Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students' Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 2, 261 - 272, 31.08.2025

Abstract

This study was carried out to examine the individual entrepreneurial orientation of third and fourth grade students studying in the Coaching Education and Sport Management Departments of Sports Science Faculties in terms of different variables. The participants in our study were 245 students (age: 22.3 ± 1.6 years; height: 174.9 ± 9.5 cm; weight: 71.8 ± 14.2 kg) studying in the Coaching Education and Sport Management Departments at the Sports Science Faculties of Trakya, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart, Yalova, Sakarya Applied Sciences and Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Universities. The participants’ individual entrepreneurial orientation was assessed with the Individual Entrepreneurial Orientation Scale, while their physical activity levels were assessed with the short form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). In addition to these scales, the participants’ body mass index (BMI) and whether they had received entrepreneurship-related education were recorded, and the effects of various variables, namely physical activity level, BMI, gender, department attended, and previous entrepreneurship education experience, on individual entrepreneurial orientation were statistically examined. It was observed that physical activity level and BMI values had no effect on the individual entrepreneurial characteristics of either male or female participants (p > 0.05). However, the total scale scores and scores in the subscales of risk taking, innovation, and proactiveness of students who had received entrepreneurship education differed statistically from those who had not received entrepreneurship education (p < 0.05). The scores of coaching education department students in the proactiveness subscale of the scale were higher than the scores of sport management department students (p < 0.05). In conclusion, it can be said that participation in any training related to entrepreneurship can change individual entrepreneurial orientation. Repeating the study with a larger sample to explain the effects of independent variables such as body mass index, gender, and physical activity level on individual entrepreneurial orientation may produce different results.

References

  • 1. Çiftçi F, Zencir E. Social entrepreneurship behaviour, job satisfaction and life satisfaction of employees in Turkish tourism sector: TaTuTa project Narköy Example. Tourism Academic Journal,2019; 6:131-145.
  • 2. Tikici M, Aksoy A. Girişimcilik ve küçük işletmeler, Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi,2002.
  • 3. Saber FO. Spor eğitimi alan öğrencilerin bireysel girişimcilik algı düzeyleri. Master of Science Thesis, Fırat University,2020.
  • 4. Güler BK, 2008. Sosyal girişimciliği etkileyen faktörlerin analizi. PhD Thesis, Dokuz Eylül University
  • 5. Ibeh KI. Furthering export participation in less performing developing countries: The effects of entrepreneurial orientation and managerial capacity factors. International Journal of Social Economics,2004; 31: 94-110. doi: 10.1108/03068290410515448
  • 6. TÜSİAD (Türk Sanayici ve İş insanları Derneği).2003. Türkiye’de girişimcilik. https://tusiad.org/tr/abd-network/item/3587-turkiyede-girisimcilik-raporu-ozet-bulgulari. Accessed 8 January 2025
  • 7. Ekmekçi A, İrmiş A, 2013. Entrepreneurship and sport. International Conference on Eurasian Economies, St. Petersburg – Russia, 2013.
  • 8. Bozkurt ÖÇ, Kalkan A, Koyuncu O, Alparslan AM. The development of entrepreneurship in Turkey: A qualitative research on entrepreneurs .Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences, 2012; 15: 229-247.
  • 9. Özbay HP. Sosyal sorumluluk kampanyaları ve girişimcilik üzerine bir araştırma. Master of Science Thesis, Ankara Başkent University, 2016.
  • 10. Young DR. If Not for Profit, For What?: A Behavioral Theory of the Nonprofit Sector Based on Entrepreneurship, Massachusetts: LexingtonBooks,1983.
  • 11. Eren F. Batman ilinde yiyecek ve içecek işletmelerinde girişimcilik yöneliminin işletme performansına etkisi. Master of Science Thesis, Batman University,2020.
  • 12. Kreiser PM, Marino LD, Weaver KM. Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A Multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2002; 26: 71-93. doi.org/10.1177/104225870202600405
  • 13. Altuntas G, Donmez D. The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance: evidence from the hotel industry in Çanakkale region. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 2010; 39: 50-74.
  • 14. Koç B. Küçük ve orta ölçekli konaklama işletmelerinde girişimcilik yöneliminin işletme performansına etkisi. PhD Thesis, Gazi University, 2019.
  • 15. Hernández-Perlines F, Ibarra Cisneros MA, Ribeiro-Soriano D, Mogorrón-Guerrero H. innovativeness as a determinant of entrepreneurial orientation: analysis of the hotel sector. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 2020; 33: 2305-2321. doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1696696
  • 16. Wiklund J. The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation—performance relationship. Entrepreneurship. Theory and Practice, 1999; 24: 37-48. doi.org/10.1177/104225879902400
  • 17. Newbold P. Statistics for Business and Economics. Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey,1995.
  • 18. Ercan S, Yıldıran C. Turkish adaptation of individual entrepreneurship orientation scale. Journal of Entrepreneurship & Development, 2021; 16: 91-105.
  • 19. Öztürk M. Üniversitede eğitim-öğretim gören öğrencilerde uluslararası fiziksel aktivite anketinin geçerliliği ve güvenirliği ve fiziksel aktivite düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Master of Science Thesis, Ankara Hacettepe University, 2005.
  • 20. Ak B, 2008. Verilerin Düzenlenmesi ve Gösterimi. Kalaycı, Şeref (Yayına Hazırlayan) SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri içinde (ss.3-47). Ankara, Turkey, 2008.
  • 21. Salkind NJ, Green SB. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2005.
  • 22. Morgan GA, Leech NL, Gloeckner GW, Barrett KC. SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation. New York and London,2004.
  • 23. Robert P, Bukodi E. Who are the entrepreneurs and where do they come from? Transition to self-employment before, under and after communism in Hungary. International Review of Sociology, 2000; 10: 147-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/713673992
  • 24. Bird BJ. Demographic approaches to entrepreneurship: The role of experience and background. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth,1993; 1: 11-48.
  • 25. Kuratko DF. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship. Theory and Practice, 2005; 29: 577-597. doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.000
  • 26. Akman SU, Bektaş H. Examining the entrepreneurial characteristics of university students. Marmara University Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences,2015; 37: 217-232. https://doi.org/10.14780/iibd.56366
  • 27. Kılıç R, Keklik B, Çalış N. A Study on entrepreneurship tendency of university students: Example of Bandırma Department of Business Administration. Süleyman Demirel University, The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2012; 17: 423-435.
  • 28. Aksel İ, Bağcı Z. Entrepreneurship tendency; A research on senior grade students in economics and administrative science faculty in one public university. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches,2016; 5: 2120-2133.
  • 29. Korkmaz O. A Research on determining the entrepreneurialism inclination of university students: Bülent Ecevit University example. The Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2012; 14: 209-226

Spor Bilimleri Fakültesi Öğrencilerin Bireysel Girişimcilik Yönelimlerinin Farkli Değişkenler Açisindan İncelenmesi

Year 2025, Volume: 27 Issue: 2, 261 - 272, 31.08.2025

Abstract

Bu araştırma, Spor Bilimleri Fakültesi Antrenörlük Eğitimi ve Spor Yöneticiliği Bölümlerinde öğrenim gören 3 ve 4. sınıf öğrencilerin bireysel girişimcilik yönelimlerinin farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi amacıyla gerçekleştirildi. Çalışmamıza Trakya, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart, Yalova, Sakarya Uygulamalı Bilimler ve Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitelerinin Spor Bilimleri Fakülteleri bünyesindeki Antrenörlük Eğitimi ve Spor Yöneticiliği bölümlerinde öğrenim gören 245 öğrenci (yaş: 22.3 ± 1.6 yıl; boy: 174.9 ± 9.5 cm; kilo: 71.8 ± 14.2 kg) katıldı. Katılımcılara ait bireysel girişimcilik yönelimleri Bireysel Girişimcilik Yönelimi Ölçeği ile fiziksel aktivite düzeyleri ise Uluslararası Fiziksel aktivite ölçeğinin kısa formu (IPAQ) ile değerlendirildi. Bu ölçeklere ek olarak, katılımcılara ait vücut kütle indeksi (VKİ) ve girişimcilikle ilgili eğitim alıp almadığı bilgileri de kaydedilerek IPAQ, VKİ, cinsiyet, öğrenim görülen bölüm ve girişimcilik eğitimi durumu gibi çeşitli değişkenlerin bireysel girişimcilik yönelimleri üzerindeki etkileri istatistiksel olarak incelendi. Fiziksel aktivite düzeyi ve VKİ değerlerinin gerek erkek gerekse kadın katılımcıların bireysel girişimcilik özellikleri üzerinde etkisinin olmadığı görüldü (p>0.05). Girişimcilikle ilgili eğitim alan öğrencilerin ölçek alt boyutlarından risk alma, yenilikçilik, proaktiflik ve ölçekten aldıkları toplam puan, girişimcilik eğitimi almayanlardan istatistiksel olarak farklılık gösterdi (p<0.05). Antrenörlük eğitimi bölümü öğrencilerinin ölçek proaktiflik alt boyutundan aldıkları puan, yöneticilik bölümü öğrencilerinin aldıkları puandan daha yüksekti (p<0.05). Sonuç olarak, girişimcilikle ilgili herhangi bir eğitime katılmanın bireysel girişimcilik yönelimlerini değiştirebileceği söylenebilir. Vücut kütle indeksi, cinsiyet, fiziksel aktivite düzeyi gibi bağımsız değişkenlerin bireysel girişimcilik yönelimi üzerindeki etkilerinin açıklanabilmesi için çalışmanın daha büyük örneklemle tekrarlanması farklı sonuçların alınmasına neden olabilir.

References

  • 1. Çiftçi F, Zencir E. Social entrepreneurship behaviour, job satisfaction and life satisfaction of employees in Turkish tourism sector: TaTuTa project Narköy Example. Tourism Academic Journal,2019; 6:131-145.
  • 2. Tikici M, Aksoy A. Girişimcilik ve küçük işletmeler, Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi,2002.
  • 3. Saber FO. Spor eğitimi alan öğrencilerin bireysel girişimcilik algı düzeyleri. Master of Science Thesis, Fırat University,2020.
  • 4. Güler BK, 2008. Sosyal girişimciliği etkileyen faktörlerin analizi. PhD Thesis, Dokuz Eylül University
  • 5. Ibeh KI. Furthering export participation in less performing developing countries: The effects of entrepreneurial orientation and managerial capacity factors. International Journal of Social Economics,2004; 31: 94-110. doi: 10.1108/03068290410515448
  • 6. TÜSİAD (Türk Sanayici ve İş insanları Derneği).2003. Türkiye’de girişimcilik. https://tusiad.org/tr/abd-network/item/3587-turkiyede-girisimcilik-raporu-ozet-bulgulari. Accessed 8 January 2025
  • 7. Ekmekçi A, İrmiş A, 2013. Entrepreneurship and sport. International Conference on Eurasian Economies, St. Petersburg – Russia, 2013.
  • 8. Bozkurt ÖÇ, Kalkan A, Koyuncu O, Alparslan AM. The development of entrepreneurship in Turkey: A qualitative research on entrepreneurs .Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences, 2012; 15: 229-247.
  • 9. Özbay HP. Sosyal sorumluluk kampanyaları ve girişimcilik üzerine bir araştırma. Master of Science Thesis, Ankara Başkent University, 2016.
  • 10. Young DR. If Not for Profit, For What?: A Behavioral Theory of the Nonprofit Sector Based on Entrepreneurship, Massachusetts: LexingtonBooks,1983.
  • 11. Eren F. Batman ilinde yiyecek ve içecek işletmelerinde girişimcilik yöneliminin işletme performansına etkisi. Master of Science Thesis, Batman University,2020.
  • 12. Kreiser PM, Marino LD, Weaver KM. Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A Multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,2002; 26: 71-93. doi.org/10.1177/104225870202600405
  • 13. Altuntas G, Donmez D. The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance: evidence from the hotel industry in Çanakkale region. Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration, 2010; 39: 50-74.
  • 14. Koç B. Küçük ve orta ölçekli konaklama işletmelerinde girişimcilik yöneliminin işletme performansına etkisi. PhD Thesis, Gazi University, 2019.
  • 15. Hernández-Perlines F, Ibarra Cisneros MA, Ribeiro-Soriano D, Mogorrón-Guerrero H. innovativeness as a determinant of entrepreneurial orientation: analysis of the hotel sector. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 2020; 33: 2305-2321. doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1696696
  • 16. Wiklund J. The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation—performance relationship. Entrepreneurship. Theory and Practice, 1999; 24: 37-48. doi.org/10.1177/104225879902400
  • 17. Newbold P. Statistics for Business and Economics. Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey,1995.
  • 18. Ercan S, Yıldıran C. Turkish adaptation of individual entrepreneurship orientation scale. Journal of Entrepreneurship & Development, 2021; 16: 91-105.
  • 19. Öztürk M. Üniversitede eğitim-öğretim gören öğrencilerde uluslararası fiziksel aktivite anketinin geçerliliği ve güvenirliği ve fiziksel aktivite düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Master of Science Thesis, Ankara Hacettepe University, 2005.
  • 20. Ak B, 2008. Verilerin Düzenlenmesi ve Gösterimi. Kalaycı, Şeref (Yayına Hazırlayan) SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri içinde (ss.3-47). Ankara, Turkey, 2008.
  • 21. Salkind NJ, Green SB. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2005.
  • 22. Morgan GA, Leech NL, Gloeckner GW, Barrett KC. SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation. New York and London,2004.
  • 23. Robert P, Bukodi E. Who are the entrepreneurs and where do they come from? Transition to self-employment before, under and after communism in Hungary. International Review of Sociology, 2000; 10: 147-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/713673992
  • 24. Bird BJ. Demographic approaches to entrepreneurship: The role of experience and background. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth,1993; 1: 11-48.
  • 25. Kuratko DF. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges. Entrepreneurship. Theory and Practice, 2005; 29: 577-597. doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.000
  • 26. Akman SU, Bektaş H. Examining the entrepreneurial characteristics of university students. Marmara University Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences,2015; 37: 217-232. https://doi.org/10.14780/iibd.56366
  • 27. Kılıç R, Keklik B, Çalış N. A Study on entrepreneurship tendency of university students: Example of Bandırma Department of Business Administration. Süleyman Demirel University, The Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2012; 17: 423-435.
  • 28. Aksel İ, Bağcı Z. Entrepreneurship tendency; A research on senior grade students in economics and administrative science faculty in one public university. Journal of the Human and Social Sciences Researches,2016; 5: 2120-2133.
  • 29. Korkmaz O. A Research on determining the entrepreneurialism inclination of university students: Bülent Ecevit University example. The Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2012; 14: 209-226
There are 29 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Sports Activity Management
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Ayşe Yıldırım 0009-0006-1089-9509

Cem Kurt 0000-0002-0254-5923

İlbilge Özsu Nebioğlu 0000-0003-3678-1294

Publication Date August 31, 2025
Submission Date May 7, 2025
Acceptance Date July 2, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 27 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yıldırım, A., Kurt, C., & Özsu Nebioğlu, İ. (2025). Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise, 27(2), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.15314/tsed.1694709
AMA Yıldırım A, Kurt C, Özsu Nebioğlu İ. Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables. Turk J Sport Exe. August 2025;27(2):261-272. doi:10.15314/tsed.1694709
Chicago Yıldırım, Ayşe, Cem Kurt, and İlbilge Özsu Nebioğlu. “Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 27, no. 2 (August 2025): 261-72. https://doi.org/10.15314/tsed.1694709.
EndNote Yıldırım A, Kurt C, Özsu Nebioğlu İ (August 1, 2025) Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 27 2 261–272.
IEEE A. Yıldırım, C. Kurt, and İ. Özsu Nebioğlu, “Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables”, Turk J Sport Exe, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 261–272, 2025, doi: 10.15314/tsed.1694709.
ISNAD Yıldırım, Ayşe et al. “Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise 27/2 (August2025), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.15314/tsed.1694709.
JAMA Yıldırım A, Kurt C, Özsu Nebioğlu İ. Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables. Turk J Sport Exe. 2025;27:261–272.
MLA Yıldırım, Ayşe et al. “Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables”. Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise, vol. 27, no. 2, 2025, pp. 261-72, doi:10.15314/tsed.1694709.
Vancouver Yıldırım A, Kurt C, Özsu Nebioğlu İ. Examination of Sport Sciences Faculty Students’ Individual Entrepreneurship Orientations in Terms of Different Variables. Turk J Sport Exe. 2025;27(2):261-72.

Turkish Journal of Sport and Exercise is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC).