The Dual-Subject–Three-Loop Linkage: A Theoretical Framework for University Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education Derived from Pedagogical Practice
Articles

The Dual-Subject–Three-Loop Linkage: A Theoretical Framework for University Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education Derived from Pedagogical Practice

Zhe Zheng
The Communist Youth League Committee of Tianjin University, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Junjie Zong
The Communist Youth League Committee of Tianjin University, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Jialin Li
School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Jiangying Niu
State Key Laboratory of North China Crop Improvement and Regulation, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071000, Hebei, China
Chenxi Jia
School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Kaifan Xue
The Communist Youth League Committee of Tianjin University, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Yang Zhou
School of History and Culture, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300350, China
Yujia Pang
The Communist Youth League Committee of Tianjin University, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China; School of Mechanical Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300350, China
Download PDF

Keywords

Innovation and entrepreneurship education
Cyclical construction
Research translation
Industry-education synergy
Educational theory-practice nexus

DOI

10.26689/jcer.v10i1.13684

Submitted : 2026-01-06
Accepted : 2026-01-21
Published : 2026-02-05

Abstract

This study proposes a “Dual-Subject–Three-Loop Linkage” theoretical framework for university innovation and entrepreneurship education, distilled from systematic pedagogical practice. The model comprises three interlinked loops—Teaching-Research, Technology-Entrepreneurship, and Industry-Education Synergy—governed by dual subjects (faculty professors and innovation-entrepreneurship educators). By constructing a “Technological Intensity–Industrialization Degree” (τ-ι) coordinate system, the framework externalizes the innovation process into quantifiable expressions, revealing the interactive mechanisms among undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. It provides theoretical guidance for optimizing research translation efficiency and serves as a metric tool for institutional policy-making.

References

Andersen H, 2025, Leading Faculty as Teachers, in Lindgreen A, Irwin A, Poulfelt F, (Eds.), How to Lead Academic Departments Successfully, Second Edition, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, 185–202.

Evans D, Chen J, Bokas G, et al., 2021. Visualizing Temperature-Dependent Phase Stability in High Entropy Alloys. NPJ Comput. Mater., 7.

Hassaniyan A, 2024, Revisiting the Debate About Teaching-Research Nexus Relevance. Res. Educ.

Munroe KE, 2023, Mentoring and Engaging Undergraduate Students in Authentic Research in Mammalogy. J. Mammal., 104: 675–684.

Paine AR, Wilton M, Solanki SM, et al., 2025, Reimagining the Role of Teaching-Focused Faculty in Research-Intensive Universities: The Evolution of Scholarly Expectations and Departmental Influence. PLoS ONE, 20.

Savoca M, Perlman RF, Bell K, et al., 2021, Welcoming and Building Community for Graduate Students through Remote Tech Environments, ASEE Annu. Conf. Expos. Conf. Proc. Presented at the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education.

Spratling TB, Valdovinos S, 2022, Transition to Graduate and Professional School, in Shepard VA, Perry AL, (Eds.), A Practitioner’s Guide to Supporting Graduate and Professional Students, Taylor and Francis, 73–93.

Tahir M, 2023, Role of Undergraduate Research Projects in Learning Skills of Chemical Engineering Students: A Brief Review. Chem. Eng. Trans., 106: 715–720.