Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study draws on ecological systems theory across the system levels of micro (entrepreneurial teacher), meso (entrepreneurial teaching training/stakeholders/institutions), exo (community involvement), macro (culture, value, policies), and chrono (socioeconomics). Together with a social constructivist perspective, we synthesize the prevalent factors in pre-service teacher Entrepreneurial Education (EE). This paper presents a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed studies in EE to address the research gap and inform the development of effective teacher preparation, promoting EE. Researchers obtained publications from databases, including ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, through expert consulting and the backward snowballing technique. This systematic analysis used Covidence Reference Management Software to manage the screening and review of studies and extracted data for this study. Data screening and full-text review resulted in 61 relevant publications with Pre-Service Teacher (PST) education on EE as their research context. The qualitative content analysis and integrative synthesis method were then applied using NVivo to integrate coding and sorting into categories. The insights from this systematic review can aid in expanding the current emphasis on improving PST education in schools by incorporating EE into Higher Education Institutions to improve Pre-Service Teachers' and students' capabilities and to promote and advance this research field.

Keywords

entrepreneurial education entrepreneurial teacher pre-service teacher ecological systems theory entrepreneurial mindset entrepreneurship

Introduction

In Brüne and Lutz’ (2020) systematic review, the effect of entrepreneurship education in schools on entrepreneurial outcomes was explored. There is a societal impact based on the inclusion of entrepreneurial education (EE) in educational and carricular contexts, including youth learning. Particularly, teachers are instrumental in decisions about how learning is taken up. Therefore, it is important to identify the necessary capabilities for teachers during their development as Pre-Service Teachers (PST). Despite the growing wealth of literature on EE, there remains a gap in research and knowledge on the contextual factors in PST education. This gap raises important questions about how an entrepreneurial teacher is constituted within PST education literature. It also prompts an examination of how educational organizations implement EE—through curriculum design, partnerships, experiential learning, and comparative education and the enabling factors and challenges in teacher development. Analyzing these aspects reveals the efficacy of EE implementation in PST education that may be significantly impacted in the specific contexts in which they are applied (Higgins & Galloway, 2014). For instance, varying educational jurisprudence, economic, cultural and geographical factors can shape the enabling conditions and challenges in integrating EE into PST programs. These considerations are the underlying objectives of this current study. We are motivated to explore this topic further to raise awareness of its importance in education and in society.

This study aims to examine the prevalent factors in entrepreneurial education for PSTs. By exploring entrepreneurial factors, the authors seek to broaden the current focus of enhancing PST education to include EE in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). The target of pre-service teacher preparation (and not teachers in practice) is to focus on inclusion of entrepreneurial competencies and mindset at the point of professional development in HEIs in a profession crucial to emancipation and learning.

Moreover, this study’s emphasis on entrepreneurial education carries broader implications for educational systems, highlighting the need for teaching methods that reflect diverse contexts and promote adaptability, creativity, and innovation (Ucus & Acar, 2018). Therefore, it is entrepreneurial education that we are focused on, as it is broader and focuses on developing an entrepreneurial mindset (QAA, 2018). It emphasizes creativity, problem-solving, adaptability, and opportunity recognition—skills that can be applied in various contexts, not just in starting a business. Entrepreneurial education is valuable for individuals in any profession including education, as it fosters innovation and proactive thinking. It is noted that there is overlap and inconsistency in the use of the terms entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial education; however, entrepreneurial education encompasses both enterprise and entrepreneurship (QAA, 2018).

Entrepreneurship education is important to equip teachers with the essential skills and knowledge needed for setting up new businesses, self-employment, developing ventures, and fostering innovation. However, our focus is not solely on entrepreneurship teachers or business teachers but encompasses factors from a broader teacher preparation (across different subjects) aimed at promoting a mindset that encourages taking ideas from concepts to execution. This involves nurturing creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities, enabling PSTs to become educators who inspire their students to explore entrepreneurial opportunities and apply these skills in various contexts. Importantly, bridging to Fayolle’s approach (2013) that EE should go beyond technical skills and encourage critical reflection on societal structures that shape entrepreneurial opportunities supports our approach and decision to focus on entrepreneurial education (as a multi/interdisciplinary consideration). Through a paradigmatic perspective of social constructivism, the conceptual framework applied in this research is focused on ecological systems theory. We scrutinize the included articles for influential factors across a spectrum of geographical and educational environments, offering a comprehensive analysis of contemporary literature.

This study posits that a nuanced examination of the factors within PST development enhances the efforts to implement EE in teacher training. In addition, this study argues for the necessity of fostering an entrepreneurial mindset (as an encompassed term of EE) among pre-service teachers globally. By examining the essential elements of EE in PST education, it becomes evident that future educators—who will guide students from preschool to higher education across various disciplines—must adopt an entrepreneurial perspective. This transformation is crucial for education systems in professional development and effectiveness in preparing entrepreneurial citizens to navigate an increasingly dynamic and complex world (Joensuu-Salo et al., 2021). This work also helps scholars take stock of the existing literature and advance this field of research.

Literature & Background

The ongoing advancements in teacher education today align with a heightened need for awareness of the significant factors that impact PST development and the challenges confronting education systems. Therefore, there is a high need for education systems to impart useful employability skills, prepare leaders, instill norms of ethical behavior, and produce responsible management professionals (Igwe et al., 2022). This has resulted in considerable research worldwide focused on PST education and EE, particularly as a critical economic and sociocultural development area. Additionally, there has been a notable shift towards incorporating entrepreneurial skills, which include business development, shareholder agreements, or human resource management (Sá & Husain, 2023), into PST education on the rationale that teachers play vital roles in the development of entrepreneurial skillsets with their students (Konakll, 2015).

When considering the traits of entrepreneurial individuals, it is noteworthy that integrating EE into PST training can significantly enhance PSTs’ foresight, problem-solving skills, as well as teachers’ creativity and imagination, and soft skills which are important for addressing challenges in societies (Fayolle, 2018; Tican, 2019). For example, given the rapid evolution of youth employment opportunities, there remains an increasing demand for skill enhancement—particularly focused on entrepreneurial behaviors attributes, and competencies—and practical education (Hytti et al., 2010; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). Addressing these issues necessitates that PSTs are prepared to foster entrepreneurial qualities in their future students, to effectively respond to the challenges presented by the existing and future labor markets and societies.

In Deveci and Seikkula-Leino’s (2018) review of EE in teacher education, the focus was “curriculum, teacher training, economy and unemployment, entrepreneurial characteristics and the importance of teachers” (p. 105). Their findings highlight importance and prevalence of entrepreneurial characteristics, competences, and mindset in teacher education. They concluded that it is “highly important that pre-service teachers become acquainted with entrepreneurship education during pre-service training” (p. 137). The challenges facing EE implementation in PST education globally need attention. This systematic literature review moves to explore elements that encompass the implementation of EE during PST education as published in peer-reviewed articles over a ten-year period ending in 2023. In addition, this study includes six years beyond (extending after) the work of Deveci and Seikkula-Leino’s (2018) and focuses on the context of PST education.

EE research has grown significantly in the past decade, drawing interest from many prominent scholars who have contributed through the extensive body of literature. Research on EE involves emancipatory functions, which encompass “economic, social, and political power” (Walmsley & Wraae, 2022, p. 3). Scholars such as Brush (2014) and Walmsley and Wraae (2022) have investigated the impact of these factors on both entrepreneurial development and Personal Social Transformation (PST). Notably, Walmsley and Wraae (2022) concluded that emancipation in EE has been recognized as empowering for entrepreneurial capability and development (Calás et al., 2009; dos Santos & Banerjee, 2019; Goss et al., 2011; Rindova et al., 2009). In addition, there is an increasing focus on the ability for EE to connect current economic development practices with academic theory. Alongside a greater emphasis on EE, there has also been a rise in research interest in the field of education. This study also contributes to the ongoing discussion on the interplay of emancipatory functions (including but not limited to social, economic, and political functions) and EE regarding PST because these factors are prominent at the intersection of quality education and decent work and economic growth (c.f. UN SDG #4 and #8, 2022). Unfortunately, these critical aspects have largely been neglected in discussions regarding the nature and purpose of EE (Kuckertz, 2021; Wraae, 2021).

For the scope and purpose of this study, it was necessary to begin by framing the terms entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship education, and entrepreneurial education to explore entrepreneurial teachers (e.g., Berry et al., 2013; Buckley & Futonge, 2016; Epler, 2020; Lasekan et al., 2020). These foundations will improve clarity and establish a common vocabulary, as the field of EE is constantly evolving within the realm of education, resulting in varying definitions across different contexts (Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020).

Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship refers to the individual capability to identify a business venture and develop it into practice (European Commission, 2008). Entrepreneurship is a complex concept that has evolved over time. The term “entrepreneurship” originates from the French word ‘entreprendre’, which was initially applied to refer to individuals who organized musical or other entertainment events (Akar & Üstüner, 2017; Gangaiah & Viswanath, 2014). In about 1730, French economist Richard Cantillon is referred for being the first to use the term entrepreneurship in relation to self-employment and business ventures (Ahmad & Seymour, 2008). From a contemporary lens, entrepreneurship involves using innovation to create efficient products, services, and technologies to improve people’s lives and build a productive, socially responsible, and technologically advanced society. Entrepreneurs exercise creativity and persevere through setbacks to overcome the fear of failure and achieve their goals (Cacciotti & Hayton, 2015). There have been developments to the definitions of concepts around entrepreneurship, particularly in contemporary discussions and research, and has been promoted as a solution to many societal challenges (Byrne et al., 2014; Hägg & Kurczewska, 2016). The history of entrepreneurship emphasizes an evolving definition and significance, providing context for this research by deepening understanding of entrepreneurial concepts and informs our analysis.

Entrepreneurship Education

Entrepreneurship education is “the application of enterprise behaviors, attributes and competencies into the creation of cultural, social or economic value” (QAA 2018, p. 7). Entrepreneurship education has emerged as a multifaceted concept that continues to develop a single, widely accepted definition (Omer Attali & Yemini, 2016). Scholars have noted that EE encompasses both instructional methods and content (Ireland et al., 2003), functioning as a research-driven approach aimed at equipping graduates with knowledge, skills, and abilities (Abiogu, 2011; Deveci & Seikkula-Leino, 2018; Neck & Corbett, 2018). This education process is fundamentally a problem-solving effort to transfer knowledge and skills across various contexts (Amos & Onifade, 2013). It is important to present entrepreneurship education when examining the factors in entrepreneurial education because doing this broadens the focus beyond individual skills to include the entire entrepreneurial process.

Several generalized approaches to EE are highlighted in the literature, each offering a distinct perspective on how entrepreneurial capabilities are taught and understood (Gautam & Singh, 2015). The first approach identifies entrepreneurship as a personal trait, distinguishing entrepreneurs from non-entrepreneurs (Markman et al., 2005). The second position is entrepreneurship as a process, advocating for a curricular design that reflects this dynamic concept (Neck et al., 2014). The third emphasizes the transformation of ideas into action, encouraging creativity and self-confidence (Bacigalupo et al., 2016; European Commission, 2008). Lastly, the approach of entrepreneurship as a method, integrating hands-on activities such as business startups and simulations (Neck & Greene, 2011). “Entrepreneurship is not only an economic value but also a social and cultural phenomenon. Therefore, parallel to its role in the economic process, it is the initiator of a transformational/innovative process in the social structure” (Demirbatir, 2021, p. 352). From the perspective of education, “entrepreneurship can now be perceived as a form of pedagogy that renews the previous learning paradigms and furthers educational institutional practices” (Kyrö, 2018, p. 182). Entrepreneurship is vital for economic growth and job creation, and EE is essential for growing entrepreneurial intentions and activities (Thomas, 2023).

Entrepreneurial Education

Entrepreneurial education encompasses both enterprise and entrepreneurship and is applied when discussing the combination of both concepts (QAA, 2018). Entrepreneurial education is delivered through a systematic learning process incorporating knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA). In this study, notions of KSA involve the entrepreneurial characteristics of teachers. In addition, the European Entrepreneurship Competence Framework (EntreComp) creates a shared understanding of the KSA needed to develop entrepreneurial qualities, consequently emphasizing that all citizens should develop entrepreneurial competence. The attribute of knowledge in EE includes both explicit knowledge, such as data analysis, and tacit knowledge derived from personal experience. Entrepreneurial knowledge sharing occurs through interactions among faculty, mentors, and students (Acharya & Chandra, 2019). Skills involve the cognitive manipulation of data and concepts to support task performance (Acharya & Chandra, 2019). The attribute of attitudes reflects an individual’s state of mind, encompassing their feelings, desires, values, and beliefs. Therefore, entrepreneurial attitude is an integral component of an individual’s mindset and behavior, influencing their intention to cultivate an entrepreneurial perspective.

EE aligns well with human capability development through the skills, behaviors, and attributes of entrepreneurial thinking, which has influenced education globally (Pittaway & Edwards, 2012; QAA, 2018). For example, most entrepreneurial capabilities are co-located alongside the professional capabilities for successful teachers in the Australian Standards (c.f. AITSL, 2021). According to Davis (2019); Jones (2019); Tiernan & Deveci (2021), entrepreneurial thinking embodies an action-oriented approach that learners apply when engaging in entrepreneurship and enterprise education. Enterprise integrates skills, abilities, and learning dispositions identified as requirements for success in societies and workplaces by educators, fostering “creativity, critical thinking, and communication skills intertwine with building personal resilience, taking the initiative” (QAA, 2018, as cited by Davis, 2023b, p. 5). Learning to be enterprising involves a way of thinking that is linked to one’s passions, emotions, and ideas. Building on the foundation of enterprise, EE focuses on the thoughtful execution of actions, often incorporating processes and techniques within social, cultural values and organizational contexts (Brinia & Psoni, 2020; Davis, 2019, 2023a, 2023b).

Moreover, scholars have identified various forms or modes of EE, which have been analyzed and summarized by researchers such as Kakouris and Liargovas (2021), Lackeus (2015), Pittaway (2009), and Pittaway and Edwards (2012), into categories described as “about,” “for,” “through,” and “embedded” or “in.” It is necessary to briefly present these distinctions, as the entrepreneurial focus in this study encompasses all its forms. Education “about” entrepreneurship is characterized as a content and theoretical approach aiming to comprehensively understand entrepreneurship. In contrast, education “for” entrepreneurship is described as an occupationally oriented approach to student engagement in tasks, activities, and projects designed to equip them with KSAs to become entrepreneurs (Pittaway & Edwards, 2012, p. 781). This type of education often employs experiential project-based teaching and learning approaches. On the other hand, education “through” entrepreneurship is viewed as process-oriented allowing for actual participation (learning-through-doing method), wherein students engage in authentic entrepreneurial learning experiences (Kakouris & Liargovas, 2021). The final type, referred to as “embedded” or “in,” involves embedding entrepreneurial content within curriculum, courses or subjects focused on other disciplines (Pittaway & Edwards, 2012, p. 781). This form of entrepreneurship education develops human capabilities and can enable students and PSTs in non-business disciplines to gain critical awareness and practical experience relevant to their specific fields. These modes are fundamental in understanding EE implementation serving as reference points, scope, context and relevance of its application.

This study advocates for embedding EE into teacher training, promoting an experiential learning approach alongside an ecosystem that nurtures diverse entrepreneurial behaviors, attributes, mindset and competencies (Davis, 2019; European Commission, 2004). Ultimately, this educational focus is on enhancing students’ entrepreneurial mindsets—characteristics vital for navigating uncertain situations (Ireland et al., 2003).

Entrepreneurial Education and Pre-Service Teacher Education and Training

Entrepreneurial education equips students with essential behaviors, attributes and competencies that can help them achieve successful careers and lead fulfilling, self-determined professional lives. Competence in this study refers to “a set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes” that are acquired by individual students (Bacigalupo et al., 2016, p. 20). The intention in designing conditions for learning that can instill these skills and attributes needs to be supported in curriculum and development of pre-service teachers so that they can contribute to the goal of impacting social, cultural, and economic aspects of society through entrepreneurial factors.

Over the last decade, there have been developments in higher education institutions’ efforts to leverage the potential of EE by integrating it into their education programs and curriculum (Ncanywa & Dyantyi, 2022). However, the development of teacher education and training in entrepreneurial approach and practice and the strengthening of entrepreneurship have received far too little attention (Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010).

To support the development of entrepreneurial competencies among teachers and students, PST education becomes a point of intersection to focus on. Although some pre-service teacher programs are building entrepreneurial factors into curriculum, there is a gap in which factors are prioritized, the factors contributing to their effectiveness, the practical competencies of teachers, and the challenges faced in integrating and implementing EE in PST training globally.

Entrepreneurial Teacher

In this study, we apply the concept of the entrepreneurial teacher, which embodies entrepreneurial behavior in ethos and practices, and fosters students’ entrepreneurial learning (Gibb, 2011; Joensuu-Salo et al., 2021; Peltonen, 2015). An entrepreneurial teacher actively engages in educational activities that support students’ entrepreneurial learning processes and supports the development of their entrepreneurial competencies (Joensuu-Salo et al., 2021). Preparing PSTs to become entrepreneurial teachers covers theory, entrepreneurial techniques, reflective practice, and learning experiences, which can apply to schools from early childhood through primary school to secondary schools, in pre-vocational and vocational learning centers (Davis, 2023b). In his book, How to Become an Entrepreneurial Teacher: Being Innovative, Leading Change, James Davis (2023b) wrote that:

Teachers exposed to entrepreneurial thinking rapidly gain an appreciation for human capability development, going well beyond business contexts to address bigger issues such as sustainability and climate resilience, poverty, and other forms of disadvantage (cf. DeJaeghere & Baxter, 2014). This book is about removing the misconceived neoliberal labels and opening the package to see what’s inside... entrepreneurial thinking is about personal transformation, understanding people’s social and cultural values, and being open-minded towards opportunities, differences, and diversity. It is about building confidence, fostering collegial and community engagement, and building a sense of purpose and agency for being innovative and leading change. (p. 4)

In fostering opportunities for these transformations during PST education, innovation is essential. “Innovation infusion is about the infusion of preservice and beginning teachers into school ecosystems. Newcomers to teaching are an innovation infusion because they are bringing novel ideas from their initial teacher education and other industry experiences” (Davis, 2023b, p. 7). Moreover, entrepreneurial teachers act as translators among various key stakeholders, including community groups and educational institutions. They empower and promote emancipation through diverse entrepreneurial approaches and practices. This role is pivotal in fostering entrepreneurial learning environments, enhancing entrepreneurial outcomes, and supporting holistic entrepreneurial competencies and mindset (Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010, 2012). This study focuses on the factors that affect the training of PSTs to become entrepreneurial teachers.

Conceptual Framework

Ecological Systems Theory in EE

Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) Ecological Systems Theory (EST) provides a transdisciplinary framework for understanding development within nested, interacting contexts, including the micro-, meso-, exo-, macro-, and chronosystems (Bronfenbrenner, 1992). Emphasizing linkages across these layers, EST helps explain how contextual conditions shape behavior over time (Tang et al., 2016). In this study, EST informs analysis of influences on pre-service teacher education and the implementation of entrepreneurship education (EE), enabling identification of emergent patterns across system levels.

PST education with EE involves a complex interplay of key stakeholders, practices, and pedagogical action within educational systems. These systems comprise multiple layers that can best be described using the Bronfenbrenner (1992) framework. These layers can be used to classify pedagogical, philosophical, social, historical, policy and cultural practices that can impact EE and shape PST development. The interaction between these layers can influence PSTs’ personal and academic perspectives, attitudes, teaching pedagogies, and practices. This research explores entrepreneurial factors in pre-service teacher education, which is constantly evolving through the interweaving of the past and present, curriculum, policy, frameworks and guidelines, skills, pedagogy, and support within the developing field of EE in teacher education.

At the core of Bronfenbrenner’s theory sits individual characteristics. For instance, in this review, PST characteristics include gender, age, perspective, influence, qualification, and self-efficacy, all of which play important roles that could shape the outcome of EE in PST education.

Microsystems refer to immediate social settings where individuals are actively participating. Microsystems have also been described as a pattern of “activities, roles, and interpersonal relations” experienced by individuals across different contexts, with physical and material characteristics (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 22). In this research, concentration is placed on microsystems that are present in HEIs like universities and vocational training institutions, where the training of PSTs takes place. In addition, we consider interaction with PSTs in this layer. The experiences of curriculum and program level or class level can also impact EE. Concurrently, the mesosystem involves the interrelationships among various settings in which individuals actively participate. For PSTs, this would encompass relationships within higher learning institutions, the community, and social life.

The “exosystem” refers to settings that impact or are impacted by, events in an individual’s environment, even if the individual is not actively involved in those settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 25). In the context of EE for PSTs, exosystems pertain to institutions such as preschools, primary and secondary schools, and non-governmental organizations, where PSTs receive training to become educators. The significance of exosystems in EE lies in the fact that the institutional context in which PSTs are trained may influence their ability to teach and promote entrepreneurial capabilities. For instance, PSTs trained in preschool settings may differ in teaching approach compared to those trained in secondary school settings. Therefore, understanding the exosystems in EE is critical for policymakers and educators in designing effective training programs for PSTs.

Macrosystems can take the form of relationships between subcultures or entire cultures and may also be influenced by belief systems or ideologies. Here, macrosystems include consideration of public policy, environmental factors, economic conditions, and culture, which contribute to this layer.

Chronosystems refer to changes or continuities that occur over time and impact other systems. This research explores the implications when PSTs enroll in an institution to study or graduate to become entrepreneurial teachers.

The application of EST in EE research has been a significant development, particularly in the context of the ecological approach to constructing EE through a systematic review (Lin et al., 2023). In addition, attention has been given to teachers’ perspectives, curriculum and factors within the schools, especially elementary schools and secondary education systems. For instance, in Innovation and Entrepreneurial Education, EST has been given attention to the work of teachers and their perspectives on the systems (e.g., Aggarwal & Shrivastava, 2021; Gür-Erdogan et al., 2014; Jónsdóttir, 2011). These studies were situated in primary and high school training and focused on pre-service teacher training.

EST has also been applied in the narrative review regarding EE. For instance, the 13 years of literature on Social Entrepreneurship Education build on a socioecological view of ecosystems and their underlying resilience processes (Solbreux et al., 2022). In their review, Solbreux and colleagues identified a consistent Social Entrepreneurship Education curriculum around six teaching objectives and three arenas of institutionalization: the university, the business school, and the faculty members. Regarding systematic reviews, EST has been applied in systematic literature reviews to construct EE (e.g., Lin et al., 2023). Using EST, Lin and colleagues integrated research evidence into the five systems. They discovered that EE programs, when interacting with ecological systems, resulted in training success. There is still a gap, as these studies did not focus on EE in PST.

Entrepreneurship Competence Framework and Quality

The Entrepreneurship Competence Framework (EntreComp Framework; Baciaglupo et al., 2016) was an initiative designed by the European Commission to establish a common understanding of the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that constitute entrepreneurial competence. It is often a reference for training and education programs (e.g., Arruti et al., 2021; Slisane et al., 2021), and to inform policy to foster EE. The framework outlines 15 competences clustered into three areas of ideas and opportunities, resources, and action (across eight proficiency levels). The Danish model as explained by Tiemensma & Rasmussen (2019) expanded to a fourth competency beyond the EntreComp Framework to offer a broader inclusion of competencies and attitudes.

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA, 2018) in the UK is responsible for maintaining and improving the quality of higher education. The EntreComp Framework and the QAA are related through shared goals of enhancing the skills and competencies of students. The QAA focus attempts to operationalize definitions, distinctions, and relationships involving enterprise, entrepreneurship, employability, employment, and education. At the outset of this study, we considered factors aligned with EntreComp and QAA frameworks. Our approach drew on competencies identified through the systematic review rather than just the frameworks alone. This paper explores the main factors of EE for pre-service teaching through three research questions:

RQ1: How is an entrepreneurial teacher constituted in studies on PST education?

RQ2: What actions are taken by educational organizations to implement EE?

RQ3: What are the enabling factors and challenges of EE in teacher training?

This systematic literature review aims to explore the integration of entrepreneurial skills and mindsets within the framework of teacher training, highlighting the importance of these competencies in modern educational settings. As education systems increasingly recognize the need for innovative, adaptable, and entrepreneurial educators, the development of these competencies in teacher training programs becomes essential. This review synthesizes current research findings on how PST education programs are involving EE, the effectiveness of these methods, and the impact on future educators. By examining a range of studies, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of entrepreneurial factors in teacher education, offering insights for policymakers, educators, and academic institutions in enhancing teacher preparation for the challenges of 21st-century education.

Methodology

This systematic literature review was conducted using guidance identified in Borrego et al. (2014) and Gough and Thomas (2016). The PICO framework (population, intervention, comparison, outcome; Borrego et al., 2014), especially focusing on PIC as key elements in structuring a clear and manageable research question, was used to structure the research questions. The population was entrepreneurial teachers in studies on PST education. Interventions, activities, or approaches are informed by identifying the actions taken by educational organizations to implement EE. Any alternatives are explored through the enabling factors and challenges.

Kyrö (2018) refers to the suggestion by Fayolle (2013) that “we need to reflect upon our practices and take a more critical stance, breaking away from the far too common ‘taken for granted’ position. This concerns all the ‘what’, ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions” (p. 183). The three research questions framing this analysis are responsive to this call. The rigor of this systematic review is further informed by considerations common to bibliometric analysis (Passas, 2024).

Article Selection Process

The considerations for article selection were determined by three criteria including: 1) database selection; 2) search word selection; and 3) selection of articles to be included for analysis that address the defined research questions and objectives. The databases used in this review were comprised (and progressed through in this order) of ERIC plus Education Source (via EBSCOhost; referred to as ERIC plus), Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Syed et al. (2024) posit that “every database has benefits and drawbacks of its own” (pp. 1454–1455). They present Google Scholar as “the most extensive database with generous citation counts… [but] a compromise on quality since… [it] takes the citation counts from published articles but also from working papers… conference presentations, and book chapters” (Syed et al., 2024, p. 1455). In contrast, Scopus and Web of Science are “regarded as high-quality database[s] that select citation counts from the papers that have been published” in the journal indexes (Syed et al., 2024, p. 1455).

For the focus on EE, these three databases were well suited. The inclusion of ERIC plus was due to the coverage of the full Education Source database. Although alternative searches may be accessible to certain users, these four databases were jointly accessible to the researchers and represented a thorough search threshold for this study. The multidisciplinary considerations for entrepreneurial and PST education cross disciplines that may have a larger presence in one of the databases over another. The intention was to address this by searching for studies across databases and removing duplicates. The article selection process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA; Page et al., 2021a, 2021b; Syed et al., 2024).

Search Word Criteria

The keywords and use of word strings or connectors were chosen after an initial assessment of the field of literature and the research questions (Xiao & Wu, 2021). Through the identification stage, a comprehensive search was conducted in January 2024, using the following electronic databases: ERIC (EBSCO), Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Additional references were sought through searches and examination of grey literature to ensure coverage of relevant studies. The authors used Google Scholar to conduct forward citation checks and cross-verified that pertinent articles were turning up in the search results. We applied additional features to the search query on ProQuest One Business (ONLY journal articles) to capture the varied indexing methods and search content of the database. This approach was used to help maximize research results through the coverage of existing literature.

Search terms were developed using keywords related to “pre-service teachers,” “preservice teachers,” “student teachers,” and “teacher education,” along with “entrepreneurial education” and applicable variants (e.g., “entrepreneurship education,” “entrepreneur,” and “enterprise.” These search terms were conducted across titles, abstracts, and keywords. The search strategy was tailored to each database to accommodate different indexing systems. Our search criteria led to the use of “entrepreneurial AND education AND (pre-service teachers or teacher candidates or preservice teachers or student teachers).” Our search strategy, beginning with “entrepreneur*” and “education” through Scopus (University subscription), returned over 20,000 results.

During this period of determining search string conditions, we considered the ProQuest One Business database. However, as the articles did not include pre-service teachers as intended due to the disciplinary focus of this database, ProQuest was not used in the refined search going forward. Most articles that were relevant were already included from the search results from ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus. This search had identified 27,264 results. To filter out irrelevant documents, several filters were applied. The first filter was to refine the strategy to use the search terms “entrepreneurial AND education AND pre-service teachers OR preservice teachers OR teacher candidates OR student teachers.” To further refine the literature search results, additional criteria were applied. Full text, peer-reviewed articles from academic journals in the language of English published over the last decade between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2023. There was a significant change in the number of articles published in this field after 2013, so we initiated this project with a focus on the drastic increase of documents in the last ten years. Studies were eligible if they were published in English (common language used by the reviewers) and employed quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods designs. The researchers performed additional searches as follows (entrepreneur* AND education AND pre-service teachers OR teacher candidates OR preservice teachers OR student teachers) with limiters (Language: English, Document Type: Article, Peer Reviewed, Source Type Journal (Searched within article title, abstract and key words).

All identified records (n = 461) were imported into Covidence, a web-based platform, and screened for duplication. Kellermeyer et al. (2018) stated that: “Covidence mirrors the multiphase review process, including data extraction, directly in its design” (p. 580). Citations neatly progress through each stage based on votes received. At every stage, reviewers explicitly assign voting roles, including tie-breaking, while maintaining blinding, to help minimize bias. References were removed during this consolidated identification due to duplication (n = 83), which resulted in 378 studies being progressed to screening through a two-reviewer process.

Screening Criteria for Study Selection

The initial screening of titles and abstracts was conducted by two authors as reviewers independently, followed by a full-text review of the selected studies. Conflicts regarding inclusion decisions were resolved through meetings of the researchers engaging in discussion and consultation to achieve consensus. 378 studies were screened with 280 studies being excluded and 98 studies retrieved. Once the studies were assessed for eligibility, 61 studies were included in the review. The excluded studies (n = 37) were determined to not focus on PST, being situated outside the context of teacher education, only having an abstract in English (but not the full text), or those lacking primary data (see Figure 1 for the PRISMA report and screening process).

Figure 1.

Article selection flow chart (PRISMA)

Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers using a standardized form in Covidence, guided by the research questions (especially within the intervention sections of Covidence for data extraction protocol). Extracted information included study characteristics such as author, year, country, setting, study design, methodology, outcomes, key findings, and insights regarding the identified research questions. Following individual review, a consensus review was conducted to consolidate the data across the two reviewers.

All extracted data was exported and uploaded for qualitative analysis in NVivo 14 with the accompanied use of cloud collaboration to explore the themes and patterns across the included studies. Once completed through Covidence, the files were exported with the included documents from study information, study arms, study results, and risk of bias.

The data extraction was uploaded as 61 PDF files (one file per study) to NVivo 14. Thematic coding (Saldaña, 2021) was applied to help identify recurring patterns and themes. Each author reviewed the data multiple times to gain an overall understanding and independently identified initial codes to segments of text that captured relevant concepts. Through these articles, we examined various dimensions, including entrepreneurial level, teaching areas, skills, collaborations and mentorship, cultural and societal values, and sustainable development factors. The authors conferred and explored any coding variations to come to consensus. The codes were refined through several review cycles and similar codes were grouped to form broader themes. The themes were refined and validated by checking the relevance and coherence to each article and ensuring the accurate representation of the data.

Systematic Review Findings

During each cycle in Covidence, the researchers held frequent meetings to discuss points of interest from the articles throughout the review and extraction process. During the review, research sub-questions were generated through topics that arose during notetaking while reviewing all the studies prior to the first cycle coding (Saldaña, 2021). The first topic involved the situated entrepreneurial components with respect to PST and included: (1) construction of entrepreneurial teachers, (2) action taken by educational organizations to implement EE, and (3) factors and challenges.

Each of the studies was annotated with excerpts of content that aligned to each of the sub-research questions. All the studies were completed through the Covidence extraction process, and the content was uploaded and viewed in NVivo. Prior to the analysis being initiated in NVivo, the extracted data (from Covidence) was uploaded into Leximancer, a software that conducts quantitative content analysis to create concept maps, to visualize clusters and connections amongst content. The generated concept map is shown in Figure 2 (inspired by bibliometric analysis studies for visualization of clusters, e.g., Syed et al., 2023, 2024). This offered the authors support, as it reaffirmed that the sub-questions had clustered the results from the content analysis. Upon the review of each of the topics (sub-questions), a list of categories and subcategories was developed through the analysis (Saldaña, 2021) to establish the provisional list beginning with the clustered topics. The researchers read each study and extracted the applicable content by sub-question, reinforced through the concept maps generated in Leximancer, and then the categories and sub-categories were distilled through the NVivo coding process and applied to each of the articles.
Figure 2.
Concept map using Leximancer Software

The content was reviewed by each sub-question, then each category and sub-category, with synthesis in the discussion (see Table 1 for the categories and sub-categories from the provisional coding). The research team met frequently to discuss coding and increase trustworthiness and consistency of data through inter-rater reliability to ensure quality of coding and interpretation of results.
Table 1.
Categories and Subcategories Developed From Analysis

Topic by research sub-question Categories, sub-categories

Construct entrepreneurial teacher (RQ1) • Skills Training and Future Real-life Needs (Curriculum and Skills Training; Specialized Training Programs; Collaboration and Mentorship)

• Principles and Characteristics of Entrepreneurial Teachers

• Facilitating Development (Role and Impact of Entrepreneurial Teachers through Knowledge Promotion; Implementation of EE Across Fields)

Action taken by organizations to implement EE (RQ2) • Curriculum Development

• Partnerships and Institutional Support

• Benchmarking and Best Practices

• Fostering Culture and Strengthening attitudes

• Policy (Research and innovation)

Factors (RQ3a) • Student Characteristics (Entrepreneurial Skills; Self-Efficacy, Attitudes, and Interest; Readiness, Knowledge, Mindset, and Behavior; Development of 21st century skills).

• Microsystem (Institutions and Curriculum; Emancipation; Methodologies and Techniques; Economic Factors)

• Mesosystem (Working environments)

• Exosystem (Community Involvement (collaboration) and Mentorship; Social entrepreneurship; Creating an entrepreneurial mindset)

• Macrosystem (Culture, values, gender, family, and policies)

• Chronosystem (Environment, employment, socioeconomics, training and professional practice)

Challenges (RQ3b) • Economic Challenges

• Employment Barriers

• Environmental Factors (climate, pandemic)

• Policy and Reforms challenges

• Entrepreneurial Knowledge (skill training; Quality and access to education)

It was also of interest to explore the methodological range (including methods and design) across the ten-year span across approaches used in the studies within this literature review. There were quantitative (n = 27), qualitative (n = 26), and mixed methods (n = 8) studies. Many of these studies focus on preparing PSTs for Primary/Elementary Education (e.g., Arruti et al., 2021; Arruti et al., 2023; Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Bayu & Yudiana, 2023; Ehrlin et al., 2016; Erden, 2019; Goksu & Demir, 2021; Tiemensma & Rasmussen, 2019; Uaidullakyzy et al., 2022; Özçetin & Gök, 2021), and Pre-School Teacher Education (e.g., Ehrlin et al. (2016); Erden (2019); Kaya-Capocci (2022); Yılmaz et al. (2022); Yin et al. (2020).

In one study, preschool teacher education was described as a programme aimed at PST who were prepared to work with children aged one to five years old, and a primary school teacher education programme for preschool class and primary school years one through three, aimed at PST to work with children aged 6–10 years old (Ehrlin et al., 2016). Other studies specified all grades (both primary and secondary; Atalay, 2022) and Vocational Teacher Education (Asikainen & Tapani, 2021). However, only a few studies have focused on Inclusive Education/Special Education or on students with disabilities (e.g., Elwakil, 2023; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021).

This systematic review also uncovered a variety of studies that focused on EE in PST courses across different fields. Most of these studies concentrate on entrepreneurial training for teachers in science education, about 40% of the studies. Other studies are more specific, exploring entrepreneurial characteristics and skills in STEM education (Akrami, 2022; Deger et al., 2023; Ergün, 2019; Tüysüz et al., 2023) and in physical education and sports (Adatepe & Kul, 2018; Eroğlu and Eroğlu, 2020). STEM has been described to comprise (Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) (Akrami, 2022; Alan, 2019; Asici, 2021; Aydin-Günbatar, 2020; Davis, 2023a; Ergün, 2019; Kiyici et al., 2022). Other studies delved into EE for PST in the social studies (Aydoğmuş et al., 2022; Seçgin and Tural, 2020; Tarhan, 2021; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021; Yazıcı et al., 2016; Özçetin & Gök, 2021), economics education (Setiawan, 2023), English language education (Erden, 2019; Tarhan, 2021; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021) and music teacher education (Demirbatır, 2021; Erden, 2019; Tarhan, 2021; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021).

Most of the studies (72%) were published between 2020 and 2023 while only 28% of the studies were published between 2014 and 2019—the period before and leading into COVID-19 (see Figure 3 for the distribution of publications by country, author, and year). In the studies that were included in this review 25 countries were represented. Most of the studies were reported from Europe, and the majority 54% of all the 61 studies, were undertaken in Turkey alone across different years. However, only two studies were identified from the US and Australia. It is also noteworthy that one study was reported from Sweden in 2016. In addition, the frequency of publications by country is also illustrated.
Figure 3.
Frequency count of articles included by country.

In the following section, we discuss key themes including collaboration, facilitation of development, the future real-life needs, and skill training that developed from our analysis and synthesis for this study.

Discussion

Construction of the Entrepreneurial Teacher

Across studies in PST education, entrepreneurial teachers are framed as educators who integrate entrepreneurial competencies, authentic application, and collaborative practice into their pedagogy (Akrami, 2022; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2012; Uaidullakyzy et al., 2022). Through each of the research questions that emerged, we share highlights of the clustered themes found across the included studies.

Skills Training and Real-Life Needs

Curriculum and Skills Training

PSTs advocate embedding entrepreneurial skills in curricula and co-curricular seminars (Uaidullakyzy et al., 2022). Effective EE begins during undergraduate study, guided by frameworks such as EntreComp and EntreCompEdu, and strengthened through partnerships with businesses and community organizations (European Commission, 2008, as cited in Adatepe & Kul, 2018; Arruti et al., 2021, 2023). Curriculum design and teaching techniques must align with societal needs, bringing entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, and exemplars into the profession (Akrami, 2022; Imaduddin et al., 2022; Setiawan, 2023; Slattery & Danaher, 2015).

Specialized Education Programs and Entrepreneurial Dispositions

Targeted programs build entrepreneurial awareness, competence, and mindset, and develop methodological, interpersonal, and network capabilities needed for contemporary schooling (Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Atamojo et al., 2019; Davis, 2023; Durnali et al., 2023; Goksu & Demir, 2021; Slisane et al., 2021). Carefully designed HEI initiatives are key levers for PST engagement in EE (Arruti et al., 2023; Slišane et al., 2021).

Future Skills and Teacher Characteristics

EE extends beyond subject content to cultivate value creation, risk-taking, reflection, and resilience that drive innovation and economic development (Akkaş, 2021; America and Neethling, 2023; Davis, 2023a; Erden, 2019). Entrepreneurial teachers demonstrate foresight, creativity, and problem-solving capacities linked to learners’ future-ready skills (Adatepe & Kul, 2018; America & Neethling, 2023; Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020).

Collaboration, Mentorship, and Facilitation

Mentorship, multi-professional collaboration, and knowledge-sharing foster entrepreneurial awareness and innovation cultures in PST programs (America & Neethling, 2023, 2023; Arruti et al., 2021; Asikainen & Tapani, 2021; Slišane et al., 2021; Tüzün et al., 2023). Entrepreneurial teachers model attitudes and vision, guide diverse learners, and translate entrepreneurial value creation into disciplinary contexts (Adatepe & Kul, 2018; Asikainen & Tapani, 2021; Davis et al., 2022; Deveci, 2016; Ehrlin et al., 2016). Ultimately, they act as gate-openers for creative practices across subjects, including STEM and the arts (Atalay, 2022; Deveci & Seikkula-Leino, 2018; Durnali et al., 2023; Kiyici et al., 2022).

Action Taken by Educational Organizations to Implement Entrepreneurship Education

Curriculum Development

Institutions embed EE across levels (primary through university), emphasizing analytical thinking, problem-solving, innovation, risk-taking, and leadership (Akrami, 2022; Rönkkö & Lepistö, 2015; Tiernan & O’Kelly, 2022). EntreComp, EntreCompEdu, and QAA provide structure for outcomes and assessment, with interdisciplinary integration and experiential learning central to PST preparation (Arruti et al., 2023; Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Bilgin & İnaltekin, 2022; Durnali et al., 2023; Ehrlin et al., 2016; Setiawan, 2023; Yılmaz et al., 2022, Özçetin & Gök, 2021).

Partnerships and Institutional Support

Strategic partnerships (i.e., European Union, OECD, United Nations) and multi-professional collaborations enrich EE quality and alignment with social, environmental, and economic goals (Arruti et al., 2021; Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Asikainen & Tapani, 2021).

Benchmarking and Best Practices

Continuous benchmarking, research-informed design, and feedback cycles sustain improvement; global exemplars (e.g., UNCTAD advocating for integrating EE into formal education, promoting entrepreneurial awareness from early ages, Further Education and Training provision) help standardize effective practice (Arruti et al., 2021, 2023; Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021).

Culture, Attitudes and Policy

Goal setting, mentoring, and role-modeling cultivate risk-taking, confidence, social motivation, and opportunity recognition; STEAM and design-thinking approaches help overcome affective barriers and embed innovation (Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Davis et al., 2022; Ergün, 2019; Imaduddin et al., 2022; Kaya-Capocci, 2022; Yılmaz et al., 2022). Policy frameworks should integrate EE into standards, laws, and teacher-training pathways, with frequent leveraging of EntreComp and EntreCompEdu to structure implementation (Arruti et al., 2021, 2023). HEIs and local governments advance EE through research collaborations, innovation hubs, and professional learning (Akar & Üstüner, 2017; Arruti et al., 2021; Asikainen & Tapanin, 2021).

Enabling Factors in Teacher Training (Ecological Systems)

Student Characteristics

STEM-rich, interdisciplinary experiences (e.g., Arduino activities; enterprise projects) develop entrepreneurial traits and update skills for shifting labor markets (Adatepe & Kul, 2018; Akrami, 2022; Deveci, 2016; Ergün, 2019; Hytti et al., 2010; Sari et al., 2022; Seikkula-Leino et al., 2010). Core skills include problem-solving, critical thinking, communication, metacognition, and “teacherpreneurship” competence (Adatepe & Kul, 2018; Duman, 2018; Lasekan et al., 2020; Uaidullakyzy et al., 2022). High self-efficacy and positive attitudes predict entrepreneurship, though variation persists by context and gender-role attitudes (Akar & Üstüner, 2017; Imaduddin et al., 2022; Setiawan, 2023; Seçgin & Tural, 2020; Yin et al., 2020; Yılmaz et al., 2022). Readiness encompasses opportunity identification, creativity, ethical/sustainable thinking, and initiative (Bayu & Yudiana, 2023; Samanci et al., 2020; Slišane et al., 2021).

Microsystem

HEIs are primary sites for EE, embedding domain-specific skills (e.g., creativity, decision-making, teamwork) and social entrepreneurship through practical, cross-curricular, and STEM approaches, complemented by clubs and community engagement (Arruti & Paños-Castro, 2020; Aydoğmuş, 2019; Bayu & Yudiana, 2023; Brinia & Psoni, 2020; Deger et al., 2023; Erden, 2019; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021; Yazıcı et al., 2016). However, tensions between learner emancipation and necessary structure persist (Arruti et al., 2023; Ehrlin et al., 2016).

Mesosystem – Exosystem

Out-of-school and cross-institutional activity (e.g., music, STEM) broadens entrepreneurial learning; mentorship and local-government collaboration extend impact and promote early-years EE and social entrepreneurship (America & Neethling, 2023; Arruti et al., 2023; Bates et al., 2024; Capella-Peris et al., 2023a, 2023b; Demirbatir, 2021; Erden, 2019; Rigg & van der Wal-Maris, 2020; Seçgin & Tural, 2020; Tiernan & Deveci, 2021).

Macrosystem – Chronosystem

Culture, values, and policies (including cross-cultural experiences) shape competencies and civic aims; over time, applied EE improves employability, well-being, and sustainable development (Arruti et al., 2023; Ehrlin et al., 2016; Erden & Erden, 2020; Kaya-Capocci, 2022; Slišane et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020).

Challenges with EE for Pre-Service Teachers

Despite steady growth and development in integrating and implementing EE across different levels of education, studies have identified some challenges, areas of need, and barriers that require attention.

Economics, Employment and Environmental

Resource constraints, ICT costs, poverty, and labor-market competition hinder implementation; graduate and youth unemployment underscore the need for practical, work-ready EE (Arruti et al., 2023; Bayu & Yudiana, 2023; Demirbatır, 2021; Lasekan et al., 2020; Samanci et al., 2020; Setiawan, 2023). Complex external conditions, such as limited role models and opportunities, policy variability, sustainability pressures, and pandemic disruptions, affect uptake. Supportive environments increase entrepreneurial intent and success (Akrami, 2022; Bayu & Yudiana, 2023; Slisane et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020).

Policy and Reforms, Knowledge Gaps, and Quality and Access

Systems struggle to institutionalize EE coherently, especially at early levels and in STEM; some HEIs lack EE expertise, and PSTs may be unfamiliar with fundamental venture processes (Arruti et al., 2021, 2023; Demirbatır, 2021; Kaya-Capocci, 2022; Samanci et al., 2020; Sari et al., 2022; Tiemensma & Rasmussen, 2019; Tüysüz et al., 2023). Ensuring inclusive, high-quality access remains a universal challenge, though several countries are expanding HEI-based EE in initial teacher education (Akrami, 2022; Arruti et al., 2021).

The integration of EE into education systems presents a significant policy challenge globally. America and Neethling (2023) emphasizes the South African government’s recognition of entrepreneurs as crucial for sustainable economic growth, prompting urgent policy reforms. Importantly, scholars, including Kaya-Capocci (2022) and Sari et al. (2022), call for clearly defined enterprise education objectives, especially in preschools and STEM education, to support this goal. Sweden exemplifies this approach through proactive entrepreneurial learning in preschools, encouraged by university courses for teachers. Thus, educational policy trends require bringing up students from all academic levels with high metacognitive abilities, especially being able to integrate STEM knowledge and gaining entrepreneurial thinking (Tüysüz et al., 2023).

Knowledge of Entrepreneurial Education

Some HEIs lack sufficient knowledge in the EE field (Demirbatir, 2021) and face challenges in balancing control and freedom in developing entrepreneurial capabilities among students. For instance, some PSTs are unaware of how to perform operations such as determining the business idea, making a preliminary assessment of entrepreneurial ideas, and questioning the feasibility of business ideas (Samanci et al., 2020; Yin et al., 2020). Therefore, it is imperative that sufficient knowledge of entrepreneurial concepts is integrated into PST education.

Quality and Access to Education

Akrami (2022) emphasizes that the primary challenge faced by all countries is ensuring quality education with inclusive and equitable access. Studies have pointed out that concerns regarding access to quality education hinder teachers’ prior experience and familiarity with entrepreneurial competencies and mindsets (Arruti et al., 2021). Additionally, the structural organization of teacher education poses significant challenges to effectively deliver EE (Tiemensma & Rasmussen, 2019). As a result, several barriers need to be addressed to enhance the quality and access to EE (Samanci et al., 2020). It has been proposed that improving the quality of education by training individuals with entrepreneurial skills can help alleviate unemployment (Bayu & Yudiana, 2023). Countries including Germany, Sweden, Lithuania, and Denmark are taking the initiative to address this concern by increasing the number of HEIs offering EE and enhancing the quality of EE programs in the initial teacher training of primary school teachers (Arruti et al., 2021).

Conclusion

The successful implementation of EE in PST education requires a multi-layered approach that includes considerations for PSTs’ characteristics, curriculum development and teaching approaches, strategic partnerships, benchmarking best practices, and fostering an entrepreneurial culture. By integrating entrepreneurial competencies and mindset across various educational levels and emphasizing experiential learning in teacher training, educational organizations can better empower students with entrepreneurial knowledge, skills and abilities. Policy support and advocacy play crucial roles in establishing frameworks that support the integration of EE into education systems. Ultimately, the alignment of these multifaceted collaborative efforts, values, societal development goals, policy support, and advocacy aims to equip learners at all levels of education with the mindset and skills needed to thrive in a dynamic ecosystem.

Limitations and Future Research

Limitations

One limitation of this study, which may likely stem from its methodology, relates to some of the defined search criteria. These considerations were detailed in the methods section (e.g., search filters, a 10-year time frame, English language requirement, and the use of accessible databases). Relevant studies likely exist in languages other than English; for instance, one study in the initial search results was excluded because it only had an abstract available in English, as noted in the PRISMA report from Covidence (e.g., Karademir et al., 2018). However, the transparency and clarity surrounding the declaration of search parameters, along with the conditions outlined in the PRISMA report, enhance the credibility of the overall process.

In this systematic literature review, the researchers narrowed the focus to the context of pre-service teacher education because of its potential for influence and impact in the education field. While this may seem quite specific, this concentration allows us to thoroughly explore the subject and directly addresses the theme of this special issue. The limitations of the study are also geographical; for instance, the corpus primarily consists of studies from Western countries and Asia.

The limitations of the study are also geographical, for instance the corpus primarily consists of studies from Western countries and Asia focusing on postcolonial/entrepreneurial perspectives, temporal (the sustainability of entrepreneurial activity is not widely discussed due to the selected time period), and ontological (developing teachers’ entrepreneurial mindset) because the concept of EE is a new concept in education in PTS training. In a global context of budget constraints in education and training, increasing pressure toward self-employability as a solution to unsustainable economic growth, and the shifting responsibility for (un)employment onto individuals in the name of emancipation, it is crucial to critically examine the role of teachers and the tools/methods available to them in shaping the citizens of tomorrow. Therefore, we focused on how and where this was being brought to teachers in pre-service teacher education as the underlying foundation.

Future Research

As educators continue to respond to the changes across ecological systems (especially following the pandemic, advancements in technology such as generative artificial intelligence, and other sociocultural factors), the impact of entrepreneurial competencies on education systems is crucial. As we better understand the landscape and impacts, these competencies can be applied across disciplinary fields and extend the expertise and knowledge into more broadly applied education. This is supported by the QAA (2018) position that “these international policy calls go beyond the higher education sector and promote entrepreneurial schooling, encouraging an education pipeline to develop. This requires supportive university-level research and innovation, not least in the development of teacher training initiatives” (p. 6). Drawing on a growing corpus of literature expanding EE, this systematic review identifies the methods, competencies, factors, and geographical locations of research-active contributions in this pursuit.

We are inspired by the work of scholars (e.g. Felix-Faure & Fayolle, 2025) that explore emancipatory entrepreneurship education, especially through a critical pedagogy lens. This contrasts with traditional models of entrepreneurship education and simply teaching business creation challenges dominant capitalist market ideologies. Rather, this approach seeks to empower learners, specifically in marginalized or post-colonial contexts, by fostering critical reflection, self-determination, and social change. Entrepreneurship education should go beyond technical skills and encourage critical reflection on societal structures that shape entrepreneurial opportunities and overcome systemic oppression. The corpus of literature we identified in this study shows an absence of voices that are essential and future research should amplify to ensure worldly views. Future research should explore the involvement and impact of stakeholders, tools and inventories used to assess the level of entrepreneurial competencies and effects, and analyze methodologies utilized in the undertakings of ongoing research studies. Although there appears to be a greater uptake within certain subjects, further exploration should be done to expand disciplinary reach. There is a growing body of literature that looks at the societal intervention of change through education of youth, especially embodied during PST education. The ability to support the youngest learners through EE at a foundational level would have long-lasting benefits to individuals, community, and our greater society. Future research should also consider empowerment processes not only in imparting knowledge and skills but also in educational approaches that enable students to challenge existing frameworks for fostering innovative mindsets and entrepreneurial behaviors.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - A Systematic Review of the Factors of Entrepreneurial Education in Pre-service Teacher Education

Supplemental Material for A Systematic Review of the Factors of Entrepreneurial Education in Pre-service Teacher Education by Joseph O. Athiende and Sonja L. Johnston in Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy.

Topic by research sub-question	Categories, sub-categories
Construct entrepreneurial teacher (RQ1)	• Skills Training and Future Real-life Needs (Curriculum and Skills Training; Specialized Training Programs; Collaboration and Mentorship)
• Principles and Characteristics of Entrepreneurial Teachers
• Facilitating Development (Role and Impact of Entrepreneurial Teachers through Knowledge Promotion; Implementation of EE Across Fields)
Action taken by organizations to implement EE (RQ2)	• Curriculum Development
• Partnerships and Institutional Support
• Benchmarking and Best Practices
• Fostering Culture and Strengthening attitudes
• Policy (Research and innovation)
Factors (RQ3a)	• Student Characteristics (Entrepreneurial Skills; Self-Efficacy, Attitudes, and Interest; Readiness, Knowledge, Mindset, and Behavior; Development of 21st century skills).
• Microsystem (Institutions and Curriculum; Emancipation; Methodologies and Techniques; Economic Factors)
• Mesosystem (Working environments)
• Exosystem (Community Involvement (collaboration) and Mentorship; Social entrepreneurship; Creating an entrepreneurial mindset)
• Macrosystem (Culture, values, gender, family, and policies)
• Chronosystem (Environment, employment, socioeconomics, training and professional practice)
Challenges (RQ3b)	• Economic Challenges
• Employment Barriers
• Environmental Factors (climate, pandemic)
• Policy and Reforms challenges
• Entrepreneurial Knowledge (skill training; Quality and access to education)

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

This project came about through an International Doctoral Academic Writing Group (year-long exchange) hosted collaboratively by the University of Calgary, the Queensland University of Technology and the Beijing Normal University. The authors were two of the participants in the 2023–2024 exchange. We are grateful for the support and guidance of the three supervisors and mentors: Dr. Michele Jacobsen, Professor at Werklund School of Education (University of Calgary), Associate Professor James Davis (Queensland University of Technology), and Dr. Xijing Wang, Professor (Beijing Normal University). Our deepest gratitude also goes to all the Doctoral Participants (BNU, QUT, UC) 2023–2024 (especially to our colleague Yahan Chen). Our deepest gratitude also goes to Sandra Fry (Queensland University of Technology, Liaison Librarian, CIESJ) for library support and Ryan Verhagen (Department of Education, Queensland) for spreadsheeting support.

ORCID iDs

Joseph O. Athiende

Sonja L. Johnston

Ethical Approval

Ethics approval was not required for this systematic review.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent was not required for this systematic review.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

All the data used in this systematic review was extracted from published peer-reviewed articles. Authors can provide further documentation upon reasonable request.*

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)–Assisted Technologies

Artificial Intelligence (AI)–assisted technologies (such as Large Language Models [LLMs], chatbots, or image creators) were not used in the production of submitted work.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material for this article is available online.

References

* indicates inclusion in systematic literature review.

Abiogu

G. C.

(2011). Entrepreneurship education: A veritable means of reconstructing tertiary institutions in Nigeria. The 29th annual conference of philosophy of education association of Nigeria (PEAN): Lagos State University.

Acharya

S. R.

Chandra

(2019). Entrepreneurship skills acquisition through education: Impact of the nurturance of knowledge, skills, and attitude on new venture creation. International Journal of Education and Pedagogical Sciences, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2576931

* Adatepe

Kul

(2018). Themes of reflective thinking as a predictor of physical education and sport pre-service teachers’ entrepreneurial characteristics. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(10), 117–122. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i10.3487

Aggarwal

Shrivastava

(2021). Entrepreneurship as a career choice: Impact of environments on high school students' intentions. Education + Training, 63(7/8), 1073–1091. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-07-2020-0206

Ahmad

Seymour

R. G.

(2008). Defining entrepreneurial activity: Definitions supporting frameworks for data collection. OECD statistics working papers, 2008/01. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/243164686763

* Akar

Üstüner

M. A.

(2017). Mediation role of self-efficacy perceptions in the relationship between emotional intelligence levels and social entrepreneurship traits of pre-service teachers. Journal of Education and Future, 12, 95–115.

* Akkaş

E. N.

(2021). Investigation of activity designs prepared by pre- service Mathematics teachers for aspects of entrepreneurship education. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 11(3), 593–612. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.994247

* Akrami

(2022). The effectiveness of education with the STEM approach in the development of entrepreneurial thinking in chemistry students. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 23(2), 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1039/d2rp00011c

10.

* Alan

(2019). Comparative investigation of entrepreneurship and innovation perceptions of preservice teachers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(4), 311–318.

11.

* America

Neethling

(2023). International collaboration for the advancement of entrepreneurship education: An activity theory approach. South African Journal of Higher Education, 37(4), 20–39. https://doi.org/10.20853/37-4-5389

12.

Amos

Onifade

C. A.

(2013). The perception of students on the need for entrepreneurship education i n teacher education programme. Global Journal of Human-Social Science Research, 13(3), 75–80.

13.

* Arruti

Benitez

Paños-Castro

(2023). Analysis of pre-service teachers’ knowledge about the entrepreneurial competence: A case study of a Spanish university. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1279705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1279705

14.

* Arruti

Morales

Benitez

(2021). Entrepreneurship competence in pre-service teachers training degrees at Spanish jesuit universities: A content analysis based on entrecomp and entrecompedu. Sustainability, 13(16), 8740. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168740

15.

* Arruti

Paños-Castro

(2020). International entrepreneurship education for pre-service teachers: A longitudinal study. Education and Training, 62(7-8), 825–841. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-04-2020-0098

16.

* Asici

(2021). Social entrepreneurship and psychological well-being in teaching candidates: Mediator role of hope. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 7(2), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.1186

17.

* Asikainen

Tapani

(2021). Exploring the connections of education for sustainable development and entrepreneurial education—a case study of vocational teacher education in Finland. Sustainability, 13(21), 11887. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111887

18.

* Atalay

(2022). The prediction power of pre-service classroom teachers’ individual innovativeness characteristics on entrepreneurship skills. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 10(S1-Aug), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v10iS1-Aug.4525

19.

* Atamojo

I. R. W.

Sajidan

Ashadi

(2019). Improving the entrepreneurship competence of pre-service elementary teachers on professional education program through the skills of disruptive innovators. Elementary Education Online, 18(3), 1186–1194. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.611464

20.

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) . (2021). Spotlight: Initial teacher education today. AITSL. www.aitsl.edu.au/research/spotlight/initial-teachereducation-today

21.

* Aydın-Günbatar

(2020). Making homemade indicator and strips: A STEM + activity for acid-base chemistry with entrepreneurship applications. Science Activities, 57(3), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2020.1828794

22.

* Aydoğmuş

(2019). Investigation of the effect of social entrepreneurship on professional attitude and self-efficacy perception: A research on prospective teachers. Studies in Higher Education, 46(7), 1462–1476. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1673719

23.

* Aydoğmuş

Calonge

D. S.

Kirk

(2022). Turkish pre-service teachers’ perceptions on social entrepreneurship through metaphors. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 10(1), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7501566

24.

Bacigalupo

Kampylis

Punie

Van den Brande

(2016) EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence framework. Publication Office of the European Union. 593884.

25.

* Bates

Fisher

Turner

Machirori

T. L.

Rixon

(2024). Raising the social status of teachers: Teachers as social entrepreneurs. Australian Educational Researcher, 51(4), 1405–1424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-023-00646-4

26.

* Bayu

G. W.

Yudiana

(2023). Entrepreneurship learning increases interest in entrepreneurship for elementary school teacher education students. Synesis, 15(1).

27.

Berry

Byrd

Wieder

(2013). Teacherpreneurs: Innovative teachers who lead but don’t leave. John Wiley & Sons.

28.

* Bilgin

A. K.

İnaltekin

(2022). Investigating the effectiveness of integrated entrepreneurship education. Education in Science, 47(210), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2022.10888

29.

Borrego

Foster

M. J.

Froyd

J. E.

(2014). Systematic literature reviews in engineering education and other developing interdisciplinary fields. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(1), 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20038

30.

* Brinia

Psoni

(2020). How to teach social entrepreneurship to teacher-candidates through cultural promenades: The teacher-candidates’ views. Educational Studies, 47(3), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1717929

31.

Bronfenbrenner

(1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

32.

Bronfenbrenner

(1992). Ecological systems theory. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

33.

Brüne

Lutz

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

34.

Buckley

A. P.

Futonge

(2016). Teacherpreneurs: From vocation to innovation. 4th international conference on innovation and entrepreneurship (ICIE 2016), the ted rogers school of management: Ryerson University.

35.

Byrne

Fayolle

Toutain

(2014). Entrepreneurship education: What we know and what we need to know. In Handbook of research on small business and entrepreneurship (pp. 261–288). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849809245.00025

36.

Cacciotti

Hayton

J. C.

(2015). Fear and entrepreneurship: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(2), 165–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12052

37.

Calás

M. B.

Smircich

Bourne

K. A.

(2009). Extending the boundaries: Reframing “entrepreneurship as social change” through feminist perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 552–569. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40633597

38.

* Capella-Peris

Chiva-Bartoll

Salvador-Garcia

Maravé-Vivas

(2023a). Let us debate! A proposal to promote social entrepreneurship in physical education teacher education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 42(2), 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.2021-0302

39.

* Capella-Peris

Cosgrove

M. M.

Salvador-Garcia

Maravé-Vivas

(2023b). How to promote social entrepreneurship in urban education? An active learning implementation. Education and Urban Society, 55(7), 771–791. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245221083551

40.

* Davis

J. P.

(2023a). Creating values: The entrepreneurial-science education nexus. Research in Science Education, 53(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10040-8

41.

Davis

J. P.

(2019). Preservice teacher learning experiences of entrepreneurial thinking in a STEM investigation. Entrepreneurship Education, 2(1-2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41959-01900009-0

42.

Davis

J. P.

(2023b). How to become an entrepreneurial teacher: Being innovative, leading change. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

43.

Davis

J. P.

Seifert

Vecchio

Galpin

(2022). Innovation infusion. In How to become an entrepreneurial teacher (pp. 87–94). Routledge.

44.

* Deger

Inaltekin

Kirman-Bilgin

(2023). Investigating the effectiveness of life skills training guide on pre-service science teachers' development of professional knowledge regarding entrepreneurship skills. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 15(2), 2325–2353. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.23.or221

45.

DeJaeghere

Baxter

(2014). Entrepreneurship education for youth in sub-saharan Africa: A capabilities approach as an alternative framework to neoliberalism’s individualizing risks. Progress in Development Studies, 14(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464993413504353

46.

* Demirbatir

R. E.

(2021). Investigating entrepreneurship levels of pre-service music teachers. Journal of Education and Learning, 15(3), 352–359. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v15i3.20298

47.

* Deveci

(2016). Perceptions and competence of Turkish pre-service science teachers with regard to entrepreneurship. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(5), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n5.10

48.

* Deveci

İ.

Seikkula-Leino

(2018). A review of entrepreneurship education in teacher education. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 15(1), 105-148. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2018.15.1.5. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1185795.pdf

49.

Dos Santos

L. L.

Banerjee

(2019). Social enterprise: Is it possible to decolonise this concept? Theory of social enterprise and pluralism (pp. 3–17). Routledge.

50.

* Duman

(2018). The relationship between the entrepreneurship characteristics and metacognitive awareness levels of pre-service teachers. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(5), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i5.3080

51.

* Durnali

Orakci

Ş.

Khalili

(2023). Fostering creative thinking skills to burst the effect of emotional intelligence on entrepreneurial skills. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 47, 101200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101200

52.

* Ehrlin

Insulander

Sandberg

(2016). The transformation of creativity in entrepreneurial learning in teacher education: A critical reflection. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(6), 35–51. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol41/iss6/3

53.

* Elwakil

F. R.

(2023). Social entrepreneurship and career adaptability: The mediating effect of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. Educational Studies, 51(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2023.2255343

54.

Epler

(2020). Enhancing Teaching and Leadership Initiatives with Teacherpreneurs: Emerging Research and Opportunities. IGI Global.

55.

* Erden

(2019). Influence of teacher candidates’ motivation on social entrepreneurship: A qualitative study. Folklor/Edebiyat, 25(97), 499–514. https://doi.org/10.22559/folklor.964

56.

* Erden

Erden

(2020). The relationship between individual innovation and social entrepreneurship characteristics of teacher candidates. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction (IJCI), 12(special issue), 185–206.

57.

* Ergün

S. S.

(2019). Examining the STEM awareness and entrepreneurship levels of pre-service science teachers. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(3), 142–149. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i3.3960

58.

* Eroğlu

Eroğlu

S. Y.

(2020). The necessity of social entrepreneurship levels of teacher candidates: Physical education and sports. African Educational Research Journal, 8(2), 233–238. https://doi.org/10.30918/AERJ.82.20.059

59.

European Commission . (2004). Action plan: The European agenda for entrepreneurship, Brussels: CEC. In: Communication from the commission to the council, the European parliament, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions: European Commission.

60.

European Commission . (2008). Think small first - a small business act for Europe (p. 394): COM.

61.

Fayolle

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

62.

Fayolle

(2018). Personal views on the future of entrepreneurship education. In: A research agenda for entrepreneurship education (pp. 127–138). Edward Elgar Publishing.

63.

Gangaiah

Viswanath

(2014). Impact of Indian management education in developing entrepreneurial aspirations and attitudes among management students. Asia Pacific Journal of Research, 1(1).

64.

Gautam

M. K.

Singh

D. S. K.

(2015). Entrepreneurship education: Concept, characteristics and implications for teacher education: Banaras Hindu University.

65.

Gibb

(2011). Concepts into practice: Meeting the challenge of development of entrepreneurship educators around an innovative paradigm: The case of the international entrepreneurship educators’ programme (IEEP). International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 17(2), 146–165. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552551111114914

66.

* Goksu

M. M.

Demir

(2021). Investigation of the extent to which metacognition and epistemological beliefs predict prospective teachers' entrepreneurial dispositions. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 8(1), 310–334.

67.

Goss

Jones

Betta

Latham

(2011). Power as practice: A micro-sociological analysis of the dynamics of emancipatory entrepreneurship. Organization Studies, 32(2), 211–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610397471

68.

Gough

Thomas

(2016). Systematic reviews of research in education: Aims, myths and multiple methods. Revista de Educación, 4(1), 84–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3068

69.

* Gür-Erdogan

Ekşioğlu

Zafer-Gunes

Sezen-Gultekin

(2014). The relationship between social entrepreneurship characteristics and the personal innovativeness of prospective teachers. The Anthropologist, 18(3), 727–733. https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891603

70.

Hägg

Kurczewska

(2016). Connecting the dots: A discussion on key concepts in contemporary entrepreneurship education. Education + Training, 58(7/8), 700–714. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-12-2015-0115

71.

Higgins

Galloway

(2014). Refocusing — building a future for entrepreneurial education and learning. Industry and Higher Education, 28(6), 449–457. https://doi.org/10.5367/ihe.2014.0233

72.

Hytti

Stenholm

Heinonen

Seikkula‐Leino

(2010). Perceived learning outcomes in entrepreneurship education: The impact of student motivation and team behaviour. Education + Training, 52(8/9), 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911011088935

73.

Igwe

P. A.

Madichie

N. O.

Chukwuemeka

Rahman

Ochinanwata

Uzuegbunam

(2022). Pedagogical approaches to responsible entrepreneurship education. Sustainability, 14(15), 9440. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159440

74.

* Imaduddin

Ihsan

Shofyan

M. A.

Shofa

M. M.

Riza

M. F.

Jannah

R. J.

Fitriani

N. L.

Dewi

R. U.

(2022). Strengthening pre-service science teachers’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy through design thinking process on the eco-printing STEAM-project. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health (JESEH), 8(4), 319–331. https://doi.org/10.55549/jeseh.1193683

75.

Ireland

R. D.

Hitt

M. A.

Sirmon

D. G.

(2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0149-2063(03)00086-2

76.

Joensuu-Salo

Peltonen

Hämäläinen

Oikkonen

Raappana

(2021). Entrepreneurial teachers do make a difference – or do they? Industry and Higher Education, 35(4), 536–546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422220983236

77.

Jones

(2019). A signature pedagogy for entrepreneurship education. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-03-2018-0080

78.

Jónsdóttir

(2011). The location of innovation education in Icelandic compulsory schools: University of Iceland. https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/10748/1/8desemberSvanborgThesis.pdf

79.

Kakouris

Liargovas

(2021). On the about/for/through framework of entrepreneurship education: A critical analysis. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 4(3), 396–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127420916740

80.

Karademir

Balbağ

M. Z.

Çemrek

(2018). Investigation of the entrepreneurship levels of pre-service teachers according to some variables. Journal of National Education, 47(220).

81.

* Kaya-Capocci

(2022). Entrepreneurship in preschool education: Turkish preservice teachers' entrepreneurship features, comparison with their lecturers' views and suggestions for development. Education Quarterly Review, 5(4), 310–325. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.05.04.593

82.

Kellermeyer

Harnke

Knight

(2018). Covidence and rayyan. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(4), 580–583. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.513

83.

* Kiyici

Canbazoğlu Bilici

Yamak

Kavak

(2022). Engineering design-based thematic activities: An investigation of pre-service science teachers’ entrepreneurship mindsets. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 11(2), 1531–1549. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.22.or050

84.

* Konakll

(2015). Effects of self-efficacy on social entrepreneurship in education: A correlational research. Research in Education, 94(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.7227/rie.0019

85.

Kuckertz

(2021). Why we think we teach entrepreneurship-and why we should really teach it. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 24(3), 1–7.

86.

Kyrö

(2018). The conceptual contribution of education to research on entrepreneurship education. In Fayolle

(Ed.), A research agenda for entrepreneurship education. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

87.

Lackeus

(2015). Entrepreneurship in education—what, why, when, how. Background paper for OECD-LEED. https://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/BGP_Entrepreneurship-inEducation.pdf

88.

* Lasekan

O. A.

Malik

Alarcon

C. M.

(2020). A conceptual research model for investigating the impact of online teacherpreneurship education on students’ teacherpreneurial competencies and intentions in preservice teacher education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching, and Educational Research, 19(12), 163–189. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.12.9

89.

Lin

Qin

Lyons

Nakajima

Kawakatsu

Sekiguchi

(2023). The ecological approach to construct entrepreneurship education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 15(6), 1333–1353. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-12-2021-0455

90.

Markman

G. D.

Baron

R. A.

Balkin

D. B.

(2005). Are perseverance and self‐efficacy costless? Assessing entrepreneurs’ regretful thinking. Journal of organizational behavior. The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 26(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.305

91.

Ncanywa

Dyantyi

(2022). The role of entrepreneurship education in higher education institutions. E-Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 3, 75–89. https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.2022SP3117

92.

Neck

H. M.

Corbett

A. C.

(2018). The scholarship of teaching and learning entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 8–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127417737286

93.

Neck

H. M.

Greene

P. G.

(2011). Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 5570. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627x.2010.00314.x

94.

Neck

H. M.

Greene

P. G.

Brush

C. G.

(2014). Teaching entrepreneurship: A practice-based approach. Edward Elgar Publishing.

95.

Omer Attali

Yemini

(2016). Initiating consensus: Stakeholders define entrepreneurship in education. Educational Review, 69(2), 140–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1153457

96.

* Özçetin

Gök

(2021). Examining the entrepreneurship levels of teacher candidates. Anatolian Journal of Education, 6(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2021.6212a

97.

Page

M. J.

McKenzie

J. E.

Bossuyt

P. M.

Boutron

Hoffmann

T. C.

Mulrow

C. D.

Shamseer

Tetzlaff

J. M.

Akl

E. A.

Brennan

S. E.

Chou

Glanville

Grimshaw

J. M.

Hróbjartsson

Lalu

M. M.

Loder

E. W.

Mayo-Wilson

McDonald

Moher

(2021a). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

98.

Page

M. J.

Moher

Bossuyt

P. M.

Boutron

Hoffmann

T. C.

Mulrow

C. D.

McKenzie

J. E.

Tetzlaff

J. M.

Akl

E. A.

Brennan

S. E.

Chou

Glanville

Grimshaw

J. M.

Hróbjartsson

Lalu

M. M.

Loder

E. W.

Mayo-Wilson

McDonald

(2021b). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. bmj, 372, n160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160

99.

Passas

(2024). Bibliometric analysis: The main steps. Encyclopedia, 4(2), 1014–1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4020065

100.

Peltonen

(2015). How can teachers’ entrepreneurial competences be developed? A collaborative learning perspective. Education + Training, 57(5), 492–511. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-03-2014-0033

101.

Pittaway

(2009). The role of inquiry-based learning in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 23(3), 153–162. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000009788640251

102.

Pittaway

Edwards

(2012). Assessment: Examining practice in entrepreneurship education. Education + Training, 54(8/9), 778–800. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211274882

103.

Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) . (2018). Enterprise and entrepreneurship education: Guidance for UK higher education providers: The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaas/enhancement-and-development/enterprise-and-entrpreneurship-education-2018.pdf?sfvrsn=15f1f981_8

104.

* Rigg

van der Wal-Maris

(2020). Student teachers’ learning about social entrepreneurship education – a Dutch pilot study in primary teacher education. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2020-0005

105.

* Rönkkö

M.-L.

Lepistö

(2015). Finnish student teachers’ critical conceptions of entrepreneurship education. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 9(1), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-03-2013-0003

106.

Sá

Husain

(2023). Entrepreneurship education in Canada. In Xu

(Ed.), Comparative entrepreneurship education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1835-5_2

107.

Saldaña

(2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). Sage.

108.

* Samanci

Inaltekin

Kirman Bilgin

(2020). Identifying the prospective science teachers’ understanding towards entrepreneurial skills. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 15(4), 699–726. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v15i4.5052

109.

* Sarı

Çelik

Pektaş

H. M.

Yalçın

(2022). Effects of STEM-focused Arduino practical activities on problem-solving and entrepreneurship skills. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7293

110.

* Seçgin

Tural

(2020). The relationship between prospective social studies teachers’ attitudes towards gender roles and entrepreneurship levels. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 8(4), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.8n.4p.64

111.

Seikkula-Leino

Ruskovaara

Hannula

Saarivirta

(2012). Facing the changing demands of Europe: Integrating entrepreneurship education in Finnish teacher training curricula. European Educational Research Journal, 11(3), 382–399. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2012.11.3.382

112.

Seikkula Leino

Ruskovaara

Ikavalko

Mattila

Rytkola

(2010). Promoting entrepreneurship education: The role of the teacher? Education + Training, 52(2), 117–127. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911011027716

113.

* Setiawan

(2023). An exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach to understanding students’ entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 20(2), 320–332. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2023.018

114.

* Slattery

G. M.

Danaher

M. P.

(2015). Curriculum design: A gestalt approach to the pedagogy of entrepreneurship education with postgraduate student teachers in an Irish university. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers JETT, 6(1), 109–123.

115.

* Slisane

Lama

Rubene

(2021). Self-assessment of the entrepreneurial competence of teacher education students in the remote study process. Sustainability, 13(11), 6424. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116424

116.

Solbreux

Pondeville

Hermans

(2022). Social entrepreneurship education literature: An ecological narrative review. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 20(1).

117.

Syed

R. T.

Singh

Ahmad

Butt

(2024). Age and entrepreneurship: Mapping the scientific coverage and future research directions. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 20(2), 1451–1486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-024-00964-8

118.

Syed

R. T.

Singh

Spicer

(2023). Entrepreneurial higher education institutions: Development of the research and future directions. Higher Education Quarterly, 77(1), 158–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12379

119.

Tang

M.-S.

Lai

W.-H.

Chou

Y.-C.

(2016). Using socioecological systems based on a modified Delphi method to explore entrepreneurship education. Advances in Management and Applied Economics, 6(6), 1–14.

120.

* Tarhan

(2021). Perceptions of pre-service teachers regarding entrepreneurship education: A metaphoric study. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 8(2), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.52380/ijpes.2021.8.2.315

121.

Thomas

(2023). Entrepreneurship education: Which educational elements influence entrepreneurial intention? Industry and Higher Education, 37(3), 328–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/09504222221121065

122.

* Tican

(2019). Pre-service primary school and pre-school teachers’ perception of individual entrepreneurship and opinions about their creative thinking tendency. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(4), 591–606. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.5.4.591

123.

* Tiemensma

B. D.

Rasmussen

C. S.

(2019). Entrepreneurship education in a democratic perspective. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 10(2), 100–111. https://doi.org/10.2478/dcse-2019-0021

124.

* Tiernan

Deveci

İ.

(2021). Irish and Turkish pre-service teachers' understanding and perceptions of enterprise education. Heliyon, 7(7), e07591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07591

125.

* Tiernan

O’Kelly

(2022). Enterprise education: Pre-service further education teachers’ impressions and aspirations. Education + Training, 64(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-03-2021-0116

126.

* Tüysüz

Tüzün

Ü. N.

Öztay

E. S.

Eyceyurt-Türk

(2023). Examining of STEM motivations and entrepreneurship levels of pre-service teachers. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 5(2), 858–875. https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1315893

127.

* Uaidullakyzy

Zhunusbekova

Roza

Doszhan

Maratovna

K. G.

Аbdigapbarova

(2022). Development of entrepreneurial competence of future primary school teachers. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 17(4), 1333–1346. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i4.7157

128.

Ucus

Acar

I. H.

(2018). Teachers' innovativeness and teaching approach: The mediating role of creative classroom behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 46(10), 1697–1711. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7100

129.

Walmsley

Wraae

(2022). Entrepreneurship education but not as we know it: Reflections on the relationship between critical pedagogy and entrepreneurship education. International Journal of Management in Education, 20(3), 100726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100726

130.

Wraae

(2021). The entrepreneurial learning journey and back again: Conversations with entrepreneurship educators from around the world. New Degree Press.

131.

Xiao

(2021). Life-cycle factors and entrepreneurship: Evidence from rural China. Small Business Economics, 57(4), 2017–2040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00370-8

132.

* Yazıcı

Uslu

Arık

(2016). The investigation of the social entrepreneurship characteristics of social studies pre-service teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1141455. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1141455

133.

* Yılmaz

Tunçeli

H. İ.

Yavuz

E. A.

Zembat

(2022). Do preschool teacher candidates’ self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes towards the profession predict their entrepreneurship? Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(4), 234–251. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202215721

134.

* Yin

Y. W.

Yang

Liu

B. J.

(2020). Analysis on entrepreneurship psychology of preschool education students with entrepreneurial intention. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1559. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01559

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.47 MB

A Systematic Review of the Factors of Entrepreneurial Education in Pre-Service Teacher Education

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Literature & Background

Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship Education

Entrepreneurial Education

Entrepreneurial Education and Pre-Service Teacher Education and Training

Entrepreneurial Teacher

Conceptual Framework

Ecological Systems Theory in EE

Entrepreneurship Competence Framework and Quality

Methodology

Article Selection Process

Search Word Criteria

Screening Criteria for Study Selection

Systematic Review Findings

Discussion

Construction of the Entrepreneurial Teacher

Skills Training and Real-Life Needs

Curriculum and Skills Training

Specialized Education Programs and Entrepreneurial Dispositions

Future Skills and Teacher Characteristics

Collaboration, Mentorship, and Facilitation

Action Taken by Educational Organizations to Implement Entrepreneurship Education

Curriculum Development

Partnerships and Institutional Support

Benchmarking and Best Practices

Culture, Attitudes and Policy

Enabling Factors in Teacher Training (Ecological Systems)

Student Characteristics

Microsystem

Mesosystem – Exosystem

Macrosystem – Chronosystem

Challenges with EE for Pre-Service Teachers

Economics, Employment and Environmental

Policy and Reforms, Knowledge Gaps, and Quality and Access

Knowledge of Entrepreneurial Education

Quality and Access to Education

Conclusion

Limitations and Future Research

Limitations

Future Research

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - A Systematic Review of the Factors of Entrepreneurial Education in Pre-service Teacher Education

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iDs

Ethical Approval

Consent to Participate

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)–Assisted Technologies

Supplemental Material

References

Supplementary Material