Entrepreneurship education and training in Indian higher education institutions: a suggested framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The study aims to evaluate the components of entrepreneurship education and training (EET) in India. The paper proposes a framework for an effective EET regime for amalgamating entrepreneurship education as fundamental to mainstream higher education in India. Design/methodology/approach The current study utilises a qualitative research technique, that is, the narrative inquiry methodology based on in-depth interviews. The study respondents included sixteen educators who are actively engaged in EET and related activities for a minimum of ten years. Findings The study identified five broad “meaning units” or “themes,” that is, “incremental pedagogical efficiency and flexible evaluation systems,” “entrepreneurial experience of the faculty,” “extended support,” “holistic mentoring” and “experiential learning” as components of an effective EET regime. Originality/value The study will help the policymakers and higher education institutions (HEIs) revisit their policy frameworks and practices to promote entrepreneurial capacity and entrepreneurial intentions among students. The study will also help to gain deeper insights into EET components and will propose a framework for an effective EET regime based on its findings.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it