skip to main content

Title: Remote-Region Interior Alaska Community Survey with Two Statistical Measures: Arctic Indigenous Entrepreneurial Readiness (ER); and Remote-Region Digital Technology Needs and Skills (DT).
Between 2018 and 2021 PIs for National Science Foundation Awards # 1758781 and 1758814 EAGER: Collaborative Research: Developing and Testing an Incubator for Digital Entrepreneurship in Remote Communities, inMore>>
; ;
Arctic Data Center
Publication Year:
Arctic Social Sciences Remote-Region Digital Entrepreneurship Arctic Cultural Entrepreneurship Arctic Indigenous Entrepreneurial Readiness Remote-Region Digital Technology Education, Needs and Skills Incubator for Digital Entrepreneurship in Remote Communities
Award ID(s):
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract
    This dataset includes the complete instructor materials for the Rural Digital Entrepreneurship Workshop delivered to Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) from November 15-19, 2021. The data set includes PDF files that will allow interested researchers and practitioners, including staff at TCC, to deliver an identical or similar workshop on rural digital entrepreneurship in the future. The workshop included three days of instruction (for which the files are provided), and two days of individualized work with participants as they work on pitching a digital business idea. The materials included here are anonymized, make no reference to participants and can also be imported into learning management systems. The workshop intent was to guide participants towards the development and completion of a business plan for a digital enterprise situated in rural Alaska. Editable versions of the files can be requested from the authors.
  2. Purpose Expanding access to entrepreneurship training programs can be a method to increase female involvement in technology commercialization only if these programs adequately address the specific challenges facing female faculty and graduate students. In the context of the US National Science Foundation's Innovation Corps (NSF I-Corps) program, this study examines gender differences in prior experience and attitudes towards the training in order to propose improvements to the program design. Design/methodology/approach This quantitative study uses Pearson's Chi-Square and ANOVA tests on survey data from the I-Corps national program ( n  = 2,195), which enrolls faculty members, graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and industry experts. Findings In comparison to male participants, female I-Corps participants reported less entrepreneurial experience prior to the program, poorer team relationships during the program and lower entrepreneurial intention and technology commercialization readiness at both the beginning and the end of the program. However, no gender differences were found in positive or negative perceptions of the instructional climate or perceptions of program usefulness. Originality/value This study is unique as it is based on a large-scale dataset drawn from sites across the United States. The results support potential changes to I-Corps and similar programs, including providing more explicit instructions for tasks withmore »which female participants have less prior experience than males (e.g. in applying for patents), offering guidance for team interactions, and providing mentorship to assess whether low self-efficacy is leading women to underestimate the potential success of their projects.« less
  3. First-generation (FG) and/or low-income (LI) engineering student populations are of particular interest in engineering education. However, these populations are not defined in a consistent manner across the literature or amongst stakeholders. The intersectional identities of these groups have also not been fully explored in most quantitative-based engineering education research. This research paper aims to answer the following three research questions: (RQ1) How do students’ demographic characteristics and college experiences differ depending on levels of parent educational attainment (which forms the basis of first-generation definitions) and family income? (RQ2) How do ‘first-generation’ and ‘low-income’ definitions impact results comparing to their continuing-generation and higher-income peers? (RQ3) How does considering first-generation and low-income identities through an intersectional lens deepen insight into the experiences of first-generation and low-income groups? Data were drawn from a nationally representative survey of engineering juniors and seniors (n = 6197 from 27 U.S. institutions). Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate respondent differences in demographics (underrepresented racial/ethnic minority (URM), women, URM women), college experiences (internships/co-ops, having a job, conducting research, and study abroad), and engineering task self-efficacy (ETSE), based on various definitions of ‘first generation’ and ‘low income’ depending on levels of parental educational attainment and self-reported family income. Ourmore »results indicate that categorizing a first-generation student as someone whose parents have less than an associate’s degree versus less than a bachelor’s degree may lead to different understandings of their experiences (RQ1). For example, the proportion of URM students is higher among those whose parents have less than an associate’s degree than among their “associate’s degree or more” peers (26% vs 11.9%). However, differences in college experiences are most pronounced among students whose parents have less than a bachelor’s degree compared with their “bachelor’s degree or more” peers: having a job to help pay for college (55.4% vs 47.3%), research with faculty (22.7% vs 35.0%), and study abroad (9.0% vs 17.3%). With respect to differences by income levels, respondents are statistically different across income groups, with fewer URM students as family income level increases. As family income level increases, there are more women in aggregate, but fewer URM women. College experiences are different for the middle income or higher group (internship 48.4% low and lower-middle income vs 59.0% middle income or higher; study abroad 11.2% vs 16.4%; job 58.6% vs 46.8%). Despite these differences in demographic characteristics and college experiences depending on parental educational attainment and family income, our dataset indicates that the definition does not change the statistical significance when comparing between first-generation students and students who were continuing-generation by any definition (RQ2). First-generation and low-income statuses are often used as proxies for one another, and in this dataset, are highly correlated. However, there are unique patterns at the intersection of these two identities. For the purpose of our RQ3 analysis, we define ‘first-generation’ as students whose parents earned less than a bachelor’s degree and ‘low-income’ as low or lower-middle income. In this sample, 68 percent of students were neither FG nor LI while 11 percent were both (FG&LI). On no measure of demographics or college experience is the FG&LI group statistically similar to the advantaged group. Low-income students had the highest participation in working to pay for college, regardless of parental education, while first-generation students had the lower internship participation than low-income students. Furthermore, being FG&LI is associated with lower ETSE compared with all other groups. These results suggest that care is required when applying the labels “first-generation” and/or “low-income” when considering these groups in developing institutional support programs, in engineering education research, and in educational policy. Moreover, by considering first-generation and low-income students with an intersectional lens, we gain deeper insight into engineering student populations that may reveal potential opportunities and barriers to educational resources and experiences that are an important part of preparation for an engineering career.« less
  4. This S-STEM Project responds to a growing disparity among technology firms and the number of under-represented people in managerial and executive positions. Of particular interest is developing mentorship relationships and intrapreneurial competencies (i.e., entrepreneurship within established firms). Mentorship and increased skills preemptively aid in the retention and promotability of engineering undergraduates (upon entering the workforce). Specifically, the project was designed to produce electrical and computer engineering graduates with intrapreneurial knowledge and skills, which are characteristic of managers and innovators. Using the Intrepreneurial Competencies literature, the authors develop and test a multi-phased project among a diverse group of engineering undergraduates. The literature suggests enhancing intrapreneurial skills of students in engineering can be achieved through a combination of curricular and real-world experiences. Thus, this project incorporates faculty and industry mentorship, workforce development seminars, an industrial internship, entrepreneurship programs, and scholarships. Cohort 1 is comprised of a diverse group of 16 students (8 men, 8 women, 8 ethnic minorities). Students attended lectures by prominent engineering entrepreneurs, participated in a 3-day start-up weekend, attended engineering job fairs and two semesters of project-focused seminars, and read entrepreneurial and/or leadership-related books. Two primary data sets were collected utilizing a repeated measures design. Data were collected inmore »the form of student reflections about being a mentee in the mentor relationships and interview data from mentors (i.e., engineering professionals). Students documented their mentoring sessions, which were reviewed by the project team. A primary theme that emerged from mentor reports was the effects of COVID-19, mostly how students felt about their coursework and how their industry mentors felt about their jobs. Although there was deep concern about the impacts of COVID-19, the students expressed a sense of growth and learning in spite of the virus. Students self-reported that the S-STEM experience was still highly beneficial, even as much of the coursework and mentoring for the latter half of the Spring semester had to be moved online. The students responded well, with the average semester GPA rising from 3.483 in the Fall to 3.774 in the Spring. Second, data were collected by survey pre- and post-semester to measure improvements in Intrapreneurial Competencies. The “Intrapreneurial Competencies Measurement Scale”(ICMS) by Vargas-Halabi et al. was used to measure and evaluate the development of intrapreneurial competencies, which include: (1) Opportunity promoter, (2) Proactivity, (3) Flexibility, (4) Drive, and (5) Risk taking. Each of the six categories of the ICMS is divided into 3-9 sub-categories to assess skill and mindset in the six general categories. In answering the questions on the ICMS test, students evaluated their proficiency in each of the areas. Growth was evident for almost all the categories and sub-categories across each of the three data-gathering points.« less
  5. Broadening participation in entrepreneurship is an important topic and critical challenge that continues to gain attention and intervention programs within the STEM entrepreneurial ecosystem. However, the challenges of people of color in STEM entrepreneurship are amplified in technology intensive and the high-growth space of STEM innovation. Researchers, practitioners, academic scholars, and policy-makers have focused on training entrepreneurs of color in an inclusive way that considers both similarities and the uniqueness of the individuals that may be interested in a career as an entrepreneur. The National Science Foundation I-Corps is one such training program. Established in 2012, the I-Corps program brings NSF-funded researchers and industry expert together in an entrepreneurship and innovation training course. The expectation is that the training will lead to a growth in the translation of “deep tech” and in the creation of entrepreneurial ventures. The I-Corps program consists of both regional training as well as a national training program. Participation in the national program requires the formation of a team that consists of a Technical Lead, Entrepreneurial Lead, and a Business Mentor. Under-represented Groups (URGs) and women participation in I-Corps has been relatively low since inception. In this paper, we use survey data to explore the relationshipmore »amongst the differing roles and their perception as a participant in the national I-Corps training program. We consider demographics and gender identity to explore the experiences of the National I-Corps program participants. Additionally, we explore the impact of the engagement of the I-Corps staff with the participants and the perception of inclusivity and biasness within the training program.« less