































   Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 5, Issue 4, 2024 
  agdevresearch.org 

 

1. Stephen C. Mukembo, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri, 212 Mumford Hall, Columbia Missouri, 65211, 

mukembos@missouri.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1909-9349  
2. John D. Tummons, Associate Professor, University of Missouri, 127 Gentry Hall, Columbia Missouri, 65211, 

tummonsj@missouri.edu,  https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4191-4564 
3. Nathan Smith, Instructor, Oklahoma State University, 224 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, OK 74078, 

nathan.smith@okstate.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3126-9083  
4. Jon Simonsen, Professor, University of Missouri, 126 Gentry Hall, Columbia Missouri, 65211, simonsenj@missouri.edu,  

 https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0532-1635 
 

99 

 

Entrepreneurial Competencies in High School Agricultural 
Education: Assessing Educator Perceptions, Gender 
Differences, and Professional Development Needs 

 
S. C. Mukembo1,  J. D. Tummons2, N. Smith3, J. Simonsen4 

 
 

Article History 
Received: October 11, 2024 
Accepted: December 7, 2024 
Published: December 13, 2024 
 
 
Keywords 
entrepreneurship competencies; 
entrepreneurship knowledge;  
high school agriculture teachers; 
professional development;  
SDG #4: Quality Education.  

Abstract 
School-based agricultural educators play a critical role in building 
students’ entrepreneurial and employability competencies by shaping 
learning experiences and supervising entrepreneurship projects. 
However, many educators do not receive formal preparation in 
entrepreneurship during their training. This ex post facto quantitative 
study investigates agriculture educators’ perceived entrepreneurial 
competencies, including differences between male and female teachers, 
regarding the perceived importance of entrepreneurial competencies in 
their role. A total of 301 agricultural educators in Missouri responded to 
the survey. Despite limited formal entrepreneurship education, most 
educators agreed they possessed 11 of the 12 assessed entrepreneurship 
competencies. The top four entrepreneurship competencies were 
independence, leadership skills, opportunity assessment, and resilience, 
while social networking received the lowest score. These data raise 
questions about the possible relationship between entrepreneurial 
competencies and competencies needed of agricultural educators, and to 
what extent teaching agriculture attracts or develops entrepreneurial 
competencies. Researchers recommend investigating what autonomous 
or entrepreneurial components of agricultural education may contribute 
to developing educators’ entrepreneurial competencies. Researchers 
propose incorporating entrepreneurship training in teacher preparation 
programs and professional development, emphasizing social networking 
skills to promote their social capital and professional networks for 
information sharing, increasing their visibility and career growth.  

 

mailto:mukembos@missouri.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1909-9349
mailto:tummonsj@missouri.edu
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-4191-4564
mailto:nathan.smith@okstate.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3126-9083
mailto:simonsenj@missouri.edu
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0532-1635


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  100 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
Agricultural educators play a pivotal role in building human capital for the agricultural sector by 
preparing students for higher education or entry into the workforce (Barrick, 1992; Phipps et 
al., 2008). Educators leverage their interdisciplinary expertise and in-depth knowledge to guide 
and mentor students in applying abstract concepts to real-world situations, both inside and 
outside the classroom (Mukembo et al., 2023). Entrepreneurship is a critical aspect of the 
school-based agricultural education (SBAE) curriculum, especially within students’ supervised 
agricultural experience (SAE) Program (Brown & Knobloch, 2022; Phipps et al., 2008). One in 
three United States SBAE students with an SAE have an ownership component, where students 
can create real-world entrepreneurial ventures. The agricultural educator is often the primary 
(and only) business advisor for students (Hanagriff, 2024; Heinert & Roberts, 2018).  
 
Agricultural educators need unique entrepreneurship knowledge and competencies to 
effectively guide students in their entrepreneurial endeavors (Mukembo, 2017). Regrettably, 
many educators receive minimal or no training in entrepreneurship during their teacher 
preparation (Tummons et al., 2023). A recent survey conducted by the authors in 2023 revealed 
that 79% of educators in Missouri received no training in entrepreneurship during their teacher 
preparation programs. Lack of training may hinder an educator’s ability to provide effective 
guidance to students pursuing entrepreneurial endeavors. Despite the integration of 
entrepreneurship into the high school agricultural curriculum (Heinert & Roberts, 2017, 2018), 
limited research explores entrepreneurial competencies possessed by agricultural educators, or 
how they acquire these competencies to fulfill their role as entrepreneurship advisors.  Further, 
although numerous studies have documented gender differences in entrepreneurial 
competencies and aspirations, finding that males are more likely to pursue entrepreneurial 
ventures than females (Abbasianchavari & Block, 2022; Cowling & Taylor, 2001; Koellinger et 
al., 2008, 2011; Mukembo et al., 2020; Revell-Love & Revell-Love, 2016; Shahriar, 2018), no 
research has explored this phenomenon in the context of agricultural educators. Identifying 
gaps in entrepreneurial competency impacting teachers’ ability to foster student 
entrepreneurial projects could allow for professional development in deficient areas, 
contributing to Sustainable Development Goal #4, ensuring inclusive and equitable Quality 
Education, including opportunities for lifelong learning. 
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
Researchers integrated the human capital theory (Becker, 1993; Schultz, 1961, 1972) to guide 
this inquiry. Human capital theory is a grand theory which posits individuals can enhance their 
knowledge, skills, and abilities through education and professional development, ultimately 
boosting their self-efficacy, productivity, and incomes (Hartog & Van den Brick, 2007). 
Investments in human capital through education bring about positive returns to both the 
individual and society (Becker, 1993; Sweetland, 1996). Human capital investments have 
transformative potential; differences in wealth and economic development among nations has 
been attributed to investments made in their human capital (Schultz, 1961, 1972). 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  101 
 

Furthermore, since this study involved evaluating teacher’s entrepreneurial competencies, we 
also integrated the substantive competency-based theory (CBT). CBT theorizes specific 
competencies can be identified and measured based on an individual’s behaviors and actions 
(Klein-Collins, 2013; Makulova et al., 2015). Entrepreneurship competencies and actions are 
reflected in the individual behavior of teachers as they work to guide students on their 
entrepreneurship projects. The CBT also suggests individuals can receive training to improve 
their personal competencies within a specific field, such as entrepreneurship, to achieve 
specific goals and tasks (Morris et al., 2013; Schenkel et al., 2022), thereby enhancing their 
human capital (Venesaar et al., 2022). Building an individual’s entrepreneurial competencies 
contributes to their human capital, so integrating these two theoretical approaches allowed 
researchers to conduct a holistic assessment of the survey data and develop appropriate 
recommendations for research and practice. 
 

Purpose 
 
The purpose of this study was to investigate the entrepreneurial competencies of agricultural 
educators and their perceived importance of entrepreneurship in the context of SBAE. This 
report is part of a larger study which aimed to explore teachers’ entrepreneurial competencies, 
and the role played by these competencies in building a competent and innovative workforce 
to address the wicked problems in agriculture as well as economic development challenges. 
Four objectives undergirded this study: 
1. Describe agricultural educators’ self-perceived entrepreneurial competencies. 
2. Explore educators’ perspectives regarding the significance of entrepreneurship knowledge 

in their work. 
3. Determine differences between male and female agricultural educators regarding the 

importance of entrepreneurship knowledge in their work. 
4. Describe the perceived need for entrepreneurship professional development among 

agricultural educators. 
 

Methods 
 
This ex post facto quantitative study was approved by the Institution’s Review Board. Data were 
collected through an online Qualtrics survey. Researchers utilized two existing instruments 
(Morris et al., 2013; Mukembo, 2017) to measure teachers’ self-perceived competence across 
12 entrepreneurial constructs. Because of the adaptations made to the original instruments, 
researchers conducted a pilot test with student teachers from the Department of Agricultural 
Education, Communication & Leadership at Oklahoma State University; feedback from the pilot 
was used to improve readability and construct reliability on the final instrument. The final 
survey instrument had 60 Likert-type prompts to measure the 12 entrepreneurship 
competence constructs of creative problem-solving, independence/autonomy, innovativeness, 
leadership, opportunity assessment, opportunity recognition, opportunity exploitation, 
resilience, risk-taking, social networking, tenacity/perseverance, and being visionary. Other 
single-item rating statements were used to measure the importance of entrepreneurship 
knowledge to the agriculture teachers’ work, including the need for professional development 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  102 
 

in this area. These items were anchored as Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neither Agree 
nor Disagree (3), Agree (4), and Strongly Agree (5) (Boone & Boone, 2012; Joshi et al., 2015; 
Lindner & Lindner, 2024). To guide our interpretation of the scores, we set a priori and adopted 
the true scale limits as Strongly Disagree (1 – 1.5), Disagree (1.51 – 2.5), Neither Agree nor 
Disagree (2.51 – 3.5), Agree (3.51 – 4.5), Strongly Agree (4.51 – 5) (Linder & Linder, 2024). 
 
Researchers estimated instrument reliability using Cronbach’s alpha instead of relying on 
previously published reliability data, which did not reflect the population for this study (Tavakol 
& Dennick, 2011).  The final reliability estimate for each construct was: creative problem solving 
(a = 0.83), innovativeness (a = 0.79), leadership (a = 0.72), resilience (a = 0.82), networking 
and social (a = 0.80), visionary and futuristic orientation (a = 0.81), risk management 
techniques (a = 0.73),  opportunity recognition competencies (a = 0.83), opportunity 
exploitation (a = 0.86), and opportunity assessment competencies (a = 0.73), independent or 
autonomous (a = 0.65),  and tenacity and perseverance (a = 0.69). These Cronbach’s alpha 
reliability estimates are deemed acceptable within the social sciences (Berthoud, 2000; Field, 
2013; Murphy & Davidshofer, 2004; Nunnally, 1967; Tavakol & Dennick, 2011).  
 
The instrument was also assessed for content and face validity by a panel of experts from 
entrepreneurship and agriculture education (Clark et al., 2021; Creswell, 2014). After 
researchers modified the instrument based on feedback from the panel and pilot, the survey 
was distributed to a population of 535 agriculture teachers in Missouri via Qualtrics, during the 
months of March and April 2023 with three weekly follow-up email remainders to 
nonrespondents. To encourage participation, we offered an incentive of entering participants 
names into a raffle for a chance to win one of the 10 Amazon gift cards, each valued at $50. A 
total of 301 teachers (56.26%) responded to the survey, adequately representing the target 
population (Krejcie & Morgan, 1970). Data were cleaned, and in the process, we removed 44 
empty responses that were submitted. This left us with 257 valid responses for analysis which 
still met the threshold for acceptable sample size for a population of 535 (Krejcie & Morgan, 
1970). Data analysis was performed using SPSS, including a t-test to determine differences 
based on reported sex.   
 

Findings 
 

Participant Demographics 
Almost an equal number of participants self-identified as females (f = 50.6%) and males (f = 
49.4%) respectively. An overwhelming majority (f = 89.5%) of participants identified as being 
White. Respondents had an average of 12 years of teaching experience, and 53% indicated that 
they had or were pursuing a graduate degree. The modal age rage was between 35-44 years 
(27.6%), followed by 25-34 age range (25.7%). One hundred and eighty-four teachers (78.30%) 
had not received entrepreneurship training, whereas 51 teachers (21.70%) had received 
training.  
 
Objective #1: Describe Agricultural Educators’ Perceived Entrepreneurial Competencies 
For objective one, teachers rated their perceived entrepreneurship competence based various 
Likert item statements on a scale of Strongly disagree (1) to Strongly agree (5). The 60 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  103 
 

statements were aggregated into 12 entrepreneurship constructs and analyzed as interval data. 
Based on the established true limits of the scale, teachers agreed (3.51 – 4.5) they possessed 11 
of the 12 entrepreneurial competencies, including independence (M = 4.35, SD = 0.52), 
leadership skills (M = 4.07, SD = 0.42), opportunity assessment (M = 4.07, SD = 0.47), resilience 
(M = 4.00, SD = 0.46), visionary, opportunity exploitation (M = 3.85, SD = 0.57), creative 
problem solving (M = 3.81, SD = 0.65), risk management (M = 3.65, SD = 0.56), opportunity 
recognition (M = 3.62, SD = 0.64), and innovativeness (M = 3.55, SD = 0.6). The teachers neither 
agreed nor disagreed about possessing social and networking competencies (M = 3.27, SD = 
0.77); see Table 1. None of the educators strongly agreed, disagreed, or strongly disagreed 
about possessing any of the 12 entrepreneurship competencies. 
 
Table 1 
 

Agricultural Educators’ Perception of the Various Entrepreneurial Competencies (N = 235) 

Entrepreneurship 
Competency 
Rankinga  

Overall mean 
(SD) 

N = 235 

No trainingb n = 184 Trainingc n = 51 
Female 
n = 96 

Male 
n = 88 

Female 
n = 23 

Male 
n = 28 

Independent or 
autonomous 

4.35 (0.52) 4.34 (0.53) 4.38 (0.50) 
 4.29 (0.55) 4.38 (0.49) 4.26 (0.51) 4.48 (0.48) 

Leadership skills 4.07 (0.42) 4.07 (0.42) 4.06 (0.43) 
  4.08 (0.40) 4.05 (0.44) 4.06 (0.42) 4.06 (0.43) 
Opportunity 

assessment  
4.07 (0.47) 4.06 (0.46) 4.07 (0.48) 

 3.99 (0.44) 4.14 (0.48) 4.02 (0.54) 4.11 (0.42) 
Resilience skills 4.00 (0.46) 4.00 (0.46) 4.02 (0.48) 
  3.98 (0.44) 4.02 (0.50) 3.98 (0.54) 4.06 (0.42) 
Visionary  3.93 (0.53) 3.92 (0.53) 3.97 (0.49) 
  3.92 (0.49) 3.91 (0.58) 4.17 (0.50) 3.79 (0.45) 
Opportunity 

Exploitation  
3.85 (0.57) 3.82 (0.61) 3.93 (0.41) 

 3.86 (0.58) 3.78 (0.65) 3.90 (0.40) 3.96 (0.41) 
Creative Problem 

Solving 
3.81 (0.65) 3.79 (0.65) 3.89 (0.62) 

 3.76 (0.66) 3.81 (0.64) 3.76 (0.61) 3.99 (0.63) 
Tenacity/ 

Perseverance 
3.68 (0.54) 3.65 (0.57) 3.79 (0.40) 

 3.66 (0.54) 3.65 (0.61) 3.70 (0.45) 3.87 (0.35) 
Risk management 

techniques 
3.65 (0.56) 3.62 (0.58) 3.73 (0.49) 

 3.50 (0.57) 3.74 (0.57) 3.67 (0.63) 3.79 (0.35) 
Opportunity 

recognition 
3.62 (0.64) 3.60 (0.65) 3.69 (0.55) 

 3.61 (0.67) 3.57 (0.64) 3.54 (0.61) 3.82 (0.47) 
Innovativeness 3.55 (0.60) 3.50 (0.62) 3.72 (0.51) 
  3.41 (0.60) 3.60 (0.63) 3.58 (0.55) 3.82 (0.46) 
Social Networking 3.27 (0.77) 3.19 (0.79) 3.55 (0.63) 

 3.16 (0.76) 3.22 (0.81) 3.49 (0.67) 3.60 (0.61) 
Note: a a priori true scale limit was used and anchored as Strongly Disagree (1 – 1.5), Disagree (1.51 – 2.5), Neither 
Agree nor Disagree (2.51 – 3.5), Agree (3.51 – 4.5), Strongly Agree (4.51 – 5). The ranking of the entrepreneurial 
competencies is based off the overall mean scores for the two groups, i.e., those that received training and those 
that did not.  Scale Strongly disagree (1), Disagree (2), Neither Disagree or Agree (3), Agree (4), Strongly Agree (5). 
bNo training ranking includes educators who indicated not having received entrepreneurship training/course work 
during their teacher preparation course work. cTraining refers to educators that received training/coursework in 
entrepreneurship during their teacher preparation course. 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  104 
 

Objective #2: Explore Educators’ Perspectives Regarding the Significance of Entrepreneurship 
Knowledge in their Work. 
A large majority of respondents (n = 247, 96.1%; see Table 2) strongly agreed or agreed 
entrepreneurship knowledge was relevant to their teaching. Only 1.2% (n = 3) strongly 
disagreed or disagreed entrepreneurship was relevant to their teaching, and 2.7% (n = 7) 
neither agreed nor disagreed with this statement (see Table 2).  
 
Table 2 
 
Educators’ Perceptions Regarding the Importance of Entrepreneurship Knowledge to their Work.  
(N = 257). 

Entrepreneurship is relevant to my work as an agriculture teacher n % 
Strongly Agree 126 49.0% 
Agree 121 47.1% 
Neither Agree nor Disagree 7 2.7%  
Disagree  1 0.4% 
Strongly Disagree 2 0.8% 

 
Objective #3: Determine Differences between Male and Female Agricultural Educators 
Regarding the Importance of Entrepreneurship Knowledge in their Work. 
For objective three, researchers utilized an independent samples t-test to determine whether 
differences existed between males and female educators’ perception regarding the importance 
of entrepreneurship knowledge to their work. The 116 male respondents (M = 4.46, SD = 0.59) 
were not significantly different from the 119 female respondents (M = 4.43, SD = 0.71) in the 
reported relevance of entrepreneurship to their job as agricultural educators t(233) = 0.364, p = 
0.358. The test for differences between sex on perceived relevance yielded a medium effect 
size d = 0.66.  
 
Objective #4: Ascertain the Perceived Need for Entrepreneurship Professional Development 
among Agriculture Educators. 
For objective four, over nine in 10 educators (n = 237, 92.2%) strongly agreed or agreed 
educators needed training in entrepreneurship to help them be effective working with students 
SAE - entrepreneurship projects. Sixteen teachers (6.2%) neither agreed or disagreed with the 
need for educators’ entrepreneurship professional development, whereas 1.6% (n = 4) 
disagreed or strongly disagreed with the need to provide professional development for 
educators in entrepreneurship (see Table 4). Of teachers who responded to this question, 79% 
(f = 203) did not receive entrepreneurship training in their teacher preparation coursework. 
 
  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  105 
 

Table 4 
 
Perceived Need for Entrepreneurship Professional Development among Agricultural Educators 
(N = 257). 

Item n % 
Strongly Agree  81 31.5% 
Agree  156 60.7% 
Neither Agree nor Disagree  16 6.2%  
Disagree  3 1.2% 
Strongly Disagree 1 0.4% 

 
Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 

 
Based on these data, researchers conclude agricultural educators agree they feel competent in 
11 of the 12 entrepreneurship competencies. The only entrepreneurship competency where 
teachers were uncertain and fell below the true limits of the scale was about their competence 
with social networking skills. None of the educators strongly agreed, disagreed, or strongly 
disagreed about possessing any of the 12 entrepreneurship competencies. 
 
These data left researchers searching for explanations on the source of teacher entrepreneurial 
competence, despite most lacking formal entrepreneurship education during their teacher 
preparation. One potential explanation could be the relatively autonomous structure of 
secondary agricultural education programs, where teachers manage various learning 
laboratories, such as greenhouses, mechanics, and meat processing laboratories that often 
operate as small entrepreneurial ventures. These small enterprises may require teachers to 
develop and utilize competencies parallel to the skills of entrepreneurs. Also, questions arose 
about how on-the-job learning, years of experience, and educators’ own background as 
agriculture students contribute to acquiring entrepreneurship competencies.  
 
The researchers recommend investigating if years of experience and laboratory management 
are predictive of teacher entrepreneurial competency. A second explanation for high levels of 
entrepreneurial competence is many agriculture educators were former agriculture students 
themselves; did these educators gain entrepreneurial competencies through their own high 
school entrepreneurship projects? Do the agriculture educators who farm outside of school or 
have a “side hustle” have different levels of entrepreneurial competence? The researchers 
recommend further investigation into how high school and SAE supervision experiences 
contribute to the development of entrepreneurial competencies. Perhaps individuals with high 
entrepreneurial competencies are drawn to careers teaching agriculture. We recommend 
further research on the genesis of agriculture educator entrepreneurship competencies.  
 
Our research revealed that educators were uncertain about social networking competencies, 
despite the assumption agricultural teachers needing social networking skills for their 
professional success as agricultural educators. Social networking encompasses the ability to 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  106 
 

interact effectively, comprehend social contexts, and cultivate both personal and professional 
relationships with peers. Despite uncertainty about their abilities, social networking skills are 
vital for educators to enhance their collaboration, foster professional development, enhance 
student engagement, and facilitate effective communication (Baker-Doyle, 2011; Kaihoi et al., 
2022; Marcelo-Martínez et al., 2024). Social networking can also help educators manage stress, 
promote emotional well-being and reduce attrition (Baker-Doyle, 2011; Kaihoi et al., 2022). 
Further, social networking competencies enable educators build and maintain a sense of 
community within their classrooms and schools while also strengthening interactions between 
parents and the broader community. Proficiency in social networking allows educators to build 
valuable social capital and professional networks, essential for information sharing, increasing 
professional visibility, and promoting career growth and well-being (Baker-Doyle, 2011; Staudt 
Willet, 2024). And, in an increasingly digital world, these competencies can help educators stay 
relevant and better prepare students for future challenges and opportunities.   
 
Given the crucial nature of these competencies, we strongly recommend educators actively 
work on enhancing their social networking competencies. This can be achieved through various 
means, including joining professional networking organizations specific to education and 
building communities of practice where they can connect with peers and share relevant 
resources (Baker-Doyle, 2011; Staudt Willet, 2024). Attending conferences and webinars 
provides excellent opportunities to engage with like-minded professionals, expand their 
knowledge base and networks. Further, developing professional learning networks can be 
another effective strategy for ongoing professional growth and collaboration (Baker-Doyle, 
2011; Staudt Willet, 2024). Additionally, educators should explore ways to leverage social 
media platforms for classroom engagement, which can simultaneously improve their social 
networking skills and enhance student learning experiences (Marcelo-Martínez et al., 2024). By 
implementing these recommendations, teachers can bridge the gap between their current 
uncertainty and the growing demand for social networking proficiency in agricultural and 
entrepreneurship education.   
 
Educators desire entrepreneurship-focused professional development. Researchers 
recommend training to improve social networking skills for building professional and 
community connections. This can be achieved by providing educators with trainings in effective 
communication strategies especially in professional settings, developing workshops aimed at 
building and maintaining relationships with students, parents, and community leaders. 
Educators should also be empowered to use social networking platforms to expand their 
professional networks, including equipping them with techniques for initiating and nurturing 
collaborations with other educators and institutions.  We also suggest development in creative 
problem solving which can be achieved through introducing educators to design thinking 
methodologies, exercises in lateral thinking such as mind mapping and brainstorming 
techniques that they can use with their students to generate ideas and develop a growth 
mindset (Neck et al., 2024). Regarding the innovation competency, educators can receive 
training in emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence to enhance their teaching and 
engagement with students during ideation stage in design thinking to develop creative 
solutions.  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  107 
 

 
The competencies of opportunity recognition and exploitation could be enhanced by equipping 
educators with skills to help students identify needs or market gaps through customer 
discovery techniques and market research, including transforming ideas into actionable 
business ventures through the lean start up approach (Ries, 2011).  Further, educators need to 
be equipped with skills to evaluate and mitigate risks, crisis management, and developing 
contingency plans to deal with unexpected events. Helping educators to develop strategies for 
overcoming setbacks and learning from failure, including developing techniques to maintain 
motivation and focus on long-term goals through peer support systems can help them become 
resilient, persevere, reduce burnout, and attrition rates. Also, visionary thinking among 
educators can be enhanced through long term strategic planning and inspiring others towards a 
shared vision to help them stay focused and accountable as they guide their students. All these 
competencies can be developed through professional development programs which might 
include a structured curriculum with theoretical and practical entrepreneurial applications, 
including experiential leaning opportunities involving hands-on, minds-on projects and 
simulations to apply the skills learned. Enhancing these competencies would boost teachers’ 
self-efficacy and effectiveness with students, while potentially leading to entrepreneurial 
opportunities that benefit the community.  
 
Researchers found no differences between males and female educators regarding the 
importance of entrepreneurial competencies. Previous research has found males tend to be 
more entrepreneurial and likely to pursue entrepreneurial ventures than females 
(Abbasianchavari & Block, 2022; Cowling & Taylor, 2001; Kickul et al., 2008; Koellinger et al., 
2011; Mukembo, 2017; Mukembo et al., 2020), and females reported lower perceived 
entrepreneurial competencies (Coleman & Robb, 2017; Somia et al., 2024). According to 
Shahriar (2018), differences in entrepreneurial tendencies between males and females can be 
attributed to distinct socialization and nurturing patterns across genders. In this study, 
researchers conclude both male and female teachers see entrepreneurial competence as 
important in their work as agriculture teachers. Educators, regardless of sex, reported 
entrepreneurship knowledge was relevant to effectively fulfill their teaching, mentoring, and 
supervision roles of student projects.  
 
Despite high reported levels of competence, more than nine in 10 teachers reported 
entrepreneurship training would benefit teachers when supervising entrepreneurship projects 
with their students. Researchers recommend teacher preparation programs incorporate 
entrepreneurship training as part of their coursework and professional development, with a 
special focus on social networking skills which are essential for community integration, reducing 
teacher burnout and attrition, and building professional learning networks with other educators 
and students (Baker-Doyle, 2011; Staudt Willet, 2024). Further, a need exists to create peer 
mentorship networks, by connecting experienced entrepreneurship educators with those 
agricultural educators that are joining the field to help leverage their knowledge and build self-
efficacy across all genders and experience levels. Acquiring such knowledge and related 
competencies will contribute to the development of their human and social capital (Becker, 
1993; Schultz, 1961). Professional development for participants in entrepreneurship can 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  108 
 

enhance entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy and entrepreneurial competencies (Morris et al., 2013; 
Schenkel et al., 2022; Venesaar et al., 2022), thereby contributing to their human capital 
(Becker, 1993; Schultz, 1972) and effectiveness in assisting students with their 
entrepreneurship projects as well as building meaningful community relationships. 
 

Acknowledgments 
 
This research was supported in part by funds from the McQuinn Center for Entrepreneurial 
Leadership in the Division of Applied Social Sciences at the University of Missouri. 
 
Some of the work in this manuscript were presented at the 40th Annual Conference of the 
Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education (AIAEE), in Orlando, Florida. 
 
Also, some of these findings were presented at the 2023 North Central Region - American 
Association for Agricultural Education Conference in Brookings, South Dakota. 
 
Author Contributions: S. Mukembo – conceptualization, formal analysis, and writing – original 
draft; J. Tummons – investigation, formal analysis, writing – review and editing; N. Smith – 
investigation; J. Simonsen –  conceptualization. 
 

References 
 
Abbasianchavari, A., & Block, J. (2022). Perceptual factors explaining the gender gap in 

entrepreneurial propensity: A replication and extension. Journal of Business Venturing 
Insights, 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2022.e00303 

  
Baker-Doyle, K. J. (2011). The networked teacher: How new teachers build social networks for 

professional support. Teachers College Press.  
 
Barrick, R. K. (1992). A new model for agricultural education and SAE. The Agricultural 

Education Magazine, 65(6), 4–7. 
http://www.naae.org/profdevelopment/magazine/archive_issues/Volume65/v65i6.pdf 

 
Becker, G. S. (1993). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference 

to education (3rd ed.). The University of Chicago Press. 
 
Berthoud, R. (2000). A measure of changing health. In R. Berthoud & J. Gershuny (Eds.), Seventy 

years in the lives of British families: Evidence on the dynamics of social change from 
British household panel survey (pp. 161–192). The Policy Press.  

 
Boone, H. N., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2), Article 

Number 2TOT2. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2012april/pdf/JOE_v50_2tt2.pdf  
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2022.e00303
http://www.naae.org/profdevelopment/magazine/archive_issues/Volume65/v65i6.pdf
https://archives.joe.org/joe/2012april/pdf/JOE_v50_2tt2.pdf


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  109 
 

Brown, A., & Knobloch, N. (2022). Effects of a simulation on eighth grade students’ Business 
Management Knowledge and entrepreneurial intent in an exploratory agriculture 
course. Journal of Agricultural Education, 63(2), 88–101. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2022.02088 

 
Clark, T., Foster, L., Bryman, A., & Sloan, L. (2021). Bryman's social research methods. Oxford 

University Press. 
 
Coleman, S., & Robb, A. (2017). Empowering equality: 5 challenges faced by women 

entrepreneurs. Third Way. https://www.thirdway.org/report/empowering-equality-5-
challenges-faced-by-women-entrepreneurs  

 
Cowling, M., & Taylor, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial Women and Men: Two Different Species? 

Small Business Economics, 16(3), 167–175. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40229147 
 
Creswell. J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods 

approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. 
 
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. 
 
Hanagriff, R. D. (2024). 2023 Agricultural education engagement executive summary report. The 

Agricultural Experience Tracker (AET) & Texas A&M University Kingsville. 
https://www.theaet.com/docs/edited%202023%20Exec%20Summary%20-
All%20Program%20Summary%20Values_FINAL.pdf  

 
Hartog, J., & Van den Brick, M. (2007). Human capital. Cambridge University Press. 
 
Heinert, S. B., & Roberts, T. G. (2017). A profile of agricultural education teachers with 

exemplary rural agricultural entrepreneurship education programs. Journal of 
Agricultural Education, 58(4) 192–209. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2017.04192 

 
Heinert, S. B., & Roberts, T. G. (2018). A profile of exemplary rural agricultural entrepreneurship 

education programs. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(3), 291–308 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.03291 

 
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British 

Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396–403. 
https://doi.org/10.9734/bjast/2015/14975   

 
Kaihoi, C. A., Bottiani, J. H., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2022). Teachers supporting teachers: A social 

network perspective on collegial stress support and emotional wellbeing among 
elementary and middle school educators. School Mental Health, 14(4), 1070–1085. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09529-y 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2022.02088
https://www.thirdway.org/report/empowering-equality-5-challenges-faced-by-women-entrepreneurs
https://www.thirdway.org/report/empowering-equality-5-challenges-faced-by-women-entrepreneurs
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40229147
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2017.04192
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.03291
https://doi.org/10.9734/bjast/2015/14975
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09529-y


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  110 
 

Kickul, J., Wilson, F., Marlino, D., & Barbosa, S. D. (2008). Are misalignments of perceptions and 
self-efficacy causing gender gaps in entrepreneurial intentions among our nation’s 
teens? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 321-335. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871709 

 
Klein-Collins, R. (2013, November). Sharpening our focus on learning: The rise of competency-

based approaches to degree completion. (Occasional Paper No. 20). University of Illinois 
and Indiana University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA). 
Retrieved from https://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/02/OccasionalPaper20.pdf  

   
Koellinger, P., Minniti, M., & Schade, C. (2008). Seeing the world with different eyes: Gender 

differences in perceptions and the propensity to start a business. Tinbergen Institute 
Discussion Paper No. 2008-035/3. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1115354 

  
Koellinger, Philipp, Minniti, M., & Schade, C. (2011). Gender differences in entrepreneurial 

propensity. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 75(2), 213–234. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00689.x 

  
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. 

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308 

 
Lindner, J. R., & Lindner, N. (2024). Interpreting likert type, summated, unidimensional, and 

attitudinal scales: I neither agree nor disagree, Likert or not. Advancements in 
Agricultural Development, 5(2), 152–163. https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i2.351 

   
Makulova, A. T., Alimzhanova, G. M., Bekturganova, Z. M., Umirzakova, Z. A., Makulova, L. T., & 

Karymbayeva, K. M. (2015). Theory and practice of competency-based approach in 
Education. International Education Studies, 8(8), 183–192. 
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n8p183 

  
Marcelo-Martínez, P., Yot-Domínguez, C., & Marcelo, C. (2024). How and why teachers use 

social networks for professional learning. Teacher Development, 28(3), 317–329. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2023.2296611   

 
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 
Business Management, 51(3), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12023  

 
Mukembo, S. C. (2017). Equipping youth with agripreneurship and other valuable life skills by 

linking secondary agricultural education to communities for improved livelihoods: A 
comparative analysis of project-based learning in Uganda (Doctoral dissertation, 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557
https://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/OccasionalPaper20.pdf
https://www.learningoutcomesassessment.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/OccasionalPaper20.pdf
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1115354
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00689.x
https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i2.351
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n8p183
https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2023.2296611
https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12023


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  111 
 

Oklahoma State University). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses 
database. (UMI No.10608552). 

 
Mukembo, S. C., Edwards, M. C., & Robinson, J. S. (2020). Comparative analysis of students’ 

perceived agripreneurship competencies and likelihood to become agripreneurs 
depending on learning approach: A report from Uganda. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 61(2), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02093 

 
Mukembo, S. C., Edwards, M. C., & Robinson, J. S. (2023). Students’ acquisition of agricultural 

and entrepreneurship (agripreneurship) knowledge and skills: Does instructional 
approach and their sex matter? Journal of International Agricultural and Extension 
Education, 30(3), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.4148/2831-5960.1147 

 
Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (2004). Psychological testing: Principles and Applications. 

(6th ed.). Pearson 
 
Neck, M. H., Neck, C. P., & Murray, E. L. (2024). Entrepreneurship: The practice and mindset (3rd 

ed.). Sage Publications. 
 
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, Inc. 
 
Phipps, L. J, Osborne, E. W., Dyer, J. E., & Ball, A. (2008). Theoretical foundations of effective 

 teaching: Handbook on agricultural education in public schools (6th ed.). Thomson 
Delmar Learning. 

 
Revell-Love, C., & Revell-Love, T. (2016). Competencies of Women entrepreneurs utilizing 

information marketing businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise 
Development, 23(3), 831–853. https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-02-2016-0027 

  
Ries, E. (2011). The learn startup. Crown Publishing Group.  
 
Schenkel, M., D’Souza, R. R., & Hornsby, J. S. (2022). Entrepreneurship competency 

development: Where are we and where do we need to go? In C. Mathews and S. Santos 
(Eds.). Annals of Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy – 2023, Annals of 
Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy – 2023, (pp. 64–76). Edward Elgar Publishing, 
Inc. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803926193.00012 

  
Schultz, T. W. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American Economic  

 Review, 51(1), 1–17. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1818907 
 
Schultz, T. W. (1972). Human capital: Policy issues and research opportunities.  

 Journal of Human Resources, 6(1), 1–86. 
https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c4126/c4126.pdf 

 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02093
https://doi.org/10.4148/2831-5960.1147
https://doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-02-2016-0027
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803926193.00012
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1818907
https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c4126/c4126.pdf


Mukembo et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557  112 
 

Shahriar, A. Z. (2018). Gender differences in entrepreneurial propensity: Evidence from 
matrilineal and Patriarchal Societies. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(6), 762–779. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.04.005 

  
Somià, T., Pittaway, L., & Benedict, P. (2024). Rethinking entrepreneurial competencies: A 

gender-focused analysis of students’ perceived competencies. The International Journal 
of Management Education, 22(3), 101038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101038 

  
Staudt Willet, K. B. (2024). Early career teachers’ expansion of professional learning networks 

with social media. Professional Development in Education, 50(2), 386–402. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2023.2178481 

   
Sweetland, S. R. (1996). Human capital theory: Foundations of a field of inquiry. Review of 

Educational Research, 66(3), 341–359. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066003341 
 
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of 

Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi:10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd 
 
Tummons, J., Mukembo, S. C., Simonsen, J. C., & Smith, N. (2023). Agricultural Teacher views on 

Importance of Entrepreneurial Competencies for Student Career Success. In the 
proceedings of North Central Region - American Association for Agricultural Education, 
September 27– 29, Brookings, South Dakota, USA. 

  
Venesaar, U., Antonelli, G., Dorożyński, T., Duarte, H., Kallaste, M., Riviezzo, A., Räisänen, M., & 

Santos, S. C. (2022). Entrepreneurship competence among students and employees: A 
Comparative Study in five European countries. In C. Mathews and S. Santos (Eds.). 
Annals of Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy – 2023, (pp. 120–144). Edward 
Elgar Publishing, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803926193.00015 

 
 
© 2024 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v5i4.557
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.04.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2024.101038
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2023.2178481
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066003341
https://doi:10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
https://doi.org/10.4337/9781803926193.00015

