Index

Impact of Academic Self-Efficacy on Entrepreneurial Intention of Faculty of Sport Sciences' Students: Bayburt University

Eda Adatepe1*; Yilmaz Unlu2

1Department of Sports Management, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Bayburt University, Turkey.
2Department of Physical Education and Sport Teaching, Faculty of Sports Sciences, Bartin University, Turkey.

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the academic self-efficacy and entrepreneurial levels of the students studying in the faculties of sport sciences, to define the factors affecting these characteristics and to determine their impacts. In this study, the Entrepreneurial Scale for University Students and the Academic Self-Efficacy Scale were applied to 372 students studying at the faculty of. sport sciences. According to analysis results of the data obtained, it has been determined that the entrepreneurial levels of the students participating in the research are high. Entrepreneurial levels of male students are higher. than female students. Positive relationships were found with respect to the age variable in the dimensions of entrepreneurship and cognitive practices. BPT (Basic Proficiency Test) score has positive significant relations with entrepreneurship, cognitive practices and technical skills and CGPA has positive significant relations with academic self-efficacy scale sub-dimensions. As the work experience period of the students increased, the acquired level of entrepreneurship also increased. Moreover, as their academic self-efficacy increased, their entrepreneurial intentions also increased. The results obtained include empirical evidence that academic self-efficacy has a statistically significant. and positive impact on entrepreneurial intention. Therefore, higher education institutions should focus on improving the academic performance of students studying in undergraduate, associate and graduate education in order to increase their intention to create new job opportunities. Since this study only includes the opinions of the students of the faculty of sport sciences, it is recommended to expand the sample group and investigate the effect of different variables on entrepreneurial intention.

Keywords: Academic self-efficacy, Entrepreneurial intention, Sport sciences’ students.

Contribution of this paper to the literature
In this study aimed to determine the academic self-efficacy and entrepreneurial levels of the students studying in the faculties of sport sciences, to define the factors affecting these characteristics and to determine their impacts. The fact that this sample and variables have not been examined in the literature makes this study unique.

1. Introduction

“Self-efficacy” is one of the key concepts in Albert Bandura's Social Learning Theory research. “Bandura defines self-efficacy as an effective quality in the formation of behaviors and an individual's self-judgment about his/her capacity to organize and successfully perform the activities necessary to demonstrate a certain performance (Bandura, 1997). According to Schunk, self-efficacy belief is the most important predictor of an individual's behavior (Schunk, 1991). If an individual finds the necessary ability and strength to perform a task, he/she will behave more willingly and more decisively.

Individuals have different self-efficacy perceptions for many behaviors in daily life. Academic self-efficacy is one of them, and it is a special type of self-efficacy. “The concept of academic self-efficacy is the perception that an individual can perform a given academic task at a determined level of success (Solberg, O'Brien, Villareal, Kennel, & Davis, 1993). According to Chemers, Hu, and Garcia (2001) academic self-efficacy is students' self-confidence in subjects that require academic study. In this context, in order to learn, it is the individual's ability to use cognitive strategies, effective management of learning environment and time, and to regulate his/her own performance effectively (Chemers et al., 2001).

It is an undeniable fact that education is a necessity of the epoch for current and future generations and has the most effective significance in building the world (Adatepe, Kul, & Adatepe, 2021). Many characteristics of individuals such as skills, abilities and qualities are mostly affected by this change and development. According to Semerci, the developing and changing world conditions demand individuals who can demonstrate their existence strongly (Semerci, 1999). In other words, people who can use their mental skills will be more successful individuals in the future and will be able to survive. The situation expected from educational institutions is to raise individuals who can use technology, are equipped with knowledge and skills and who are self-taught autodidacts (Yagar, Dökme, & Coşkun, 2020).

Entrepreneurship is of great importance today. It is “very important to identify entrepreneurial qualified people and” to educate them properly and reintegrate them into society “by educational institutions such” as universities. Universities have great duties to encourage entrepreneurship and to plan and implement it in a way that meets” the needs of the sectors (Lekoko, Rankhumise, & Ras, 2012). In many countries, entrepreneurial activity is considered a positive activity (Igwe, Adebayo, Olakanmi, Ogbonna, & Aina, 2013). Because entrepreneurial individuals not only reduce poverty by establishing a business, but also increase the welfare of. the society by generating added value with these activities, organizing resources efficiently and effectively.

It is thought that one of the factors affecting students' entrepreneurial characteristics is their academic self-efficacy belief. It is known that self-efficacy has a significant and positive impact on entrepreneurial intention (Pihie & Bagheri, 2013) and in terms of academic context, it has a positive impact on self-efficacy, motivation and student performance.

It is seen that sport develops constructive and productive abilities, imposes job, duty and professional responsibility on the individual, and creates awareness of using public and national energy resources well by protecting them (Kolayiş & Taşkıran, 2001). As the literature investigating the sports, entrepreneurship and academic self-efficacy triangle is very limited, this research was conducted with the aim of filling the. gap base on the sample of students studying in sport sciences faculties.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

The universe of the research consists of 780 students studying at “Bayburt University Faculty of Sport Sciences. The sample consisted of a total of 372 students, 148 females and 224 males, selected by random method, who were studying at the Faculty of Sport Sciences of Bayburt University in the spring semester of the 2021-2022 academic year and who attended the classes between 23.05.2022 and 10.06.2022.

2.2. Research Design

In the research, the survey method, which is the most preferred among the descriptive research model (Thomas & Nelson, 1996), carried out with large groups, in which the opinions and attitudes of the people in the group about a phenomenon or event is taken, and the phenomenon and events are tried to be defined with respect to their own conditions and as they are, was used (Karasar, 2005).

2.3. Data Collection Tools

2.3.1. Academic Self-Efficacy Scale (ASES)

ASES is a 33-item scale originally prepared by Owen and Forman (1988). Items are evaluated on a 5-point Likert scale (1= Fairly Low to 5= Extremely High). In the study of Owen and Forman (1988), Cronbach's alpha coefficient was expressed as 0.92. The Turkish version validity and reliability of the scale was made by Ekici (2012) and the alpha coefficient was determined as 0.86. The scale has three dimensions: social status, cognitive practices, and technical skills. The Cronbach Alpha coefficients for this research are given in the Table 1.

In Table 1, the .78 value for the “social status” sub-dimension, which is one of the sub-dimensions of the scale, indicates that the reliability of the scale is high, .67 value is found for the “technical skills” sub-dimension, and the Cronbach Alpha coefficient for the other dimension, “cognitive practices” was found to be .90. The Cronbach Alpha value of the. entire scale was found to be .93 and it was determined to be of high reliability (George & Mallery, 2010).

Table 1 . Relaibility analysis.
Sub-Factors
Sub-Factor items
Cronbach’s Alpha
Social status
2-3-4-11-14-15-16-17-25-27
0.78
Cognitive applications
1-5-6-7-8-9-10-12-13-18-19-20-21-22-24-30-31-32-33
0.90
Technical skills
23-26-28-29
0.67
Academic Self-efficacy Scale
All items
0.93

2.3.2. Entrepreneurship Scale for University Students (ESUS)

Secondly, “Entrepreneurship Scale, which was developed by Yılmaz and Sünbül (2009) and consisted of 36 items, was used in the research. Questionnaire sentences were arranged as a 5-point scale ranging from “Very often” (5) to “Never” (1). As a result of the factor analysis performed with Principal Components Analysis, All items were collected in one dimension. As a result of the reliability analysis, it was determined that the Cronbach/Alpha reliability coefficient of the scale was .90. The internal consistency. coefficient of the measurement. tool from the data collected” within the framework of this study was found to be 0.95.

2.4. Data Analysis

The data obtained within the scope of the research” were analysed with the help of SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) 25.0 package program. Descriptive statistics were used in the research. For the tests to be applied to the data, the normal distribution values were examined. In the literature, it is stated as normal distribution that the results of kurtosis skewness are between +1.5 and -1.5 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). When the scale items were within the limitation of these values, parametric tests were used in the study, otherwise non-parametric tests were used. In addition, in order to reveal whether the data are homogeneously distributed or not, the intergroup homogeneity test was applied and Levene statistics were revealed. The reliability of the study was determined with the Cronbach's Alpha test.

In order. to determine the relationships and differences between the variables in the study, independent groups t-test, one-way ANOVA (ANalysis of Variance)  and Pearson, non-parametric Spearman Correlation analyses were used. After ANOVA tests, Scheffe test from Post-Hoc analysis was used in the tests that provided homogeneous variance distribution, and Tamhane's T2 test was used in cases where there was no homogeneous variance.

3. Results

In results of the research, there are findings related to the results of the analysis of the data obtained. within the framework of the research.

Table 2 . Frequency & percentage distributions of the demographic characteristics of the sample group.
Variables Groups
Frequency
% Percent
Age 18
8
2.2
19
17
4.6
20
74
19.9
21
93
25.0
22
95
25.5
23
52
14.0
24
33
8.9
Gender Female 
148
39.8
Male
224
60.2
Grade 1st Grade
40
10.8
2nd Grade
115
30.9
3rd Grade
161
43.3
4th Grade
56
15.1
Department Coaching Training
157
42.2
Physical Education and Sports Education
76
20.4
Sports Management
139
37.4
Number of family members 1-3 individuals
48
12.9
4-6 individuals
206
55.4
7-9 individuals
103
27.7
10 individuals and more
15
4.0
Entrepreneurship Course/Training Status Yes
163
43.8
No
209
56.2
Work Experience Status Never worked before
87
23.4
1-6 months
42
11.3
7-11 months
66
17.7
1-3 years
97
26.1
4 years and more
80
21.5

According to Table 2, the sample mostly consists of individuals aged 21, 22 and 23. 60.2% of the participants are men and 39.8% are women. 2nd and 3rd grades make up 74.2% of the participants. Coaching Training and Sports Management includes 79.6% of the participants. The number of family members is mostly in the group of 4-6 individuals. The number of students who did not attend the entrepreneurship course/training is 209. Work experience is at most 1-3 years, at least 1-6 months.

Table 3 shows the descriptive statistics of the other variables in the study. Family income of the participants varies between 500-34.000 TL (Turkish Liras). Personal income, on the other hand, varies between 800 and 10.000 TL. The BPT (Basic Proficiency Test) scores declared by the students who are qualified to enter the school are 150 as the lowest and 308 as the highest. CGPA (Cumulative Grade Point Average) scores ranged from 1.5 to 3.96 out of 4.

Table 3 . Descriptive statistics of other variables of the sample group.
Variables
N
Min
Max
Mean
sd
Family Income (TL)
372
500
34000
5506.47
4306.29
Personel Income (TL)
372
800
10000
1135.89
753.56
BPT (Basic Proficiency Test) Score
372
150
427
194.61
38.89
CGPA (Cumulative Grade Point Average)
372
1.50
3.96
2.80
0.41
Valid N 
372
  

Table 4 . Entrepreneurship mean score of the sample group
Scale
N
Mean
sd
Entrepreneurship
372
3.85
0.598

Table 4 shows the arithmetic mean of the scores calculated from the entrepreneurship scale of the students. This score is 3.85. This average shows that these students are at the "High Entrepreneurship" level.

Table 5 . Independent groups t test between gender variable and scale sub-factors.
Sub-factors Gender
N
Mean
t
p
Entrepreneurship Female
148
3.85
6.66
0.010*
Male
224
3.86
Social status Female
148
3.20
2.01
0.157
Male
224
3.25
 Cognitive applications Female
148
3.32
1.40
0.238
Male
224
3.25
Technical skills Female
148
3.19
3.76
0.053
Male
224
3.16

Note: *p<.05.

When the findings in Table 5 are examined, a statistically significant difference was found only in the single dimension of the "entrepreneurship scale", as a result of the independent groups t-test performed between the scale sub-dimensions of the participants and the gender variable (p<0.05). No differentiation was found in the sub-dimensions of the academic self-efficacy scale.

Table 6 . Correlations between other variables and scale sub-factors.
N=372
Age
Entrepreneurship
Social Status
Cognitive applications
Technical Skills
Age
1
0.141**
0.097
0.102*
0.092
Personal income
1
-0.007
0.005
0.048
0.019
Family income
1
0.015
-0.012
-0.045
0.027
BPT scores
1
0.132*
0.086
0.103*
0.105*
CGPA
1
0.051
0.148**
0.239**
0.208**

Note: *p<.05,**p<.01.

As seen in Table 6, as a result of the Pearson Correlation Analysis. performed to determine the relationship between the age of the participants and the sub-dimensions of the scale, age and “entrepreneurship scale” (r=0.141**, p<.01) and “cognitive practices” (r= 0.102*, p<0.05) sub-dimension was found to be positively and significantly correlated. However, it can be said that there are weak linear relations. No relationship was found between family income, personal income and sub-dimensions. There is a low-level and positive significant relationship between the students' BPT scores and the sub-dimensions such as the "entrepreneurship scale" (r=0.132*, p<0.05), "cognitive practices" (r= 0.103*, p<0.05) and "technical skills" (r= 0.105*, p <0.05). While no relationship was found between CGPA and entrepreneurship scale, in all sub-dimensions of academic self-efficacy (r= 0.148**, p<0.01), (r= 0.238**, p<0.01) and (r= 0.208*, respectively.*, p<0.01) weak positive correlations were found.

Table 7 . ANOVA test between entrepreneurship scale and work experience variable.
Sub-Factors Work Exp.
N
Mean
sd
F
p
Scheffe Test
Entrepreneurship Never worked before(1)
87
3.64
4
4.619
0.001**
4>1
5>1
1-6 months(2)
42
3.76
367
7-11 months(3)
66
3.91
371
1-3 years(4)
97
3.95
4 years and more(5)
80
3.96

Note: **p< .01

Table 7 shows “that there is a statistically significant difference between the entrepreneurship levels” of the students participating in the research and the work experience variable.

As the variances were equal based on multiple comparison tests (Post Hoc test) Scheffe test was applied to figure out between which groups the difference was.

The result of the Scheffe test on the "entrepreneurship" scale was between 1-3 years and I have never worked (X=3.95 - X=3.64) in favor of 1-3 years, between 4 years and above and I have never worked (X=3.96 - X=3.64) was found to be in favor of the 4 years and above group.

Table 8 .Correlations between the entrepreneurship levels of the participants and the sub-factors of the academic self-efficacy scale.
N=372
Ent
SS
CA
TS
Ent
1
0.196**
0.155**
0.194**

Note: **p<.01 Ent: Entrepreneurship, SS: Social status, CA: Cognitive applications, TS: Technical skills.

Looking at Table 8, as a “result of the Spearman Correlation Analysis conducted to determine the relationship between” the entrepreneurship levels of the students participating in the research and the sub-dimensions of the academic self-efficacy scale, it was found that there was a positive and significant relationship between. entrepreneurship and all academic self-efficacy sub-dimensions:

4. Discussion

With this study, the impact of demographic factors and academic self-efficacy levels of Bayburt University Faculty of Sport Sciences students on entrepreneurial intentions was tried to be examined. The study  was initiated by giving information about the variables analyzed. First, students' entrepreneurship levels were measured. Their arithmetic average is 3.85 (out of 5). This average indicates that these students are at the "High Entrepreneurship" level. Pan and Akay (2015) obtained similar results in their studies. A statistically significant difference was found in only one dimension of the "entrepreneurship scale" in the test conducted between the scale sub-dimensions of the participants and the gender variable (p<.05). In the literature, it has been stated that male students are more entrepreneurial than female students (Dabic, Daim, Bayraktaroglu, Novak, & Basic, 2012). The lack of differentiation in academic self-efficacy sub-dimensions may be due to the fact that students are given the same education, regardless of whether they are men or women.

Another analysis is the correlation analysis to determine the relationship between the participants' age, personal income, family income, BPT scores and CGPA scores and the sub-dimensions of the scale. As a result of the analysis, it was determined that there is a positive and significant relationship between age and the "entrepreneurship scale" (r=.141**, p<.01) and "cognitive practices" (r= .102*, p<.05) sub-dimensions. However, it can be said that there are weak linear relations. Bohlmann, Rauch, and Zacher (2017) stated that age should be considered as an important variable in entrepreneurship studies and explained the role of increasing age in entrepreneurial and cognitive activities.

Family income and personal income variables are the expected results, but in this study, no relationship was found between the sub-dimensions and these variables. There is a positive and low-level significant relationship between sub-dimensions; namely the students' BPT scores and the "entrepreneurship scale" (r=.132*, p<.05), "cognitive practices" (r= .103*, p<.05) and "technical skills" (r= .105*, p <.05) . While no relationship was found between CGPA and entrepreneurship scale, in all sub-dimensions of academic self-efficacy weak positive correlations were found as (r= .148**, p<.01), (r= .238**, p<.01) and (r= .208**, p<.01) respectively. BPT scores measure the general competencies and field competencies of the students who proceed on to higher education. Likewise, CGPA scores in undergraduate education demonstrate the students’ levels in the academic assessment and evaluation system. Therefore, there may be relationships between sub-dimensions and BPT and CGPA scores.

In Table 7, there “are statistical differences between the entrepreneurship levels of the students participating” in the research and the work experience variable. Since the variances were equal, the Scheffe test was used to find out between which groups the difference was available. As a result of this test, the "entrepreneurship" scale was in favor of the groups with more work experience. Nassif, Ghobril, and Silva (2010) found that work experience affects the entrepreneurial process, and in another study, Adatepe et al. (2021) found similar results.

According to Table 8, Spearman Correlation Analysis was conducted to determine the relationship between the entrepreneurship levels of the students participating in the research and the sub-dimensions of the academic self-efficacy scale. A positive and significant relationship was found between entrepreneurship and all academic self-efficacy sub-dimensions: Social status (r=0.196**, p<.01), Cognitive practices (r=0.155**, p<.01), Technical skills (r=0.194**,p<.01) There are same-directional, but low-level linear relations between the variables. In other words, as their academic self-efficacy increased, their entrepreneurial intentions also increased. This relationship was also detected in a study conducted in Portugal by Ribeiro, Fernandes, and Fernandes (2020).

5. Conclusions

Occupational fields and social competencies of university students are important factors for raising new generations in the future. It is an expected result that the 4-year undergraduate education will contribute positively to the students, and their self-confidence, competence beliefs and entrepreneurial characteristics will improve. Unemployment, which is one of the biggest problems of today's world, is wanted to be permanently eliminated by developed and developing countries, and it draws attention in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. In line with these actions, entrepreneurship is a supported issue. New workplaces and job opportunities support the economic development of countries and help tackling the unemployment problem. Its effect on the economy, establishing social networks in the globalizing world, opening sports halls, establishing clubs, mediating large-scale international organizations, and being associated with many economic activities demonstrate how relevant sports are for entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial individuals' having high persuasion ability, passion, ambition, good observer, feeling competent and academically competent in the field they will do are closely related to the education they receive. In the light of this information, it is important to measure an academic self-efficacy and entrepreneurship levels of the students studying at the faculties of sport sciences and to define the factors affecting these characteristics. The results obtained include empirical evidence that academic self-efficacy has a statistically significant and positive effect on entrepreneurial intention. Therefore, higher education institutions should focus on improving the academic performance levels of students in undergraduate, associate and postgraduate education in order to increase new job creation trends. Since this study only includes the opinions of the students of the faculty of sport sciences, it is recommended to expand the sample group and investigate the effect of different variables on entrepreneurial intention.

References

Adatepe, S., Kul, M., & Adatepe, E. (2021). Examining entrepreneurship characteristics and reflective thinking levels of pre-service teachers at physical education and sports school. Education Quarterly Reviews, 4(3), 342-355.Available at: https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.04.03.343.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Bohlmann, C., Rauch, A., & Zacher, H. (2017). A lifespan perspective on entrepreneurship: Perceived opportunities and skills explain the negative association between age and entrepreneurial activity. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2015.Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02015.

Chemers, M. M., Hu, L.-t., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55–64.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.55.

Dabic, M., Daim, T., Bayraktaroglu, E., Novak, I., & Basic, M. (2012). Exploring gender differences in attitudes of university students towards entrepreneurship: An international survey. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 4(3), 316-336.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/17566261211264172.

Ekici , G. (2012). Academic self-efficacy scale: Turkish adaptation, validity and reliability study. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty (H.U. Journal of Education), 43, 174-185.

George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference, 17.0 Update (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Igwe, C., Adebayo, M., Olakanmi, O., Ogbonna, I., & Aina, O. (2013). Promoting wealth and job creation in Nigeria"“Review of the Role of Entrepreneurship. Journal of Sustainable Development Studies, 3(1), 80-100.

Karasar, N. (2005). Scientific research method (14th ed.). Ankara: Nobel Publication & Distribution.

Kolayiş, H., & Taşkıran, Y. (2001). The role of physical education teacher in talent selection. Uludag University II. National Physical Education and Sports Teaching Symposium Book (pp. 164). Bursa: AK MAT Printing.

Lekoko, M., Rankhumise, E., & Ras, P. (2012). The effectiveness of entrepreneurship education: What matters most? African Journal of Business Management, 65(1), 12023.Available at: https://doi.org/10.5897/ajbmx12.001.

Nassif, V. M. J., Ghobril, A. N., & Silva, N. S. d. (2010). Understanding the entrepreneurial process: A dynamic approach. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 7(2), 213-226.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1590/s1807-76922010000200007.

Owen, S. V., & Forman, R. D. (1988). Development of a college academic self-efficacy scale. Paper presented at the The Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education; New Orleans, LA.

Pan, V., & Akay, C. (2015). Examination of entrepreneurship levels of education faculty students in terms of various variables. Education Sciences, 10(2), 125-138.Available at: https://doi.org/10.12739/nwsa.2015.10.2.1c0637.

Pihie, Z. A. L., & Bagheri, A. (2013). Self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intention: The mediation effect of self-regulation. Vocations and Learning, 6(3), 385-401.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-013-9101-9.

Ribeiro, M. I., Fernandes, A., & Fernandes, A. P. (2020). Impact of academic self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intention of portuguese higher education students. Paper presented at the ICERI2020 Proceedings.

Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 207-231.

Semerci, N. (1999). The teacher's task: To develop thinking. Firat University Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 209-216.

Solberg, V. S., O'Brien, K., Villareal, P., Kennel, R., & Davis, B. (1993). Self-efficacy and Hispanic college students: Validation of the college self-efficacy instrument. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 15(1), 80-95.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863930151004.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.

Thomas, J. R., & Nelson, J. K. (1996). Research methods in physical activity (3rd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Yagar, F., Dökme, S., & Coşkun, S. (2020). The effect of self-efficacy level and demographic factors on entrepreneurial tendency: A study on university students. Journal of Suleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences, 37, 302-314.

Yılmaz, E., & Sünbül, A. M. (2009). Developing an entrepreneurship scale for university students. Selcuk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 21, 195-203.

Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article.