Makerspaces as Catalysts for Entrepreneurial Education: Insights from a Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

Makerspaces are increasingly integrated into educational activities in both formal and nonformal contexts, from primary to higher education, particularly as interdisciplinary learning spaces that foster creativity and the “do-it-yourself” approach. Their hands-on approach stimulates agency, critical thinking, and innovation—competences closely tied to the entrepreneurship competence. However, empirical studies exploring the relationship between makerspaces and the development of entrepreneurship competence remain limited, often addressing only specific types of makerspaces or partial aspects of entrepreneurial competence. The aim of this study is to identify, based on a systematic literature review, if/how makerspaces contribute to developing entrepreneurial competences of students in secondary education. In total, 35 articles published in the last 10 years, indexed in ERIC, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, selected according to the PRISMA guidelines, met the inclusion criteria. The selected databases ensure both quality and broad coverage. The studies were analyzed using a structured framework based on four thematic categories: identity (makerspace as learning space influencing entrepreneurial competences), competence (focus on entrepreneurial competences), program (educational initiatives fostering entrepreneurial competences), environment (contextual factors shaping entrepreneurial competences in makerspaces). The findings reveal that the identity of makerspaces, characterized by values such as collaboration, valuing ideas, and hands-on learning, converges with the intentional design of learning environments and the structure of educational programs to foster entrepreneurial competences. Makerspaces were found to cultivate dimensions such as creativity, problem-solving, teamwork, initiative, and ethical thinking, all of which are listed as units of the entrepreneurial competence by EntreComp. The study concludes that makerspaces can act as effective pedagogical means for supporting entrepreneurial competence development. The results provide valuable insights and examples that can inform the design of future educational strategies and programs to promote entrepreneurship education and develop entrepreneurial competences in nonformal and formal learning settings acting as makerspaces.

1. Introduction

Great efforts are made to prepare students to succeed in the wide range of opportunities that await them (Reynolds, 2021). These efforts range from the development of knowledge to fostering competences and attitudes that students will demonstrate in all aspects of their lives (Ho et al., 2021; Reynolds, 2021). Entrepreneurship is one of the key competences for achieving sustainable development and for equipping students for the future, but this competence is not sufficiently valued and provided by the traditional education and training system (Hollauf et al., 2020).

The overarching goal of education for the future is marked by the fact that students need to develop self-confidence, direct their lives responsibly, find solutions to social, economic, and cultural challenges, and create new opportunities for sustainable development, as detailed by Geurts et al. (2024). These abilities are core elements of entrepreneurial competences as defined by the EntreComp framework (Bacigalupo et al., 2024), which emphasizes personal agency, creativity, problem-solving, and the capacity to turn ideas into action in diverse contexts, among other aspects. As learning spaces, makerspaces (MSs) proved to have the potential to develop such abilities related to entrepreneurial competence. However, the extent to which MSs can contribute to developing the entrepreneurial competence has been less explored. We will try to analyze this relation by mapping the research findings that demonstrate the traits, educational arrangements, and outcomes of MSs that foster entrepreneurial education and the development of entrepreneurial competences. While the focus on makerspaces is central to this review, we acknowledge that they are means by which entrepreneurial competence (EC) is developed, as an aim of educational interventions. EC has been recognized as a basic competence to be ensured in compulsory education, as a key competence for lifelong learning in European and international educational policy frameworks (Margherita et al., 2016), emphasizing creativity, innovation, and problem-solving as essential for personal and societal development. In this sense, the development of formal and nonformal learning environments as makerspaces is not the goal but rather the pedagogical approach through which EC can be cultivated.

As these two concepts are complex and multidimensional, emerging increasingly in educational practices and research, we will try to map them as they are approached in the scientific literature.

1.1. Entrepreneurial Education and Entrepreneurial Competence

Entrepreneurial education (EE) is understood as a multifaceted domain that includes diverse pedagogical strategies such as project-based learning, experiential learning, and competence-based learning (CBL). While CBL is an important strand, EE also aims to foster broader outcomes such as entrepreneurial mindsets and intentions (Lackéus, 2015; Nabi et al., 2017). Within this diversity, entrepreneurial competences (ECs) are often operationalized as outcomes of EE initiatives, as illustrated by the well-established EntreComp framework (Margherita et al., 2016).

As EC is listed as one of the eight basic competences to be ensured until the end of compulsory schooling, in many educational systems, there are even dedicated subjects for entrepreneurship education, mainly in secondary schools. Therefore, we place the analysis for students in secondary education (typically aged 12–16 years old), trying to map how the development of entrepreneurial competences is ensured in learning spaces acting as makerspaces inside or outside of school and what features of educational programs and environments foster an entrepreneurial mindset and competences. Unterfrauner et al. (2021) investigated the impact of specific educational approaches in creative spaces on the development of entrepreneurial skills, and the results indicated that these programs can have a significantly greater impact on middle school students. To optimize the development of entrepreneurial competences, data-informed recommendations highlighted by the reviewed studies are useful references.

In the last decade, academic and practical interest in entrepreneurial competences has grown significantly, evidenced by numerous studies exploring the effectiveness of different educational contexts in cultivating entrepreneurship (Margherita et al., 2016; Soomro et al., 2022). However, there are significant challenges in implementing and evaluating educational programs and spaces that develop entrepreneurial competences. The effectiveness of these programs can vary depending on many factors, including the cultural and economic context, available resources, and the level of institutional support (Pilgaard et al., 2022).

1.2. Makerspaces as Learning Environments

Capitalizing on the Maker Movement that stimulated the do-it-yourselfers with entrepreneurial, innovative mindsets and creative expression (Rouse & Rouse, 2022), makerspaces are understood as learning spaces that foster creativity, STEM learning, critical thinking, and future skills. With their proven potential, makerspaces represent an emergent and rapidly evolving educational domain. They facilitate the development of entrepreneurial competences, offering unique opportunities for experiential learning, acts of making, developing agency, collaboration, perseverance, curiosity, fostering community, showcasing achievements, and innovation in a realistic and applied context (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014; Rouse & Rouse, 2022).

Furthermore, Marinoble (2019) shows how students’ potential can be reached by organizing a makerspace in school, considering early exposure essential. At the same time, makerspaces, which are increasing in number worldwide, stimulate researchers to explore what they are and what effects they have (Mersand, 2021).

The directions of analysis of makerspaces are many, ranging from how the right to quality education is ensured for every child, youth, and adult (Hartikainen et al., 2024); to the transformative potential of makerspace education as facilitative learning spaces for a sustainable collective future (Hartikainen et al., 2024); and to education for the development of entrepreneurial competences that enable people to create socially (Soomro et al., 2022)

Recent literature review studies on makerspaces in education investigated their development and influence on learning. Soomro et al. (2022) analyze creativity in learning spaces, Konstantinou et al. (2021) map research trends, and Rouse and Rouse (2022) systematically review the implementation of school-based makerspaces in preK-12 education. However, the existing systematic literature reviews so far did not focus on more precisely identifying the characteristics of makerspaces that foster entrepreneurial competence development.

It is in this pedagogical context that we place our systematic review study, aiming to identify whether makerspaces can be characterized as learning spaces that develop entrepreneurial competences of secondary school students. We analyze which programs and educational environments promote the development of entrepreneurial competences and their attributes, proposing makerspaces as learning environments that possess the characteristics of educational approaches conducive to entrepreneurial competences.

Trying to answer the research question of whether a makerspace is an appropriate methodological approach for gaining entrepreneurial competences, this review synthesizes existing evidence rather than directly measuring competences to determine whether makerspaces can be considered effective educational tools, environments, and pedagogical approaches for developing entrepreneurial competences in lower secondary students and which of their traits favor such an attempt.

1.3. Conceptual and Theoretical Grid

Makerspaces, Hackerspaces, and Fab Labs have each developed independently, yet they have emerged with converging structures and similar uses (Van Holm, 2014). Researchers continue to debate whether to treat these three concepts as distinct entities or as synonymous (Van Holm, 2014). Vuorikari et al. (2019) acknowledge that the terms ‘Fab Labs’, ‘Hackerspaces’, and ‘Makerspaces’ are sometimes used interchangeably, despite their distinct historical evolution shaped by their unique identities, practices, and surrounding communities. Designed to transform ideas into tangible products through creativity, a Fab Lab is a laboratory or production space (Soomro et al., 2022). A hackerspace represents a physical community space where participants regularly engage in meaningful creative projects (Van Holm, 2014), while a makerspace serves as a collaborative workspace for creation, learning, exploration, and knowledge-sharing (Vuorikari et al., 2019). These descriptions reveal that the three terms share commonalities that include fostering creativity, collaboration, learning, exploration, and the practical application of ideas (Van Holm, 2014). However, key differences arise from their independent development, shaped by the specific communities in which they were established. Vuorikari et al. (2019) also underscore three distinct features that significantly enhance the value of these spaces for education and training. Firstly, these spaces enhance interdisciplinary learning by integrating disciplines that are traditionally taught separately. Secondly, as individuals engage with real-world problems, they acquire new knowledge and construct meaning from their experiences (problem-based and experiential learning). Thirdly, the informal modes of social interaction within makerspaces foster diverse and flexible learning arrangements, such as peer learning, mentorship, and peer coaching (informal social learning).

The current stage of theoretical understanding and debates reflects an evolving discourse on makerspaces in education, emphasizing their role in fostering creativity, entrepreneurship, and experiential learning while highlighting the need for further research on their long-term impact and integration into formal curricula (Rouse & Rouse, 2022).

Several explanatory theories and theoretical frameworks have been proposed to understand the processes involved in such learning spaces, eventually leading to entrepreneurial competence development. Experiential learning theory (Kolb, 2014) complements the understanding of fostering learning in makerspace environments, emphasizing the importance of practical experiences in the development of entrepreneurial competences (experiential learning). It argues that learning occurs through action and reflection, and makerspaces provide the perfect environment for applied learning experiences.

Cervetti et al. (2006) mention the “multiple literacies” that students will bring to the learning space and recommend teacher training in multiple literacies. By mastering the multiple literacies approach, described in the homonym theory, teachers can guide students in developing rich portfolios of multiple literacy tools and comprehension (digital and media literacy). Kist (2005) describes operationalizing new literacies in differently designed learning spaces for middle school students.

1.4. Identity of Makerspaces as Learning Environments That Develop Entrepreneurial Competences—Previous Systematic Reviews

Previous literature reviews analyzed different research contributions. Thus, Halverson and Sheridan (2014) provided a comprehensive analysis of how makerspaces foster learning and innovation. Smay and Walker (2015) discussed the practical implications of makerspaces within educational settings. Soomro et al. (2022) expanded on the role of educational innovation, particularly in the context of makerspaces. Rouse and Rouse (2022) highlighted that, despite the transformative potential of makerspaces, there remains insufficient evidence on how students’ specific learning outcomes are shaped by these environments. They noted that many studies on makerspaces in schools failed to identify precisely what students learn or how their competences are developed through these spaces, leaving a gap in understanding the explicit mechanisms that promote the growth of entrepreneurial abilities. However, these systematic reviews do not manage to clarify the features of the makerspace environments, proposed learning interactions, and concepts of educational programs that foster learning outcomes related to entrepreneurial competence. This limitation points to the need for deeper exploration into how makerspaces go beyond fostering creativity and provide a concrete pathway to cultivating entrepreneurial competences. The analytic focus we propose in this review offers a more comprehensive understanding of how entrepreneurial competences evolve within makerspace environments, emphasizing the interplay between the learner’s identity, the pedagogical programs, and the collaborative, real-world experiences facilitated by these spaces.

The theory of entrepreneurial development (Krueger, 2007) offers a detailed perspective on how makerspace members form and refine their entrepreneurial competences, highlighting the stages and processes involved in developing these competences through practical experience and reflection. Such insights are foundational for designing training programs that can be tailored to different levels of expertise and specific competence units, as clearly structured in the EntreComp framework (Margherita et al., 2016), adopted by the European Commission. EntreComp defines entrepreneurial competence through three key domains, reuniting 15 individual competence areas: “Ideas and Opportunities” (including “creativity, vision, opportunity recognition, valuing ideas, and ethical and sustainable thinking”), “Resources” (such as “self-awareness”, “self-efficacy, motivation”, “perseverance, mobilizing resources, financial and economic literacy, mobilizing others”, and “taking initiative”), and “Into Action” (covering “planning” and “management, working with others, learning through experience, communication and networking, innovation and problem-solving”) (Margherita et al., 2016). These three domains directly reflect the essence of entrepreneurial competence, understood by Bacigalupo et al. (2024) as the ability “to turn ideas into action to create value for others”, as attitude and mindset, fostered by the appropriate knowledge. Together, the 15 individual competence areas form the foundation of entrepreneurial competence as a key skillset essential for all citizens (Margherita et al., 2016; Bacigalupo et al., 2024).

Using such a theoretical framework for understanding and explaining the development of entrepreneurial competences in makerspaces, the analysis and synthesis of the literature can provide a deeper understanding of the processes involved and the factors that influence the effectiveness of educational programs run in these innovative environments leading to the development of entrepreneurship competences.

For example, the European Horizon DOIT project studied the elements of entrepreneurship education and social innovation that have been researched and combined in a piloted education program, investigating the impact of specific educational approaches in makerspaces on the development of entrepreneurial competences (Unterfrauner et al., 2021). The results indicated that such a program can have a significantly higher impact on secondary school students by providing them with authentic, hands-on learning experiences that integrate social innovation with entrepreneurial thinking (social innovation and value creation). The insights guided the methodological approach of this study, which focuses on identifying and categorizing educational activities based on their thematic orientation.

Besides such large-scale research projects, in the following sections, we will systematically map and analyze the evidence that highlights the traits of makerspaces that foster EC development.

2. Methodology

2.1. Study Design

The methodological design was guided by Grant and Booth (2009) and Gough et al. (2012) and their comprehensive framework for rigorously appraising and synthesizing evidence in literature reviews. Furthermore, the investigative design builds on Gough and Thomas’s (2016) recommendation of integrating diverse methodological approaches to address complex research questions and on Alexander’s (2020) guidance of contextualizing findings within broader theoretical and practical domains, ensuring that the synthesis contributes meaningfully to the existing body of knowledge.

To conduct this systematic literature review, we followed the instructions in Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Page et al., 2020). The methodological approach adopted in this study is similar to the review methodology used in the study of Rouse and Rouse (2022). While Rouse and Rouse’s (2022) systematic review focuses on makerspaces as learning spaces in schools, our study addresses the development of entrepreneurial competences in makerspaces inside and outside schools, bringing a more complex appreciation for the competences that are developed in makerspaces. The analytic lens is based on the EntreComp framework (Bacigalupo et al., 2024), which emphasizes the role of experiential learning in fostering entrepreneurial competence, and on Vuorikari et al. (2019), who highlight the importance of transversal competences, including entrepreneurial ones, in innovative educational settings such as makerspaces.

We have chosen to concentrate on the studies conducted on students in grades V-IX, covering, in most educational systems, middle school. The focus on middle school students was considered because entrepreneurial competence is listed as basic competence to be developed until the end of the compulsory schooling, which relates to secondary school in most educational systems. Also, the studies emphasize the importance of developing entrepreneurial competences as early as adolescence to prepare learners to respond effectively to the demands of a volatile and dynamic world for their future careers that may not even exist today (Rayna & Striukova, 2021).

2.2. Search Process and Outcome

The investigative approach employed a rigorous, systematic process to identify, select, and integrate relevant studies.

In the initial stage, we searched for studies cited in previously conducted systematic literature reviews (Fellnhofer, 2019; Mersand, 2021; Rouse & Rouse, 2022; San Juan & Murai, 2022; Soomro et al., 2022) on makerspaces and entrepreneurial competences and related concepts. The Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar databases were selected because they ensure both quality and breadth: Web of Science offers access to high-quality, peer-reviewed studies, ERIC provides specialized resources in education, and Google Scholar allows coverage of a wide range of recent and interdisciplinary publications, reflecting the emergent nature of this topic. We hand-searched for research reports as well as gray area resources, as this is a newly emerging domain, in expansion. The literature search was performed between April and August 2024, and it included studies published between 2013 and 2024. This time frame was selected because 2013 marks the early integration of makerspaces into educational contexts, aligning with the rising research and policy focus on entrepreneurial education through making.

We used the search algorithm “entrepreneurial* competences*” OR “entrepreneurship* competences*” OR “entrepreneurial skills” OR “entrepreneurship skills” AND “makerspaces as learning environments” OR “maker spaces” OR “maker education” OR “innovation labs” OR “creative spaces*” OR “hackerspaces*” OR “fab labs” OR “educational spaces” OR “learning spaces” AND “middle school” OR “secondary education” OR “junior high school” OR “lower secondary school”.

The articles published in the last five years in the Educational Technology journal were mapped, as this journal published several articles on makerspaces, and makerspaces as learning spaces do not have their own flagship journal. Using the snowball technique, we scrutinized the references of matched articles to uncover additional valuable sources. Of the potential articles found in our manual searches, we excluded articles because they were not related to our topic (n = 17) or participants were not suitable for grades V–IX (n = 15). After conducting manual searches, we downloaded 3 additional articles that met our review criteria.

The initial search returned 2173 articles. In the first stage, 641 duplicate studies were removed using Mendeley Desktop reference management software, version Desktop for MacOS 10.13 (High Sierra), resulting in 1673 studies remaining.

For the inclusion of studies in this review, we considered 3 criteria:

(a)

The study had to address a topic related to makerspaces, inside or outside of the school context, and entrepreneurial competences and/or a related concept (e.g., makerspace, EntreComp, Fab Labs, entrepreneurial mindset, entrepreneurship education, etc.);

(b)

The study had to be published in English in a peer-reviewed journal or in an academically evaluated document, such as a thesis or dissertation;

(c)

The study had to involve students in grades V–IX, typically aged 11–16 years.

We excluded articles that were not related to our theme (n = 914), those for which participants were not in secondary education (n = 675), and those for which the context was a workspace, not a learning space (n = 40).

Out of the 44 full-text articles, we excluded 8 due to their lack of a full text or their non-English content. We included 35 studies in the systematic review.

Figure 1 provides an overview of the procedures for searching for and selecting studies suitable for our approach.

2.3. Data Analysis

The coding was performed based on a self-developed coding grid, as we could not find a suitable example of coding. All 35 full-text articles were coded, following the study characteristics (author, institution, year of publication, study design, journal, or paper), sample (grade, age), types of competences (as defined in the EntreComp framework, e.g., creativity, problem-solving, collaboration, initiative, self-efficacy, perseverance, etc.), inside or outside of school context (formal and nonformal education), methodology, outcome data (type of data collected, description of results), contributions to the field, limitations, and future research directions (Lawrence & McEvoy, 2022). In this coding process, entrepreneurial competences were treated as the primary focus, while makerspace dimensions (identity, programs, and environment) were considered central to the review. The parallel coding was performed by two of the authors. A high interrater agreement percentage of 91% was achieved across the 35 studies. The remaining 9% was resolved through coder discussion and consensus. The two researchers discussed divergences until agreement was reached, following principles of systematized consensus (Teodoro, 2025), ensuring the reliability and consistency of the coding process.

Inductive coding was employed to identify emerging themes and patterns within the data, allowing for a grounded analysis of how entrepreneurial competences develop in the makerspace. Next, we analyzed information about the participants and the outcomes measured related to the development of entrepreneurial competences in makerspaces. Finally, we examined the approaches to entrepreneurial competence development in makerspaces. Data were extracted by analyzing each article included in this SLR. There were cases where the studies did not provide all the necessary information for coding the variables. In some cases, studies lacked details needed for coding certain variables (e.g., grade/age, specific competences, or outcomes). These were marked as ‘not reported (NR)’. For this reason, study numbers did not always sum to 35. In analyzing the results, we used thematic analysis to systematically identify patterns within the qualitative data set (Naeem et al., 2023), choosing to apply an approach focused on sharing and understanding the meaning, as we worked to identify the deeper significance of the thematic categories.

3. Results

In the last ten years, a growing research interest could be noticed, as between 2013 and 2016, five articles were published; between 2017 and 2020, eleven articles; and between 2021 and 2024, nineteen. In terms of investigative design, three articles delineate mixed research, two articles comprise quantitative research, and thirty articles showcase qualitative research. The majority of studies on this topic are focused on the United States and various European countries, such as Finland, Austria, the Netherlands, Norway, and Spain.

Details for each article regarding author(s), year of publication, region, type of research/number of subjects/research instrument, journal title, and research focus used can be seen in

Table 1. Overview of the selected studies: authors, year, country; research type, focus.

Author, Region	Research Type, Sample	Exploration of the Research Focuses/Outcomes Related to Makerspaces and Entrepreneurial Competences
1. (Fasso & Knight, 2020), Australia	Qualitative, description design makerspace	Makerspace design.
2. (Fellnhofer, 2019), Finland	Qualitative, literature review	Taxonomy of entrepreneurship education research situates makerspaces as environments enhancing experiential and project-based competences such as problem-solving and creativity.
3. (Geser et al., 2019), Austria and the Netherlands	Qualitative, Horizon DOIT program description	Makerspaces as social innovation and entrepreneurship learning environments, promoting collaboration and opportunity recognition.
4. (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014), USA	Qualitative	Makerspaces as transformative educational settings that develop creativity, resilience, and agency.
5. (Hartikainen et al., 2024), Finland	Qualitative	Collaborative digital fabrication in makerspaces strengthens teamwork, innovation, and perseverance.
6. (Hira & Hynes, 2018), USA	Qualitative	People, resources, and activities in makerspaces foster creativity, critical thinking, and entrepreneurial initiative.
7. (Hui & Gerber, 2017), USA	Mixed, observations and interviews N = 22	Makerspaces as sites of entrepreneurship, enhancing opportunity recognition and value creation.
8. (Hornung-Prähauser et al., 2018), Europe	Qualitative DOIT program description N ≥ 1000 students	DOIT approach shows how makerspaces foster creativity, collaboration, and ethical thinking.
9. (Høibo et al., 2024), Norway	Qualitative, interview N = 30	Teachers’ values and beliefs regarding maker-centered learning.
10. (Hollauf et al., 2020), Europe	Qualitative DOIT program description	Makerspace activities support youth creativity, problem-solving, and entrepreneurial self-efficacy.
11. (Koh & Abbas, 2015), USA	Quantitative, interviews N = 9	Makerspaces and learning labs cultivate entrepreneurial competences such as opportunity recognition, collaboration, and initiative.
12. (Konstantinou et al., 2021), international	Qualitative, literature review	Makerspaces support the development of problem-solving, creativity, and teamwork.
13. (Litts, 2015), USA	Qualitative, comparative case study	Makerspaces as learning environments for skill development, fostering initiative and critical thinking.
14. (Marinoble, 2019), USA	Qualitative, case study N = 9	Makerspaces nurture entrepreneurial competences such as innovation, perseverance, and collaboration.
15. (Mersand, 2021), USA	Qualitative, literature review	Literature review highlights makerspaces’ role in fostering creativity and problem-solving.
16. (Miliou et al., 2024), Cyprus	Qualitative, case study	Self-assessment tool in makerspaces supports reflection, creativity, and entrepreneurial self-awareness.
17. (Montes et al., 2024), Columbia	Qualitative, case study	Makerspaces foster creativity, opportunity recognition, and problem-solving.
18. (Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024), Norway	Qualitative, interview N = 9	Teachers’ perception of makerspaces influences creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurial initiative.
19. (Peppler & Bender, 2013), USA	Qualitative, description maker lessons	Maker Movement promotes innovation, laying foundations for opportunity recognition and creativity.
20. (Peterson & Scharber, 2018), USA	Qualitative, workshop description N = 50	Teachers’ use of makerspaces fosters student creativity, collaboration, and initiative.
21. (Quintana-Ordorika et al., 2024), Spain	Mixed, questionnaire N = 38	Maker pedagogies strengthen creativity, teamwork, and problem-solving competences.
22. (Rayna & Striukova, 2021), Europe	Qualitative, focus group N = 22	Fab Labs and makerspaces foster creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurial mindset.
23. (Reynolds, 2021), Florida	Qualitative, questionnaire N = 30	Makerspaces empower students with 21st-century skills, especially creativity, collaboration, and initiative.
24. (Rouse & Rouse, 2022), USA	Systematic review, qualitative	Literature review links school makerspaces with entrepreneurial competences such as problem-solving and teamwork.
25. (San Juan & Murai, 2022), international	Systematic review, qualitative	Frustration in makerspaces promotes resilience, problem-solving, and perseverance.
26. (Smay & Walker, 2015), Florida	Qualitative, description makerspace practices	Makerspaces encourage creativity, agency, and initiative.
27. (Smolarczyk et al., 2024), Germany	Qualitative, focus group N = 61	Fab Labs and makerspaces foster collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving.
28. (Soomro et al., 2022), international	Systematic review, qualitative	Fab Lab environments foster creativity, resilience, and teamwork as entrepreneurial competences.
29. (Tan, 2019), Singapore	Qualitative, case study N = 15	Makerspaces in schools support creativity, problem-solving, and collaboration.
30. (Turakhia et al., 2024), USA	Qualitative, interview	Educators’ practices in makerspaces promote creativity, collaboration, and opportunity recognition.
31. (Unterfrauner et al., 2021), Europe	Quantitative questionnaire N = 759	Maker-centered activities impact self-efficacy and creativity as core entrepreneurial competences.
32. (Vongkulluksn et al., 2018), California	Quantitative questionnaire N = 100	Motivational factors in makerspaces foster perseverance, initiative, and self-efficacy.
33. (Walan & Brink, 2024), Sweden	Qualitative, interviews N = 69	Makerspace activities develop 21st-century skills, including creativity, teamwork, and initiative.
34. (Weng et al., 2022), Hong Kong	Qualitative, case study N = 70	Real-world-problem-based maker education enhances creativity, problem-solving, and entrepreneurial initiative.
35. (White, 2022), USA	Mixed, action research	Middle school makerspaces foster collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking as entrepreneurial competences.

.

Using inductive thematic analysis, a qualitative analytical model methodologically grounded by Braun and Clarke (2006), four thematic categories were identified: makerspace identity, (entrepreneurial) competences, programs run in makerspaces, and the environment.

3.1. Identity (Makerspace as Learning Space Influencing Entrepreneurial Competences)

Identity is the most studied aspect. Almost a third of the papers discuss the identity of spaces, research that seeks to delineate the features of these spaces, defining the uniqueness and specificity of makerspaces. The identity elements that define and individualize makerspaces reflect their purpose, functionality, type of activity carried out, specificity, and participants (Smay & Walker, 2015; Hira & Hynes, 2018; Tan, 2019; White, 2022).

In terms of educational purpose and mission, makerspaces are designed to encourage learning through experimentation, sharing and acceptance of ideas, collaboration, and innovation. Empirical research shows that makerspaces contribute to the development of critical thinking, problem solving, the development of social competences, and the cultivation of creativity and entrepreneurship. Geser et al. (2019) emphasize that makerspaces serve as collaborative environments that foster both social innovation and entrepreneurial learning through hands-on, project-based activities.

Design is essential for the functionality of a makerspace, including flexible work areas for individual and collaborative activities, socialization, and brainstorming (Fasso & Knight, 2020).

Makerspaces are also individualized by the different types of activities they organize: hands-on workshops, interdisciplinary projects, exhibitions, competitions, etc. (Marinoble, 2019; Bobic, 2023).

The access policies of makerspaces are different; some are open to the general public, while others are integrated in educational institutions.

The makerspace community and culture are defined by collaboration and inclusion, with the space being open to all, regardless of age or level of experience; mentoring, as we often find experts guiding users in their projects; and partnerships with various entities (Marinoble, 2019). The identity of people in the makerspace holds significant importance. The identity of teachers and students is constructed through the roles they play in the makerspace (mentor, novice, expert, creator, facilitator) (Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024). Also, people in the makerspace form their identity through social interaction and cooperation, creativity and self-expression, personal motivations and interests (Turakhia et al., 2024; Walan & Brink, 2024). Regarding the identity of the teachers, we refer only to their relational connection with the students, who constitute the sample of the investigative focus.

After exploring the identity of makerspaces, we identify two types of makerspaces, differentiated according to inside/outside school (Fasso & Knight, 2020).

3.2. Makerspaces Inside Schools

Hira and Hynes (2018) conceptualize how makerspaces have evolved and are adapted to educational environments, pointing out that the people, resources, and activities within a makerspace are adaptable, proving to be beneficial for further development.

Many schools are successfully entering the makerspace arena (Fasso & Knight, 2020). Makerspace culture and values portray users learning from each other, sharing knowledge and competences, promoting learning by doing and sharing ideas (Geser et al., 2019), and fostering the development of entrepreneurial competence (Geser et al., 2019). Empirical findings show that makerspaces in schools foster entrepreneurial competences through peer collaboration, creativity, knowledge sharing, and initiative-taking. Joyful engagement and a supportive environment motivate students to engage deeply and think innovatively (Tan, 2019; White, 2022; Hartikainen et al., 2024).

3.3. Makerspaces Outside of School

Makerspaces outside of school are places that provide opportunities for exploration, experimentation, and creative learning (Litts, 2015). In libraries, museums, community centers, afterschool clubs, etc., are learning spaces open to the general public or to specific groups, encouraging innovation, collaboration, and leadership (Geser et al., 2019; Litts, 2015). Research shows that nonformal makerspaces facilitate the growth of transferable skills, autonomy in learning, leadership, and entrepreneurial attitudes (Geser et al., 2019; Hollauf et al., 2020; Grant & Booth, 2009). After experimenting with makerspaces inside or outside of the school context, it has been found that they are useful for developing transversal competences, developing autonomy in learning, and promoting social innovation and entrepreneurial learning (Geser et al., 2019). The features that generate this usefulness emerge from approaches and are highlighted through qualitative research on the DOIT (entrepreneurial skills for young social innovators in an open digital world) program and its description. Students are able to transform creative ideas into real projects when they are supported with the right tools and encouragement (Geser et al., 2019). A quasi-experimental study found measurable improvements in creativity and self-efficacy after participation in makerspace programs (Grant & Booth, 2009). Moreover, failure was identified as a valuable learning experience, helping students develop perseverance and motivation (Hollauf et al., 2020). Moreover, failure was identified as a valuable learning experience, helping students develop perseverance and motivation. In a similar vein, various studies highlight aspects of makerspaces—such as creativity, problem-solving, collaboration, and initiative—that may stimulate entrepreneurial thinking (

Table 2. Details on makerspace identity and its contribution to entrepreneurial competence.

Author	Details of Identifying a Makerspace That Can Contribute to Entrepreneurial Competence Development	Details Identifying People in the Makerspace
(Smay & Walker, 2015)	A makerspace is a creative and safe place where students can explore, collaborate, experiment, and learn from failures. Makerspaces are increasingly becoming the center of activity and learning in schools, attracting students and transforming traditional spaces, like libraries, into environments for creativity and innovation.	Students develop resilience and collaboration through experimentation, fostering entrepreneurial competences such as problem-solving and creativity.
(Hira & Hynes, 2018)	Creating in the community; educational potential, which makes it attractive to schools.	Makerspaces empower learners to take initiative and build confidence, strengthening entrepreneurial competences.
(Marinoble, 2019)	Practices that promote innovation, opportunities to build on your own interests.	Teachers create conditions for students to practice innovation and agency, directly supporting entrepreneurial competences.
(Tan, 2019)	Three specific makerspace practices: meaningful playfulness, authentic scientific practices, learning by doing.	These practices encourage curiosity and risk-taking, key entrepreneurial competences.
(Fasso & Knight, 2020)	Increasingly popular in schools; at the heart of a makerspace is its intention as well as anticipated learning outcomes. Design is the basis of the process in a makerspace, and the transformation of the learner’s identity is its outcome.	Makerspace design helps learners develop initiative, creativity, and adaptability, central to entrepreneurial competences.
(White, 2022)	Curriculum links knowledge with real-world challenges.	Empathy, problem-solving, real-world orientation.
(Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024)	Norwegian makerspace teachers’ conceptions about learning by doing to develop creativity and about the practices they carry out as makerspace teachers.	Teachers highlight creativity and problem-solving as outcomes, strengthening entrepreneurial competences.
(Turakhia et al., 2024)	Contexts, goals, values, and practices of makerspace teachers. The design of makerspaces can support the variety of learning opportunities for students.	Teachers design activities that encourage initiative and collaboration, key entrepreneurial competences.
(Walan & Brink, 2024)	Self-assessment of students and teachers on developing 21st-century skills during makerspace activities.	Makerspaces support reflection and agency, reinforcing entrepreneurial competences such as critical thinking and responsibility.

). However, while these skills are frequently emphasized, the systematic development of entrepreneurial competences is less consistently demonstrated, and direct investigation of the relationship between makerspace participation and entrepreneurial competence remains limited. Students developed a strong sense of ownership from idea to prototype, which significantly contributed to building entrepreneurial competence.

3.4. Identity of the Makerspace Teacher

The identity of the makerspace teacher is grounded in their role as a learning facilitator/mentor who intentionally designs learning experiences that nurture entrepreneurial competences through collaboration, creativity, and learner agency (Fasso & Knight, 2020). These educators adopt learner-centered, project-based, and inquiry-driven approaches, focusing not on transmitting knowledge but on guiding students to generate ideas, solve problems, and take initiative. Empirical studies show that such pedagogical approaches help students develop initiative, problem-solving skills, and creative confidence (Fasso & Knight, 2020; Litts, 2015).

Through narrative framing, inclusive task design, and hands-on exploration, teachers structure the environment to support experimentation, persistence, reflection, and collaborative learning—all essential for developing an entrepreneurial mindset (Litts, 2015; Quintana-Ordorika et al., 2024). They tailor activities to students’ interests and experiences, helping learners connect emotionally and cognitively with the tasks and fostering self-efficacy, teamwork, and value creation (Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024). Teachers acting as co-creators of learning promote key entrepreneurial competences such as self-efficacy, teamwork, and creativity (Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024; Grant & Booth, 2009; Inăşel et al., 2022).

3.5. Student Identity in the Makerspace

Makerspace provides a socio-cultural environment in which making, interaction, modeling, and narrative explain and support identity construction (Fasso & Knight, 2020). After participating in a makerspace-specific program, students’ identities change as openness to collaboration and learning, experimentation, a growth-oriented mindset that views failure as part of the learning process, cultural and perspective diversity, creativity, and innovativeness develop (Fasso & Knight, 2020).

Empirical data show that students gain confidence in experimenting, become more resilient, and enhance their collaboration and communication skills (Fasso & Knight, 2020; Litts, 2015).

Students report that they experiment with more collaboration, communication, coordination, and joint work, seeking resources, exploring new ideas, asking for support, and receiving informed guidance (Fasso & Knight, 2020; Litts, 2015). These behaviors directly contribute to developing entrepreneurial competences such as resourcefulness, teamwork, initiative, and creative problem-solving (Smay & Walker, 2015; Fasso & Knight, 2020).

3.6. Competence (Focus on Entrepreneurial Competences)

Exploring the literature through this thematic category reveals an inventory of how skills are developed in makerspaces, with a particular focus on how entrepreneurial competence of secondary school students is ensured in makerspaces. Entrepreneurial competence characterized by critical thinking, problem solving, and collaboration develops faster in makerspaces. Studies show that makerspaces accelerate the development of critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and initiative, core components of entrepreneurial competence (Weng et al., 2022; Rayna & Striukova, 2021; Koh & Abbas, 2015).

Entrepreneurial competence is described as the ability to turn ideas and opportunities into action by mobilizing resources (Margherita et al., 2016). Resources can be personal (“self-awareness, self-efficacy, motivation, and perseverance”) (Margherita et al., 2016), material (means of production and financial resources), or non-material (specific “knowledge, competences and attitudes”) (Margherita et al., 2016). The 15 competence units that make up entrepreneurial competence are interdependent and interrelated, and they should be treated as parts of a whole. It is not advisable to develop each competence unit to the highest level across all the competence domains that circumscribe entrepreneurial competence. Linking and extending the elements gives the user the chance to adapt them to best fit. For example, creativity is a unit of competence in the domain area of ideas and opportunities, and the creative process involves both the use of resources and the ability to act on ideas by shaping their value (Margherita et al., 2016).

Empirical findings indicate that makerspaces support the growth of competence units such as creativity, self-awareness, perseverance, risk-taking, collaboration, ideation, and ethical thinking (Weng et al., 2022; Unterfrauner et al., 2021; Hollauf et al., 2020). Peer collaboration and experiential learning foster deeper understanding of concepts and boost initiative and resilience (Fasso & Knight, 2020; Reynolds, 2021).

Weng et al. (2022) investigate entrepreneurial competence by exploring the resource dimension, with a particular emphasis on perseverance and self-awareness. Additionally, they state that students demonstrated entrepreneurial competence by leveraging ideas and resources through mobilizing others and identifying opportunities. Moreover, during peer group peer feedback activities, students practiced collaboration with others, ethical and sustainable thinking, and experiential learning through experiential practice of planning and management, specific elements of entrepreneurial competence.

Technology-rich makerspace activities are empirically linked to higher student engagement and the development of innovation, planning, and risk management skills (Weng et al., 2022; Rayna & Striukova, 2021; Konstantinou et al., 2021). Consequently, the majority of studies characterize makerspaces as places where entrepreneurial competence units are developed.

3.7. Program (Initiatives Fostering Entrepreneurial Competences)

By programs, we mean structured initiatives that aim to achieve specific objectives, such as developing competences, promoting innovation, solving social problems, etc. Entrepreneurship education programs give students the opportunity to explore new ideas and build confidence and knowledge in an experiential way (Reynolds, 2021).

The programs presented in the analyzed studies promote the use of makerspaces and innovative tools to develop entrepreneurial competences and prepare students for the future through hands-on, collaborative, and interdisciplinary education. The focus is to highlight evidence-informed examples of programs that develop entrepreneurial competences in makerspaces and to emphasize what they reveal.

Programs like DOIT and others have been empirically validated to enhance entrepreneurial learning through project-based, hands-on activities (Hollauf et al., 2020; Unterfrauner et al., 2021). Unterfrauner et al. (2021) present the scientifically validated effectiveness of the DOIT program through a quasi-experimental study, demonstrating its positive impact on individual entrepreneurial competence development. The DOIT program has been implemented across 10 European countries, presenting structured activities, including social innovation projects that guide youth through the stages of ideation, prototyping, and dissemination (Hollauf et al., 2020).

Weng et al. (2022) investigate students’ creativity and entrepreneurship development in an integrated maker program with real-world problems. The learning outcomes of the program were designed following the EntreComp framework. The students’ learning experiences and their products show that students develop entrepreneurial competences around ideas, opportunities, and resources while designing the activity (Weng et al., 2022). The Weng et al. (2022) program followed the instructional model of learning in five different ways (involve, explore, explain, elaborate, evaluate), which is well designed but may be difficult to implement widely without sufficient resources.

Peterson and Scharber (2018) argue that makerspaces are the latest movement in education that can disrupt the grammar of school. Thus, workshops are organized with a focus on teaching and learning strategies, modeling pedagogy, exposing teachers to current technological tools, and valuing play (Peterson & Scharber, 2018). Teacher preparation and professional development programs fail to prepare teachers to use technology effectively (Peterson & Scharber, 2018). Teachers are encouraged to design, use, and promote makerspaces and pay attention to the importance of pedagogy, teaching and learning strategies, and valuing play (Peterson & Scharber, 2018). Empirical observations confirm that structured maker programs support ideation, problem-solving, and team collaboration (Weng et al., 2022). Fellnhofer (2019) mentions that teachers feel the need for a closer link between entrepreneurship and education to address theoretical content in formal curricula interdisciplinarily through effective policy tools to develop students’ entrepreneurial cognitive competences, not only the practical and attitudinal parts of the competence.

Smay and Walker (2015) present a makerspace design and creation program run over one year, during the school day, on students’ timetables, framing the activity in the context of current educational trends. The impact lies in the effective integration of makerspaces into the school curriculum, allowing students to actively participate in the design and creation in a structured and consistent way. Mersand (2021) presents the makerspace as part of the school library program, pointing toward its role in fostering creativity, interdisciplinary learning, and student autonomy. Such findings were underlined by Rouse and Rouse (2022) in their systematic review of 22 articles while mapping the aims, scopes, designs, and interventions implemented in makerspace programs in schools.

A larger, systemic vision for the whole educational system was encouraged by the Singapore Ministry of Education, considering the entrepreneurial audacity to be developed through makerspaces, perceived as contributing to the schemes for developing the country into a smart nation, giving schools the mission to create a mix of programs through a multi-perspective approach toward their subjects (Tan, 2019).

Comparative analysis of programs shows that both formal and nonformal settings can foster entrepreneurial competences, with adaptation and scalability as key challenges (Tan, 2019; Rayna & Striukova, 2021). Teachers argue that they struggle to find room for iterative processes, play, and productive failure in learning in an environment that is still goal-oriented. Empirical data supports that giving students room for play, iteration, and failure contributes significantly to entrepreneurial growth (Peterson & Scharber, 2018; Høibo et al., 2024).

3.8. Environment (Contextual Factors Shaping Entrepreneurial Competences in Makerspaces)

Empirical studies show that social environments in makerspaces promoting trust, collaboration, and experimentation significantly enhance student engagement and entrepreneurial behavior (Weng et al., 2022; Peterson & Scharber, 2018). Environments that normalize failure and exploration lead to increased resilience, initiative, and creative risk-taking (Weng et al., 2022; Peterson & Scharber, 2018).

3.9. Social Environment

The social environment reflects the interactions that take place between students and instructors. The social environment in a makerspace can be a powerful tool to facilitate students’ participation in entrepreneurship-stimulating educational processes. One way to stimulate students’ entrepreneurial competence is to engage them in learning through pedagogically appropriately designed digital fabrication tools (Peterson & Scharber, 2018), as well as in creating real-world problems with the aim of identifying solutions (Weng et al., 2022). Also, studying human interactions in makerspaces found that creating an atmosphere in which students and teachers are allowed to fail at a given task encourages them to experiment, explore, and integrate other participants into their activities (Peterson & Scharber, 2018). Thus, it can be argued that the social environment of makerspaces provides opportunities for people to be expressive, increasing the chances of producing outcomes and motivating their engagement in entrepreneurial activities.

3.10. Physical Environment

This trend reflects how the physical environment of makerspaces, including digital fabrication tools, influences the development of entrepreneurial competence (White, 2022). The physical environment of makerspaces, through infrastructure, available equipment, site design and organization, and the ergonomics facilitating collaboration, creativity, and participant engagement, aims to stimulate active learning and explore innovation (Peppler & Bender, 2013). A well-designed layout that encourages interaction and teamwork further supports critical thinking and problem-solving, essential components of entrepreneurial competence (Walan & Brink, 2024). Advanced equipment, for instance, such as 3D printers, laser cutters, and various materials, provides opportunities for experimentation and prototyping, essential for developing creativity and technical competences.

Makerspaces need rich equipment to facilitate experimentation and concrete action, complemented by the social spirit of such learning environments, which fosters a can-do ethos, do-it-yourself mindsets and beliefs. White (2022) found that 90% of the participants felt that makerspaces motivated them to enroll in careers involving innovation, entrepreneurship, creativity, and design. The evidence suggests a strong empirical correlation between makerspace participation and entrepreneurial career aspirations (White, 2022).

Empirical findings show that makerspaces support the development of essential skills such as creativity, collaboration, critical thinking, and initiative. Through hands-on and exploratory activities, they provide an authentic learning environment increasingly aligned with educational and entrepreneurial competence needs.

These findings form the basis for a deeper discussion on the pedagogical implications, opportunities, and challenges of using makerspaces as a framework for entrepreneurial competence development in education.

4. Discussion

The analysis of the reviewed studies shed light on the interplay between makerspaces and their contribution to EC development. The findings point out how they support or challenge the assumption that ECs are developed in middle school students through makerspaces.

In line with the theory of experiential learning and entrepreneurial competence development presented in the conceptual framework, twenty-one of the thirty-five publications identified for inclusion in this systematic review were published in the last five years. This is perhaps not surprising given that makerspaces have become increasingly integrated into educational settings worldwide, aligning with broader trends in hands-on, experiential learning (Kolb, 2014). However, what is surprising is the rapid expansion of research in this field across diverse international contexts, highlighting a growing academic interest in understanding the impact of makerspaces on EC, creativity, and collaborative learning. First authors hailed from institutions located in the USA, Finland, Austria, and the Netherlands, as well as other regions such as Singapore, Germany, Hong Kong, and Australia, reflecting the global distribution of contributions.

In this systematic review, we identified validated pilot programs and characteristics of educational environments acting as makerspaces, and of teachers’ identity and actions leading to developing entrepreneurial competences in middle school students. Characterizing the traits of makerspaces that might lead to entrepreneurial competence development, four main dimensions of analysis could be derived, related to their identity, the units of entrepreneurial competence most likely to be developed, and the resources that characterize such learning environments. Such learning environments are purposely designed as MSs, and the pedagogical concepts of educational programs meant for students/teachers were also listed, together with the traits shaping their identity and their contribution to EC development:

Firstly, identity emerged as a central theme, appearing in almost a third of the reviewed studies (Smay & Walker, 2015; Hira & Hynes, 2018; Tan, 2019; White, 2022). Research addresses multiple dimensions of identity, linking it to educational goals, activity types, community culture, and participant interaction. This educational identity is dynamic, rooted in experiential learning, and shaped both by teacher facilitation and student participation (Geser et al., 2019; Fasso & Knight, 2020). Makerspaces promote collaboration, inclusion, and flexible roles like mentor, expert, or novice, supporting identity formation through meaningful engagement (Olafsson & Thorsteinsson, 2024; Turakhia et al., 2024). The findings suggest that educational identity is key in fostering entrepreneurial and innovative thinking.

Secondly, competence development covered a wide range of units of EC, mainly related to creativity, collaboration, problem-solving, and ethical thinking. Such abilities and components of EC are more likely to be developed in MSs, rather than traditional business-oriented skills. This indicates a broader interpretation of entrepreneurial learning and competence development, oriented toward mindset and transversal abilities. Promising practices included hands-on learning, the development of a growth mindset, and opportunities for real-world experimentation, although challenges such as unequal resource access and limited mentoring persist (Smay & Walker, 2015; Fasso & Knight, 2020; Weng et al., 2022).

In the third place, program structure and intentional pedagogical design were highlighted as essential approaches to effective EC development, due to a careful design and meaningful effort being necessary to meet and valorize MS strengths. Our review reinforces that structured programs, such as the DOIT project (Hornung-Prähauser et al., 2018), play a pivotal role in guiding students through real-world challenges, encouraging creativity, and fostering innovation. A key insight is the blending of formal and informal learning settings. While formal education provides structure and curricular alignment, nonformal makerspace environments offer flexibility and intrinsic motivation. Balancing these two dimensions appears essential for optimal entrepreneurial competence development.

In the fourth place, the environment—both physical and social—was found to significantly influence learning outcomes. Makerspaces equipped with tools like 3D printers and laser cutters, as well as supportive peer networks, provide a fertile ground for entrepreneurial experimentation. However, the studies also raised concerns about equal access and the readiness of educators to facilitate such learning. Addressing these gaps will be essential for ensuring that makerspaces are inclusive and effective for all learners.

In summary, while makerspaces offer substantial promise in developing entrepreneurial skills and competences, the effectiveness of their programs depends on factors such as the design of the space, the mentor’s role, and the learning environment’s ability to balance structure with flexibility. There is much to be gained from further exploring how these elements interact and influence the long-term impact of makerspace experiences on students’ entrepreneurial mindset. The findings are notable because they highlight that, although some researchers focus on developing entrepreneurial competences through makerspace interventions, this approach is not yet consistently applied. In the future, it is essential that research continues to adopt a comprehensive view of entrepreneurial learning in makerspaces, ensuring that these environments effectively contribute to the development of such competences. Recommendations for practical implementation include increasing student autonomy in makerspace activities, tailoring interventions to the specific needs of various student groups, creating strong social and emotional support systems for participants (Fasso & Knight, 2020; Miliou et al., 2024), and using methods such as human-centered design to enable students to identify and solve problems within their communities. These strategies will be important for optimizing the potential of makerspaces in fostering entrepreneurial skills.

The makerspace simultaneously functions as an active learning method, a stimulating educational environment, and an integrated pedagogical approach, contributing to the formation of an entrepreneurial mindset and competence through experience, creativity, collaboration, and reflection.

Limitations and Next Steps

This systematic review, while insightful, is subject to several limitations concerning the development of entrepreneurial competences within makerspaces as learning environments. Firstly, our focus on peer-reviewed journal articles, dissertations, and school-based makerspace research may have inadvertently prioritized certain types of research and interventions, potentially overlooking valuable insights from alternative approaches. The limitation to only three databases could lead to missing important other publications, such as the ones included in Scopus, Ebsco, Proquest, or other relevant databases. Further systematic reviews should include a more extended search. Secondly, the nascent nature of secondary-school-based makerspace research, as evidenced by the limited number of qualifying studies (N = 35), underscores the need for further investigation in this area and the need to extend it by including different age groups to ensure coherence and continuity of tailored educational practices and interventions.

Our findings yield several important implications and suggest promising avenues for advancing secondary school makerspace research, particularly in relation to entrepreneurial competency development. Firstly, replication studies are important for enhancing the reliability of findings and contributing to theoretical frameworks. Secondly, there is a need for longitudinal studies examining the impact of sustained makerspace interventions on student learning and competency development. Thirdly, critical evaluation of facilitator expertise and training is essential for ensuring effective makerspace implementation. Finally, future research should prioritize the development of equitable and inclusive interventions, incorporating diverse methodologies and student populations.

Given the current state of research, there is a pressing need for additional qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies, mainly related to quasi-experimental interventions across various age groups and makerspace settings. These studies should emphasize activities and materials that foster student agency and inclusivity, thereby contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of makerspace pedagogy.

Recalling the research question about how makerspaces contribute to the development of entrepreneurial competences in middle school students, we found that intentional pedagogical design, collaborative learning environments, and structured programs effectively support the development of these competences. In line with the theoretical frameworks, makerspaces function simultaneously as an active learning method, a stimulating educational environment, and an integrated pedagogical approach, fostering an entrepreneurial mindset and competence through experience, creativity, idea generation, collaboration, and reflection.

5. Conclusions

The analysis of the 35 studies included in this systematic review demonstrates that makerspaces can effectively support the development of entrepreneurial competence among middle school students, provided intentional pedagogical design, a collaborative learning environment, and structured programs are in place.

Overall, the findings demonstrated that makerspaces nurture creativity, innovation, collaboration, valuing ideas, and hands-on learning, which in turn support the development of entrepreneurial competences. Through the concept, design, purpose, facilitation, interaction with makerspaces, and technological resources and materials available in makerspaces, students have the opportunity to explore, experiment, and learn by doing. To better understand the impact of makerspaces on students’ entrepreneurial competences, it is essential to examine how these environments foster problem-solving skills, risk-taking, adaptability, and the ability to transform ideas into tangible outcomes. By engaging in iterative design processes, collaborative projects, and self-directed exploration, students not only gain technical and creative skills but also develop critical thinking, resilience, and a mindset oriented toward innovation and opportunity recognition.

Based on this observation, we estimate an increase in research regarding the competences developed in makerspaces in the future, as research concern has been identified across the world, with settled international teams.

This review confirms that makerspaces can play an important role in developing entrepreneurial competences in secondary school students, particularly enhancing creativity, collaboration, problem-solving, and initiative. The creative process involves both the use of resources and the ability to act on ideas by shaping their value, which makerspaces foster through hands-on experimentation and collaborative learning. Their impact, however, depends on intentional pedagogical design, trained facilitators, and adequate resources. To translate this potential into practice, schools should integrate makerspaces into the curriculum as active learning laboratories, promote student autonomy, and support teachers through professional development so that the teachers can better facilitate hands-on, collaborative, and entrepreneurial learning experiences. At the policy level, efforts should focus on supporting educational programs that leverage makerspaces to foster entrepreneurial learning. Future research should deepen evidence through longitudinal and comparative studies, helping to strengthen the foundations for using makerspaces as a framework for entrepreneurial learning.