marco general y estado de la cuestión. In Cultura Emprendedora y Educación; L. Núñez (Coord.); Universidad de Sevilla: Sevilla, Spain, 2015; pp. 19–59. [Google Scholar]
  73. MEFP. PISA 2018. Competencia Financiera. Informe Español; Instituto Nacional de Evaluación Educativa: Madrid, Spain, 2020. [Google Scholar]
Education 13 00740 g001 550
Figure 1. Hypothesis model and population comparison for the tests performed.
Figure 1. Hypothesis model and population comparison for the tests performed.
Education 13 00740 g001
Education 13 00740 g002 550
Figure 2. Correspondence analysis of ATE.PRE and CON.PRE.
Figure 2. Correspondence analysis of ATE.PRE and CON.PRE.
Education 13 00740 g002
Education 13 00740 g003 550
Figure 3. ATE.POST and CON.POST correspondence analysis.
Figure 3. ATE.POST and CON.POST correspondence analysis.
Education 13 00740 g003
Table
Table 1. Sample distribution.
Table 1. Sample distribution.
GenderWomen514 (49.6%)
Men522 (50.4%)
Ownership of the center State-owned schools771 (74.4%)
State-subsidized private-schools203 (19.6%)
Private schools62 (6%)
Educational level Secondary education428 (41.3%)
High school31 (3%)
Vocacional training (basic)230 (22.2%)
Vocacional training (high)347 (33.5%)
Table
Table 2. Categorization of the variable.
Table 2. Categorization of the variable.
Value of variable < Q1—low score.
Q1 ≤ Value of variable < Q3—average score.
Value of the variable ≥ Q3—high score.
Table
Table 3. Descriptive analysis of the variables ATE.PRE and CON.PRE with the respective sections.
Table 3. Descriptive analysis of the variables ATE.PRE and CON.PRE with the respective sections.
MediasdIQR0%25%50%75%100%n
ATE.PRE 85.666118.7014491254808692106596
CON.PRE 52.7130915.83815231841536490596
Table
Table 4. Contingency table for recoded variables.
Table 4. Contingency table for recoded variables.
High CON.PRELow CON.PREMedium CON.PRE
High ATE.PRE633262
Low ATE.PRE193379
Medium ATE.PRE7973156
Pearson’s Chi-squared testp-value = 0.00005304
Table
Table 5. Descriptive analysis of ATE.POST and CON.POST.
Table 5. Descriptive analysis of ATE.POST and CON.POST.
MediasdIQR0%25%50%75%100%n
ATE.POST 95.486587.37619314708993103110596
CON.POST 80.909407.906503123576818890596
Table
Table 6. Contingency table for recoded variables.
Table 6. Contingency table for recoded variables.
High CON.PRELow CON.PREMedium CON.PRE
High ATE.PRE 81086
Low ATE.PRE 163542
Medium ATE.PRE 6196170
Pearson’s Chi-squared test p-value < 2.2 × 10−16
Table
Table 7. Comparison of medians of knowledge and factors before and after in the control group.
Table 7. Comparison of medians of knowledge and factors before and after in the control group.
p-Valor WilcoxonIC95%
Entrepreneurial Knowledge (CON) 0.0000(−23.49997, −19.50006)
Business Management 0.0000(−8.500050, −7.000015)
Legal Framework 0.0000(−6.999967, −5.500028)
Strategy 0.0000(−8.999977, −7.499924)
Table
Table 8. Comparison of median knowledge and factors before and after in the experimental group.
Table 8. Comparison of median knowledge and factors before and after in the experimental group.
p-Valor WilcoxonIC95%
Entrepreneurial Knowledge (CON) 0.0000(−30.49997, −26.49995)
Business Management 0.0000(−12.50000, −10.50001)
Legal Framework 0.0000(−8.500004, −7.499939)
Strategy 0.0000(−10.500005, −9.499971)
Table
Table 9. Comparison of medians: knowledge before and after in experimental and control group.
Table 9. Comparison of medians: knowledge before and after in experimental and control group.
p-Valor WilcoxonIC95%
CON.PRE: control vs. experimental 0.3432(−1.000033, 3.000013)
CON.POST: control vs. experimental 0.0000(−7.654534, −6.128006)
Table
Table 10. Comparison of knowledge factors in the control and experimental groups at POST.
Table 10. Comparison of knowledge factors in the control and experimental groups at POST.
p-Valor WilcoxonIC95%
Business Management (POST) 0.0000(−3.311552, −2.314363)
Legal Framework (POST) 0.0000(−1.0000331, −0.9999924)
Strategy (POST) 0.0000(−2.339948, −1.000030)
Table
Table 11. Comparison of knowledge factors in the control and experimental groups at POST.
Table 11. Comparison of knowledge factors in the control and experimental groups at POST.
Gender Difference CONBusiness ManagementLegal FrameworkStrategy
p-Valor Wilcoxon 0.20480.52140.34100.0536
Table
Table 12. Comparison of the variable CON according to the school ownership type in each of the factors.
Table 12. Comparison of the variable CON according to the school ownership type in each of the factors.
School OwnershipCONBusiness ManagementLegal FrameworkStrategy
p-Valor test de Kruskal-Wallis 0.64330.28060.98150.7997
Table
Table 13. Contingency table of father’s and mother’s education.
Table 13. Contingency table of father’s and mother’s education.
Mother’s Education
No DegreePrimarySecondaryVocationalHigherUniversity
Father’s Education No degree 1357220
Primary 1298732
Secondary 41053231112
Vocational 141822713
Higher 021062810
University 0085466
Table
Table 14. Frequency of the variable Parents.Edu by levels.
Table 14. Frequency of the variable Parents.Edu by levels.
Parents’ Education LevelFrequencies
Level 1 Both University Degrees 66
Level 2 One University Degree 54
Level 3 No University Degree 276
Missing Values 200
Table
Table 15. Comparison of parents’ level of education by factor.
Table 15. Comparison of parents’ level of education by factor.
Parents’ Level of EducationCONBusiness ManagementLegal FrameworkStrategy
p-Valor test de Kruskal-Wallis0.057320.15210.061070.2062
Table
Table 16. Comparison of the level of studies pursued by students by factors.
Table 16. Comparison of the level of studies pursued by students by factors.
Students’ Education LevelCONBusiness ManagementLegal FrameworkStrategy
p-Valor test de Kruskal-Wallis0.0017450.017250.0081580.1325
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Núñez-Canal, M.; Sanz Ponce, R.; Azqueta, A.; Montoro-Fernández, E. How Effective Is Entrepreneurship Education in Schools? An Empirical Study of the New Curriculum in Spain. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13, 740. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070740

AMA Style

Núñez-Canal M, Sanz Ponce R, Azqueta A, Montoro-Fernández E. How Effective Is Entrepreneurship Education in Schools? An Empirical Study of the New Curriculum in Spain. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(7):740. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070740

Chicago/Turabian Style

Núñez-Canal, Margarita, Roberto Sanz Ponce, Arantxa Azqueta, and Elisabet Montoro-Fernández. 2023. "How Effective Is Entrepreneurship Education in Schools? An Empirical Study of the New Curriculum in Spain" Education Sciences 13, no. 7: 740. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070740

APA Style

Núñez-Canal, M., Sanz Ponce, R., Azqueta, A., & Montoro-Fernández, E. (2023). How Effective Is Entrepreneurship Education in Schools? An Empirical Study of the New Curriculum in Spain. Education Sciences, 13(7), 740. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070740

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop