Formula for Identifying and Evaluating the Teaching of Entrepreneurship and Innovation
A shared methodological framework developed within WP3 of the ENGINE project to support the structured identification, analysis and description of entrepreneurship and innovation education in rural contexts.
About D3.01
A Shared Methodological Framework for Entrepreneurship and Innovation Education
The formula introduced a shared methodological framework for WP3 in the form of a structured set of descriptive criteria. It helped partner universities identify, select, analyse and describe entrepreneurship and innovation (E&I) teaching within their study programmes and it also supported the development of student profiles and the mapping of rural stakeholders who can contribute to the educational process. Importantly, these criteria were descriptive rather than judgmental – they were designed to capture structured, comparable information without ranking or scoring programmes or comparing teaching effectiveness across universities. The formula was grounded in an extensive literature review and in consultations with academic teachers from all four partner universities, ensuring that the criteria were evidence-based and relevant to diverse institutional contexts.
The formula comprised three principal sets of descriptive criteria, each addressing a distinct dimension of E&I education.
Three Sets of Descriptive Criteria:
The study program criteria
These criteria enabled a structured inventory and comparative description of E&I study programmes, with attention to both content and delivery. They encompassed:
the educational area (this criterion was used to select study programmes for analysis based on whether their name included keywords related to entrepreneurship and/or innovation),
employed teaching methods (variety of forms of teaching used),
practical orientation (extent of hands-on, experiential learning),
cooperation with the external environment (partnerships with companies, organisations, and communities),
development of soft skills (i.e. creativity, teamwork, communication, leadership),
cultivation of an entrepreneurial mindset (i.e. proactiveness, risk tolerance, resilience),
incorporation of local and regional contexts (integration of territory-specific challenges and opportunities),
adoption of interdisciplinary approaches (integration of knowledge from different academic fields),
integration of entrepreneurship and innovation components (dedicated courses or specialisations),
integration of other relevant thematic areas (such as marketing, finance, management, digital technologies or sustainability).
In WP3, partners applied these criteria through a structured self-assessment of their own study programmes, which supported the identification of strengths, limitations and gaps, especially in relation to rural E&I competence needs derived from WP2 outputs (Rural Development Potential Maps). Based on these findings, partners formulated shared recommendations that were translated into the Academic Standardized Content Plan for Rural Entrepreneurial Education, organised into five progressive thematic blocks designed to enrich existing curricula with rural-relevant content.
The student profile criteria
This set of criteria supported the definition of a harmonised competence-oriented student profile. It covered ten key competence areas relevant to rural entrepreneurship & innovation, expressed in terms of knowledge, skills and attitudes. They included:
entrepreneurial competence,
innovation competence,
rural-context competence,
marketing competence,
financial and fundraising competence,
communication and negotiation competence,
sustainability competence,
networking competence,
digital competence,
managerial competence.
In WP3, these criteria served as a framework for partner universities to develop their own student profiles reflecting the competences needed for entrepreneurship and innovation in their specific rural contexts. The four university student profiles were then compared and synthesised to create a single, standardised EU-wide Academic Profile of Rural Entrepreneur, which describes the knowledge, skills and attitudes required from graduates to become effective rural development leaders capable of launching and growing both business-oriented and social initiatives in rural areas.
Stakeholder Criteria
These criteria were used in WP3 activities to systematically analyse and describe the types of external stakeholders that can support E&I teaching in a rural context, both those already cooperating with partner universities and potential future partners. This work resulted in the creation of the Stakeholders of Rural Growth Database – a structured resource identifying actors who can meaningfully contribute to rural entrepreneurship and innovation education. The criteria were divided into two groups: classification and quality criteria.
The classification criteria encompassed:
• stakeholder type (the kind of institution or organisation the stakeholder represents, e.g., university, SME, NGO, local government, cooperative),
• sector according to the Quadruple Helix framework (science & education, business & economy, public administration & policy, or civil society & community),
• role in the educational process (e.g., mentor, lecturer, advisor, project partner),
• level of involvement (depth and frequency of engagement, from strategic partner to ad hoc collaborator),
• territorial reach (geographical scale of operations: local, regional, national, or international),
• the nature of engagement with the university (form and purpose of collaboration, e.g., educational activities, research, advisory services).
The quality criteria included:
• competencies and experience in entrepreneurship and innovation relevant to rural areas (i.e. practical knowledge and skills in running or supporting rural startups, innovation projects, or business initiatives),
• experience in implementing or advising on local or regional development (i.e. involvement in planning, executing, or consulting on development policies and projects),
• affiliations with rural contexts underpinned by in-depth knowledge of socio-economic and cultural specificities (sustained connection to rural areas through professional work, personal background, or community engagement),
• the capacity to operate across sectors (ability to engage and collaborate across multiple sectors, bridging academic, business, public, and civil society actors).
Together, these three sets of criteria ensured a consistent, evidence-based approach across partners and provided the basis for WP3 standardised outputs that inform EDUPACK development in WP4.
How the Formula Was Applied?
Within WP3, partner universities applied the formula through:
Structured self-assessment of study programmes
Development of university-specific student profiles
Comparative analysis across institutions
Formulation of shared recommendations
Key Outcomes and Impact
Consistent methodology across partner universities
Comparable descriptions of E&I education
EU-wide standardised profile of a rural entrepreneur
Evidence-based foundation for educational content development
Strong link between rural needs (WP2) and curricula design
Link to Other Work Packages
How D3.01 Connects to the ENGINE Ecosystem
Builds on:
WP2 – Rural Development Potential Maps
Informs:
WP4 – EDUPACK development
Supports:
long-term integration of rural entrepreneurship into higher education
OUR TEAM
Meet the partners of ENGINE
