MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619573266 · doi:10.26417/ejms.v5i1.p477-477

Entrepreneurial Education: A Systematic Review of Undergraduate University Entrepreneurial Studies in Ontario, Canada

2017· review· en· W2619573266 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Don E. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitalityEntrepreneurial educationEntrepreneurshipGovernment (linguistics)Entrepreneurship educationEconomic growthEntrepreneurial spiritHigher educationPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Entrepreneurial education (EE), globally, has been a rapidly growing field of study. In Ontario, Canada, we have experienced both a growth and a maturation of undergraduate entrepreneurship education. This systematic review of undergraduate entrepreneurial education (EE) in Ontario will provide a mapping of this field of study. This review will be conducted through a two-stage process. Research indicates that the quality of entrepreneurial activity is important in the economic vitality of communities, regions and countries (Florida, 2002). In Canada and Ontario, government policy trends support providing entrepreneurial education, as well as supporting entrepreneurs, especially youth entrepreneurs. The result of this reviewing process reveals the breadth of entrepreneurial education, as well as the various tangents of related studies.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0250.038
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Multidisciplinary StudiesSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207