ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AT UNIVERSITY LEVEL AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT AN ANALYSIS OF BUITEMS UNIVERSITY PAKISTAN

http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gmsr.2024(IX-IV).09      10.31703/gmsr.2024(IX-IV).09      Published : Dec 2024
Authored by : GulPanra , ZarPanra , NaginaGul

09 Pages : 108-120

    Abstract

    This study investigated the role of entrepreneurial education in promoting entrepreneurship development between management sciences students at BUITEMS University, Quetta. It explored three dimensions of entrepreneurial education—generalized, motivational, and augmented—using the Theory of Planned Behavior and McClelland’s Theory of Achievement as frameworks. Primary data were collected through a structured questionnaire, with 203 responses analyzed using SPSS 20.0. The findings indicated that generalized education built essential entrepreneurial knowledge, motivational education enhanced entrepreneurial intentions, and augmented education, emphasizing practical exposure, had the greatest impact. The study proposed integrating experiential learning elements, such as internships and business simulations, into the curriculum to strengthen entrepreneurial skills. Enhancing university-industry linkages and providing financial and technical support were also suggested to better associate educational outcomes with market demands. These insights offer assistance for policymakers and educators to develop effective programs, address unemployment challenges, and advance entrepreneurial capabilities among youth in Pakistan.

    Key Words

    Entrepreneurial Education, Generalized Entrepreneurial Education, Motivational Entrepreneurial Education, Augmented Entrepreneurial Education, Entrepreneurship Development

    Introduction

    Background of the Study

    Entrepreneurship education is a key driver of sustainable socio-economic growth, promoting innovation, creativity, and efficient task execution through commitment and initiative (Klinger & Schundeln, 2011; Acs et al., 2008). It focuses on enhancing entrepreneurial skills and competencies, enabling graduates to start and succeed in their own ventures (Blenker et al., 2014). This education fosters critical abilities like creativity, problem-solving, and communication, which, along with practical experience, are vital for entrepreneurial success (Murphy & Dyrenfurth, 2012).

    In growing countries, constrained task opportunities for graduates propose an enormous challenge. While universities produce skilled graduates capable of excelling in public and private sectors, job markets often cannot absorb them all, leading to rising unemployment and socio-economic imbalances (Brown, 2003; Okorafor & Okorafor, 2011).

    Entrepreneurship has emerged as a viable solution to address these challenges. Research highlights its role in creating self-employment and reducing unemployment, with entrepreneurship education playing a crucial role in preparing individuals to capitalize on opportunities and adapt to market needs (Peterman & Kennedy, 2003).

    Given the increasing focus on entrepreneurship by policymakers, universities, and practitioners, there is a growing need for empirical research in this area (Sanchez, 2011). This study aims to contribute to the field by examining the impact of university-level entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship development in Pakistan, a non-Western context with unique cultural and organizational dynamics.


    Objectives of the Study

    This study investigates the role of university-level entrepreneurship education in fostering entrepreneurship development, focusing on students from the Management Sciences department at BUITEMS. The objectives are:

    1. To evaluate how generalized entrepreneurial education influences entrepreneurship development.

    2. To assess the impact of motivational entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurship development.

    3. To examine the role of augmented entrepreneurial education in entrepreneurship development.


    Significance of the Research

    The research addresses a gap in the literature by exploring entrepreneurship education's impact within the cultural and economic context of a developing country, Pakistan. Most prior studies focus on Western, industrialized settings, limiting their applicability to non-Western contexts.

    Theoretical Contributions: The study extends the current body of knowledge by testing the generalizability of findings from existing literature in a culturally distinct and under-researched environment.

    Practical Implications: The results offer actionable insights for policymakers and practitioners to design effective entrepreneurship education programs tailored to local needs, highlighting their potential to enhance entrepreneurship development among university students.

    Literature Review

    This section provides a deep theoretical base of study. The literature review examines a critique view of different authors on entrepreneurial education and its impact on entrepreneur development in universities. Researchers stated that there are three types of entrepreneurial education which include generalized entrepreneurial education, motivational entrepreneurial education, and augmented entrepreneurial education. This chapter provides a brief overview of these three entrepreneurial educations and their impact on the entrepreneurial development of university students. 


    Definition of the Concept of Entrepreneurship

    The concept of entrepreneurship can be defined as follows about definition proposed by several different researchers in multiple disciplines:

    “In simple form, it is an energetic and self-motivated process of change that ultimately translates into the creation of marketable products and services. The process required an application of enthusiasm and passion for the formulation and implementation of innovative ideas and solutions in the marketplace. For successful implementation, team formulation consisting of different ventures, undertaking of risks, utilization of efforts and resources, efficient and effective business plan along with utilization of key skills and capabilities and abilities to explore advantageous opportunities are necessary (Kuratko & Hodgetts, 2009).  Initially, the educational institution should revise its course structure to promote and enhance entrepreneurial development at the national level. Additionally, entrepreneurial culture should be fostered at the organizational level to enhance the behavior of both managers as well as employees concerning entrepreneurial activities within an organization (Krackhardt, 1995; Welsch, 2003). 


    Entrepreneurship Theories and Models

    There is a need for strong theoretical support for the present study of entrepreneurship development. Several theories support the concept of entrepreneurship education and its development some basic theories are given below:

    The evolution of entrepreneurship studies and research was started over the last few years. Now it has become one of the important and most discussed topics in research. Some schools of thought prevail in the market and also explain a shift from positivist epistemology to the new school of thought more constructive epistemology (Bygrave & Hofer, 1991). 


    Entrepreneurship Schools of Thought

    Classifying different philosophers into different schools of thought was a problem that occurred a long time before and it has been recognized as an important discipline. 

    There are various similarities and differences among entrepreneurship theories which were the cause of the new school of thought development (Elias & Merriam, 1980). 

    According to Cunningham and Lischeron (1991), there are six schools of thought. They described that entrepreneurship is a multi-faceted phenomenon. There are different dimensions offered by these schools of thought. In order to understand the concept of entrepreneurship it is important that the researcher should take an interest in each dimension process (Cunningham & Lischeron, 1991)


    Theory of Planned Behaviour

    The theory of planned behavior is one of the important behavioral theories introduced by Ajzen and Fishbein in 1980 and is classified as one of the most important and popular entrepreneurship theories for students. The modified theory of planned behavior is the theory of reasoned action given by Sheppard et al (1988) who stated that our every action is based on some intention or some reason (Shapero, 1972; Krueger, 1993). This theory explains that the intention of entrepreneurship stems from the opinion of the desirability and feasibility of a person and this relation is affected by social and cultural context. This model contains some variables of attitude toward behavior and perceived behavior control which is affected by subjective norms (Turker et al.2009). These attitudes, and social norms have a greater impact on student intention of entrepreneurship which causes motivational behavior of students toward thinking about new ventures (Autio, Keeley, Klofsten, Parker& Hay, 2001)


    Theory of Achievement

    A theory given by McClelland in 1961 is one of the most used theories on entrepreneurship development among students is the "Theory of Achievement". Individuals perform higher and engage them in challenging and innovative tasks that have a strong need for achievement. This individual looks for improved ways of achievement, success, and a higher level of performance (Utsch & Rauch, 2000; Littunen, 2000). According to McClelland's theory, moderate risk is required in a business's initial stages. It is important that an individual is a moderate risk taker, pays attention to the supervisory response of profit and cost, assumes personal responsibility, and finds innovative and creative ways of new product and service development. The theory also states that those characteristics prevail in the individual who has a high need for motivation and achievement (Raposo, do Paco & Ferreira, 2008). McClelland's theory of achievement shows a unique type of "Entrepreneurship personality" which includes the need for affiliation, power, and achievement. 


    Entrepreneurship Education

    This section provides entrepreneurship education reviews and why it is needed in the current situation, what steps can be taken to encourage women as well in entrepreneurship development. 


    Definition of Entrepreneurship Education and its Chronology

    The main variable of the current study is entrepreneurship education and its encouragement. Entrepreneurship education is defined as “the educational system, whole set of training and education activities”. Entrepreneurship education is one of the methods through which university can encourage their students to think outside of the box and it is an activity that creates graduates intention to perform entrepreneurial behavior. Some factors highly influence entrepreneurs which include entrepreneurial activities, desirability, knowledge, and feasibility (Linan, 2004).  Katz, 2003 developed the chronology of entrepreneurship education in 2003. 

    It started dating back to 1876 with agricultural and economic literature and it was included in hardware courses literature in 1947. 


    Emergence of Women Entrepreneurs in Pakistan

    Fostering female entrepreneurial ventures is pivotal for Pakistan’s economic growth and inclusion agenda. Access to financial services is an imperative constituent of initiating and growing a business for female entrepreneurs. Usually, women-owned businesses are small/cottage industries in their homes. Therefore, microfinance products should serve as a facilitator for start-up and working capital finance for this clientele. Microfinance portfolio data reveals that despite improvements in outreach to women in Pakistan’s microfinance sector, it still lags behind its regional peers with a mere 59% female clientele (Safavian & Haq, 2013).

     Pakistan’s female participation rate in the labor force stands at a mere 28%. More than 80% of women in Pakistan blame household duties and lack of education as the major reasons for their non-participation in the labor force (The Nation, 2012; World Bank, 2012). 


    Government Steps for Entrepreneurship Development

    Even more shocking is the fact that loans are more frequently passed on in programs that lend exclusively to women. This practice is higher in NGOs than in microfinance banks (MFBs), and higher in urban areas than in rural areas. In addition, the presence of credit information bureaus (CIBs) is also to blame for this situation though indirectly. As an inadvertent consequence of CIBs men who have previously defaulted on their payments, use women to access credit (Safavian & Haq, 2013). 

    Against this milieu (backdrop), access to finance remains the greatest challenge for female entrepreneurs who intend to initiate and grow a business. A vast majority of female entrepreneurs in Pakistan are involved in traditional business activities and still depend heavily on informal sources of finance like savings, loans from family members, or the sale of assets. 

    Relationship Analysis:

    Generalized Entrepreneurial Education and Entrepreneurship Development

    Ages ago it was widely believed that entrepreneurial qualities are inherently embedded within an individual at the time of birth instead of developing them at later stages by focusing on and utilizing entrepreneurial education in the field (Gnyawali & Fogel, 1994). Nowadays this trend has significantly changed. The researchers in the area of entrepreneurship are of the view that entrepreneurship education at the university level can enhance entrepreneurship qualities among individuals. Moreover, entrepreneurship education enabled the creation of certain new traits regarding entrepreneurship among individuals too (Henderson & Robertson, 2000). Past studies consistently reported that entrepreneurial qualities exist inherently in every human being. In other words, the potential of entrepreneurship exists in every individual to some extent (Wilson et al., 2009). 

    Hence attitudes and behaviors of individuals are shaped towards entrepreneurship by focusing on generalized entrepreneurial education as entrepreneurial education is all about learning for entrepreneurship, learning about entrepreneurship, and learning through entrepreneurship (Gibb & Hannon, 2006). As a whole, generalized entrepreneurial education significantly and positively influences the career choice of students at the university level. Moreover, owning businesses has been preferred by a high proportion of entrepreneurial students at the university level exhibiting the importance of generalized entrepreneurial education in entrepreneurship development (Mogollon & Rubio, 2010; Kelley & Thomas, 2011). Based on the preceding discussion following hypothesis is formulated that will be tested in the present study:

    Hypothesis 1: Generalized entrepreneurial education will be positively associated with entrepreneurship development among students at the university level.  


    Motivational Entrepreneurial Education and Entrepreneurship Development

    In today’s turbulent business environment, entrepreneurship has not been considered the first choice of career during the initial stage of career selection by recently graduated students (Ronstadt, 1985; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). 

    Past studies consistently argued that there is a need to develop self-determination among individuals at the university level for the purpose of motivating them to start up their own new businesses after completion of education (Shane et al., 2003). It is widely believed that the attitudes of individuals can be shaped towards entrepreneurship as the approved behaviors of successful individuals and mentors are generally followed by individuals both in positive and negative circumstances that vary across time. Hence it is argued that an individual intention to pursue entrepreneurship as a career in the near future can be influenced by having interaction with the entrepreneurs of the related area (Li et al., 2008; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). 

    All these factors hinder the career choices of graduates in terms of engaging in entrepreneurial careers (Owusu-Ansah, 2012).  Past studies in the area of entrepreneurship also reported significant and positive contributions of motivational entrepreneurial education in entrepreneurship development among students at the university level as motivational entrepreneurship education motivates the student to seek challenges in the marketplace, take initiative for the fulfillment of desired set goals and a gateway from the concept of the glass ceiling at the corporate level (Kelley & Thomas, 2011). Thus motivational entrepreneurial education significantly influences entrepreneurship development among students at the university level by motivating and encouraging graduates to the new business enterprises creation to make them job creators instead of job seekers in the market (Wilson et al., 2007). Based on the preceding discussion following hypothesis is formulated that will be tested in the present study:

    Hypothesis 2: Motivational entrepreneurial education will be positively associated with entrepreneurship development among students at the university level. 


    Augmented Entrepreneurial Education and Entrepreneurship Development

    For entrepreneurship, Self-efficacy is another important requirement (Wilson et al., 2007). Bandura (1995) explained self-efficacy/ augmented entrepreneurship education as a belief in a person’s capabilities to execute and organize the course of action which are required to manage the situation prevailing in the organization”. Bandura emphasized that community experiences, observational learning, and reciprocal determinism significantly shape an individual's personality. He also highlighted that a person’s abilities, cognitive skills, and attitudes form the " Self-mechanism," which plays an essential position in figuring out how individuals understand and reply to diverse conditions. For fostering a robust self-system and self-efficacy, greater entrepreneurship education, in addition to motivational and general entrepreneurial education, is essential.

    While motivational and general entrepreneurial education has shown a positive impact on entrepreneurship development, research indicates that only a small number of students who take entrepreneurship courses at the graduate level pursue careers as entrepreneurs. Ronstadt (1985) argued that motivational and general entrepreneurship education alone are insufficient for fostering entrepreneurship development, and an advanced level of entrepreneurship education is necessary.

    Given this context, augmented entrepreneurial education is considered a vital component for promoting entrepreneurial development among university students. To achieve this goal, universities should go beyond traditional education by offering innovative programs such as opportunity recognition, creative problem-solving, leadership development, community collaboration, bureaucratic navigation, and presentation skills. These programs can enhance students' entrepreneurial intentions (Marques and Albuquerque, 2012).

    Hypothesis 3: Augmented entrepreneurial education has a positive relationship with entrepreneurship development among university students.


    Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis Development

    Based on the detailed review of the literature along with a comprehensive investigation of models and theories of entrepreneurship, the following conceptual framework has been proposed that the present study aims to answer. The present study examines the effects of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurship development among students at the university level. All three dimensions of entrepreneurial education are investigated in the present study. Therefore the conceptual framework mainly comprises three dimensions of entrepreneurial education and its impact on entrepreneurship development. In the framework for the present study, generalized, motivational, and augmented entrepreneurship education is treated as an independent variable whereas entrepreneurship development is treated as the dependent variable.

    Figure 1

    Conceptual Framework and Hypothesis Development

    Based on an extensive review of the literature and a thorough examination of entrepreneurship models and theories, this study proposes a conceptual framework to address its research objectives. The study focuses on analyzing the impact of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurship development among university students. It specifically explores three dimensions of entrepreneurial education: generalized, motivational, and augmented. In this framework, entrepreneurial education serves as the independent variable, while entrepreneurship development is the dependent variable. The framework is adapted from the work of Hassan, Khan, and Noor Un Nabi (2017).


    Research Design

    The study adopts a causal research design to empirically examine the relationships between the variables. It investigates how the three dimensions of entrepreneurial education—generalized, motivational, and augmented—affect entrepreneurial development among university students. The study relies on participants’ self-reported perceptions to measure the variables, aiming to provide actionable insights for both academic researchers and practitioners in the field of entrepreneurship.


    Study Setting

    The study was conducted as a field study, examining the causal relationships between entrepreneurial education dimensions and entrepreneurship development. Data were collected from management science students at BUITEMS University in Quetta, Balochistan, within their natural work and learning environments.


    Measurement scales

    Entrepreneurial Education (Armstrong, 1987) 

    ? Generalized Entrepreneurial Education

    ? Motivational Entrepreneurial Education

    ? Augmented Entrepreneurial Education

    Data Collection Procedures

    The data collection for this study involved two primary methods: direct contact and online distribution via email and social media platforms. Questionnaires were distributed in person to management sciences students at BUITEMS University in Quetta, Balochistan. Additionally, a digital version of the questionnaire was created using Google Forms and shared through social media channels such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and Viber. While the response rate from online participants was relatively low, the researcher compensated by collecting the remaining responses through direct interaction with the students. Participants were informed that completing the questionnaire would take approximately ten minutes, and detailed explanations were provided as needed to encourage maximum participation.


    Data Analysis Methods/Procedures

    The study employs causal analysis to examine the relationships between the variables. Given the presence of multiple independent variables, parametric tests were used to measure associations, with "Multiple Regression Analysis" as the primary method. Additionally, various analyses were performed, such as descriptive evaluation, normality trying out, reliability evaluation, correlation evaluation, and multiple regression evaluation, to discover the proposed relationships comprehensively. The primary focus of the study’s analysis lies in examining the "Main Effect Results," which assess the impact of generalized, motivational, and augmented entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship development.


    Demographic Analysis

    Demographic analysis was conducted to describe the characteristics of the study sample. This analysis considered variables such as gender, age, education level, and monthly income of the respondents, providing a detailed profile of the participants and aiding in contextualizing the findings of the study.

     


    Table 1

    Demographic Profile of Sample (Students)

    Questions

    Options

    Frequency

    Percent

    Mean

    Mode

    Standard Deviation

    Gender

    Male

    Female

    159

    44

    78.3

    21.7

    1.2167

    1.00

     

    .41305

    Age

    20 -30 Yrs

    31-40 Yrs

    41 and Above Yrs

    Above 50 Yrs

    137

    57

    7

     

    2

    67.5

    28.1

    3.4

    1.0

    1.3793

    1.00

     

    .60441

    Educational Level

    Bachelors

    Masters

    MS/MPhil

    PhD

    110

    72

    19

    2

    54.2

    35.5

    9.4

    1.0

    1.5714

    1.00

    .70259

    Monthly Income

    20,000 – 30,000

    31,000 – 40,000

    41,000 and above

    30

    111

    62

     

    14.8

    54.7

    30.5

     

    2.6256

    2.00

    1.05198
    Source: Developed by Researcher (2018)
     Table 1 provides the demographic details of respondents in terms of gender, age, educational qualifications, and monthly income. The majority of participants in the study were male, with 78.3% identifying as male and 21.7% as female. Most respondents fell within the 21–30 age group, accounting for 67.5%, Observed by 28.1% within the 31–40 age organization, three. Four within the forty-one–50 age organization, and the most effective 1% aged above 50. Regarding education, the largest portion of participants (54.2%) held a bachelor’s degree, 35.5% had a master’s degree, 9.4% had an MS/MPhil degree, and just 1% held a Ph.D. Concerning income, the majority (54.7%) reported earning between PKR 31,000 and PKR 40,000 monthly. In comparison, 14.8% earned between PKR 20,000 and PKR 30,000, and 30.5% earned PKR 41,000 or more.
    Reliability AnalysisReliability analysis was conducted to evaluate the consistency and dependability of the measurement scales used in the study. According to Gerber and Finn (2005), a Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.6 or higher indicates reliable internal consistency. The results of the reliability analysis are summarized in Table 3: 
    Table 2

    Variables

    No of items

    Cronbach Alpha

    Generalized Entrepreneurship Education

    7

    0.818

    Motivational Entrepreneurship Education

    3

    0.613

    Augmented Entrepreneurship Education 

    6

    0.787

    Entrepreneurship Development

    6

    0.697
    The analysis revealed that all variables exceeded the threshold of 0.6, confirming the reliability of the scales. Specifically:? Generalized Entrepreneurship Education scored 0.818, indicating strong internal consistency.? Motivational Entrepreneurship Education scored 0.613, meeting the minimum threshold for reliability.? Augmented Entrepreneurship Education scored 0.787, showing good reliability.? Entrepreneurship Development scored 0.697, demonstrating consistent and reliable measurements.Generally, reliability analysis confirms that all items and variables are dependable for further analysis.
    Pearson’s Correlation AnalysisCorrelation analysis is a valuable tool for identifying the linear relationship between variables in a study. When the dataset follows a normal distribution, Pearson’s Correlation analysis is commonly used to measure the degree of dependence between two variables (Gerber & Finn, 2005). The correlation coefficient (r) ranges from -1 to +1, where the value indicates both the strength and direction of the relationship. A positive correlation coefficient signifies a direct relationship between variables, while a negative coefficient indicates an inverse relationship. The strength of the correlation can be interpreted as follows:? Values less than 0.4 suggest a susceptible correlation.? Values between 0.4 and 0.8 indicate a moderate correlation.? Values above 0.8 suggest a strong correlation, which may additionally factor in the opportunity for commonplace approach bias within the records. As data from the current study is normally distributed, Pearson's Correlation evaluation was achieved to assess both the dependence and power of relationships between the various variables. 
    Table 4Correlation AnalysisThe table below illustrates the results of Pearson’s Correlation analysis, showing the relationships between the variables under study:

    Variables

    GEE

    MEE

    AEE

    ED

    Generalized Entrepreneurship Education (GEE)

    1

     

     

     

    Motivational Entrepreneurship Education (MEE)

    0.533*

    1

     

     

    Augmented Entrepreneurship Education (AEE)

    0.491*

    0.636*

    1

     

    Entrepreneurship Development (ED)

    0.445*

    0.631*

    0.659*

    1
    *Correlation is significant at the 0.01 (99%) level, **Correlation is significant at the 0.05 (95%) level, ***Correlation is significant at the 0.10 (90%) levelSource: Developed by Researcher (2018)
     Table 4 presents the correlation analysis for the variables investigated in the study. The results show a moderate positive relationship between motivational entrepreneurship education (MEE) and generalized entrepreneurship education (GEE), with a correlation coefficient of 0.533. This indicates that a change in one variable leads to a 53.3% change in the other, and the relationship is statistically significant at the 99% confidence level. Similarly, augmented entrepreneurship education (AEE) and GEE exhibit a moderate positive correlation, with a coefficient of 0.491, reflecting a 49.1% change in one variable resulting from a change in the other, significant at the 95% confidence level. AEE and MEE also display a moderate positive correlation, with a coefficient of 0.636, indicating a 63.6% change between the variables, significant at the 95% confidence level.Entrepreneurship development (ED) and GEE show a weak positive relationship, with a correlation coefficient of 0.445, meaning a 44.5% change in one variable corresponds to a change in the other, significant at the 95% confidence level. The relationship between ED and MEE is moderate and positive, with a coefficient of 0.631, showing a 63.1% change between the variables, also significant at the 95% confidence level. Lastly, ED and AEE exhibit a moderate positive correlation, with a coefficient of 0.659, indicating a 65.9% change, significant at the 95% confidence level.Overall, the analysis demonstrates that all variables have moderate or weak positive correlations, with coefficients below 0.8. This indicates direct relationships between the variables while avoiding multicollinearity or common method bias issues. The statistically significant correlations, primarily at 99% and 95% confidence levels, confirm the reliability of these relationships. These findings underscore the independence of the variables and their suitability for further analysis.
    Regression Analysis (Analysis of Model)The main objective of regression analysis is to explore the cause-and-effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables in a study. It also quantifies how much of the variation in the established variable can be defined with the aid of the unbiased variables. In this study, three independent variables—generalized entrepreneurship education (GEE), motivational entrepreneurship education (MEE), and augmented entrepreneurship education (AEE)—are examined about the dependent variable, entrepreneurship development (ED). Multiple regression analysis was executed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, Version 22.0)to evaluate these relationships.The regression model for this analysis is:
    Entrepreneurship Development = ? + ??(GEE) + ??(MEE) + ??(AEE) + eWhere "e" represents the error term. 
    Table 5Regression Model Fit Summary

    Model

    R

    R²

    Adjusted R²

    F-Value

    Sig. F Change

    1

    0.716

    0.513

    0.505

    69.829

    0.000
    ? R (0.716): Indicates a strong positive relationship between the independent variables and entrepreneurship development.? R² (0.513): This shows that 51.3% of the variation in entrepreneurship development is explained by GEE, MEE, and AEE.? Adjusted R² (0.505): Accounts for the number of predictors, confirming a strong model fit.? F-value (69.829): Indicates the overall statistical significance of the regression model, with a p-value of 0.000, confirming the model's reliability.1. Predictors: (Constant),  Generalized Entrepreneurship Education, Motivational Entrepreneurship Education, Augmented Entrepreneurship Education 2. Dependent Variable: Entrepreneurship Development Source: Developed through Researcher (2018)The explanatory power of a regression model is primarily shown through the R² value, also known as the coefficient of determination. When multiple independent variables are involved, the adjusted R² value is used to assess the relationships between the variables being studied. Additionally, The overall significance of the regression model is represented by utilizing the importance F change value (Gerber & Finn, 2005).Table 5 gives the regression results for entrepreneurship development (ED) as the structured variable, brought about through generalized entrepreneurship training (GEE), motivational entrepreneurship schooling (MEE), and augmented entrepreneurship schooling (AEE). In this study, the adjusted R² value is 0.505 (as shown in Table 5), indicating that a 1% change in the independent variables (GEE, MEE, and AEE) leads to a 50.5% change in entrepreneurship development, with the remaining variation attributed to other factors.Moreover, the significance value (Sig. F Change) is 0.000 (Table 5), showing that the independent variables significantly affect entrepreneurship development. This confirms that the Regression model significance is the 95% confidence level. Therefore, The output of this study (Table 5) supports Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3. 
    Table 6Regression Analysis for Generalized Entrepreneurship Education, Motivational Entrepreneurship Education, Augmented Entrepreneurship Education, and Entrepreneurship Development

    Model

    Independent Variables

    Standardized Beta

    T Value

    Sig (p-Value)

    1

    Constant

     

    6.381

    .000

    2

    Generalized Entrepreneurship Education

    0.64

    1.063

    .289

    3

    Motivational Entrepreneurship Education

    .333

    4.900

    .000

    4

    Augmented Entrepreneurship Education

    .416

    6.315

    .0000
    Source: Developed by Researcher (2018)
     Table 6 donations the standardized beta values, t-values, and p-values for the predictor variables (generalized entrepreneurship education, motivational entrepreneurship training, and augmented entrepreneurship training) in terms of the outcome variable, entrepreneurship development. The standardized beta value allows for determining the strength of the relationship between the variables, whilst the signal of the beta value indicates the course of this relationship. Additionally, the p-value indicates the statistical significance of the model.The results show that generalized entrepreneurship training (? = .064, p = .289) is undoubtedly associated with entrepreneurship improvement. However, the p-value is not significant at the 95% confidence level, which means that generalized entrepreneurship education is not a significant predictor of entrepreneurship development. Based on these findings, Hypothesis 1 (? = .064, p = .289) is rejected, indicating that generalized entrepreneurship schooling does now not considerably predict entrepreneurship improvement.In contrast, motivational entrepreneurship education (? = .333, p = .000) is discovered to be positively and significantly related to entrepreneurship development. This result supports Hypothesis 2 (? = .333, p = .000), which means that motivational entrepreneurship training significantly contributes to entrepreneurship improvement.Similarly, augmented entrepreneurship education (? = .416, p = .000) is also definitely and significantly correlated with entrepreneurship development. Thus, Hypothesis three (? = .416, p = .000) is supported, indicating that augmented entrepreneurship schooling has a positive significant impact on entrepreneurship development.

Discussion

The study explored whether generalized entrepreneurship education (broad, foundational knowledge and skills) positively impacts entrepreneurship development. Contrary to expectations, this hypothesis was rejected, as the findings indicated no significant relationship (? = 0.064, p = 0.289). These results diverge from prior studies, which found such education positively influenced entrepreneurship development. The cultural and organizational differences in Pakistan may explain the discrepancy. Despite this, generalized education can help cultivate entrepreneurial attitudes and competencies. However, the lack of immediate relevance to Pakistan's non-Western context led to the observed insignificant results.

The study confirmed a positive relationship between motivational entrepreneurship education (education fostering initiative, goal-setting, and entrepreneurial aspirations) and entrepreneurship development (? = 0.333, p < 0.01). This finding aligns with prior research, emphasizing how motivational education equips students to overcome barriers, explore opportunities, and pursue entrepreneurial careers. Family and institutional encouragement also play a key role. The study reinforces the importance of motivational education in linking entrepreneurial intentions with actionable behaviors.

The research also validated the positive influence of augmented entrepreneurship education (programs beyond traditional curricula that develop creativity, problem-solving, leadership, and community engagement) on entrepreneurship development (? = 0.416, p < 0.01). This aligns with earlier studies, showing that innovative, skill-based programs enhance students’ entrepreneurial intentions by preparing them for real-world challenges. These findings highlight the role of augmented education in boosting entrepreneurial readiness and capability.

Conclusion

The present study examined the impact of entrepreneurial education at the university level on entrepreneurship development at BUITMS University, Pakistan. Each dimension of entrepreneurship education involving generalized entrepreneurship education, motivational entrepreneurship education, and augmented entrepreneurship education was investigated about entrepreneurship development. The present study supports the findings of previous research in the area of entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurship development.

The present study examined the impact of entrepreneurial education at the university level on entrepreneurship development at BUITMS University, Pakistan. Each dimension of entrepreneurship education related to generalized entrepreneurship education, motivational entrepreneurship education, and augmented entrepreneurship education was investigated about entrepreneurship development. The current study supports the findings of previous research in the area of entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurship development.

Primary data has been used by the study to investigate the consequences of entrepreneurial education at the university level on entrepreneurship development among students. An adapted questionnaire was employed to collect data for the study. The sample of the study was 203 management sciences students of BUITMS University operated in Quetta, Baluchistan. There were 3 hypotheses 2 hypotheses were accepted n and one hypothesis was rejected. The rejected hypothesis has an insignificant relationship due to cross-cultural and organizational differences. Thus, positive entrepreneurship education at the university level can enhance entrepreneurship qualities among people. Hence positive entrepreneurial attitudes and behaviors may evolve among students towards small and medium business enterprises by means of focusing successfully on entrepreneurial education at the university level, in particular in developing economies like Pakistan.

Implications

The study provides critical insights for universities and policymakers to design education systems that foster entrepreneurial competencies. It suggests tailoring educational approaches to cultural and organizational contexts, emphasizing motivational and augmented programs to effectively nurture entrepreneurship.

Limitations and Future Research

The chapter concludes with the study’s limitations, such as its focus on a non-Western context and reliance on university-level data, and calls for future research to explore broader contexts, diverse educational systems, and longitudinal impacts of entrepreneurship education.

References

  • Acs, Z. J., Desai, S., & Hessels, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, economic development, and institutions. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9135-9

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Prentice Hall.
  • Autio, E., Keeley, R. H., Klofsten, M., Parker, G. G. C., & Hay, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial Intent among Students in Scandinavia and in the USA. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 2(2), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14632440110094632
  • Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
  • Blenker, P., Elmholdt, S. T., Frederiksen, S. H., Korsgaard, S., & Wagner, K. (2014). Methods in entrepreneurship education research: a review and integrative framework. Education + Training, 56(8/9), 697–715. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-06-2014-0066
  • Brown, P. (2003). The opportunity trap: education and employment in a global economy. European Educational Research Journal, 2(1), 141–179. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2003.2.1.4
  • Bygrave, W. D., & Hofer, C. W. (1991). Theorizing about entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Winter, 13-22.
  • Cunningham, J. B., & Lischeron, J. (1991). Defining entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 29(1), 45-61.
  • Dyer, W. G., & Handler, W. (1994). Entrepreneurship and Family Business: Exploring the connections. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401900105
  • Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. (1980). Philosophical foundations of adult education. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co.
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Prediction and change of behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.
  • Gerber, S. B., & Finn, K. V. (2005). Using SPSS for Windows: Data analysis and graphics (2nd ed.). Springer.
  • Gibb, A., & Hannon, P. (2006). Towards the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 4(1), 73-110.
  • Gnyawali, D. R., & Fogel, D. S. (1994). Environments for Entrepreneurship Development: Key dimensions and research implications. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(4), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401800403
  • Henderson, R., & Robertson, M. (2000). Erratum. Career Development International, 5(6), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430010373755
  • Katz, J. A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(02)00098-8
  • Kelley, D., & Thomas, H. (2011). Entrepreneurship education in Asia. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Klinger, B., & Schündeln, M. (2011). Can Entrepreneurial Activity be Taught? Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Central America. World Development, 39(9), 1592–1610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.021
  • Krackhardt, D. (1995). Entrepreneurial Opportunities in an entrepreneurial Firm: A structural approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(3), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879501900305
  • Krueger, N. (1993). The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301800101
  • Kuratko, D. F., & Hodgetts, R. M. (2009). Entrepreneurship: Theory, process, and practice (8th ed.). Thomson Learning.
  • Linan, F. (2004a). Educación empresarial y modelo de intenciones. Formación para un empresariado de calidad (PhD dissertation). Departamento de Economía Aplicada I, Universidad de Sevilla.
  • Littunen, H. (2000). Entrepreneurship and the characteristics of the entrepreneurial personality. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 6(6), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550010362741
  • Marques, L. A., & Albuquerque, C. (2012). Entrepreneurship education and the development of young people life competencies and skills. ACRN Journal of Entrepreneurship Perspectives, 1(2), 55-68.
  • McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Van Nostrand.
  • Mogollon, R. H., & Rubio, P. P. (2010). An approach to entrepreneurial culture and education in secondary school. International Journal of Business Environment, 3(1), 120-134.
  • Welsch, H. P. (2003). Entrepreneurship. In Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203356821
  • Murphy, M. and Dyrenfurth, M.J. (2012), “Examining the role of the university in creating jobs”,
  • Okorafor, P., & Okorafor, A. (2011). Reappraising technical and vocational education and training (TVET) for functionality and self-reliance. Journal of Qualitative Education, 7(1), 80-87.
  • Owusu-Ansah, W. (2012). Entrepreneurship education, a panacea to graduate unemployment in Ghana? International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(15), 211-220.
  • Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise Education: Influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-6520.2003.00035.x
  • Raposo, M., Paço, A. D., & Ferreira, J. (2008). Entrepreneur’s profile: a taxonomy of attributes and motivations of university students. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871763
  • Ronstadt, R. (1985). Every entrepreneur’s nightmare: The decision to become an ex-entrepreneur and work for someone else. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1985 Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference, 409-434.
  • Safavian, M., & Haq, A. (2013). Are Pakistan’s women entrepreneurs being served by the microfinance sector? The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9833-3
  • Shane, S., Locke, E. A., & Collins, C. J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human Resource Management Review, 13(2), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1053-4822(03)00017-2
  • Shapero, A. (1972). The process of technical company formation in a local area. In A. C. Cooper & J. L. (Eds.).
  • Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170
  • Turker, D., & Selcuk, S. S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university students? Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142–159. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590910939049
  • Wilson, F., Kickul, J. and Marlino, D. (2007), “Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship education1”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 387-406.
  • Wilson, K. E., Vyakarnam, S., Volkmann, C., Mariotti, S., & Rabuzzi, D. (2009). Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs—Unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the global challenges of the 21st century: A report of the Global Education Initiative. World Economic Forum.

References

  • Acs, Z. J., Desai, S., & Hessels, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, economic development, and institutions. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9135-9

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Prentice Hall.
  • Autio, E., Keeley, R. H., Klofsten, M., Parker, G. G. C., & Hay, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial Intent among Students in Scandinavia and in the USA. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 2(2), 145–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14632440110094632
  • Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
  • Blenker, P., Elmholdt, S. T., Frederiksen, S. H., Korsgaard, S., & Wagner, K. (2014). Methods in entrepreneurship education research: a review and integrative framework. Education + Training, 56(8/9), 697–715. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-06-2014-0066
  • Brown, P. (2003). The opportunity trap: education and employment in a global economy. European Educational Research Journal, 2(1), 141–179. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2003.2.1.4
  • Bygrave, W. D., & Hofer, C. W. (1991). Theorizing about entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Winter, 13-22.
  • Cunningham, J. B., & Lischeron, J. (1991). Defining entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 29(1), 45-61.
  • Dyer, W. G., & Handler, W. (1994). Entrepreneurship and Family Business: Exploring the connections. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401900105
  • Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. (1980). Philosophical foundations of adult education. Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co.
  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Prediction and change of behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.
  • Gerber, S. B., & Finn, K. V. (2005). Using SPSS for Windows: Data analysis and graphics (2nd ed.). Springer.
  • Gibb, A., & Hannon, P. (2006). Towards the entrepreneurial university. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 4(1), 73-110.
  • Gnyawali, D. R., & Fogel, D. S. (1994). Environments for Entrepreneurship Development: Key dimensions and research implications. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(4), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879401800403
  • Henderson, R., & Robertson, M. (2000). Erratum. Career Development International, 5(6), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430010373755
  • Katz, J. A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(02)00098-8
  • Kelley, D., & Thomas, H. (2011). Entrepreneurship education in Asia. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Klinger, B., & Schündeln, M. (2011). Can Entrepreneurial Activity be Taught? Quasi-Experimental Evidence from Central America. World Development, 39(9), 1592–1610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.021
  • Krackhardt, D. (1995). Entrepreneurial Opportunities in an entrepreneurial Firm: A structural approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(3), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879501900305
  • Krueger, N. (1993). The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301800101
  • Kuratko, D. F., & Hodgetts, R. M. (2009). Entrepreneurship: Theory, process, and practice (8th ed.). Thomson Learning.
  • Linan, F. (2004a). Educación empresarial y modelo de intenciones. Formación para un empresariado de calidad (PhD dissertation). Departamento de Economía Aplicada I, Universidad de Sevilla.
  • Littunen, H. (2000). Entrepreneurship and the characteristics of the entrepreneurial personality. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 6(6), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550010362741
  • Marques, L. A., & Albuquerque, C. (2012). Entrepreneurship education and the development of young people life competencies and skills. ACRN Journal of Entrepreneurship Perspectives, 1(2), 55-68.
  • McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Van Nostrand.
  • Mogollon, R. H., & Rubio, P. P. (2010). An approach to entrepreneurial culture and education in secondary school. International Journal of Business Environment, 3(1), 120-134.
  • Welsch, H. P. (2003). Entrepreneurship. In Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203356821
  • Murphy, M. and Dyrenfurth, M.J. (2012), “Examining the role of the university in creating jobs”,
  • Okorafor, P., & Okorafor, A. (2011). Reappraising technical and vocational education and training (TVET) for functionality and self-reliance. Journal of Qualitative Education, 7(1), 80-87.
  • Owusu-Ansah, W. (2012). Entrepreneurship education, a panacea to graduate unemployment in Ghana? International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(15), 211-220.
  • Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise Education: Influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-6520.2003.00035.x
  • Raposo, M., Paço, A. D., & Ferreira, J. (2008). Entrepreneur’s profile: a taxonomy of attributes and motivations of university students. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 405–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871763
  • Ronstadt, R. (1985). Every entrepreneur’s nightmare: The decision to become an ex-entrepreneur and work for someone else. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 1985 Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference, 409-434.
  • Safavian, M., & Haq, A. (2013). Are Pakistan’s women entrepreneurs being served by the microfinance sector? The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9833-3
  • Shane, S., Locke, E. A., & Collins, C. J. (2003). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human Resource Management Review, 13(2), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1053-4822(03)00017-2
  • Shapero, A. (1972). The process of technical company formation in a local area. In A. C. Cooper & J. L. (Eds.).
  • Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170
  • Turker, D., & Selcuk, S. S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university students? Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142–159. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590910939049
  • Wilson, F., Kickul, J. and Marlino, D. (2007), “Gender, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship education1”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 387-406.
  • Wilson, K. E., Vyakarnam, S., Volkmann, C., Mariotti, S., & Rabuzzi, D. (2009). Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs—Unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the global challenges of the 21st century: A report of the Global Education Initiative. World Economic Forum.

Cite this article

APA

    APA : Panra, G., Panra, Z., & Gul, N. (2024). Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan. Global Management Sciences Review, IX(IV), 108-120. https://doi.org/10.31703/gmsr.2024(IX-IV).09

CHICAGO

    CHICAGO : Panra, Gul, Zar Panra, and Nagina Gul. 2024. "Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan." Global Management Sciences Review, IX (IV): 108-120 doi: 10.31703/gmsr.2024(IX-IV).09

HARVARD

    HARVARD : PANRA, G., PANRA, Z. & GUL, N. 2024. Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan. Global Management Sciences Review, IX, 108-120.

MHRA

    MHRA : Panra, Gul, Zar Panra, and Nagina Gul. 2024. "Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan." Global Management Sciences Review, IX: 108-120

MLA

    MLA : Panra, Gul, Zar Panra, and Nagina Gul. "Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan." Global Management Sciences Review, IX.IV (2024): 108-120 Print.

OXFORD

    OXFORD : Panra, Gul, Panra, Zar, and Gul, Nagina (2024), "Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan", Global Management Sciences Review, IX (IV), 108-120

TURABIAN

    TURABIAN : Panra, Gul, Zar Panra, and Nagina Gul. "Entrepreneurial Education at University Level and Entrepreneurship Development: An Analysis of Buitems University, Pakistan." Global Management Sciences Review IX, no. IV (2024): 108-120. https://doi.org/10.31703/gmsr.2024(IX-IV).09