The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An … · The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An Assessment Instrument to Examine Engineering Student Involvement in Entrepreneurship

Volume 2, Number 2, Special Issue 2011

*Associate Professor, Technology, Leadership, and Innovation

Director, Certificate in Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program

Purdue University

35

The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey:

An Assessment Instrument to Examine Engineering Student

Involvement in Entrepreneurship Education

Nathalie Duval-Couetil*, Teri Reed-Rhoads, and Shiva Haghighi

Abstract - This paper describes the Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey

(EES), an assessment instrument designed to examine engineering student

involvement in entrepreneurship education and related outcomes. It was

developed as part of an NSF-funded study “Entrepreneurship Education and its

Impact on Engineering Student Outcomes: The Role of Program Characteristics

and Faculty Beliefs.” It has been used successfully over the past two years to

gather data from senior-level students at multiple institutions that have

entrepreneurship courses or programs that are available to engineers. The 135-

item survey examines: 1) engineering student attitudes towards entrepreneurship,

2) engagement in entrepreneurial activities and behaviors, 3) knowledge of

entrepreneurship-related terms and concepts, 4) entrepreneurial self-efficacy, 5)

student perceptions of engineering faculty attitudes toward entrepreneurship.

Item categories and subscales show high reliability. The validated survey

collects baseline data that can be valuable in program development and

evaluation.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship courses and programs may be one of the fastest growing curricular areas within

engineering schools. Economic realities such as global competition, downsizing, decentralization,

re-engineering, mergers, and new technologies have made career paths more complex and

uncertain for graduates in all sectors (Gibb, 1996). In this new environment, it is widely accepted

that entrepreneurial ventures are key to innovation and economic growth. Therefore, students

who are able to identify opportunities, understand market forces, commercialize new products,

communicate, and lead teams, in addition to having strong science and technical skills, are likely

to have more value in the marketplace for jobs. To meet this need, colleges of engineering are

increasingly developing entrepreneurship courses and/or are making those offered through

business schools or multidisciplinary programs accessible to their students. This movement has

garnered support from influential publications and professional organizations such as the National

Academy of Engineering (NAE) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE)

(Dabbagh and Menascé, 2006; Rover, 2005).

The characteristics of entrepreneurship programs offered to engineers can vary widely as do the

beliefs and practices of the faculty who teach them. A multi-institution, NSF-funded study,

Entrepreneurship Education and its Impact on Engineering Student Outcomes: The Role of

Program Characteristics and Faculty Beliefs, was undertaken to address how these factors

influence student outcomes. The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between

N. Duval-Couetil, T. Reed-Rhoads, and S. Haghighi

The Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship 36

program models, faculty beliefs, and student outcomes to help inform program development,

improve educational experiences, and evaluate their success (Figure 1). Consequently, a primary

component of this study was to investigate the engineering student involvement in

entrepreneurship education within their engineering programs and its impact on them. This

required the development of a comprehensive assessment instrument capable of collecting

baseline data on a broad range of attitudes toward and outcomes of entrepreneurship education on

engineering students across multiple institutions.

Figure 1. Components and objectives of the NSF-funded study Entrepreneurship

Education and its Impact on Engineering Student Outcomes: The Role of

Program Characteristics and Faculty Beliefs

Somewhat surprisingly, although an increasing number of students in all disciplines are being

exposed to entrepreneurship education (Streeter et a., 2002), minimal published research has

examined related learning outcomes or their influence on student attitudes, behaviors, career

goals, or professional competence. Pittaway et al. (2009) observed that most of the research on

entrepreneurship pedagogy focused on program design and implementation, and that assessment

practice was a major gap in the field. One of the major reasons contributing to the lack of

assessment in entrepreneurship education pointed to within the management literature is a lack of

consensus on what entrepreneurship or being entrepreneurial is. Another reason is the wide range

of learning objectives that exist across courses and programs. This led Henry et al. (2005) to state

that the "content of syllabi of courses developed by entrepreneurship scholars differs to such an

extent that it is difficult to determine if they even have a common purpose" (p. 103).

A comprehensive review of the entrepreneurship education assessment literature uncovered few

validated instruments available to faculty and administrators to assess the impact of

entrepreneurship education at the course or program level (Duval-Couetil et al., 2010a). The

review identified three primary types and categories of assessment: 1) course level evaluations

which measure student reactions to a particular class or specific activities; 2) focused instruments

which measure very specific aspects of, or constructs related to, entrepreneurship; and 3) program

evaluations which assess a wider range of outcomes. Most published work appeared to be related

to developing entrepreneurship-related constructs that are most appropriate for management or

Entrepreneurship Program models

Engineering School-based

Business School-based

Multidisciplinary

Faculty beliefs and practices

Engineering faculty

Business School Faculty

Lecturers or Part-time faculty

Practitioners

Student outcomes

Behaviors

Attitudes

Knowledge

Self-efficacy

Explore relationships to help inform program development,

improve educational experiences, and evaluate their success

The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An Assessment Instrument to Examine Engineering Student Involvement in Entrepreneurship Education

Volume 2, Number 2 Special Issue2011 37

professional contexts. Of the instruments reviewed, only those by Shartrand et al. (2008)and

Lucas et al. (2009) were developed to be used primarily with engineering students.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the development, use, and preliminary validation of the

Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey (EES) (Appendix A). This survey instrument has been

used successfully to collect data among engineering students enrolled at universities that have

entrepreneurship programs accessible to engineering students. The data gathered from the

administration of the survey over the past two years has served as the basis for several conference

presentations and papers (Duval-Couetil et al., 2010b, 2011a, b & c). Given the breadth of data

collected, it can serve as a valuable tool for engineering programs or faculty interested in

gathering student data as part of their program development and/or evaluation processes.

2. Development of the Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey

2.1. Research Questions

The EES instrument was developed to capture the data necessary to investigate how

entrepreneurship education impacts a broad range of attitudes toward and outcomes of

entrepreneurship education for engineering students. The primary focus of the research study was

to examine the extent and nature of changes in behaviors, knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy

that result from exposure to entrepreneurship education. It was important to provide a context for

the research by providing background data related to the extent to which engineering students

were involved in or being exposed to entrepreneurial activities within their academic programs.

Therefore, the instrument addressed the following research questions:

To what extent do engineering students participate in entrepreneurship education and

related activities?

To what extent is entrepreneurship addressed in their engineering programs?

What are engineering student attitudes toward entrepreneurship as a career?

Why are students interested or not interested in entrepreneurship?

How familiar are engineering students with entrepreneurship terms and concepts?

What are engineering student perceptions of their entrepreneurship-related abilities?

What are the characteristics of engineering students participating in entrepreneurship

education?

Student demographic and program data were collected to investigate differences within and

across the following groups:

Engineering students who had and who had not participated in entrepreneurship courses

or programs

Demographic characteristics (e.g., sex, culture, ethnicity, familial entrepreneurial

background)

Engineering disciplines

Individual programs and universities

2.2. Selection of the Appropriate Assessment Method and Administration Period

Given the varying program models, the first step in creating the assessment instrument was to

review the requirements of the entrepreneurship programs across the institutions. This was

necessary in order to determine the type of assessment that would be most appropriate to capture



involvement in entrepreneurship education, and the period within students’ academic programs

when it would be most appropriate to administer the survey. The review found that the programs

involved in the study could vary significantly in their length and when they began and ended.

Consideration was given to administering pre- and post-tests to engineering students involved in

entrepreneurship education given their value in establishing benchmarks against which changes in

attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, or self-efficacy can be measured. It was determined, however,

that they could not be used in this study given the varying program models and lengths. This was

based on the principle that to be valid, pre- and post-assessments should be used with highly

structured curriculum where learning objectives are addressed to all subjects in a systematic

manner at equivalent times within and across academic programs. Another factor that precluded

the use of pre- and post-tests was the three-year grant period, which limited our ability to collect

data for more than three semesters. Given the time necessary to develop the assessment

instrument and analyze results, three semesters was not sufficient to capture exposure to

entrepreneurship education in an adequate sample of students across the three institutions.

As a result, it was decided that a self-report instrument administered to students involved in

senior-level capstone design courses would provide the necessary sample homogeneity across

institutions. It would capture involvement in entrepreneurship and innovation-related activities,

such as formulating an idea for a product/business, developing prototypes, presenting, researching

markets, and preparing business plans, since they typically occur at the capstone level (Dabbagh

and Menascé, 2006). It would also allow for the investigation of differences across the desired

demographic characteristics and groups. To minimize logistics and challenges related to survey

administration across multiple institutions, it was decided that a web-based version would be used

(Qualtrix).

2.3. Review of Existing Assessment Instruments

As stated in the introduction to this paper, a comprehensive literature review of entrepreneurship

education assessment was conducted both within and outside the domain of engineering. The

results of this review were published in a conference paper (Duval-Coutil et al., 2010a) and

disseminated in a workshop on entrepreneurship assessment (Duval-Coutil et al., 2010b). The

literature review identified two existing scales developed that were integrated into the EES

instrument with permission from their authors and with minor modifications:

Venturing and Technology Self-efficacy (Lucas et al., 2009): This scale is

comprised of 15 items to measure engineering students’ confidence in their

venturing and technology application skills based on authentic tasks they might

encounter in the workplace. It emphasizes the leadership of innovation rather

than a narrow focus on the formation of companies. Items consist of short task

descriptions that involve self-confidence in one’s ability to recognize

opportunities, write business plans, manage projects and human resources,

estimate the costs of, and market a new product, as well as items that examine

self-efficacy related to moving from science concepts to applications. The scale

was validated with a sample of approximately 400 third and fourth year

engineering students. The category of items uses a response scale reflecting 0-

100% in intervals of 10, which the authors state is easily understood by

engineers.

Motivations and Barriers to Starting a Business (Shinner et al., 2009): Two

scales were selected from a larger survey instrument designed to investigate



attitudes toward entrepreneurship and its education in order to assess demand for

a multidisciplinary entrepreneurship course. The survey was administered to 317

students and 87 faculty members in a variety of disciplines. Original survey

items were modified slightly and the original 5-point Likert scale based on

relative importance was changed to level of agreement (1=strongly disagree,

5=strongly agree).

Consideration was given to using the NCIIA’s Entrepreneurship Inventory as a source for a

subset of survey items related to familiarity with entrepreneurial terms and concepts (Shartrand,

et al., 2008). The instrument was developed to measure engineering students’ familiarity with

105 terms and concepts, and it provides information on validated scales related to five categories;

becoming an entrepreneur, finance and accounting, people and human resources, sales and

marketing, and product ideation and development. Its integration was not feasible, however, due

to its length. The need to minimize the number of response scales in the EES was another factor

in the decision.

In addition to the literature review, course- and program-level instruments used at each institution

were reviewed. This was done to determine the extent to which existing assessments used at each

institution could be leveraged and to evaluate the degree to which there might be overlap or

interference with historical assessments still taking place at each university. Each program had

used assessments internally for assessment and/or program development purposes, and they were

in various stages of development and validation. Of the internal instruments reviewed, the

research team drew most heavily on pre- and post-survey instruments used at their own

institution, Purdue University, as part of its multidisciplinary Certificate in Entrepreneurship and

Innovation Program. The entry survey has 74 items and the exit survey 61 items focused on work

experience, post-graduation plans, motivations for taking an entrepreneurship course, familiarity

with entrepreneurial topics, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, family/parental history in

entrepreneurship, and demographics. It has been used with hundreds of students primarily for

program development and reporting purposes. A number of items and scales from these

instruments were modified and/or expanded upon to better address the needs of engineering

students.

Where no assessments were found to address research topics, the research team created new

survey items. This occurred primarily in categories having to do with entrepreneurial activity or

behaviors occurring within engineering programs:

Engineering student participation in entrepreneurial activities: This category of

ten items was developed to examine the extent to which students had been

exposed to entrepreneurship education or related experiential learning activities.

It was generated from the literature review and knowledge of entrepreneurial

activities available to engineering students either through or external to their

engineering programs. Students were asked to respond yes or no to whether they

participated in activities such as taking a course, interning with a startup,

conducting market research for a new product, developing a product for a real

client, writing a business plan, delivering an elevator pitch, protecting intellectual

club, participating in an entrepreneurship-related competition, joining an

entrepreneurship student organization, or participating in non-credit workshops.

Extent to which entrepreneurship is addressed in engineering programs: This

category of nine items examined student perceptions of the extent to which

entrepreneurship was addressed within their engineering programs. Items



investigated the degree to which students agreed that they were taught or

encouraged to develop entrepreneurial skills, take entrepreneurship courses,

participate in experiential learning opportunities related to entrepreneurship, and

interact with entrepreneurs. It also addressed the degree to which engineering

faculty discussed entrepreneurship.

2.4. Format and Structure

Given the number of sources of existing and newly created items, it was necessary to structure the

survey in a way that was user-friendly for the subjects. Effort was made to minimize the number

and types of response scales used. Most had 5-point Likert scales with endpoints either strongly

disagree (1) strongly agree (5) or poor (1) to excellent (5) with the exception of Lucas and

Cooper’s Venturing and Technology Self-Efficacy Scale. So that it would not interrupt the flow

of the survey, the scale was placed near the end. Survey codes were developed for each of the

subscales or categories of questions, and these are presented in Table 1. Attention was paid to the

length of the survey; it had to be comprehensive enough that faculty would recognize its value yet

short enough so students would complete it. It was estimated that it would take students

approximately 15 minutes to complete. Feedback from the faculty who participated was positive.

Over 90 percent of the students who started the survey completed it.

3. Sample

Over a period of three semesters, the EES was administered to engineering students enrolled at

senior-level engineering capstone design courses at three large public universities with

established entrepreneurship programs available to engineering students. Two of the

entrepreneurship programs were predominantly engineering-based. The other was a

multidisciplinary program, whereby engineering students took “core” entrepreneurship courses

with students in a variety of majors and complemented them with approved engineering courses

to complete program requirements. Students received the survey via the faculty members

teaching these courses. Contact with faculty members was made either through personal contacts

at each institution, or through Internet searches to identify department heads and others able to

approve and/or facilitate survey administration. Faculty members were sent an email describing

the intent of the study and what would be required of them. If faculty agreed to participate, they

were sent an email to be forwarded to students, which included a brief explanation of the survey

and its URL. Over the course of the month that followed initial distribution of the survey to

students, faculty members were asked to remind students to complete it. Over three semesters,

501 engineering students completed the survey. It was distributed to approximately 30 courses

across the three institutions. Response rates per course ranged from 3 to 58 percent, with a mean

of 21 percent. Preliminary results from an initial sample of 345 subjects and final sample of 501

have been reported (Duval-Couetil, 2011a &b).



Table 1. EES Survey Item Categories and Scales, Topics Addressed, and Item Sources

Category, Code, No.

of Items

Specific Topic Addressed by EES Item

Categories and Scales Source of Items

BEHAVIORS

ACTIVITIES (10) Extent to which engineering students participate

in entrepreneurship education and related

activities

New items

POSTGRAD (7) Students’ post-graduation career plans Purdue surveys

BUSINESS (1) Number of students who had, have, or intend to

have a business

New items

VENTURE (1) Type of businesses students are interested in

starting

Purdue surveys

ATTITUDES

PROGRAM (9) Extent to which entrepreneurship addressed in

engineering programs

New items

INTEREST (7) Nature of engineering student interest in

entrepreneurship

Purdue surveys

STARTBUS (12) Reasons students would be interested in

entrepreneurship

Shinnar et al.

NOTSTART (14) Reasons students would not be interested in

entrepreneurship

Shinnar et al.

KNOWLEDGE

FAMILIAR (37) Student familiarity with entrepreneurship terms

and concepts

New items

Purdue surveys

SELF-EFFICACY

EFFICACY (15) Student perceptions of their technology

venturing and entrepreneurship-related abilities

Lucas et al.

SKILLS (6) Student perceptions of their skills in areas

related to entrepreneurship

New items

Purdue surveys

ABILITY (1) Student perceptions of their entrepreneurship

ability overall

Purdue surveys

BUSABILITY (1) Student perceptions of their ability to start a

business immediately

Purdue surveys

DEMOGRAPHICS

Multiple codes (14) Characteristics of engineering students

participating in entrepreneurship education

New items

Purdue surveys



4. Establishing Validity and Reliability

To be effective, a survey instrument should be both reliable and valid. Validity refers to the

ability of an instrument to measure the real concept under consideration. Reliability refers to

whether a particular technique applied repeatedly to the same object would yield the same result

each time (Babbie, 1990). Since reliability is an indication of measurement error, an instrument

must be reliable in order for validity to have meaning. Therefore, both are necessary and

individually are not sufficient.

4.1. Validity

The first type of validity to be considered in survey instrument development is content validity,

which refers to the degree to which a survey covers the range of meanings and content within a

specific domain (Babbie, 1990). EES content validity was evaluated through a comprehensive

literature review, as well as evaluation by a panel of approximately 20 experts. This panel was

comprised of engineering and entrepreneurship faculty at the institutions involved in the study,

members of the external advisory board for the grant and educational assessment specialists.

Feedback was integrated into revisions of the survey.

Face validity is a form of content validity and “may be of importance in determining its

acceptability and reasonableness to those who will be tested” (Messick, 1989). If a survey is

considered to be meaningless or irrelevant by subjects, they may be less willing to participate. To

determine whether the EES would be considered valid from the subject’s point of view,

engineering students who had and who had not been exposed to entrepreneurship education,

participated in a think-aloud protocol. This protocol allowed members of the research team to

observe subjects completing the online survey to evaluate comprehension, the instrument’s

relevance, and its user-friendliness. Subjects were asked to identify any ambiguities or

difficulties they encountered as they completed the survey. The think-aloud protocol resulted in

feedback that led to the revision of items, scales, survey instructions and length.

Construct validity refers to evidence of the extent at which a measure relates to other variables

within a system of theoretical relationships or constructs (Babbie, 1990). Often, experts in the

field are used to verify construct validity as was the case with the EES. Preliminary evaluation of

construct validity also consisted of data analyses to examine differences in the results of students

who had and who had not been exposed to entrepreneurship education. These were detected in

larger populations as data collection progressed.

Future analyses will examine predictive validity, which refers to the extent to which a given

instrument can be used to predict desired future performance, such as a student’s future success

within a given field. In the short term, this could be achieved by examining performance in

entrepreneurial activities while they are on campus (e.g., competitions). Longer term,

longitudinal research could examine engineering students’ post-graduation career choices,

income, and net worth as reported. A survey of entrepreneurship alumni of a business school

conducted by Charney and Libecap (2003) explored the impact of entrepreneurship education on

these factors.

4.2. Reliability

In this study, reliability was assessed through internal consistency to determine the extent to

which similar survey items give consistent responses. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was used to

measure the overall internal reliability within the categories of survey items that addressed



attitudes, beliefs, or perceptions that were most appropriate for such analysis (Table 2).

Categories of items that measured behaviors and past or future participation in activities were

excluded from the analyses.

Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha for EES survey item categories and scales

(see Table 1 for details of items and scales)

Category of Items/Scale Number of

items

Cronbach’s

Coefficient

Alpha

PROGRAM (9) 9 .89

INTEREST (7) 7 .92

STARTBUS (12) 12 .83

NOTSTART (14) 14 .86

FAMILIAR (37) 37 .96

EFFICACY (15) 15 .96

SKILLS (6) 6 .74

Notable results are the following:

All but one category, SKILLS, met the standard of 0.8, which is considered acceptable

for group comparisons (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1991). Items in this category addressed a

variety of skills including analytical, communication, and presentation skills, as well as

the ability to evaluate business ideas, level of risk tolerance and ability to deal with

uncertainty. These items were not written in a way that tied them to an entrepreneurial

context, and this will be addressed in future revisions.

The category FAMILIAR is comprised of 37 terms and concepts that are relevant to

entrepreneurship. Students were asked to rate their familiarity with each. Cronbach’s

alpha of 0.96 was high for the group, which is to be expected with such a large number of

items. Given the large number of items, this category was analyzed independently for a

conference presentation (Duval-Couetil, 2011)). This consisted of dividing 35 of the 37

terms into six categories based on content and face validity and calculating the internal

consistency for each. They included the following: engineering (α = .88); general

entrepreneurship (α = .86); 3); general business (α = .84); marketing (α = .93); finance (α

= .93); and professional skills (α = .75).

Future work will address the refinement of these scales.

5. Discussion

The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey (EES) was developed based on a need to be able to

measure student attitudes toward entrepreneurship, their level of involvement and interest in

entrepreneurship education, and its impact on their entrepreneurial knowledge and self-efficacy.

The instrument was designed to collect a wide range of baseline data that would be useful to

make comparisons based on student characteristics and program characteristics both within and

across institutions. It was developed after conducting a comprehensive review of the

entrepreneurship education assessment literature both within and outside the field of engineering.

This review identified validated scales that were used in the development of the EES and

identified assessment gaps that were filled with new items and scales developed by the research

team. Attention was given to ensure that the survey would be administered at a period in a



student’s academic program when exposure to entrepreneurship education would be detected and

that the administration would not interfere or overlap with assessments used at institutions

involved in the study.

Using conventional analytical approaches, we have demonstrated that the EES is acceptable as a

self-report instrument to be used with engineering students. It was used over a period of two

years to collect data that, thus far, has been primarily used to measure levels of student interest in

and involvement in entrepreneurship education and to investigate differences between groups of

students who have and have not had exposure to entrepreneurship education. Future analyses will

explore differences in attitudes based on demographic characteristics such as sex, ethnicity, and

parent involvement in entrepreneurship. They will also explore differences in institutions to

examine the extent to which program characteristics and faculty beliefs and practices impact

student attitudes and outcomes, which is the overarching objective of the NSF-funded study.

As it stands, the EES can be used as an effective assessment tool for needs assessment, program

development, and research purposes. It can be used alone to measure differences in groups, as has

been described in this manuscript. There are, however, opportunities to refine the instrument as a

whole and to further explore the validation of subscales focused on the following areas:

Demand for entrepreneurship education: Items addressing student interest in taking

entrepreneurship courses, as well as their post-graduation career plans can be used to

estimate potential demand for entrepreneurship courses or related activities.

Entrepreneurial climate: Items related to student perceptions to the extent that

entrepreneurship is addressed within engineering programs or by engineering faculty can

assess whether a particular environment is conducive to and supportive of entrepreneurial

education or activities.

Entrepreneurial mindset: Items pertaining to student involvement in entrepreneurial

education, activities, courses, and whether students have ideas for ventures; the nature of

student interest in entrepreneurship can be used to measure the degree to which students

have an entrepreneurial mindset.

Gains in entrepreneurial knowledge and self-efficacy: Used as a pre- and post-test in

contexts with homogeneous conditions, it can measure gains related to exposure to

entrepreneurship education or related activities. It can also be used to compare

knowledge or gains across courses, engineering departments or institutions.

Body of knowledge for engineering entrepreneurs: Items pertaining to familiarity with

terms and entrepreneurial self-efficacy can identify the emphases, strengths and

weaknesses of programs being offered to engineering students. Items related to barriers

to entrepreneurship can identify areas that must be addressed in an educational program

designed to make entrepreneurship a desirable and/or accessible choice.

As with any instrument, it is important to examine the sample on which it is tested. To date, the

external validity of the survey, or degree to which the results can be generalized to populations

beyond the sample, is limited. The instrument has been used primarily within large, public

universities with established engineering and entrepreneurship programs where interest and

participation in entrepreneurship may be higher than in the general population of engineering

schools. Purposive sampling has been used to ensure adequate representation of students who

had exposure to entrepreneurship education in order to make comparisons between groups. The

representation of underserved populations and certain engineering disciplines in the sample was

too low to draw conclusions about these groups. Improving the external validity will require

administration of the survey to a more diverse group of institutions, with varying program models

and student populations.



Internal validity refers to the recognition of bias that could be introduced by the researchers

themselves through their beliefs or actions. This can be manifested in the research design or the

way the sample was obtained. For this particular instrument, and the way it has been administered

to date, bias could arise from self-selection of faculty and students who chose to participate.

Senior design faculty members from three institutions were asked to participate in the study;

however, those who chose to do so may have a positive bias toward entrepreneurship education.

Since the survey was voluntary for students, it is possible that those who chose to complete it had

a positive bias toward entrepreneurship as well. Furthermore, its administration as an online

survey may have resulted in lower response rates since students completed them outside of class

instead of in-class. Future work must address these sampling limitations.

6. Conclusion

The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey (EES) can be an effective tool as universities and

departments develop entrepreneurship courses and programs for engineering students. The

literature review on which it is based can serve as a resource for researchers developing

assessment instruments in the field of entrepreneurship education. Thus far, it has been used

effectively to detect differences across groups of students who have and who have not been

exposed to entrepreneurship education. Future work will examine differences by program and

demographic characteristics. The EES is certain to undergo refinement, and future work will

explore developing individual instruments that focus on specific constructs or content. However,

in its current form, it can provide valuable baseline data for faculty and administrators who are

involved in teaching, developing, or evaluating the impact of entrepreneurship courses delivered

to engineering students.

References

Babbie, E. (1990). Survey Research Methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Charney, A. and Libecap, G. (2003). The contribution of entrepreneurship education: An analysis

of the Berger program. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 1(3):276-288.

Dabbagh, N. and Menascé, D. (2006). Student perceptions of engineering entrepreneurship: An

exploratory study. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2): 153-163.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., and Haghighi, S. (2010a). Development of an assessment

instrument to examine outcomes of entrepreneurship education on engineering students.

Proceedings of the 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Washington, DC.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., and Haghighi, S. (2010b). Assessing the outcomes of

entrepreneurship education on engineering students. Workshop of the NCIIA Annual Meeting.

San Francisco, CA.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., and Haghighi, S. (2011a). Investigating the impact of

entrepreneurship education on engineering students. Proceedings of the NCIIA Annual

Meeting. Washington, DC.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., and Haghighi, S. (2011b). Engineering students and

entrepreneurship education: Involvement, attitudes and outcomes. International Journal of

Engineering Education, in press.

Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T., and Haghighi, S. (2011c). Entrepreneurship literacy for

engineering students. Proceedings of the 41st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education

Conference. Rapid City, South Dakota.



Gibb, A. (1996). Entrepreneurship and small business management: Can we afford to neglect

them in the twenty-first century business school? British Journal of Management, 7(4): 309-

321.

Henry, C., Hill, F., and Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: Can

entrepreneurship be taught? Part 1. Education & Training, 47(2): 98-111.

Lucas, W., Cooper, S., Ward, T., and Cave, F. (2009). Industry placement, authentic experience

and the development of venturing and technology self-efficacy. Technovation, 29(11): 738-

752.

Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational Measurement. New York, NY,

England: Macmillan Publishing. 60-68.

Nunnally, J. and Bernstein, I. (1991). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pittaway, L., Hannon, P., Gibb, A., and Thompson, J. (2009). Assessment practice in enterprise

education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15(1): 71-93.

Rover, D. (2005). New economy, new engineer. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4): 427-

428.

Shartrand, A., Weilerstein, P., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and Olds, B. (2008). Assessing student

learning in technology entrepreneurship. Proceedings of the 2008 ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in

Education Conference. Saratoga Springs, New York.

Shinnar, R. Pruett, M., and Toney B. (2009). Entrepreneurship education: Attitudes across

campus. Journal of Education for Business. 84(3):151-159.

Streeter, D., Jaquette, P. & Hovis, K. (2002). University-wide entrepreneurship education:

Alternative models and current trends. WP 2002-02 March 2002 Working Paper -

Department of Applied Economics and Management. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.



Appendix A

Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey (EES)

This survey is to gather information about your experiences and involvement in

entrepreneurship activities and education. Entrepreneurship refers to the

practice of starting business ventures based on the development of new products

and/or services.

This survey is voluntary and you may skip any questions. If necessary, you can

stop the survey and complete it at a later time. Use the same link used to access

the survey to pick up where you left off. You must be 18 years or older to

participate. Personal information, such as your name and email, is requested so

that we may conduct follow-up interviews with a small sample of students. At

the end of the survey, you will be given the option to opt-out of being contacted

for a follow-up interview. Identifying information will not be released in any

way.

Please select "yes" indicating that you have read the above statement and agree

to be included in this survey. If you do not wish to continue, you may close the

Web browser now.

I agree to participate in this survey. (AGREE)

Yes (1)

No

INSTRUCTIONS:

Please take your time to answer each question as honestly and as

accurately as possible.

You will need to click on the arrow button at the end of each page to

save it and move on to the next.

Please be sure to click the 'Submit' button on the last page to complete

the survey.

The survey should take approximately 15 minutes. If you need assistance or

have questions, please contact:

Survey Administrator

University Name

Email Address

Phone

Thank you for your time.



What university do you attend? (UNIV)

University A

University B

University C

What is your major? (MAJOR1)

Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering

Agricultural and Biological Engineering

Architectural Engineering

Biomedical Engineering

Biomolecular Engineering

Chemical Engineering

Civil Engineering

Computer Engineering

Computer Science

Construction Engineering

Electrical Engineering

Environmental/Ecological Engineering

Industrial/Systems Engineering

Interdisciplinary Engineering

Manufacturing Engineering

Materials/Materials Science Engineering

Mechanical Engineering

Multidisciplinary Engineering

Nuclear Engineering

Textile Engineering

Other (please list)

If you have a double major, please list it (if not, leave blank). (MAJOR2)

If you have one or more minors, please list it/them (if not, leave blank). Minor 1

Minor 2

Minor 3

What is your sex? (SEX) Male

Female

Please enter your age (in years). (AGE)

Please indicate your residence status. (RESIDENCE) In-state student

Out-of-state student

International student

If you are an international student, what is your home country?

(HOMECOUNTRY)



What is your ethnic/racial background? Select all that apply. (RACE)

American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

Black or African American

Hispanic or Latino

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

White

Multiracial

Other (please specify)

Decline

Are either of your parents entrepreneurs? (PARENTS)

Yes

No

I’m not sure

Is anyone in your family (not including your parents) an entrepreneur? (FAMILY)

Yes

No

I’m not sure

How many entrepreneurship courses have you taken in your college career, outside of

engineering? (COURSES)

None

1

2

3 or more

If you have taken any entrepreneurship courses outside of engineering (see previous

question), please list the course name(s) and number(s). (COURSE NAME)

Have you participated in any of the following types of academic entrepreneurship

programs? (ESHPROGRAM)

Certificate in Entrepreneurship

Major in Entrepreneurship

Minor in Entrepreneurship

Other



While in college, have you done any of the following: (ACTIVITIES)

No Yes

Taken an entrepreneurship course within the College

of Engineering at your university

Interned or worked for an entrepreneurial or start-up

company

Conducted market research and analysis for a new

product or technology

Developed a product or technology for a real

client/customer

Given an “elevator pitch” or presentation to a panel of

judges about a product or business idea

Been involved in patenting a technology or protecting

intellectual property

Been involved in entrepreneurship- or business-

related student organizations

Written a business plan

Participated in an entrepreneurship-related

competition (e.g., product development, business

plan)

Participated in entrepreneurship-related workshops

(extra-curricular, non-credit)

Rate your level of agreement with the following: In general, in my engineering courses…

(PROGRAM)

Strongly

disagree Disagree Undecided Agree

Strongly

agree

Faculty discuss

entrepreneurship

Students are taught

entrepreneurial skills

Students are encouraged to

develop entrepreneurial skills


take entrepreneurship courses

Students are encouraged or

required to participate in

entrepreneurship-related

activities


consider starting their own

companies

Entrepreneurship is presented

as a worthwhile career option

There are opportunities to

interact with entrepreneurs

Students should learn more

about entrepreneurship



Consider your post-graduation options and please rate your level of agreement with the

following: I plan to… (POSTGRAD)

Strongly

disagree

Disagree Undecided Agree

Strongly

agree

Start my own business or

be self-employed

Work for a small business

or start-up company

Work for a medium- or

large-size business

Work for the government

Serve in the military

Work for a non-profit

organization

Attend

graduate/professional

school

Please rate your level of agreement with the following: (INTEREST)

Strongly


Strongly

agree

I have a general interest in

the subject of

entrepreneurship

I want to become an

entrepreneur

I have an idea for a

business product or

technology

I would like to know if I

have what it takes to be an

entrepreneur

I am interested in taking

entrepreneurship classes

Entrepreneurship

education can broaden my

career prospects and

choices

I would like to learn about

entrepreneurship in my

engineering courses

Please check the answer that best fits your current situation. (BUSINESS)

I had my own business

I have my own business now

I would like to start a business in the next year

I would like to start a business in the next 5 years

I would like to start a business in the next 10 years

I don’t have any plans to start a business at this time



If you are interested in being an entrepreneur, what type of business are you interested in

starting? Please describe the product or service and industry or market. (VENTURE)

Please rate your level of agreement with the following: I would start a business in order

to… (STARTBUS)

Strongly


Strongly

agree

Focus on a technology

that interests me

Satisfy a need in a market

Solve a social problem

Create something of my

own

Have more flexibility and

independence

Have more free time

Make more money

Be at the head of an

organization

Manage people

Create jobs

Follow a family tradition

Gain high social status

If there are any reasons unlisted above for why you would start a business, please list them

here. (STARTBUS2)



Please rate your level of agreement with the following: I would NOT start a business in

order to… (NOTSTART)

Strongly


Strongly

agree

Lack of ideas regarding

what business to start

Lack of assistance

available to assess

business viability

Excessively risky

Lack of initial capital for

start-up

Lack of legal assistance

or counseling

Lack of knowledge of the

business world and the

market

Lack of experience in

management and finance

Current economic

situation

Irregular income

Lack of support from

people around me

(family, friends, etc)

Fear of failure

Doubts about personal

abilities

Having to work too many

hours

Problems with employees

and colleagues

If there are any reasons unlisted above for why you would start a business, please list them

here. (NOTSTART2)



Please rate your level of knowledge or skill in the following areas related to

entrepreneurship. (FAMILIAR)

Poor Below

average Average

Above

average Excellent

Characteristics of entrepreneurs

Role of entrepreneurship in the

world economy

Business ethics

Risk management

Legal structures for ventures

Intrapreneurship

Social entrepreneurship

Leadership

Managing teams

Project management

Negotiation

Product development

Product life cycle

Economies of scale

Feasibility study

Prototype

Intellectual property

Technology commercialization

Patents

Finance and accounting

Venture capital

Equity

Company valuation

Balance sheet

Income statement

Break even

Market research

Competitive analysis

Target market

Product positioning

Product distribution

Advertising and promotion

Sales and selling

Executive summary

Business plan

Business models

Business incubator



For each statement select a number from 0 (0% Not at all confident) to 10 (100%

Completely confident) to indicate how confident you are that you could perform that skill

or ability now. (EFFICACY)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Know the steps needed to place a

financial value on a new business

venture

Pick the right marketing approach

for the introduction of a new service

Work with a supplier to get better

prices to help a venture become

successful

Estimate accurately the costs of

running a new project

Recognize when an idea is good

enough to support a major business

venture

Recruit the right employees for a

new project or venture

Convince a customer or client to try

a new product for the first time

Write a clear and complete business

plan

Convert a useful scientific advance

into a practical application

Develop your own original

hypothesis and a research plan to

test it

Grasp the concept and limits of a

technology well enough to see the

best ways to use it

Design and build something new

that performs very close to your

design specifications

Lead a technical team developing a

new product to a successful result

Understand exactly what is new and

important in a groundbreaking

theoretical article

Translate user needs into

requirements for a design so well

that users will like the outcome

Overall, how would you rate your entrepreneurial ability? (ABILITY)

Poor

Below average

Average

Above average

Excellent



How would you rate your ability to start a business now? (BUSABILITY)

Poor

Below average

Average

Above average

Excellent

Rate your skill levels in the following areas: (SKILLS)

Poor Below

average Average

Above

average Excellent

Communication skills

Presentation skills

Analytical skills

Ability to evaluate business

ideas

Level of risk tolerance

Ability to deal with

uncertainty

Please enter your first name. (FIRSTNAME)

Please enter your last name. (LASTNAME)

Please enter your university assigned email address. (EMAIL1)

Please list an alternate email address, if applicable (optional). (EMAIL2)

Are you willing to be contacted for a follow-up interview? (FOLLOWUP)

Yes

No

Documents

The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An … · The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An Assessment Instrument to Examine Engineering Student Involvement in Entrepreneurship