Designing a framework for entrepreneurship education in Chinese higher education: a theoretical exploration and empirical case study

In the knowledge economy, entrepreneurship is a key driver of social and economic development, rooted in Schumpeter’s theory of creative destruction and reflected in endogenous growth and entrepreneurial ecosystem perspectives. Entrepreneurship education (EE) in higher education has gained prominence as a means to cultivate entrepreneurs. In China, national policy prioritizes EE reform to support innovation-driven development, yet challenges persist: lagging concepts, weak integration with specialized education, limited practical linkage, insufficient teacher capacity, and a shortage of practical platforms and support. These challenges require collaboration among universities, industry, and government. Internationally, the entrepreneurial university and the triple helix (TH) model demonstrate how universities can extend beyond teaching and research to catalyze economic development through academia–industry–government interaction. This study explores how Chinese university EE can align with societal demands under TH guidance, focusing on two themes—educational objectives and content—and addresses three research questions: (RQ1) the current landscape of EE research; (RQ2) unified macroscopic goals to guide EE in Chinese higher education; and (RQ3) a specific EE system to realize those goals. The paper reviews the literature (RQ1), presents methodology, derives an objectives and content model guided by educational objectives, entrepreneurial motivations, and process theories, applies the framework through a Chinese university case, and concludes with findings, discussion, and implications.

The literature review centers on triple helix (TH) theory and the evolution of EE. TH theory emerged alongside the shift to a knowledge economy, highlighting universities’ expanded role in innovation, technology transfer, and regional development through dynamic interactions with industry and government. The TH model posits: universities’ prominent innovation role; co-created innovation policies through trilateral interaction; and role-sharing among the three helices. EE both strengthens TH partnerships (by integrating entrepreneurship into curricula and university functions) and benefits from TH through enhanced capabilities, infrastructure, and policy support. The EE literature shows a broad, evolving domain. Bibliometric and systematic reviews (1975–2019) identify clusters such as policy-driven EE, human capital and self-employment, organizational EE/TH, design and evaluation of initiatives, entrepreneurial learning, impact studies, and opportunity environments. Key themes selected for this study include objectives, contents/methods, outcomes, and ecosystem experiences. Objectives have diversified: nurturing entrepreneurial attitudes, promoting new ventures, community development, and skills; recent emphasis favors cultivating entrepreneurial mindsets over simply producing entrepreneurs. Competency frameworks (EU EntreComp; US National Content Standards) define domains such as ideas/opportunities, resources, action; entrepreneurial, ready, and functional skills. Contents and methods have shifted from lecture-centric approaches to contextually rich, experiential, and hybrid methods (e.g., CTCA, simulations, company creation, portfolios), though findings on practical versus academic emphasis are mixed and consistency is lacking due to limited theoretical coherence. Outcomes research often focuses on short-term measures (intentions, self-efficacy, opportunity recognition), with mixed meta-analytic results on EE–intention links and a noted need for long-term outcome assessment (startup quality, survival, societal impact). University-centered entrepreneurial ecosystems align with TH, and global experiences (including China) report growing university innovation systems with incubators, parks, and translational infrastructures. However, the literature remains fragmented, with limited empirical guidance for China on what and how to teach and assess, underscoring the need to redefine EE objectives and contents for clear developmental guidance.

The study integrates literature-based framework construction with an empirical case study. First, a conceptual framework stage systematically reviewed EE literature to identify themes (e.g., entrepreneurial intention, self-efficacy, approaches), synthesized shared objectives across perspectives, and constructed an EE objectives model for higher education by integrating Bloom’s educational objectives, Gagné’s learning outcomes, and entrepreneurship motivation and process theories. This led to a 4H objectives model (Head, Hand, Heart, Help) and a corresponding content framework. Second, a single-case study at T-University (a comprehensive university in Shanghai) explored practical application. Case selection was justified by Shanghai’s innovation context and T-University’s EE-driven reforms and regional ecosystem building. Data collection combined field research (7-day site visits to key units; semistructured interviews with faculty and students; field notes, photos) and archival research (internal documents, websites, reports, promotional materials, published articles). Triangulation verified multi-source data consistency. Thematic analysis was employed to identify patterns related to TH factors and the objective–content frameworks; three researchers independently analyzed and then reconciled interpretations to ensure rigor. The framework’s theoretical basis rests on: (1) educational objectives theory (Bloom’s cognitive/affective/psychomotor; Gagné’s outcomes), (2) planned behavior theory (attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control underpinning entrepreneurial intentions), and (3) entrepreneurship process theory (opportunities, teams, resources, and dynamic balance affecting performance). These informed the 4H objectives and the content model encompassing entrepreneurial learning, practice, startup services, and entrepreneurial climate.

• The study proposes a unified 4H EE objectives model with two levels: (a) basic level—Head (mindset), Hand (skill), Heart (attitude), Help (support); and (b) outcome level—entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial performance. The model integrates educational objectives, planned behavior, and entrepreneurship process theories and aligns with TH. - A content model operationalizes the 4H goals through four dimensions: entrepreneurial learning (knowledge, theory, thinking), entrepreneurial practice (hands-on activities, projects, competitions), startup services (financing, legal, HR, marketing, intermediaries), and entrepreneurial climate (culture and ecosystem). - Case evidence from T-University demonstrates implementation and outcomes: • System goals: 100% student exposure to EE; 10% completion of EE program; 1% launching high-quality ventures. • Outcomes: 2020 graduate employment rate 97.49%; entrepreneurship proportion exceeds 1% in most years; T-Rim Knowledge-Based Economic Circle employed 400+ T-University graduates annually; output value reached RMB 50 billion in 2020 with 80% of entrepreneurs being T-University teachers, students, or alumni. • Infrastructure and services: School of Innovation & Entrepreneurship established (2016); integrated practice platforms (on/off-campus, production–learning–research, major facilities transformation, T-Rim strategic platform); alliances with governments and universities; multiple joint labs; science and technology park with nine professional incubation service platforms; National Technology Park cumulatively supported 3000+ enterprises, including 300+ student-founded firms. - Contributions: (1) Extends TH theory application to China by linking EE objectives and content to university–industry–government collaboration; (2) Clarifies core goals and practical content, offering actionable guidance for EE program design and stakeholder collaboration.

The findings address the research questions by: (RQ2) defining unified, macroscopic EE objectives via the 4H model to balance foundational development (mindset, skills, attitudes, support) with outcome measures (intentions, performance), countering narrow outcome-only approaches; (RQ3) specifying an implementable system through a four-part content model (learning, practice, services, climate) that operationalizes 4H and emphasizes learning-by-doing. The T-University case illustrates how integrating these elements—supported by TH-driven collaboration—yields robust EE outcomes and a regional entrepreneurial ecosystem (T-Rim). This aligns with literature calling for stronger university–ecosystem integration and addresses critiques of overreliance on theory-only pedagogy by embedding practice, services, and culture. From a TH perspective, universities can leverage unique resources and collaborate with governments and industries to co-create inclusive, innovation-supporting ecosystems, enhancing sustainability of startups and long-term EE impact. The framework serves as a tool and bridge for stakeholders, integrating resources to improve EE quality and regional innovation.

Grounded in the Chinese higher education context and guided by triple helix theory, the study proposes a comprehensive EE framework. The 4H objectives model comprises foundational elements—Head (mindset), Hand (skill), Heart (attitude), Help (support)—and outcome elements—entrepreneurial intention and performance—providing systematic, multidimensional guidance for cultivating entrepreneurial talent. A corresponding content model—entrepreneurial learning, practice, startup services, and entrepreneurial climate—offers practical means to achieve these goals. The T-University case demonstrates successful implementation, showing how coordinated development across the four content areas nurtures entrepreneurs and contributes to a regional innovation and entrepreneurship industry cluster. The study advocates strengthening TH application in EE and enhancing framework robustness via multiple and comparative case studies and broader international validation, to accelerate EE development and improve economic and employment outcomes.

• The framework is preliminary; further detailed classification and elaboration of elements are needed to deepen understanding of the EE system. - The study is China-specific; findings may not directly generalize to other regions. Future work should examine adaptability across diverse cultural and educational contexts. - The single-case design limits external validity; comparative or multiple-case studies are recommended to assess reliability and robustness.