A comparative study of technical and vocational curriculum with an emphasis on Entrepreneurship education in the countries of Canada and India with Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: In today's world, entrepreneurship education has become one of the most important and extensive activities in the Technical & Vocational education system, especially at higher education level. This research has been conducted in the field of vocational education with the entrepreneurial approach and is a comparative study. The purpose of this study is to compare the curriculum of technical and vocational training (official and academic) of the two most prosperous countries in the field of entrepreneurship education with Iran (our country) Method: This applied-descriptive research has been carried out applying comparative study method of George Brody, and the main elements of the curriculum including purposes, content, teaching-learning activities and evaluation methods in technical and vocational education have been observed approaching the promotion of Entrepreneurship education. Results: The results of this study show that there is a high similarity between the chosen country with Iran in discussing the goals and content of the curriculum, but there is a great deal of difference in the discussion of teaching-learning activities and evaluation between selected countries and Iran. Iran continues to use traditional methods in teaching and teaching-learning activities, but the approach of the chosen countries is a new one based on goals and content as well as group methods. Moreover, in the evaluation methods, the selected countries use a variety and novel methods, but in Iran, oral and written tests are still employed traditionally. Conclusions: based on the study, it seems that Iran needs to review and change the approach to new and emerging approaches in the execution stage of the curriculum.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".