A Study on the College Students' Entrepreneurial Ability in China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the entrepreneurial ability of college students in China. According to the results of the evaluation, the causes of the problems were analyzed, and some suggestions for the reform of the instructional model of entrepreneurship education in China were given. The samples were 608 students in faculty of Entrepreneurship for the Spring 2024 semester. of Sichuan Tourism University, and a total of 570 valid questionnaires were collected. The instrument was Entrepreneurship Evaluation Form. The study was conducted quantitative and qualitative method. The Fuzzy Synthetic Evaluation method was used to obtain the overall evaluation results of college students in China. The results show that college students in China have a high psychological quality and certain motivation for entrepreneurship, but they still need to improve their entrepreneurial skills and knowledge. Based on the results, it shows that the traditional instructional model is no longer suitable for entrepreneurship education. Since entrepreneurship is very practical and situational. When designing the instructional model, we should combine the theory of constructionism and the theory of situational cognition, so that students can go out of the classroom in a practical way and experience the real interaction in the process of entrepreneurship.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".