Entrepreneurship Learning Based on Literacy Skill Conservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Basic literacy comprising reading, writing, and arithmetic skills that have been possessed by one illiterate must be maintained and improved so that relapsing does not take place. In other sides, the learning of literacy for adults’ learners must be meaningful, giving economical and living values enabling the learners to improve their living standards through entrepreneurship education oriented to culture and local potential. These two combinations are the bases for the choice of education model in this study and is called entrepreneurship education based on literacy program. By combining these two aspects in its implementation, the learners are expected to be able to maintain and improve their possessed literacy and their entrepreneurship ability based on culture and local potential. This study employed descriptive analytical method. Involving 100 learners from three groups of Community Learning Centers in Pantura area, including Community Learning Center of Family Indramayu Regency, Community Learning Center of Bina Kreatif Bahari of Cirebon Regency, and Community Learning Center of Bima Sakti of Subang Regency as the source of data, this study revealed that entrepreneurship education based on literacy program could improve the ability of learners in reading, writing, and arithmetic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".