Towards Entrepreneurial Learning Competencies: The Perspective of Built Environment Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper sought to discuss entrepreneurial learning competencies by determining the outcome of entrepreneurial learning on the views of built environment students in the university setting. In this study, three relevant competencies were identified for entrepreneurial learning through literature, namely: entrepreneurial attitude, entrepreneurial skills and knowledge of entrepreneurship. On this basis, questionnaire was designed and administered to graduate students in built environment. In all, a total of 124 questionnaires were administered to respondents. Out this, 84 were retrieved representing a response rate of 68% and were further subjected to analysis using Relative Importance Index (RII). The findings from the study highlighted on competencies factors that have great impact on entrepreneurs in dealing with tasks and problems related to entrepreneurial learning processes. These key entrepreneurial competencies as perceived by the built environment students were ranked as: entrepreneurial attitude, knowledge of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skill. The findings may help stakeholders in the building industry including up-coming graduate students. Thus, it could help in their journey into entrepreneurial terrain affiliated to advancement of their career, as a way to increase private wealth and the pursuit of a more balanced life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".