MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019505605 · doi:10.1504/ijbg.2008.016135

The long-term effects of active entrepreneurial training on business school students' and graduates' attitudes towards entrepreneurship

2007· article· en· W2019505605 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean Charles Cachon, Barry Cotton

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business and Globalisation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipBusiness planPerceptionPlan (archaeology)MarketingPsychologyBusiness educationBusiness ideaPublic relationsBusinessMedical educationHigher educationPolitical scienceEconomicsEconomic growthFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At Laurentian University (Ontario, Canada), all second-year Business students complete an entrepreneurial active learning experience by preparing a comprehensive business plan over six months. Students develop an original business idea, perform a market research, and prepare a detailed business plan. This activity involves active, collaborative, and small group learning, and 'learning by doing'. This research verified whether Personal Objectives, Attitude towards Risk, Internality and Perceptions on Tutoring variables were associated with a high Entrepreneurial Orientation and whether highly entrepreneurial students had attitudes similar to those of self-employed graduates. Results showed that personal attitudes of students towards the business plan project related to the strength of their entrepreneurial orientation. Laurentian graduates high rate of self-employment was over 20%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business and GlobalisationSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207