Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 21:29:20 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
09 SES 14 C: Civic, Environmental and Entrepreneurial Competences
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Paper Environmental Awareness: Factorial Structure and Comparability across the Nordic Countries University of Oslo, Norway Presenting Author:Education for environmental sustainability has emerged as a critical global priority in response to escalating ecological challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource depletion (UNESCO, 2020). Schools have a central role in advancing sustainability education, acting as arenas where knowledge and values are translated into behaviors and actions (Campfens, 2024). Teachers are key agents in this process, responsible for embedding the sustainability principles described in the curricula into the classrooms and fostering competencies such as critical thinking, action competence, and lifelong learning among students (Felix et al., 2025; Zarzycki, 2025). Students, in turn, are expected to develop not only cognitive understanding but also behavioral dispositions that support sustainable lifestyles (Ardoin et al., 2020). The Nordic countries are recognized as leaders in environmental sustainability education (Kardyb et al., 2025; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2024). Across Finland, Norway, and Sweden, sustainability is embedded in national curricula and governance documents, reflecting shared commitments to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations, 2015) as well as international frameworks such as UNESCO’s Education for Sustainable Development roadmap (UNESCO, 2020) and the UNECE Strategy for Education for Sustainable Development (UNESCO, 2022). Despite these common policy orientations, the countries differ in pedagogical traditions and implementation strategies. Sweden has a long-standing emphasis on outdoor and experiential learning, Norway foregrounds democratic participation and interdisciplinary approaches, and Finland integrates sustainability through phenomenon-based learning and whole-school models (Kardyb et al., 2025; Nordic Council of Ministers, 2024). The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) incorporates environmental modules designed to capture key dimensions of students’ environmental awareness at the international level (Bookbinder et al., 2025). This approach is consistent with widely used conceptualizations of environmental awareness, which typically encompass students’ knowledge of environmental issues, their attitudes and values related to sustainability, and their reported behaviors or behavioral intentions (Bookbinder et al., 2025; Firmanshah et al., 2023). Informed by the Model of Ecological Values (Bogner & Wiseman, 2006) and the Theory of Ecological Attitude (Kaiser et al., 1999) the TIMSS framework operationalizes environmental awareness primarily through students’ environmental values and self-reported behaviors (Reynolds & Komakhidze, 2022). To guide the present analysis, we adapted the dynamic model of educational effectiveness (DMEE) (Kyriakides & Creemers, 2009) to develop an environmental sustainability education framework. This adaptation focuses specifically on environmental sustainability in schools and operationalizes its multilevel structure by linking national-, school-, and classroom-level actions in sustainability education to student outcomes, such as environmentally responsible behaviors. Consistent with the DMEE, the framework assumes that environmentally responsible behaviors emerge from interactions across multiple levels of the education system. Through the proposed framework and given the novelty and policy relevance of the environmental sustainability scales in TIMSS, this study examines cross-national differences among the Nordic countries in school emphasis on environmental sustainability, teacher emphasis on environmental sustainability, and student environmental awareness. The primary focus is on evaluating the factorial structure and cross-country comparability of these constructs. Thus, the research questions (RQ) are: 1) To what extent do Nordic countries differ with respect to environmental awareness?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used This study used secondary data from TIMSS 2023. TIMSS is conducted every four years and assesses student achievement in mathematics and science at the fourth and eighth grade levels, providing trend data across participating countries (von Davier et al., 2024). Schools are first selected using probability proportional to size sampling, followed by the random selection of one or two intact classrooms within each school. The present analyses included Grade 8 data from Finland including 5880 students, 395 classes, and 161 schools, Norway including 6324 students, 298 classes, and 157 schools, and Sweden 5080 students, 240 classes and 154 schools. Due to differences in school entry age with respect to other Nordic countries, Norway administers TIMSS to students in Grades 5 and 9. Sampling weights were applied at the student, teacher, and school levels to ensure that the sample is representative of students in each country. All measures were derived from the TIMSS 2023 contextual questionnaires and were operationalized in accordance with the original TIMSS scale definitions. Student-reported measures included three latent variables: student value environmental preservation, student value environmental utilization, and environmentally responsible behaviors. The environmental preservation scale consisted of six items, and the environmental utilization scale consisted of three items, all rated on Likert-type agreement scales. The environmentally responsible behaviors scale included six items measuring the frequency of students’ self-reported pro-environmental actions. Teacher-reported measures comprised two latent variables including teacher emphasis on environmental sustainability and teacher actions to teach environmental sustainability. Each latent variable was measured using four items reflecting instructional emphasis and pedagogical practices related to environmental sustainability. All teacher items were rated on ordinal Likert-type scales indicating frequency or degree of emphasis. Principal-reported measures included a single latent variable, school emphasis on environmental sustainability, measured using eight items capturing school-level priorities, practices, and organizational support for environmental sustainability. Items were rated on Likert-type agreement scales. Data were prepared in R version 4.5.2, and analyses were conducted in Mplus 8.11 (Muthen & Muthen, 2017; R Core Team, 2021). Given the ordinal nature of the indicators, models were estimated using the weighted least squares mean and variance adjusted estimator. First, confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were conducted separately for each country to evaluate the hypothesized factor structures. Second, multi-group CFA was used to examine measurement invariance across countries. When full scalar invariance was not supported, partial scalar invariance was established by freeing theoretically justified item thresholds Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Overall, the results provide initial empirical support for the proposed framework of environmental sustainability in education. Across the Nordic countries, most student-, teacher-, and school-level constructs demonstrated acceptable model fit, reliability, and at least metric levels of measurement invariance, indicating that the key dimensions of environmental sustainability captured by the TIMSS scales are largely comparable across national contexts. Specifically, student-related constructs showed strong psychometric properties and higher levels of invariance, allowing for meaningful cross-national comparisons of latent means for most constructs (environmentally responsible behaviors and students value environmental preservation). At the school and teacher levels, the need for scale modifications and the lower reliability observed for some constructs (school emphasis on environmental sustainability and teacher actions) suggest greater contextual variation in how environmental sustainability is operationalized at these levels. Nonetheless, the achievement of metric or partial scalar invariance supports the use of these measures for comparing country level means and further examining structural relations within the proposed framework. Taken together, these findings indicate that the proposed framework is reasonable venue for structuring and organizing multilevel aspects of environmental sustainability in education, while also highlighting areas where further scale development and refinement are needed. Subsequent analyses will extend the measurement models by estimating structural relations, examining how school-, teacher-, and student-level aspects of environmental sustainability predict environmentally responsible behaviors References Ardoin, N. M., Bowers, A. W., & Gaillard, E. (2020). Environmental education outcomes for conservation: A systematic review. Biological Conservation, 241, 108224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224 Bookbinder, A., Reynolds, K., Leng, D., Tyack, L., Khorramdel, L., & Bezirhan, U. (2025). Environmental Awareness in TIMSS 2023: Patterns in Achievement, Attitudes, Behaviors, and Contexts. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://doi.org/10.6017/lse.tpisc.qx7218 Campfens, N. (2024, November 22). Sustainability Starts in the Classroom: The Importance of Environmental Education in Schools | EnvironBuzzTM Magazine. https://environbuzz.com/sustainability-starts-in-the-classroom-the-importance-of-environmental-education-in-schools/ Felix, S. M., Lønnum, M., Lykknes, A., Staberg, R. L., Felix, S. M., Lønnum, M., Lykknes, A., & Staberg, R. L. (2025). Teachers’ Understanding of and Practices in Critical Thinking in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 15(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15070824 Kaiser, F. G., Ranney, M., Hartig, T., & Bowler, P. A. (1999). Ecological Behavior, Environmental Attitude, and Feelings of Responsibility for the Environment. European Psychologist, 4(2), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1027//1016-9040.4.2.59 Kardyb, D., Lysgaard, J. A., & Bengtsson, S. (2025). Sustainability Education in Nordic Countries. In D. Kardyb, J. A. Lysgaard, & S. Bengtsson, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1806 Kyriakides, L., & Creemers, B. P. M. (2009). The effects of teacher factors on different outcomes: Two studies testing the validity of the dynamic model. Effective Education, 1(1), 61–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415530903043680 Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. (2017). Mplus Version 8 User’s Guide. Muthen & Muthen. Nordic Council of Ministers. (2024). Sustainability Education in the Nordic Countries. https://pub.norden.org/nord2024-038 R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/YFRE1448 UNESCO. (2022). Berlin Declaration on Education for Sustainable Development; Learn for our planet: Act for sustainability. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000381228 von Davier, M., Fishbein, B., & Kennedy, A. (Eds.). (2024). TIMSS 2023 Technical Report (Methods and Procedures). Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. https://timss2023.org/methods Zarzycki, R. (2025). Critical Thinking as a Key to Competence Building in Sustainable Development. In W. Leal Filho, B. Gasparetto Rebelatto, A. Annelin, & G.-O. Boström (Eds.), Competence Building in Sustainable Development (pp. 357–377). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-80380-2_17 09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Paper Five Types of Civic Engagement among the Nordic Students 1: University of Jyväskylä (FIER), Finland; 2: University of Helsinki, Finland; 3: Lusófona University, Portugal Presenting Author:Background Sustainable democracies rest on broad and inclusive opportunities for civic engagement and participation. Civic engagement can be understood in practical terms as active participation in society, but it also encompasses e.g. individuals’ beliefs in their own capacity to influence matters, perceptions of the effectiveness of personal involvement, and motivation to engage (see e.g. Schulz et al., 2017). It therefore extends beyond participatory actions in formal politics, to include various forms of connections within civic life and across different communities, both in-person and online. Among young people, civic engagement prior to adulthood may be reflected in participation in, for example, school activities, that mirror civic actions in adult life. However, civic engagement becomes also evident as personal interest and taking stances in contemporary societal issues or matters of importance to young people. It may likewise be expressed through efforts to influence society by participating in, for instance, environmental organizations—contributing to shaping civil society. Therefore, civic engagement is a multidimensional concept, encompassing various forms, such as behavioural and cognitive engagement, with special functions (see Reeve et al., 2025). Furthermore, higher levels of civic engagement are also positively linked to civic knowledge gained from formal school education. It has also been associated with enhanced well‑being and a stronger commitment to civic principles such as equality (Mužík et al., 2025). Correspondingly, a lack of engagement may accumulate at the individual level over time and develop into significant challenges to social belonging, as well as undermine the ability to participate meaningfully in fostering an equitable democratic society (Schulz et al., 2017). Therefore, fostering civic engagement among young people through school education is particularly vital, as students will ultimately become the adults responsible for shaping future societies. In International Civic and Citizenship Study (ICCS) 2016, civic engagement was investigated in detail in 24 countries (Schulz et al., 2017). In ICCS studies, civic engagement of 14-year-old students is measured through indicators encompassing e.g. civic participation in school, but also with anticipated future civic actions as adults, due to participants’ young age (see e.g. Damiani et al., 2025). However, expected behaviour can serve as a predictor of future civic actions and reflects also the engagement to civic issues at young age. Nevertheless, separate scales representing different dimensions of engagement are typically applied separately in ICCS studies (e.g. Schulz, 2024), and civic engagement is rarely examined as a unified construct. Therefore, this study draws on the civic engagement item pool from ICCS framework to consider all relevant indicators collectively, aiming to identify the underlying dimensions of civic engagement and to determine which components may be redundant or strongly interrelated. The objective of this study is to develop a comprehensive measure of civic engagement to refine how its dimensions are operationalised within the current framework and within the broader field of civic and citizenship education. Furthermore, civic engagement may vary across contexts, such as countries, and according to background characteristics. Therefore, it is essential to investigate the dimensions of civic engagement among young students using large-scale datasets grounded in a robust conceptual framework, and to examine how engagement differs across countries and demographic groups. Aims The study investigates the following research questions:
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Methods Data were drawn from the ICCS 2016 study conducted in four Nordic countries—Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden (n = 18 962). The total sample was randomly divided into two equal subsamples. The first subsample was used for Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) on the combined Nordic sample using a polychoric correlation matrix (ordinal data) with the psych package in R. In EFA, oblimin rotation was used with student weights, and demonstrated excellent sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.919), with item-level MSAs all exceeding 0.90, indicating strong factorability of the selected items from ICCS. Based on the Kaiser criterion (eigenvalues > 1), scree plot, with KMO ≥ .80 in parallel analysis, five distinct factors of civic engagement emerged in the rotated solution, indicating adequate sampling adequacy (Kaiser, 1974) and loadings ≥ .40 considered salient. Factors explained approximately 51% of the total variance. Reliability estimates were satisfactory across all latent constructs, with Cronbach’s alpha values ranging from 0.72 to 0.87 and McDonald’s omega values ranging from 0.75 to 0.86, indicating adequate internal consistency for each factor. This structure was confirmed with the second subsample in confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for ordinal indicators using polychoric correlation matrix (ordinal indicators) and the DWLS estimator in lavaan package in R, using student weights. Fit indices from the refined model indicated CFI = 0.905, TLI = 0.894, SRMR = 0.089, and RMSEA = 0.063 (90% CI [0.062, 0.064]), supporting an interpretable five-factor structure consistent with the prior EFA solution providing acceptable overall model fit. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s omega (≥ .70 acceptable). Convergent validity was examined via Average Variance Extracted (AVE ≥ .50), while discriminant validity was assessed by comparing the square root of AVE for each latent factor with its inter-factor correlations, following Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criteria. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Results The analysis identified five dimensions of youth civic engagement. Standardized factor loadings were statistically significant, ranging from approximately 0.50 to 0.90, indicating strong convergent relations between latent factors and their indicators in ICCS. The second‑order factor model also showed acceptable fit. The factors included youth conventional engagement (elaborated e.g. in Kahne et al., 2008) in school, captured everyday behavioural forms of participation. Expected conventional engagement (see Schulz et al., 2017) described duty-based institutional behaviours such as voting and seeking political information. Civic efficacy (e.g., Metzger et al., 2020) represented young people’s perceived ability and willingness to engage in argumentation and public issues. Communicative engagement (see Slavina, 2021) comprised discussions of civic and political matters both in‑person and online, referring to socially oriented non-institutional expression. Finally, expected political involvement (see Ekman et al., 2012) reflected a proactive orientation, combining institutional activities—such as joining a political party—with individual, influential modes of participation, including participating in online forums and issue‑based activism. Strong measurement invariance was supported across the Nordic countries and across genders. All four countries, as well as boys and girls, exhibited a similar five‑factor structure of civic engagement, indicating that the model’s configuration is stable. Conclusions Youth civic engagement is vital as young people shape future societies. The model includes not only participation but also civic self‑efficacy, perceived impact of one’s actions, and interest in societal issues (see e.g. Schulz et al., 2017), although some redundancy was observed among the original scales. The findings show that the proposed model is suitable and reliable for the Nordic countries and genders. Next steps include testing criterion validity with civic knowledge and extending comparisons beyond the Nordic context. Strengthening understanding of youth civic engagement can support more equitable participation and improve democratic education. References Damiani, V., Fraillon, J. (2025) Civic and citizenship education, global citizenship education, and education for sustainable development: an analysis of their integrated conceptualization and measurement in the international civic and citizenship education study (ICCS) 2016 and 2022. Large-scale Assess Educ 13, 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-025-00237-y Ekman, J., Amnå, E. (2012) Political participation and civic engagement: Towards a new typology. Humaff 22, 283–300. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-012-0024-1 Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 Kahne, J. & Sporte, S. (2008). Developing citizens: The impact of civic learning opportunities. American Educational Research Journal. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575 Metzger, A., Alvis, L., & Oosterhoff, B. (2020). Adolescent views of civic responsibility and civic efficacy: Differences by rurality and socioeconomic status. Journal of applied developmental psychology, 70, 101183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101183 Mužík, M., Šerek, J. & Juhová, D.S. (2025) The Effect of Civic Engagement on Different Dimensions of Well-Being in Youth: A Scoping Review. Adolescent Res Rev 10, 1–18 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-024-00239-x Reeve, J., Basarkod, G., Jang, H.-R., Gargurevich, R., Jang, H., & Cheon, S. H. (2025). Specialized purpose of each type of student engagement: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), Article 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-09989-z Schulz, W., Ainley, J., Fraillon, J., Losito, B., Agrusti, G., & Friedman, T. (2017). Becoming citizens in a changing world: IEA International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2016 international report. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). https://research.acer.edu.au/civics/25/ Schulz, W. (2024). Young people’s trust in institutions, civic knowledge and their dispositions toward civic engagement. Large-scale Assessments in Education, 12, 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00210-1 Slavina, A. (2021). Unpacking non-institutional engagement: Collective, communicative and individualised activism. Acta sociologica, 64(1), 86-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699320902826 09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Paper ***WITHDRAWN*** Entrepreneurial Pupils or Just Certified Schools? Masaryk university, Czech Republic (Czechia) Presenting Author:In recent years, entrepreneurship has become one of the key competences of the European and Czech educational frameworks and is understood as the ability to create value through the identification of opportunities, initiative, creativity, cooperation and perseverance (Bacigalupo et al., 2016). In the Czech environment, this competence was included among the key competences in the revision of the Framework Educational Programmes in 2024, making it a mandatory part of the educational process in primary schools (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, 2024). The importance of entrepreneurship is further reinforced by changing social conditions that require adaptability and the ability to respond to uncertainty, risk and dynamic change (Council of the European Union, 2018). Although research and tools for measuring entrepreneurship competence exist, particularly at the secondary and tertiary levels (e.g., López-Núñez et al., 2022; Schelfhout et al., 2016), the area of primary education remains undervalued in the long term and lacks tools that have been validated for this target group. An attempt to fill this gap has been made by Řezníčková (2025) with a self-assessment tool based on the EntreComp framework and adapted to the cognitive abilities of secondary school pupils. The aim of this study is to revalidate the tool on a sample of pupils from nine selected schools from the Czech Republic. The schools were selected based on their certification as an "Entrepreneurial School", awarded by the organisation Association Entrepreneurial Czech Republic (Borovinová et al., 2024). Pupils will be from grades 6 and 8. And at the same time to map the level of self-perception of pupil's entrepreneurship competence in schools that declare systematic support for entrepreneurship in teaching and in the school culture. In addition to validating the tool, the study focuses in particular on comparing results between groups of students differing in their level of involvement in specific types of school and extracurricular activities, as well as in different student companies and student parliaments. The results can thus give schools an indication of which activities are likely to promote the development of particular components of entrepreneurship and help them to better target their interventions. The research tool contains 38 items divided into nine sub-competencies, with the structure adjusted based on pupil's cognitive abilities and pilot interviews. The study analyses the psychometric characteristics of the tool using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with a DWLS estimate suitable for ordinal data (Flora & Curran, 2004), as well as internal consistency using McDonald's omega (McNeish, 2018) and descriptive indicators. At the same time, differences between groups of students according to gender and involvement in school and extracurricular entrepreneurial activities are compared, which makes it possible to identify what experiences can support the development of individual components of competence. Previous research suggests that active participation in projects or student companies leads to higher self-assessment of entrepreneurship (Grewe & Brahm, 2020; Bacigalupo et al., 2016), while differences between boys and girls are not clear-cut and may depend on the nature of the activities or the way they are implemented. The study is expected to confirm the nine-factor structure of the tool and its good internal consistency, as shown by previous research (Řezníčková, 2025). The research thus contributes to more targeted support for entrepreneurship competence in primary schools. It offers a valid measurement tool and provides evidence-based recommendations for the development of a school culture that supports learning geared towards creativity, initiative and value-creating activities by pupils. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The aim of this study is to revalidate a self assessment tool that captures pupil’s self perception in the area of entrepreneurship competence and to examine how pupils themselves perceive their level of this competence. The study will be conducted on a deliberate sample of nine primary schools that hold the "Entrepreneurial School" certification (Borovinová, 2024) and have long declared their support for an entrepreneurial culture and the development of relevant competences in pupils. Pupils in grades 6 and 8 will participate in the research, which will allow us to monitor self-assessment of entrepreneurship across grades and compare results between groups differing in age, gender and level of involvement in school and extracurricular activities. The research tool will be a self-assessment questionnaire based on the EntreComp framework, which was designed by Řezníčková (2025) specifically for primary school pupils. The tool contains 38 items divided into nine sub-competences that represent key areas of entrepreneurship, such as recognising opportunities, creativity, mobilising resources, initiative, planning and working with uncertainty. Some competence areas originally present in the EntreComp framework (e.g. Vision, Valuing ideas, and Ethical and Sustainable Thinking) were not included in the tool as pupils may still find it difficult to work with these concepts, which was confirmed by pilot interviews. This adjustment is in line with the recommendations of educational psychometrics, which emphasises the need for age-appropriate items (Flora & Curran, 2004). Data collection will take place online during lessons in the presence of teachers and will be carried out during now in spring. Instructions will emphasise anonymity, voluntariness and the absence of correct answers, which is important for minimising socially desirable responses. Data analysis will focus primarily on verifying the factor structure. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed using DWLS estimation, which is suitable for ordinal items with a four-point Likert scale (Li, 2016). At the same time, internal consistency will be assessed using McDonald's omega, which is a more appropriate choice for multifactor models than the traditional Cronbach's alpha (McNeish, 2018). Furthermore, descriptive indicators and group difference tests were calculated using the non-parametric Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests, which correspond to the nature of the data, which did not show a normal distribution. The study respects the ethical requirements of research in a school environment. The data will be stored in a secure repository. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings The study responds to a defined gap in the area of self-assessment of entrepreneurship competence at primary school level. By revalidating the self-assessment questionnaire, I am striving to create a tool that is understandable for the target age group and reasonably short for school practice. Furthermore, I am trying to map the self-assessment of pupil’s entrepreneurship competence at certified primary schools in the Czech Republic. I expect that the confirmed factor structure and acceptable internal consistency of most subscales will support the regular use of the tool in schools with "Entrepreneurial School" certification – and subsequently also outside this circle. In particular, the ability to capture differences in pupil's competence to be entrepreneurial according to the specific activities in which they engage may be an important contribution of the study. For example, the results may show that pupils participating in a pupil parliament, long-term projects or other entrepreneurial activities show different - and in some components higher - self-assessments than pupils not involved in these activities. Such findings can provide schools with important support when planning different programmes or activities aimed at developing specific sub-competences of the competence to be entrepreneurial. The results also open up space for future quasi-experimental validation of the effectiveness of these interventions. From a practical point of view, the production of clear reports for schools may also be beneficial, including highlighting areas that may require further support. Limitations include the deliberate selection of only certified schools, which may overestimate the level of some components. Therefore, it may be beneficial to also examine non-certified schools in the future. Another limitation may be the reliance on self-assessment. References Bacigalupo, M., Kampylis, P., Punie, Y., & Van den Brande, G. (2016). EntreComp: The entrepreneurship competence framework. Publication Office of the European Union. Borovinová, K., Dvořáková, B., Frojdová, J., Jašková, L., Jičínská, Z., Krmíček, V., Šolcová, H., & Zouharová, D. (2024). Entrepreneurship education: Entrepreneurial School Certification: A motivational and supportive tool for the development of entrepreneurship education. Lipka – School Facility for Environmental Education Brno, contributory organisation. Council of the European Union. (2018). Council Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018H0604(01) Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466-491. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.4.466 Grewe, U., & Brahm, T. (2020). Development of entrepreneurial competences in mini-companies at schools. Education + Training, 62(7/8), 917-931. https://doi.org/10.1108/et-08-2019-0186 Li, C. H. (2016). Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behaviour Research Methods, 48(3), 936-949. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7 López-Núñez, M.I., Rubio-Valdehita, S., Armuña, C., Pérez-Urria, E. (2022). EntreComp Questionnaire: A Self-Assessment Tool for Entrepreneurship Competencies. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052983 McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we'll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412-433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144 Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. (2024). Framework Educational Programme for Primary Education. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports. Řezníčková, I. (2025). Creation of a self-evaluation tool for entrepreneurial competence for primary school pupils [master's thesis]. Masaryk University. Schelfhout, W., Bruggeman, K., & De Maeyer, S. (2016). Evaluation of entrepreneurial competence through scaled behavioural indicators: Validation of an instrument. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 29-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.09.001 | ||