V olume 25 Issue 4 Ar ticle 1 December 2023 The E ff ect of Primar y School Entr epr eneurship E ducation The E ff ect of Primar y School Entr epr eneurship E ducation Pr ogr ams on the E v olution of Pupils’ Human Capital Assets Pr ogr ams on the E v olution of Pupils’ Human Capital Assets Janez Gor enc Univ ersity of Ljubljana, School of E conomics and Business, PhD Student, Ljubljana, Slo v enia , janez.gor enc@ef.uni-lj.si Alenka Sla v ec Gomez el Univ ersity of Ljubljana, School of E conomics and Business, Ljubljana, Slo v enia , alenka.sla v ec@ef.uni-lj.si Ž eljka Kiti ć Go v ernment Office of the Republic of Slo v enia for De v elopment and E ur opean Cohesion P olicy , Ljubljana, Slo v enia , zeljka.kitic@go v .si Bla ž Zupan Univ ersity of Ljubljana, School of E conomics and Business, Ljubljana, Slo v enia , blaz.zupan@ef.uni-lj.si F ollow this and additional works at: https:/ /www .ebrjournal.net/home P ar t of the Entr epr eneurial and Small Business Oper ations Commons , and the T r aining and De v elopment Commons Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Gor enc, J., Sla v ec Gomez el, A., Kiti ć , Ž ., & Z upan, B. (2023). The E ff ect of Primar y School Entr epr eneurship E ducation Pr ogr ams on the E v olution of Pupils’ Human Capital Assets. E conomic and Business Re view , 25(4), 182-201. https:/ /doi.or g/10.15458/2335-4216.1326 This Original Ar ticle is br ought t o y ou for fr ee and open access b y E conomic and Business Re view . It has been accepted for inclusion in E conomic and Business Re view b y an authoriz ed edit or of E conomic and Business Re view . ORIGINAL ARTICLE The Effect of Primary School Entrepreneurship Education Programs on the Evolution of Pupils’ Human Capital Assets Janez Gorenc a , Alenka Slavec Gomezel b , Željka Kiti´ c c , Blaž Zupan b, * a University of Ljubljana, School of Economics and Business, PhD Student, Ljubljana, Slovenia b University of Ljubljana, School of Economics and Business, Ljubljana, Slovenia c Government Ofce of the Republic of Slovenia for Development and European Cohesion Policy, Ljubljana, Slovenia Abstract The formation of entrepreneurship-related human capital in primary-school entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) is of great interest to European policymakers. European education systems have widely implemented EEPs since the Oslo Agenda for entrepreneurship education in Europe was passed in 2006. However, primary-school EEPs remain an underresearched domain of entrepreneurship education. The present article investigates the development of entrepreneurship-related human capital in EEPs for 9–14-year-olds in 22 primary schools. It uses a quasi-experimental design with repeated measures. Based on data obtained from a sample of 180 participants, the analysis nds that the whole group partly improved only one of the components of human capital. However, the given EEPs positively impact the development of certain components of entrepreneurship-related human capital when investigated through the lens of entrepreneurial family background or gender. When subset by gender, results show that girls improved some components, while boys upgraded others. Also, pupils from entrepreneurial families improved more of the measured constructs than pupils from non-entrepreneurial families. The study provides valuable insights into the evolution of human capital among early adolescents in primary-school EEPs and uses human capital theory to explain this development. It also supplies evidence of the positive effect of EEPs on individuals of specic social groupings. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed and guidelines for further research are provided. Keywords: Human capital theory, Entrepreneurship education program, Primary school, Early adolescents, Human capital assets JEL classication: A22, L26 Introduction D ue to the fast-paced process of globalization and technological advancements, society faces several challenges. These include nancial, societal, and environmental ones, with all their ensuing un- predictability and consequences (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2018). If society is to transform these challenges into opportu- nities, it has to invest in developing entrepreneurship- related human capital at all levels (Dams et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2013). Cunha and Heckman (2007) have shown that interventions for developing hu- man capital at an early age positively impact the economic welfare of individuals. In recent decades, entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) have been introduced from primary to tertiary educa- tion levels (Fellnhofer, 2019; Kuratko, 2005). Re- search has shown that EEPs positively impact the evolution of several components of human capital, such as entrepreneurial intentions (EI), entrepreneur- ship competences (EC), a positive attitude towards Received 23 January 2023; accepted 19 June 2023. Available online 5 December 2023 * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: janez.gorenc@ef.uni-lj.si (J. Gorenc), alenka.slavec@ef.uni-lj.si (A. Slavec Gomezel), zeljka.kitic@gov.si (Ž. Kiti´ c), blaz.zupan@ef.uni-lj.si (B. Zupan). https://doi.org/10.15458/2335-4216.1326 2335-4216/© 2023 School of Economics and Business University of Ljubljana. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 183 entrepreneurship (EA), and entrepreneurial self- efcacy (ESE) (Martin et al., 2013; Martínez-Gregorio et al., 2021). The impact of EEPs on human capital assets (HCAs) is a thoroughly researched subject, but primarily at the secondary and tertiary levels of ed- ucation. Individuals aged 16–25 are already choosing their future career paths as entrepreneurs or employ- ees, so studying the development of HCAs among them is the logical step. However, according to Lazarides et al. (2020), it is in early adolescence that individuals begin to de- velop career aspirations in different elds of interest. Primary-school pupils are thus already contemplat- ing their future careers. For this reason, many authors have pointed out that early EEPs are necessary to de- velop entrepreneurship-related human capital. What is more, early adolescents seem to benet more from EEPs than secondary school or university students (Kourilsky & Carlson, 1996; Rosário et al., 2014). In fact, early adolescents (pupils 9 to 14 years of age) are in a developmental stage where they enter pu- berty and desire more autonomy from their parents. Simultaneously, they look up to non-parent adults as mentors and role models (Bandura, 2006). De- spite these reasons and even though EEPs are run in primary schools, research into their effects on entrepreneurship-related human capital in primary- school pupils is still scant (Liguori et al., 2019). Worse, a simple search on the Web of Science with the key- words “entrepreneurship” or “enterprise education” and “primary school” or “education” returns about 20 articles combined. The development of learning out- comes of primary-school EEPs is thus one of the most underresearched topics in entrepreneurship-related research. On top of that, the existing research into the learning outcomes of primary-school EEPs is still inconclusive. Although most research indicates a pos- itive impact of EEPs on human capital (Moberg, 2014; Palmér & Johansson, 2018), some studies suggest mixed or even negative results (Huber et al., 2014; Pepin & St-Jean, 2019). Consequently, there is a great need to investi- gate the evolution of entrepreneurship-related human capital in primary-school EEPs. The environment where early adolescents acquire their knowledge, skills, and attitudes for future life and work is also where human capital as the developmental outcome of EEPs forms (Martin et al., 2013). Moreover, it is necessary to conceptualize entrepreneurship-related human capital specically for primary-school pupils. Entrepreneurship outcomes such as self-employment and achieving higher productivity might still be far in the future. However, evidence shows that entrepreneurship-related HCAs often lead to rela- tively successful entrepreneurship outcomes (Elert et al., 2015; Unger et al., 2011). This study uses human capital theory to examine the evolution of entrepreneurship-related HCAs as a result of hu- man capital investment. Specically, it inspects the relationship between entrepreneurship-related hu- man capital investments in the form of EEPs and entrepreneurship-related HCAs, the components of which are the learning outcomes of EEPs (Martin et al., 2013). The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of EEPs on the development of pupils’ entrepreneurship-related HCAs during eight-month EEPs in 22 primary schools. It also investigates whether there is a difference in the development of entrepreneurship-related HCAs between girls and boys and between pupils with an entrepreneurial family background and those without one. Thus, it contributes to a better understanding of how the human capital theory can be applied to individuals in their early adolescence participating in EEPs and what role gender and entrepreneurial family back- ground play. Furthermore, the study conceptualizes entrepreneurship-related human capital for primary schools (Martin et al., 2013). Therefore, this study opens up new avenues of research on the impact of EEPs on primary-school pupils. The article begins with an overview of the literature that investigates the impact of EEPs on the develop- ment of the studied components of entrepreneurship- related HCAs and continues with the development of research hypotheses. The second part describes the methods and results. A discussion of results, theoret- ical and practical contributions, guidelines for future research, and conclusions follow. 1 Theoretical background and hypotheses development Educational programs for developing entrepreneurship-related HCAs in primary schools are gaining momentum. At the same time, there have also been many calls for further research into their outcomes (Lazarides et al., 2020; Liguori et al., 2019). For instance, early development of HCAs in the form of non-cognitive skills in children has been shown to foster their cognitive skills. Consequently, the probability of an individual’s economic success later in life increases (Hassi, 2016; Moberg, 2014). Similarly, Cunha and Heckman (2007) and Heckman et al. (2006) demonstrated that individuals attain non-cognitive skills best through early education interventions and continuous competence growth programs during their early adolescent years. 184 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 Fig. 1. Research framework. According to human capital theory, individuals that have developed HCAs are more likely to achieve bet- ter performance outcomes and success either as em- ployees or self-employed individuals (Becker, 1964; Mincer, 1958). Likewise, entrepreneurs are poised to achieve better productivity and, consequently, higher success with developed HCA. In entrepreneurship, HCAs are dened as (1) entrepreneurial intentions, (2) entrepreneurship competences, (3) an attitude towards entrepreneurship, and (4) entrepreneurial self-efcacy (Dams et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2013). Taking the domain-specic view of human capital theory, the relationship between EEPs as human capi- tal investments and HCAs as their learning outcomes represents only the rst part of the human capital theory model. In fact, Becker (1964) and Mincer (1958) contend that education is a human capital investment that should positively affect the evolution of HCAs. Thus, EEPs are a rather efcient way of improving entrepreneurship-related HCAs (Martin et al., 2013), especially if the EEPs in question use experiential ped- agogical methods (Huber et al., 2014; Unger et al., 2011), where the pupils develop HCAs by experienc- ing a simulation of entrepreneurship (Gibb, 2002). Moreover, Elert et al. (2015) and Unger et al. (2011) have shown that HCAs developed early may lead to successful entrepreneurship outcomes, which are the second part of the human capital theory model (Martin et al., 2013) Research shows that pupils can learn EC (Oost- erbeek et al., 2010; Sánchez, 2013) and mold EA, ESE, and EI (Burnette et al., 2020; Fayolle & Gailly, 2015) through appropriate EEPs. Recent studies show that entrepreneurship-related HCAs can be successfully taught to early adolescents and even to children in early stages of development (Barba- Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2016; Huber et al., 2014), as the research framework of the present study proposes (Fig. 1). 1.1 Hypothesis development 1.1.1 Entrepreneurial intentions Intentions are an expressed belief of a person about a specic future behavior they intend to undertake. EI are either the intent to start a new venture or create new value in existing businesses (Bird, 1988). Boyd and Vozikis (1994), complementing Bird’s description of EI formation, suggested that the shaping of inten- tions depends on how a specic person perceives the world around them and on the results they believe their future actions will bring. EI, therefore, will un- der certain conditions lead to entrepreneurial acts, such as new venture creation (Boyd & Vozikis, 1994). Krueger et al. (2000) dened EI as an individual’s self-perceived likelihood of becoming or their desire to become an entrepreneur. Liñán and Chen (2009) see EI as the rst step in starting a business, but whether or not this results in an actual new startup depends on several factors. They also acknowledge the impor- tance of EEP in forming EI (Liñán & Chen, 2009). Many authors espouse the importance of develop- ing EI during early adolescence or even earlier (Barba- Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2016; Huber et al., 2014). Early adolescence is seemingly the best time to boost non-cognitive skills (Cunha & Heckman, 2007), which could positively impact EI development (Hu- ber et al., 2014). Therefore, EI in pupils can indicate ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 185 their early intention of starting a business (Moberg, 2014). While some studies with children aged 11–12 have not demonstrated higher EI at the end of the EEP (Hassi, 2016; Huber et al., 2014), others have had more positive results. For instance, in a study that included 9th and 10th-graders from Danish lower secondary schools (aged 14–15 and 15–16, respectively), Moberg (2014) demonstrated that EI can be improved even at such a young age. Also, a Spanish primary-school EEP resulted in 8–12-year-old pupils increasing their EI (Barba-Sánchez & Atienza-Sahuquillo, 2016). Research shows that in EEPs, boys usually increase their EI more than girls. While some studies have found no difference in EI development between boys and girls (Hassi, 2016; Huber et al., 2014), others nd that boys develop higher EI than girls (Brüne & Lutz, 2020). For instance, a study by Athayde (2009) demon- strated that male participants developed their EI more than female participants. Pupils from an entrepreneurial family background, meaning one or more members of their immedi- ate family are entrepreneurs, are poised to improve their EI more than the pupils without such a back- ground. Lindquist et al. (2012) demonstrated that nurture is more important than nature. That is, chil- dren adopted into an entrepreneurial family are more likely to become entrepreneurs themselves than the biological children of entrepreneurs adopted by non-entrepreneur parents. Also, Athayde (2009) and Johansen (2016) demonstrated that students taking part in the Junior Achievement mini-company pro- gram whose parents were entrepreneurs developed their EI more than students whose parents were not. The following hypotheses can thus be postulated: H1a. EI in primary-school pupils will improve during an eight-month-long EEP . H1b. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , boys will display higher EI than girls. H1c. During an eight-month-long EEP , boys will improve their EI more than girls. H1d. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , primary- school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will display higher EI than those without an en- trepreneurial family background. H1e. During an eight-month-long EEP , primary-school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will im- prove their EI more than those without an entrepreneurial family background. 1.1.2 Entrepreneurship competences Another entrepreneurship-related HCA that EEPs affect positively is EC. The concept of competence, which an individual needs to be able to complete a task, is seen as a combination of appropriate knowl- edge, skills, and attitudes (Baartman & de Bruijn, 2011). In Europe, EC are one of the eight key compe- tences for lifelong learning (European Commission, 2019). According to Bacigalupo et al. (2016), more Eu- ropeans can face challenges in the present and future successfully if they develop their EC. To help educa- tors teach EC, the European Commission developed the EntreComp entrepreneurship competence model as a combination of context-appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Three competence clusters (Into Action, Resources, Ideas and Opportunities) were formed with ve entrepreneurship competences in each, enabling the would-be entrepreneur to create value for others. EntreComp dened EC on eight mas- tery levels (Bacigalupo et al., 2016). Most research into primary-school EEPs shows that pupils can learn EC. For instance, Palmér and Johansson (2018), who taught EC together with math- ematical competences in a primary school in Sweden, demonstrated that both types of competences had im- proved during the course of such a program. Also, a qualitative study in a Slovenian primary-school EEP evidenced that the participants had improved spe- cic dimensions of EC, such as learning from mistakes and coping with failure (Zupan et al., 2018). Huber et al. (2014) discovered that a ve-day BizWorld pro- gram positively impacted the development of EC. Moreover, Cárcamo-Solís et al. (2017) performed an entrepreneurship experiment where mini companies were created and run by primary-school pupils over several months and observed an improvement in EC. Floris and Pillitu (2019), who studied the learning out- comes of an EEP in a Sardinian rural primary school, also found that such programs can improve certain dimensions of EC, such as creativity, ethical thinking, perseverance, value creation, and teamwork. There has been some research into whether gender plays a crucial part in the evolution of EC in EEPs. On the one hand, some researchers have found that EEPs impact EC development in females differently than males. For instance, Czyzewska and Mroczek (2020) have demonstrated that females perceived lower de- velopment of EC in nance and economics than their male counterparts. However, in nding opportunities , resource management, team management, and risk man- agement, women fared better than males. In the same vein, Armuña et al. (2020) discovered that female students in STEM programs at the university fared better than their male schoolmates at developing the EC dimensions that were not related to nance and 186 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 economics, such as motivation and perseverance. The set of specic EC that both studies found better devel- oped in females than males are also the ones usually taught in primary school as early adolescents do not yet need a detailed knowledge of nance and economics. Another factor that has been shown to play a cru- cial role in EC development is entrepreneurial family background. Lindquist et al. (2012), for instance, have demonstrated that entrepreneurial parents most probably pass on a particular set of EC that are spe- cic for developing and running a business to their children. Moreover, it does not matter whether these children are biological children or adopted, which might mean that role modeling is more important than genetics. Also, Wang et al. (2018) determined that children pick up the needed EC by getting involved in the family business. Consequently, ac- cording to human capital theory, children that have an entrepreneurial family background are much more likely to learn the EC needed to make headway in starting up and running a business (Botha & Taljaard, 2021). The following hypotheses can be set: H2a. EC in primary-school pupils will improve during an eight-month-long EEP . H2b. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , girls will display higher EC than boys. H2c. During an eight-month-long EEP , girls will improve their EC more than boys. H2d. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , primary- school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will display higher EC than those without an en- trepreneurial family background. H2e. During an eight-month-long EEP , primary-school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will im- prove their EC more than those without an entrepreneurial family background. 1.1.3 Attitude towards entrepreneurship Liñán (2004) characterizes EA as the extent to which a person feels positively or negatively about a partic- ular activity. Likewise, Goel et al. (2007) describe EA as a combination of attitudes towards entrepreneurial activities and entrepreneurs. The present study represents EA as an amalgam of individual atti- tudes towards entrepreneurial behavior and towards entrepreneurs. EEPs can positively impact EA at all levels of ed- ucation. Pepin and St-Jean (2019) found that an EEP in Quebec did not signicantly impact the partici- pants’ EA. Athayde (2009), conversely, demonstrated that long-term programs such as the Young Enterprise Entrepreneurship Masterclass program can boost par- ticipants’ EA. In some primary education settings, EEPs have also positively impacted EA development in pupils. For instance, in a Sardinian rural school, Floris and Pillitu (2019) demonstrated that the pupils’ EA improved after participating in an EEP . Simi- larly, Barba-Sánchez and Atienza-Sahuquillo (2016) and Tsakiridou and Stergiou (2014) found that in a Greek and Spanish primary-school setting, respec- tively, EEPs had also had a positive impact on the pupils’ EA. The development of EA during an EEP depends on several factors, and gender is among the most impor- tant ones. Several researchers have found that EEPs will develop more positive EA in male students than in their female counterparts. For instance, Athayde (2009) discovered that male students improved their EA more than female students in her study on the development of students’ EA in a Junior Achievement mini-company EEP . Similarly, Johansen (2016), study- ing the outcomes of the Junior Achievement mini company EEP , also concluded that male students de- velop more positive EA in EEP than female students. Moreover, Adamus et al. (2021) revealed that women in Slovakia held less positive EA than men. Another factor in the development of EA during EEP is the entrepreneurial family background. For example, Carr and Sequeira (2007) found that individ- uals from an entrepreneurial family background held more positive EA than individuals who did not have such a family. Likewise, Fayolle and Gailly (2015) noted that individuals whose parents were involved with startups had a more positive EAthan individuals without such parents. Therefore, the following hypotheses may be posited: H3a. EA in primary-school pupils will improve during an eight-month-long EEP . H3b. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , boys will display higher EA than girls. H3c. During an eight-month-long EEP , boys will improve their EA more than girls. H3d. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , primary- school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will display higher EA than those without an en- trepreneurial family background. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 187 H3e. During an eight-month-long EEP , primary-school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will im- prove their EA more than those without an entrepreneurial family background. 1.1.4 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy Self-efcacy signies a person’s perceived ability to cope with any situation they might have to face (Bandura, 1977, 1982). Moreover, self-efcacy inu- ences a person’s behavior, the way they think, and the emotional states they experience in a situation of uncertainty. Thus, self-efcacy determines the activ- ities a person chooses to perform or avoid and the environmental settings they may select to carry out the given activities (Bandura, 1982). In entrepreneur- ship, Boyd and Vozikis (1994) dene entrepreneurial self-efcacy as how a person assesses internal and external hindrances to getting an entrepreneurial act done successfully. EEPs seem to be an appropriate way of devel- oping ESE at all educational levels (Burnette et al., 2020). Individuals can improve their ESE in an EEP , which may positively affect their career development (Burnette et al., 2020). ESE represents the condence to participate in entrepreneurship activities success- fully (Burnette et al., 2020; Karlsson & Moberg, 2013). Studies have shown that EEPs positively impact ESE development in different geographical locations and diverse educational settings – from Mexico (Cárcamo- Solís et al., 2017) to the Netherlands (Huber et al., 2014) and more. Gender also plays a crucial role in the development of ESE. Research has demonstrated that male partici- pants benet more from EEPs in terms of developed ESE than female participants. Specically, Brüne and Lutz (2020) found that boys advance their ESE more than girls. Similarly, Huber et al. (2014) showed that when done with early adolescents, the effect of EEPs on the evolution of ESE is smaller in girls than in boys. Also, if the parents of the pupils taking part in the EEP are active in entrepreneurship, then the EEP will impact the development of ESE more than if the par- ents are not. Lindquist et al. (2012) demonstrated that parental role modeling increases the probability of children becoming entrepreneurs. Such children are thus more likely to believe in their abilities to perform the entrepreneurial act successfully. What is more, Schoon and Duckworth (2012) also showed that the evolution of ESE corresponded with parents’ activi- ties. For this, the following hypotheses can be drawn: H4a. ESE in primary-school pupils will improve during an eight-month-long EEP . H4b. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , boys will display higher ESE than girls. H4c. During an eight-month-long EEP , boys will improve their ESE more than girls. H4d. At the end of an eight-month-long EEP , primary- school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will display higher ESE than those without an en- trepreneurial family background. H4e. During an eight-month-long EEP , primary-school pupils with an entrepreneurial family background will improve their ESE more than those without an en- trepreneurial family background. 2 Methods In the quasi-experimental design with no control group, changes in the constructs that represented the HCA elements, EI, EC, EA, and ESE, were measured at the beginning and the end of an eight-month-long EEP in primary schools. 2.1 Research setting: Entrepreneurship education programs in primary school The research is based on a longitudinal study of primary-school entrepreneurship clubs that were held in 22 primary schools in Slovenia as part of the Creativity, entrepreneurship, innovation project. The goals of the project were to boost creativity and in- novative spirit in pupils and to develop their EC and ESE. Also, the pupils made contact with the busi- ness world, which allowed them to understand the role entrepreneurship has in society and thus de- velop a positive attitude towards the phenomenon. Finally, the project aimed to encourage entrepreneur- ship among pupils by presenting it as a viable career option. Each entrepreneurship club consisted of at least 10 pupils and met for a minimum of 35 lessons, with each lesson lasting 45 minutes (SPIRIT Slovenija, 2017a). The pupils in the entrepreneurship clubs worked in teams. They were guided to identify authentic problems that people around them had and recog- nize them as opportunities for developing solutions for prospective customers. The pupils talked to the people they were developing the solutions for and understood their needs. The solution would then be prototyped and tested with the customers again. If the prototype tests indicated that iterations were needed, the pupils would change the prototype and test it again. The pupils calculated the expenses they would incur if they wanted to develop their idea into a 188 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 marketable product and assessed the risks involved. Moreover, they were encouraged to prepare some marketing material to promote their solutions. On top of that, the pupils were also encouraged to contact prospective suppliers to manufacture their solution if that was what their business model required (Cankar et al., 2014). The pupils thus used the learning through entrepreneurship approach as described in Gibb (2002). The teachers leading the EEP underwent en- trepreneurship training organized by the SPIRIT Slovenia public agency. By and large, there were two types of training available – With creativity and in- novation to entrepreneurship and Startup Weekend for teachers. The former was a 16-hour training program aimed at developing problem-solving skills in the participating teachers through their interaction with people they were solving the problem for (SPIRIT Slovenija, 2017b). The latter was a three-day startup weekend where the teachers worked to turn their business ideas into reality by understanding the prob- lem they were solving, building a prototype and testing it, and developing a basic business model for it. Teachers worked in teams and pitched their ideas to a panel of entrepreneurs at the end of the startup weekend (SPIRIT Slovenija, 2016). Attending at least one of the training programs was mandatory for the teachers if they were to teach in the EEP . 2.2 Sample and data collection The sample consisted of pupils that voluntarily par- ticipated in the entrepreneurship clubs. In all, 362 pupils underwent the EEP . The participating pupils were asked to ll in a questionnaire in paper form about the self-perceived level of their EI, EC, EA, and ESE at the beginning of the EEP (i.e., PRE question- naires) and the very end of the EEP eight months later (i.e., POST questionnaires). Both the PRE and POST questionnaires were answered by 180 pupils, yielding an approximately 50% response rate. The age of the participants ranged from 9 to 14 years. Most came from two-child families, themselves included. Their average grades were 3.28 out of 5.00, meaning most participants scored school grades of either 3 or 4, which is very similar to C and B grades, respectively. The genders were approximately equally distributed with, 42% boys and 58% girls. Of the entire sample, 47% of the pupils had an en- trepreneurial family background. 2.3 Measures All four constructs representing the distinct compo- nents of entrepreneurship-related HCAs (Dams et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2013) were measured with previ- ously developed measurement scales. All items are presented in Table 1. Where applicable, measures’ re- liabilities were calculated using Cronbach’s Alphas. For some constructs used, Cronbach’s Alphas were slightly below .7, but in a research setting such as ours, where pupils from primary school were the target population and scarce research on such populations exists to date, a lower threshold of .6 was accepted. This is still permitted in exploratory research (Hair et al., 2010). 2.3.1 Entrepreneurial intentions EI were measured with pupils’ opinion of the likelihood of becoming entrepreneurs (Vincett & Far- low, 2008) at the beginning and the end of the entrepreneurship education activity. Repeated mea- sures are a common way to investigate how EEPs impact the development of constructs like EI or ESE (DeGeorge & Fayolle, 2008; Moberg, 2014). 2.3.2 Entrepreneurship competences EC were measured through a set of 18 items that mirrored the 1st-level descriptors of the EntreComp Framework (Bacigalupo et al., 2016). The items had been translated into Slovenian using the translation– back-translation method (Brislin, 1970). The students answered the items on a ve-point Likert scale, which ranged from 1D totally disagree to 5D totally agree. The EC construct was measured with the same items in both the PRE and POST questionnaires. The present study measures EC as an HCA con- struct with four dimensions – Spotting opportunities, Mobilizing others, Motivation and perseverance, and Cop- ing with uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk (Bacigalupo et al., 2016; Morris et al., 2013). The Spotting opportu- nities competence is described as the ability to detect possibilities for value creation that have been over- looked (Bacigalupo et al., 2016; Morris et al., 2013). Mobilizing others is also an important competence for nascent entrepreneurs that enables them to enthuse and marshal the cooperation of other individuals in the pursuit of creating value (Karlsson & Moberg, 2013). Young future entrepreneurs also have to de- velop the competence of Motivation and perseverance, which allows them to keep up with their activities in the face of possible adversity and setbacks (Huber et al., 2014; Morris et al., 2013). Finally, the competence of Coping with uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk is one of the most recognizable competences of entrepreneurs as it enables them to mitigate eventualities that might hinder the activity of value-creation (Bacigalupo et al., 2016; Morris et al., 2013). The entire EC measurement instrument (i.e., 55 items measuring 15 competences within three areas) was pilot tested on a sample of 21 pupils. The test ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 189 Table 1. Scales’ items. SCALES FOR MEASURING HCA CONSTRUCTS ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ACTIVITY What is the likelihood that you will become an entrepreneur? ENTREPRENEURIAL INTENTIONS AT THE END OF THE ACTIVITY What is the likelihood that you will become an entrepreneur now that you have completed this entrepreneurship activity (i.e., startup weekend, workshop, after-school club: : :)? ENTREPRENEURSHIP COMPETENCES Spotting opportunities I can nd opportunities to help others. I can nd different examples of challenges that need solutions. I can nd examples of groups who have beneted from a solution to a given problem. Motivation and perseverance I am driven by the possibility to do or contribute to something that is good for me or for others. I see tasks as challenges to do my best. I can recognize different ways of motivating myself and others to create value. (Level 2) I show passion and willingness to achieve my goals. I do not give up and I can keep going even when facing difculties. Mobilizing others I show enthusiasm for challenges. I can persuade others by providing a number of arguments. (Level 2) I can communicate my ideas clearly to others. Coping with uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk I am not afraid of making mistakes while trying new things. I can identify examples of risks in my surroundings. I can critically evaluate the risks associated with an idea that creates value, taking into account a variety of factors. (Level 3) ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENTREPRENEURSHIP My parents have a positive attitude towards entrepreneurs. I have a positive attitude towards entrepreneurs. In my opinion, society respects successful entrepreneurs. People who have started their own business and have failed should be given a second chance. ENTREPRENEURIAL SELF-EFFICACY I can identify my needs, wants, interests and goals. I can identify things I am good at and things I am not good at. I believe in my ability to do what I am asked successfully. showed the instrument was too long, so a prelim- inary statistical evaluation of the items was done, and feedback on the items was gathered from pupils. Based on their feedback, as well as on low loadings, cross-loadings, and low reliabilities, seven compe- tences were excluded. Cronbach’s Alphas were the following: Spotting opportunities beginning of EEP D .690, Spotting opportunities end of EEP D .794; Motivation and Perseverance beginning of EEP D .719, Motivation and Perse- verance end of EEP D .778; Mobilizing others beginning of EEP D .707, Mobilizing others end of EEP D .593, Coping with un- certainty, ambiguity, and risk beginning of EEP D .682, and Coping with uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk end of EEP D .640. 2.3.3 Attitude towards entrepreneurship Attitude towards entrepreneurship was measured with a four-item measurement scale capturing pupils’ attitudes towards entrepreneurship. Items developed by Liñán and Chen (2009), modied to suit the context of primary school, were applied. Respondents were asked to rate their degree of agreement on a ve-point Likert scale (1D totally disagree, 5D totally agree). Cronbach’s Alpha for EA at the beginning of the EEP was .719; at the end of the EEP , it was .778. 2.3.4 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy ESE was measured as an independent construct as it is an independent component of entrepreneurship- related HCAs (Dams et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2013). Thus, it was measured as such using items based on EntreComp’s descriptors for “self-awareness and self-efcacy”. Respondents were asked to rate to what extent they agreed or disagreed on a ve-point Likert scale (1D totally disagree, 5D totally agree). Cron- bach’s Alpha for ESE at the beginning of the EEP was .661; at the end of the EEP , it was .690. 2.3.5 Gender and entrepreneurial family background The participating pupils also reported their gender, which was subsequently used in our analysis of gen- der differences in the four HCAs (0D girls, 1D boys). In addition, we measured pupils’ entrepreneurial family backgrounds in terms of entrepreneurial ex- periences. We asked pupils to rate whether any of their relatives (i.e., parents, older siblings, uncles, 190 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 Table 2. Mean differences in entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurship competences, attitude towards entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial self- efcacy at the beginning and at the end of entrepreneurship education programs for the entire sample and repeated measures ANOV A statistics. Beginning of End of the activity the activity Mean difference Repeated measures ANOVA Partial Construct of HCA Mean SD Mean SD Mean Std. Error F(1, 179) Sig. Eta squared Entrepreneurial intentions 3.006 1.275 3.070 1.249 0.064 0.098 0.384 .536 .002 Entrepreneurial competences: Spotting opportunities 3.815 0.697 3.946 0.733 0.131 0.031 4.716 .031 .026 Motivation and perseverance 4.080 0.637 4.149 0.618 0.069 0.051 1.859 .174 .010 Mobilizing others 3.671 0.815 3.767 0.729 0.096 0.065 2.183 .141 .012 Coping with uncertainty 3.825 0.706 3.846 0.687 0.022 0.066 0.109 .742 .001 Attitude towards entrepreneurship 3.847 0.702 3.881 0.707 0.034 0.060 0.311 .578 .002 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy 4.228 0.658 4.250 0.660 0.022 0.050 0.194 .660 .001 Note: ND 180; all variables measured on a 5-point Likert scale; SDD standard deviation; df 1 D hypothesis degrees of freedom, df 2 D error degrees of freedom. aunts, cousins, or grandparents) had entrepreneurial experiences. We coded their answers as a binary vari- able (0D no entrepreneurial family, 1D with an entrepreneurial family). 2.4 Statistical procedures of data analysis We ran a conrmatory factor analysis on the HCA constructs of EC, EA, and ESE in IBM AMOS ver- sion 28. Then, we performed a descriptive statistical analysis of the studied constructs and variables. Ta- ble 2 reports mean values and standard deviations as well as mean differences and standard errors for EI, EC, EA, and ESE for the whole sample. Table 3 reports mean values and standard deviations in the HCA constructs at the beginning and the end of the EEP separately for boys and girls and separately for pupils with and without an entrepreneurial family background. In Table 3, we also report the ANOVA results (F-values and p-values) of the differences in HCA constructs among the groups. Then, we sub- jected our data to a repeated measures analysis of variance (rANOVA) to determine whether there were signicant differences in mean values of EI, EC, EA, and ESE at the beginning and the end of the EEP (Table 2, section “Repeated measures ANOVA”) and whether potential differences in mean values were contingent on gender (Table 4) or entrepreneurial families (Table 5). We performed these tests in IBM SPSS version 28. 3 Results Hypothesis H1a predicted that EI would increase for the pupils during the EEP . However, the results reported in Table 2 show no signicant increase in EI at the end of the EEP; rANOVA: F(1, 179)D 0.384, pD .536, !p 2 D .002. Next, we were interested in whether boys would display higher EI at the end of the EEP (H1b) and whether boys would increase their EI more than girls during the EEP (H1c). The results in Table 4 show a signicant difference in EI when gender is considered; rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 6.449, pD .012, !p 2 D .035. Specically, at the beginning of the EEP , boys reported higher EI compared to girls, al- though the difference was not statistically signicant (Table 3: FD 3.027, pD .084), while at the end of the EEP , boys reported signicantly higher EI compared to girls (Table 3: FD 6.667, pD .011). However, across the 8-month EEP , there was no signicant increase in EI either for girls or for boys; Table 4: simple main effect for girls: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 0.000, pD 1.000, !p 2 D 0.000; simple main effect for boys: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 0.919, pD .339,!p 2 D .005. When taking into consideration the entrepreneurial family background (higher EI at the end of the EEP [H1d] and higher improvement in EI during the EEP [H1e] for pupils with an entrepreneurial family background), the results reported in Table 5 show a signicant difference in EI among the two groups; rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 9.987, pD .002, !p 2 D .053. Specically, at the beginning and the end of the EEP , pupils with an entrepreneurial family background reported statistically signicant higher values of EI (Table 3: at the beginning of the EEP: FD 10.262, pD .002, at the end of the EEP: FD 4.593, pD .033). However, neither of the groups of participants in- creased their EI signicantly; Table 5: simple main effect for pupils without an entrepreneurial family background: F(1, 178)D 1.287, pD .258, !p 2 D .007; simple main effect for pupils with entrepreneurial family background: F(1, 178)D 0.115, pD .735,!p 2 D .001). Still, entrepreneurial family background was statistically signicant—Table 5: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 9.987, pD .002, !p 2 D .007—, which evidences that pupils with an entrepreneurial family background displayed higher levels of EI. This leads us to accept H1c and H1d, while there are no substantial grounds for accepting H1a, H1b, and H1e. Refer also to Figs. 2 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 191 Table 3. Mean differences in entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurship competences, attitude towards entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurial self-efcacy at the beginning and at the end of entrepreneurship education programs based on gender and entrepreneurial family. Mean values (SD) Beginning of the EEP Mean values (SD) End of the EEP Mean difference for gender (std. error), F-value, sig. Mean values (SD) Beginning of the EEP Mean values (SD) End of the EEP Mean difference for entrepreneurial background (std. error), F-value, sig. Construct of HCA Girls Boys Girls Boys Beginning of the EEP End of the EEP No en- trepreneurial family With entrepreneurial family No entrepreneurial family With entrepreneurial family Beginning of the EEP End of the EEP Entrepreneurial intentions 2.867 (1.256) 3.200 (1.284) 2.867 (1.287) 3.347 (1.145) 0.334 (0.192), FD 3.027, pD .084 0.480 (0.186), FD 6.667, pD .011 2.740 (1.160) 3.338 (1.340) 2.890 (1.230) 3.290 (1.245) 0.597 (0.186), FD 10.262, pD .002 0.398 (0.185), FD 4.593, pD .033 Entrepreneurial competences: Spotting opportunities 3.859 (0.684) 3.753 (0.714) 4.057 (0.703) 3.791 (0.751) 0.107 (0.105), FD 1.025, pD .313 0.266 (0.109), FD 5.916, pD .016 3.811 (0.673) 3.820 (0.730) 3.927 (0.748) 3.971 (0.718) 0.009 (0.105), FD 0.008, pD .930 0.044 (0.110), FD 0.160, pD .689 Motivation and perseverance 4.138 (0.598) 3.998 (0.683) 4.238 (0.599) 4.024 (0.626) 0.140 (0.096), FD 2.131, pD .146 0.214 (0.092), FD 5.375, pD .022 4.036 (0.635) 4.134 (0.638) 4.164 (0.656) 4.130 (0.571) 0.098 (0.095), FD 1.054, pD .306 0.034 (0.093), FD 0.134, pD .715 Mobilizing others 3.746 (0.732) 3.565 (0.914) 3.819 (0.713) 3.693 (0.749) 0.182 (0.123), FD 2.188, pD .141 0.126 (0.110), FD 1.304, pD .255 3.557 (0.848) 3.813 (0.753) 3.743 (0.744) 3.796 (0.713) 0.256 (0.121), FD 4.465, pD .036 0.053 (0.110), FD 0.230, pD .632 Coping with uncertainty 3.831 (0.643) 3.815 (0.790) 3.863 (0.677) 3.822 (0.705) 0.016 (0.107), FD 0.022, pD .881 0.041 (0.104), FD 0.157, pD .692 3.801 (0.744) 3.854 (0.659) 3.800 (0.703) 3.904 (0.667) 0.053 (0.106), FD 0.245, pD .621 0.104 (0.103), FD 1.021, pD .314 Attitude towards entrepreneurship 3.851 (0.661) 3.842 (0.760) 3.886 (0.681) 3.873 (0.746) 0.009 (0.106), FD 0.008, pD .930 0.012 (0.107), FD 0.013, pD .908 3.738 (0.711) 3.983 (0.669) 3.778 (0.741) 4.009 (0.643) 0.245 (0.104), FD 5.574, pD .019 0.232 (0.105), FD 4.887, pD .028 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy 4.248 (0.685) 4.200 (0.622) 4.343 (0.636) 4.120 (0.675) 0.048 (0.100), FD 0.229, pD .633 0.223 (0.099), FD 5.103, pD .025 4.201 (0.667) 4.261 (0.648) 4.233 (0.691) 4.271 (0.623) 0.060 (0.099), FD 0.369, pD .545 0.037 (0.099), FD 0.143, pD .706 Note: ND 180, of which 105 respondents are girls and 75 respondents are boys; 100 respondents have one or more entrepreneurial family members, and 80 respondents do not have any entrepreneurial family members. Codes: girlsD 0, boysD 1; no entrepreneurial family member(s)D 0, entrepreneurial family member(s)D 1. Degrees of freedomD 178. SDD standard deviation. All variables measured on a 5-point Likert scale. 192 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 Table 4. Repeated measures ANOV A for entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurship competences, attitude towards entrepreneurship, and en- trepreneurial self-efcacy at the beginning and at the end of entrepreneurship education programs based on gender. Human capital assets F(1, 178) Sig. Partial Eta squared Human capital assets F(1, 178) Sig. Partial Eta squared Entrepreneurial intentions / rANOV A / Gender 6.449 .012 .035 / Time 0.536 .465 .003 / Gender*Time 0.537 .465 .003 / Simple Main Effects / Time–Girls 0.000 1.000 .000 / Time–Boys 0.919 .339 .005 / Entrepreneurial competences Spotting opportunities Motivation and perseverance rANOV A rANOV A Gender 4.467 .036 .024 Gender 5.060 .026 .028 Time 3.720 .055 .020 Time 1.496 .223 .008 Gender*Time 1.690 .195 .009 Gender*Time 0.514 .474 .003 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–Girls 6.255 .013 .034 Time–Girls 2.258 .135 .013 Time–Boys 0.169 .681 .001 Time–Boys 0.110 .741 .001 Mobilizing others Coping with uncertainty rANOV A rANOV A Gender 2.559 .111 .014 Gender 0.123 .726 .001 Time 2.322 .129 .013 Time 0.086 .770 .000 Gender*Time 0.179 .673 .001 Gender*Time 0.035 .851 .000 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–Girls 0.727 .395 .004 Time–Girls 0.139 .710 .001 Time–Boys 1.624 .204 .009 Time–Boys 0.005 .945 .000 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy Attitude towards entrepreneurship rANOV A rANOV A Gender 2.505 .115 .014 Gender 0.015 .901 .000 Time 0.021 .884 .000 Time 0.296 .587 .002 Gender*Time 3.036 .083 .017 Gender*Time 0.001 .981 .000 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–Girls 2.139 .145 .012 Time–Girls 0.194 .660 .001 Time–Boys 1.092 .297 .006 Time–Boys 0.116 .734 .001 and 3 for a graphical representation of the signicant results regarding EI analyses. In the second set of hypotheses testing, we investi- gated changes in EC from the beginning to the end of the EEP for the whole sample (H2a) and subsets of the sample broken down by gender (H2b and H2c) and entrepreneurial family background (H2d and H2e). We ran the analysis on each of the four dimensions 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 BeforeEEP AfterEEP s n o i t n e t n i l a i r u e n e r p e r t n E Girls Boys Fig. 2. Graphic representation of the evolution of EI during the duration of the EEP relative to gender. ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 193 Table 5. Repeated measures ANOV A for entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurship competences, attitude towards entrepreneurship, and en- trepreneurial self-efcacy at the beginning and at the end of entrepreneurship education programs based on entrepreneurial family. Human capital assets F(1, 178) Sig. Eta squared Human capital assets F(1, 178) Sig. Eta squared Entrepreneurial intentions / rANOV A / Entrepreneurial family 9.987 .002 .053 / Time 0.254 .615 .001 / Entrepreneurial family*Time 1.018 .314 .006 / Simple Main Effects / Time–No entrepreneurial family 1.287 .258 .007 / Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.115 .735 .001 / Entrepreneurial competences Spotting opportunities Motivation and perseverance rANOV A rANOV A Entrepreneurial family 0.091 .764 .001 Entrepreneurial family 0.163 .687 .001 Time 4.772 .030 .026 Time 1.474 .226 .008 Entrepreneurial family*Time 0.082 .775 .000 Entrepreneurial family*Time 1.669 .198 .009 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–No entrepreneurial family 2.026 .156 .011 Time–No entrepreneurial family 3.532 .062 .019 Time–With entrepreneurial family 2.748 .099 .015 Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.003 .958 .000 Mobilizing others Coping with uncertainty rANOV A rANOV A Entrepreneurial family 2.617 .107 .014 Entrepreneurial family 0.940 .334 .005 Time 1.692 .195 .009 Time 0.137 .711 .001 Entrepreneurial family*Time 2.432 .121 .013 Entrepreneurial family*Time 0.151 .698 .001 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–No entrepreneurial family 4.602 .033 .025 Time–No entrepreneurial family 0.000 .989 .000 Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.030 .862 .000 Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.259 .611 .001 Entrepreneurial self-efcacy Attitude towards entrepreneurship rANOV A rANOV A Entrepreneurial family 0.326 .568 .002 Entrepreneurial family 7.885 .006 .042 Time 0.169 .681 .001 Time 0.292 .590 .002 Entrepreneurial family*Time 0.050 .823 .000 Entrepreneurial family*Time 0.013 .911 .000 Simple Main Effects Simple Main Effects Time–No entrepreneurial family 0.227 .634 .001 Time–No entrepreneurial family 0.239 .625 .001 Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.016 .900 .000 Time–With entrepreneurial family 0.083 .774 .000 of EC separately. When investigating the whole sam- ple, only the EC dimension of Spotting opportunities yielded signicant changes across time as seen from results reported in Table 2; rANOVA: F(1, 179)D 4.716, pD .031, !p 2 D .026. When controlling the reported values of EC dimensions and their changes over time for gender, we uncovered that there were differences in two EC dimensions (see Tables 3 and 4). First, the 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 BeforeEEP AfterEEP s n o i t n e t n i l a i r u e n e r p e r t n E NoEnt.Background WithEnt.Background Fig. 3. Graphic representation of the evolution of EI during the duration of the EEP relative to entrepreneurial family background. 194 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 BeforeEEP AfterEEP Spottingopportunities Girls Boys Fig. 4. Graphic representation of the evolution of EC—Spotting opportunities during the duration of the EEP relative to gender. dimension of Spotting opportunities yielded a signif- icant increase across time for girls but not for boys; Table 4: simple main effect for girls: F(1, 178)D 6.255, pD .013, !p 2 D .034; simple main effect for boys: F(1, 178)D 0.169, pD .681, !p 2 D .001. Moreover, girls reported a higher value for the Spotting oppor- tunities dimension compared to boys at the end of the EEP (Table 3: FD 5.916, pD .016), and they also improved the EC dimension more than boys through the course of the EEP; Table 4: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 4.467, pD .036,!p 2 D .024. The second EC dimension that demonstrated gender differences was Motivation and perseverance—rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 5.060, pD .026,!p 2 D .028—, where girls displayed signicantly higher values compared to boys (Table 3: FD 5.375, pD .022), although there were no statistically signi- cant increases in Motivation and perseverance either for girls or for boys separately through the course of the EEP; simple main effect for girls: F(1, 178)D 2.258, pD .135,!p 2 D .013; simple main effect for boys: F(1, 178)D 0.110, pD .741,!p 2 D .001. There were also differences in changes across time in some EC dimensions when considering en- trepreneurial family background. Yet, no statistically signicant differences were detected in the value of the reported EC dimensions between the two groups at the end of the EEP (see Tables 3 and 5). The EC dimension of Spotting opportunities demonstrated an effect of time, meaning that the differences among the levels of Spotting opportunities between the two groups remained almost the same, yet for both groups, there was an increase in the level of Spotting opportunities; F(1, 178)D 4.772, pD .030,!p 2 D .026. Based on these results, we can only partly accept H2a, H2b, H2c, and H2e. Namely, only some EC dimensions increased from the beginning to the end of the EEP and only in some of the EC dimensions did girls report higher values compared to boys at the end of the EEP . We must reject H2d because none of the EC dimensions were signicantly higher at the end of the EEP for pupils with an entrepreneurial family background. See Figs. 4 and 5 for a graphical representation of the EC analyses results. The third set of hypotheses that we tested were about the improvement of EA in the course of an eight-month EEP for primary-school pupils in gen- eral (H3a). The hypotheses were separately tested for boys and girls (H3c) and for pupils with or without an entrepreneurial family background (H3e). In ad- dition, we tested the differences in the displayed EA at the end of the EEP for the two pairs of groups of pupils under study (H3b and H3d). First, the results reported in Table 2 show no signicant increase of EA for the whole sample of pupils taking part in the eight-month EEP; rANOVA: F(1, 179)D 0.311, pD .578, !p 2 D .002). There was also no effect of gender on the level of EA; Table 4: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 0.015, pD .901. However, there were signicant effects of the entrepreneurial family background—Table 5: rANOVA: F(1, 178)D 7.885, pD .006, !p 2 D .042—, which evidenced that pupils with an entrepreneurial family background displayed higher EA at the be- ginning and at the end of the EEP (Table 3: at the end of the EEP: FD 4.887, pD .028). However, there was no signicant increase of EA over time for ei- ther of the groups: pupils with no entrepreneurial family background—simple main effect: F(1, 178)D 0.239, pD .625, !p 2 D .0001—and pupils with an entrepreneurial family background—simple main ef- fect: F(1, 178)D 0.083, pD .774, !p 2 D .000). This ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 195 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 BeforeEEP AfterEEP e c n a r e v e s r e p d n a n o i t a v i t o M Girls Boys Fig. 5. Graphic representation of the evolution of EC—Motivation and perseverance during the duration of the EEP relative to gender. leads us to accept H3d, while there is no ground for accepting H3a, H3b, H3c, and H3e. Refer to Fig. 6 for a graphical representation of the signicant results regarding EA analyses. The nal set of hypotheses dealt with the possible improvement of ESE in the course of an eight-month EEP for primary-school pupils in general (H4a). Boys and girls (H4c) and pupils with and without an entrepreneurial family background (H4e) were also tested for differences. We also investigated the differ- ences in reported ESE at the end of the EEP for the two pairs of groups (H4b and H4d). As seen in Table 2, there is no signicant change in the level of ESE in the course of the EEP for the entire sample; rANOVA: F(1, 179)D 0.194, pD .660, !p 2 D .001. However, Ta- ble 3 shows a signicant difference in the level of ESE among boys and girls at the end of the EEP (FD 5.103, pD .025), with girls reporting signicantly higher ESE at the end of the EEP . However, during the EEP nei- ther girls nor boys increased their ESE signicantly. When investigating the groups of pupils with and without an entrepreneurial family background, we could not conrm any statistically signicant changes throughout the EEP or in the value of ESE at the end of the EEP . These results lead us to the conclusion that there are no grounds for accepting H4a, H4b, H4c, H4d, or H4e. Refer to Fig. 7 for a graphical representa- tion of the signicant results regarding ESE analyses. 4 Discussion According to the European Commission (2016), every young European should benet from at least one business experience before their mandatory 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 BeforeEEP AfterEEP p i h s r u e n e r p e r t n e s d r a w o t e d u t i t t A Noentrepreneurialbackground Withentrepreneurialbackground Fig. 6. Graphic representation of the evolution of EA during the duration of the EEP relative to entrepreneurial family background. 196 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Before EEP Aer EEP Girls Boys Fig. 7. Graphic representation of the evolution of ESE during the duration of the EEP relative to gender. education ends. Considering that the number of EEPs in primary schools is growing (Kourilsky & Carl- son, 1996; Rosário et al., 2014), the development of entrepreneurship-related HCAs remains surprisingly underresearched (Liguori et al., 2019). Conceptualiz- ing entrepreneurship-related HCAs and assessing the effect EEPs have on their evolution in younger adoles- cents is thus an essential undertaking. The goal of the present study was thus to concep- tualize the components of entrepreneurship-related HCAs and investigate the role that EEPs play in their evolution (Dams et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2013). The data analysis has shown that girls benetted most from the EEP in terms of developed EC and ESE com- pared to boys, while boys improved EI signicantly more than girls. At the same time, pupils with an en- trepreneurial family background developed EC more than pupils without such a background, and they also developed higher EAand EI. The present study brings theoretical and practical contributions, as discussed below. 4.1 Theoretical contributions The present study employs human capital the- ory to explain how the proposed components of entrepreneurship-related HCAs, namely EI, EC, EA, and ESE, develop in primary-school EEPs. Thus, we gain insight into the evolution of HCAs in early adolescents, which has largely been absent in exist- ing research on primary-school EEPs. The concept of entrepreneurship-related HCAs contributes to un- derstanding the development of task-specic human capital in primary-school pupils. This contribution thus adds to the ongoing debate on how human capi- tal is formed and maintained in early adolescents and beyond. The present study shows that the four measured constructs comprising entrepreneurship-related HCAs evolved in such a way that only one of the HCA components increased signicantly for the whole sample. However, different subsets developed HCAs differently. First, the EI component of HCAs increased for the boys while it remained the same for the girls. Other authors have also observed that males usually develop higher EI than women, regardless of geographical setting (Burnette et al., 2020). This phenomenon may be because early adolescent girls possess greater self-discipline than boys, which often leads to higher grades in school (Duckworth & Seligman, 2006). Girls usually have greater career aspirations and are more ambitious than boys as they aim for professional and managerial jobs (Ashby & Schoon, 2010; Francis, 2002). Girls are also usually more risk-averse than boys (Brüne & Lutz, 2020). Since better grades commonly lead to a better choice of secondary schools, girls tend to focus more on their academic performance and less on evolving their HCAs in extra-curricular activities. Such activities do not bring extra credits for entering secondary school. However, boys seem more attracted to careers that will put them up against challenges (Ashby & Schoon, 2010). Pupils from entrepreneurial families demonstrated higher EI at the beginning and the end of the EEP than those without an entrepreneurial back- ground. It is interesting, however, that their EI signicantly decreased through the EEP . While the phenomenon of higher EI is in line with the study by ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 197 Lindquist et al. (2012), who noted that entrepreneurial parents have entrepreneurial children because of role modeling, not because of their genes, an actual de- crease in EI comes somewhat as a surprise. However, it is in line with the results of a study by Fayolle and Gailly (2015), who discovered that EEP partici- pants with previous exposure to entrepreneurship— which holds for pupils with an entrepreneurial family background—were more alert to the risks of en- trepreneurship that appeared during the EEP and thus less inclined to follow the career path of self- employment. EC is another measured entrepreneurship-related HCA component that only increased in one of the dimensions for the whole sample, Spotting opportu- nities. These ndings regarding EC are inconsistent with Huber et al. (2014), who observed signicant increases in most dimensions of EC among partici- pants of EEPs. The results also do not correspond with Moberg (2014), who found that experiential EEPs fos- ter improved EC. However, when the results were explored separately for boys and girls, some of the EC dimensions (Spotting opportunities, Motivation and per- severance) were shown to have improved signicantly more for girls than for boys during the EEP . Several other researchers have observed that female students usually develop the particular dimensions of EC that are not connected to economy and nance more than male students (Armuña et al., 2020; Czyzewska & Mroczek, 2020). The analysis of the third component of HCAs, namely EA, showed it had not increased signicantly for the whole sample or any subset. The results dif- fer from what Athayde (2009) and Johansen (2016) discovered. Both measured the impact of the Ju- nior Achievement mini-company program on the development of EA. Their studies showed that the construct had improved signicantly more in male than female students. However, the participants were late adolescents or young adults, which differs from the present study. When studied through the lens of entrepreneurial family background, the present re- search corresponds with Fayolle and Gailly (2015) and Carr and Sequeira (2007). They found that EA had improved more for pupils with an entrepreneurial family background than their counterparts with no such family background. This may be attributed to the impact of parent role modeling, which is all- important for the evolution of EA and EI (Lindquist et al., 2012). When investigating the evolution of the fourth HCA component, ESE, the analysis showed no sig- nicant development for the whole group. However, this only tells part of the story. After controlling for gender, results showed that boys had decreased their ESE signicantly, not increased as had been hypoth- esized. Girls, on the other hand, had increased their ESE. Such ndings differ from Brüne and Lutz (2020), who found that women had improved their ESE less during the studied EEP than their male counterparts. The study thus contributes to the understanding and the broadening of the view on human capi- tal theory and its implementation in primary-school entrepreneurship education programs. A particular contribution to understanding human capital theory is that the present study formulates entrepreneurship- related HCAs with four components. The fact that EC, one of the elements of entrepreneurship-related HCAs, is also one of the key competences for lifelong learning (European Commission, 2019), and taking into consideration the importance of developing hu- man capital in an individual’s early years (Cunha & Heckman, 2007), highlights the urgency of re- searching this aspect of the human capital theory. The study demonstrates that the evolution of the entrepreneurship-related HCA components of EI, EC, EA, and ESE goes hand in hand with EEPs. 4.2 Practical implications Additionally, the study also has implications for practitioners of entrepreneurship education in pri- mary school, as well as researchers of entrepreneur- ship education. It empirically tests the possibility of developing entrepreneurship-related HCAs in early adolescents in the nal years of primary school. It also investigates the impact of EEPs based on expe- riential pedagogical methods, which seemingly hold great promise for developing HCAs. The ndings show that more effort should be made to develop entrepreneurship-related HCAs in primary school. The results demonstrate that HCAs can develop for certain groups, such as EI for boys and partly EC for girls and pupils with an entrepreneurial family background. However, the study also highlights the need to make self-employment more attractive for girls. The results specically demonstrate that boys have a higher propensity to develop their EI and that girls are on the losing end regarding this component of entrepreneurship-related HCAs. Conversely, boys are the ones that fall short when it comes to developing EA and ESE. Because men are more prone to start a business than women as it is (Burnette et al., 2020), practitioners should pay extra care to tailor the EEP methods in such a way that girls and boys would benet more when it comes to developing particular components of HCAs. The study also demonstrates differences between pupils with an entrepreneurial family background 198 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 and those without one. As expected, pupils with an entrepreneurial family background had higher EI, just as they had developed their EC better (Lindquist et al., 2012). Practitioners should pay special attention to how the HCAs of pupils with no entrepreneurial background evolve as it would not make much sense to get them involved in an EEP only to witness no positive development of HCAs. 4.3 Limitations Some limitations have been identied in the present study. Firstly, while the teachers in the EEP had under- gone some entrepreneurship training, information on how much training specic teachers had received was unavailable. A difference in the level of competence individual teachers possessed might have affected the results in disparate EEPs. Secondly, many of the participants failed to ll in the POST questionnaire, leading to a 50% churn. This fact may have caused the loss of valuable information as the participating pupils might not reliably represent the characteris- tics of the entire population. Thirdly, the participants elected to join the EEP of their own volition, which might have slanted the results towards a more favor- able position than a random sampling would have done. Fourthly, data on how the teachers carried out individual EEP lessons were unavailable. There may have been differences between schools in the length of individual sessions and the pedagogical methods used in the EEP , which could partly have affected the results. Additionally, we do not possess data on how the teachers were picked to mentor the EEP . Teach- ers mentoring EEPs not of their own will but by at could skew the results unfavorably. And nally, while the questionnaire for EC based on EntreComp was scientically validated, it might still be too abstract for early adolescents. It is recommended that future researchers develop a questionnaire tailor-made for 9–14-year-olds, so they could answer it without any misunderstandings. 4.4 Further research There are several new avenues this study opens for future researchers. Firstly, the present study shows how the disparate components of entrepreneurship- related HCAs, namely EI, EC, EA, and ESE, develop in a quasi-experimental design with no control group and no randomization. Future researchers could ran- domly sample participants from an EEP and create a control group to mitigate the threat to internal valid- ity. Also, researchers could collect data on how much training the teachers had, how they were picked to teach in an EEP , what pedagogical methods and class- room setup they used in their EEP , and how long each EEP session was. Secondly, researchers could investigate how indi- vidual HCA components form. For instance, the- ory postulates that ESE, one of the components of entrepreneurship-related HCAs, could be enhanced through mastery, vicarious experience, verbal per- suasion, and emotional and physiological states (Bandura, 1982). For instance, having a young en- trepreneur mentor that regularly shares experience and knowledge gained in their entrepreneurial en- deavor could be a way to increase ESE through vicarious experience. Additional research could in- vestigate how EEPs foster ESE through the four enhancement sources and further broaden the under- standing of human capital theory in the context of early adolescents. Finally, theory shows that learners enhance their overall belief in their abilities by following their role models (Fayolle & Gailly, 2015). For instance, living in an entrepreneurial family and having daily exposure to an entrepreneurial environment can be considered prior experience with entrepreneurship, which posi- tively affects the development of the HCA component of EA. Future research could explore what shapes EA in early adolescents, which could be addressed in EEPs tailored for them. EEPs could be designed to promote the development of EA and other HCA components through the role modeling of teachers, entrepreneurs, and entrepreneurial family members associated with an EEP (Fayolle & Gailly, 2015). Future research could examine how role models in- uence the development of each HCA component. 5 Conclusion The present study provides a better understand- ing of the application of human capital theory for pupils engaged in EEPs. Thus, we investigated the development of HCAs for primary school pupils in an eight-month EEP . PRE and POST evalua- tions measured the EEP outcomes to monitor HCA development. The results showed that overall, participants had signicantly increased some dimensions of EC; boys had increased EI, and girls had partly improved their EC and ESE. In addition, participants from en- trepreneurial families demonstrated higher EI and EA and partly improved EC. These results are consistent with studies by other authors who have investigated these constructs (Athayde, 2009; Burnette et al., 2020; Johansen, 2016). Broadly speaking, the ndings of the present study provide several opportunities for future research to better understand what outcomes can be expected ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 199 from an EEP , depending on the setting of the EEP , its duration, and whether the majority of partic- ipants are from entrepreneurial families. Research on entrepreneurship education is crucial for inform- ing practitioners and policymakers and providing new insights into primary school EEPs with early- adolescent participants. Funding This research has been supported by the Slovenian Research Agency (Core Project Funding J5-4574 and P5-0441). Conict of interest declaration statement All authors certify that they have no afliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any nancial interest or non-nancial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript. References Adamus, M., ˇ Cavojová, V ., & Šrol, J. (2021). The impact of stereo- typed perceptions of entrepreneurship and gender-role orien- tation on Slovak women’s entrepreneurial intentions. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 36(6), 745–761. https:// doi.org/10.1108/GM-06-2020-0179 Armuña, C., Ramos, S., Juan, J., Feijóo, C., & Arenal, A. (2020). From stand-up to start-up: Exploring entrepreneurship competences and STEM women’s intention. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(1), 69–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11365-019-00627-z Ashby, J. S., & Schoon, I. (2010). Career success: The role of teenage career aspirations, ambition value and gender in predicting adult social status and earnings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(3), 350–360. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.06.006 Athayde, R. (2009). Measuring enterprise potential in young peo- ple. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2), 481–501. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00300.x Baartman, L. K. J., & de Bruijn, E. (2011). Integrating knowledge, skills and attitudes: Conceptualising learning processes to- wards vocational competence. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.03.001 Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P ., Punie, Y., & Van den Brande, G. (2016). EntreComp: The Entrepreneurship Competence Framework. Joint Research Centre. https://doi.org/10.2791/593884 Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efcacy: Toward a unifying theory of be- havioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https:// doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efcacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0003-066X.37.2.122 Bandura, A. (2006). Adolescent development from an agentic per- spective. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efcacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 1–43). Information Age Publishing. Barba-Sánchez, V ., & Atienza-Sahuquillo, C. (2016). The develop- ment of entrepreneurship at school: The Spanish experience. Ed- ucation + Training, 58(7/8), 783–796. https://doi.org/10.1108/ ET-01-2016-0021 Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. Bird, B. (1988). Implementing entrepreneurial ideas: The case for in- tention. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 442–453. https:// doi.org/10.2307/258091 Botha, M., & Taljaard, A. (2021). Exploring the entrepreneurial intention–competency model for nascent entrepreneurs: In- sights from a developing country context. Frontiers in Psy- chology, 12, Article 516120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021 .516120 Boyd, N. G., & Vozikis, G. S. (1994). The inuence of self-efcacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. En- trepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(4), 63–77. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/104225879401800404 Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. Brüne, N., & Lutz, E. (2020). The effect of entrepreneurship ed- ucation in schools on entrepreneurial outcomes: A systematic review. Management Review Quarterly, 70(2), 275–305. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11301-019-00168-3 Burnette, J. L., Pollack, J. M., Forsyth, R. B., Hoyt, C. L., Babij, A. D., Thomas, F. N., & Coy, A. E. (2020). A growth mindset intervention: Enhancing students’ entrepreneurial self-efcacy and career development. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 44(5), 878–908. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719864293 Cankar, F., Sentoˇ cnik, S., Zupan, B., Deutsch, T., Likar, B., Kolenko, M., & Trampuš, M. (2014). Program osnovna šola: Z ustvarjalnostjo in inovativnostjo do podjetnosti [Primary school program: With creativity and innovation to entrepreneur- ship]. SPIRIT Slovenija. https://www.spiritslovenia.si/ resources/les/doc/javni_razpisi/RAZPISI_2016/631/ Metodologija_programa_ZUIP.pdf Cárcamo-Solís, M. D. L., Arroyo-López, M. D. P ., Alvarez-Castañón, L. D. C., & García-López, E. (2017). Developing entrepreneur- ship in primary schools. The Mexican experience of “My rst enterprise: Entrepreneurship by playing”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02 .013 Carr, J. C., & Sequeira, J. M. (2007). Prior family business expo- sure as intergenerational inuence and entrepreneurial intent: A Theory of Planned Behavior approach. Journal of Business Research, 60(10), 1090–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres .2006.12.016 Cunha, F., & Heckman, J. (2007). The technology of skill forma- tion. American Economic Review, 97(2), 31–47. https://doi.org/ 10.1257/aer.97.2.31 Czyzewska, M., & Mroczek, T. (2020). Data mining in en- trepreneurial competencies diagnosis. Education Sciences, 10(8), Article 196. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10080196 Dams, C., Sarria Allende, V ., Cornejo, M., Pasquini, R. A., & Robiolo, G. (2021). Impact of accelerators, as education & training programs, on female entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 12(3), 329–362. https://doi.org/10.1515/erj -2020-0306 DeGeorge, J. M., & Fayolle, A. (2008). Is entrepreneurial intention stable through time? First insights from a sample of French stu- dents. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 5(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2008.015951 Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achieve- ment test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 198–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.198 Elert, N., Andersson, F. W., & Wennberg, K. (2015). The impact of entrepreneurship education in high school on long-term entrepreneurial performance. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 111, 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2014 .12.020 European Commission. (2016). Entrepreneurship education at school in Europe. Eurydice Report. Publications Ofce of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2797/301610 European Commission (2019). Key competences for lifelong learning. Publications Ofce of the European Union. https://doi.org/10 .2766/291008 Fayolle, A., & Gailly, B. (2015). The impact of entrepreneur- ship education on entrepreneurial attitudes and intention: 200 ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 Hysteresis and persistence. Journal of Small Business Manage- ment, 53(1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12065 Fellnhofer, K. (2019). Toward a taxonomy of entrepreneurship education research literature: A bibliometric mapping and vi- sualization. Educational Research Review, 27, 28–55. https://doi .org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.10.002 Floris, M., & Pillitu, D. (2019). Improving entrepreneurship educa- tion in primary schools: A pioneer project. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(6), 1148–1169. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/IJEM-09-2018-0283 Francis, B. (2002). Is the future really female? The impact and im- plications of gender for 14-16 year olds’ career choices. Journal of Education and Work, 15(1), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13639080120106730 Gibb, A. (2002). In pursuit of a new “enterprise” and “entrepreneur- ship” paradigm for learning: Creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of knowl- edge. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3), 233–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2370.00086 Goel, A., Vohra, N., Zhang, L., & Arora, B. (2007). Attitudes of the youth towards entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship: A cross-cultural comparison of India and China. Journal of Asia Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, 3(1), 29–63. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Mul- tivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice-Hall. Hassi, A. (2016). Effectiveness of early entrepreneurship education at the primary school level: Evidence from a eld research in Morocco. Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 15(2), 83– 103. https://doi.org/10.1177/2047173416650448 Heckman, J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor Economics, 24(3), 411–482. https://doi .org/10.1086/504455 Huber, L. R., Sloof, R., & Van Praag, M. (2014). The effect of early entrepreneurship education: Evidence from a eld experiment. European Economic Review, 72, 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.euroecorev.2014.09.002 Johansen, V . (2016). Gender and self-employment: The role of mini- companies. Education and Training, 58(2), 150–163. https://doi .org/10.1108/ET-06-2015-0051 Karlsson, T., & Moberg, K. (2013). Improving perceived en- trepreneurial abilities through education: Exploratory testing of an entrepreneurial self efcacy scale in a pre-post setting. The International Journal of Management Education, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2012.10.001 Kourilsky, M. L., & Carlson, S. R. (1996). Mini-Society and Yess! learning theory in action. Citizenship, Social and Economics Education, 1(2), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.2304/csee.1996.1.2 .105 Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Ven- turing, 15(5), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98) 00033-0 Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship edu- cation: Development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1111/j .1540-6520.2005.00099.x Lazarides, R., Dicke, A.-L., Rubach, C., & Eccles, J. S. (2020). Proles of motivational beliefs in math: Exploring their development, relations to student-perceived classroom characteristics, and impact on future career aspirations and choices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(1), 70–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/ edu0000368 Liguori, E., Corbin, R., Lackeus, M., & Solomon, S. J. (2019). Under-researched domains in entrepreneurship and enterprise education: Primary school, community colleges and vocational education and training programs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 182–189. https://doi.org/10 .1108/JSBED-04-2019-402 Liñán, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship edu- cation. Piccola Impresa /Small Business, 2004(3), 11–35. Liñán, F., & Chen, Y. W. (2009). Development and cross–cultural application of a specic instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 593–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00318.x Lindquist, M. J., Sol, J., & Van Praag, M. (2012). Why do en- trepreneurial parents have entrepreneurial children? Journal of Labor Economics, 33(2), 269–296. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn .2101543 Martin, B. C., McNally, J. J., & Kay, M. J. (2013). Examining the for- mation of human capital in entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of entrepreneurship education outcomes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent .2012.03.002 Martínez-Gregorio, S., Badenes-Ribera, L., & Oliver, A. (2021). Effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship in- tention and related outcomes in educational contexts: A meta- analysis. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(3), Article 100545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100545 Mincer, J. (1958). Investment in human capital and personal income distribution. Journal of Political Economy, 66(4), 281–302. https:// doi.org/10.1086/258055 Moberg, K. (2014). Two approaches to entrepreneurship education: The different effects of education for and through entrepreneur- ship at the lower secondary level. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(3), 512–528. https://doi.org/10 .1016/j.ijme.2014.05.002 Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., Fu, J., & Singhal, S. (2013). A competency-based perspective on entrepreneurship education: Conceptual and empirical insights. Journal of Small Busi- ness Management, 51(3), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm .12023 Oosterbeek, H., Van Praag, M., & Ijsselstein, A. (2010). The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurship skills and motivation. European Economic Review, 54(3), 442–454. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.08.002 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD. Palmér, H., & Johansson, M. (2018). Combining entrepreneurship and mathematics in primary school—What happens? Education Inquiry, 9(4), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018 .1461497 Pepin, M., & St-Jean, E. (2019). Assessing the impacts of school en- trepreneurial initiatives: A quasi-experiment at the elementary school level. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 26(2), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-07-2018-0224 Rosário, P ., Pereira, A., Núñez, J. C., Cunha, J., Fuentes, S., Polydoro, S., Gaeta, M., & Fernández, E. (2014). An explanatory model of the intention to continue studying among non-traditional university students. Psicothema, 26(1), 84–90. https://doi.org/ 10.7334/psicothema2013.176 Sánchez, J. C. (2013). The impact of an entrepreneurship educa- tion program on entrepreneurial competencies and intention. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 447–465. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12025 Schoon, I., & Duckworth, K. (2012). Who becomes an entrepreneur? Early life experiences as predictors of entrepreneurship. Devel- opmental Psychology, 48(6), 1719–1726. https://doi.org/10.1037/ a0029168 SPIRIT Slovenija. (2016). Vikend podjetnosti za uˇ citelje, profesorje in vodstva šol [Startup weekend for teachers, professors, and school management]. SPIRIT Slovenija. https:// www.podjetniski-portal.si/novice/vikend-podjetnosti-za -ucitelje-profesorje-in-vodstva-sol-2016-10-04 SPIRIT Slovenija. (2017a). Javno povabilo osnovnim šolam k sodelovanju pri spodbujanju ustvarjalnosti, podjetnosti in inovativnosti med mladimi v šolskem letu 2017/2018 [Public call for tender to primary schools for collaboration in programs for enhancing creativity, entrepreneurship, and innovation for young people in the school year 2017/2018]. SPIRIT Slovenija. https://www.spiritslovenia.si/ resources/les/doc/javni_razpisi/RAZPISI_2017/941/ Javno_povabilo_osnovnim_solam_2017_2018.pdf SPIRIT Slovenija. (2017b). Usposabljanje za uˇ citelje in profesorje: “Z ustvarjalnostjo in inovativnostjo do podjetnosti.” [Training for teachers and professors: “With creativity and innovation to ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS REVIEW 2023;25:182–201 201 entrepreneurship”]. SPIRIT Slovenija. https://www .podjetniski-portal.si/dogodki/usposabljanje-za-ucitelje-in -profesorje-z-ustvarjalnostjo-in-inovativnostjo-do-podjetnosti -7472 Tsakiridou, H., & Stergiou, K. (2014). Entrepreneurial competences and entrepreneurial intentions of students in primary edu- cation. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(9), 106–117. https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ ijhsse/v1-i9/15.pdf Unger, J. M., Rauch, A., Frese, M., & Rosenbusch, N. (2011). Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(3), 341–358. https://doi.org/10 .1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.004 Vincett, P . S., & Farlow, S. (2008). “Start-a-Business”: An experiment in education through entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 274–288. https://doi.org/10 .1108/14626000810871673 Wang, D., Wang, L., & Chen, L. (2018). Unlocking the inuence of family business exposure on entrepreneurial intentions. Interna- tional Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(4), 951–974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0475-2 Zupan, B., Cankar, F., & Setnikar Cankar, S. (2018). The devel- opment of an entrepreneurial mindset in primary education. European Journal of Education, 53(3), 427–439. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ejed.12293