Cited by 1,708Entrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesVocational and Entrepreneurial EducationHigher Education and Employability

The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education in Higher Education: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda

Open access
Nabi, Ghulam, Liñán, Francisco, Fayolle, Alain, Krueger, Norris, Walmsley, Andreas·2017·Academy of Management Learning & Education

Abstract

Using a teaching model framework, we systematically review empirical evidence on the impact of entrepreneurship education (EE) in higher education on a range of entrepreneurial outcomes, analyzing 159 published articles from 2004 to 2016. The teaching model framework allows us for the first time to start rigorously examining relationships between pedagogical methods and specific outcomes. Reconfirming past reviews and meta-analyses, we find that EE impact research still predominantly focuses on short-term and subjective outcome measures and tends to severely underdescribe the actual pedagogies being tested. Moreover, we use our review to provide an up-to-date and empirically rooted call for less obvious, yet greatly promising, new or underemphasized directions for future research on the impact of university-based entrepreneurship education. This includes, for example, the use of novel impact indicators related to emotion and mind-set, focus on the impact indicators related to the intention-to-behavior transition, and exploring the reasons for some contradictory findings in impact studies including person-, context-, and pedagogical model-specific moderators.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amle.2015.0026

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nabi, G., Liñán, F., Fayolle, A., Krueger, N., & Walmsley, A.
Affiliations
  • Manchester Metropolitan University (GB)
  • Anglia Ruskin University (GB)
  • École de management de Lyon (FR)
  • University of Phoenix (US)
  • University of Plymouth (GB)
Venue
Academy of Management Learning & Education
Published
2017-06
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
277-299
ISSN
  • 1537-260X (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-9585
OpenAlex
W2311618036
Cited by
1,708
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 306 · 2025: 239 · 2024: 204 · 2023: 220 · 2022: 202 · 2021: 197 · 2020: 150 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 3
FWCI
15.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Academy of Management Learning and Education (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Deposito de Investigacion Universidad de Sevilla (University of Seville) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Education › Vocational and Entrepreneurial Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education and Employability
Keywords
entrepreneurship education, higher education, entrepreneurial outcomes, teaching methods, teaching model, impact indicators, entrepreneurial intention, emotions, mindset, research agenda

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review