Search for: All records

Student innovation competitions and programs (ICPs), including hackathons, start-up competitions, and customer discovery labs, have had a transformative impact on the higher education entrepreneurial ecosystem. They have also facilitated students’ experiences in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM). However, there is a disparity in the number of underrepresented students and dominant student groups participating in STEM fields. While research supports the benefits of ICP participation, literature discussing students’ perceptions of these programs remains limited. This study addresses three research questions about participation motivation (perceived values and associated costs), participation barriers, and differing perceptions among groups. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 38 students (25 females/13 males, 17 participants/21 non-participants). The analysis focused on the Situated Expectancy-Value Theory (SEVT) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). The research findings contribute to fostering diversity and inclusion within educational or professional environments by uncovering values (e.g., acquiring professional skills) and costs (e.g., opportunity costs) that students associate with motivation to engage in ICPs. Institutional and individual barriers were identified, including limited program awareness, lack of diversity, and identity mismatch. Therefore, the study intends to inform STEM educators and ICP organizers, foster inclusivity and diversity in the entrepreneurial ecosystem, and offer guidance for interventions. 

Student innovation competitions and programs, hereafter called ICPs, such as hackathons, start-up incubator competitions, design challenges, boot camps, and customer discovery labs, have emerged as pipeline-builders and transformative for higher education entrepreneurial ecosystems. Moreover, ICPs foster students' STEM-based experiences and serve as a gateway for career readiness. There is a disparity in ICP participation of students underrepresented in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) compared to student groups dominating STEM fields. While research supports the importance and benefits of STEM students' participation in these programs, literature discussing the students' perceptions of these programs remains limited. In order to increase diverse students' motivations for participating in ICPs and make ICPs more inclusive learning experiences for all students, this paper will answer two research questions: (i) what are the barriers that discourage student participation in ICPs, and (ii) what are the costs that associate with participation in ICPs? The primary research methodology in this paper is semi-structured interviews. Thirty-eight students (25 females vs. 13 males and 21 participants vs. 17 non-participants) were interviewed after a recruitment survey. The interview questions were crafted and analyzed based on the known scales and theories in the literature, namely the Expectancy-Value-Cost Scale and the Theory of Planned Behavior. Through student interviews, student perceptions of fitting in these co-curricular activities, i.e., ICPs, were explored, with a particular interest being students who are underrepresented in STEM. The complete recordings of the interviewee responses to interview questions were transcribed into text and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. The research findings will contribute to making the innovation ecosystem more inclusive and diverse by uncovering factors that discourage students from engaging in ICPs. Two levels of barriers were identified, institutional and individual. Institutional-level barriers include “low program awareness“ and ”lack of diversity and inclusiveness,” whereas individual barriers include “not matching self-identity” and “low expectancy of success.” As for costs, apart from “opportunity cost,” “teamwork cost” has emerged to be another important cost dimension that associates with ICP participation. The ongoing research direction is to share the findings with the STEM educators and ICP organizers so that they are aware of these barriers and costs of participating in ICPs, which might be a basis for designing and testing interventions