MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046498176

Developing entrepreneurs through experiential learning: the Master of Business, Entrepreneurship and Technology program at the University of Waterloo, Canada

2010· article· en· W7046498176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTrinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSuperconducting Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumEntrepreneurshipExperiential learningCommercializationExperiential educationGraduation (instrument)Business educationEntrepreneurship education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literature on entrepreneurship education identifies experience as a critical aspect of entrepreneurial development. Entrepreneurs learn by problem-solving, experimenting and making mistakes. This mode of learning is frequently at odds with traditional instruction methods in universities. Entrepreneurship courses and programs must balance entrepreneurial learning with demands for academic rigor and a tradition of classroom based instruction and assessment. Consequently, experiential learning is often an adjunct to classroom based pedagogy, or provided as an extra-curricular activity. This paper describes the development of the innovative Master of Business, Entrepreneurship and Technology program at the University of Waterloo. The core of this program is a practicum in which students develop a commercialization plan for their business or intellectual property owned by a researcher or local business. Uniquely designed courses support this experience, rather than the practicum being an adjunct of the coursework. Implications of this approach for entrepreneurship education and outcomes from the first six cohorts of students are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin)Same topicSuperconducting Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207