A Moderated Mediation Model of Entrepreneurship Education, Competence, and Environmental Dynamics on Entrepreneurial Performance

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

An interesting approach. Some observations would relate to more formal aspects:

- Subsection 2.1 and 2.2. have very similar paragraphs. They are citing the same sources, and Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2 are the same.

Line 449 - Limitations (Capital letter)

References - Exclude double citations (1-2, 45-46) and look over the numbering, exclude explanations 

related to the content: It would have helped to further explain how you determined the Entrepreneurial Performance in the research, also, how you evaluated the entrepreneurial education. 

The discussion and conclusion chapter could be more focused on the novelty brought about by your research

Author Response

Comments 1: Subsections 2.1 and 2.2 have very similar paragraphs, they cite the same sources, and Assumptions 1 and 2 are the same.

Respond 1: The original sections 2.1 and 2.2 of the article have now been restructured into sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4, each written in different styles without any overlapping content.

H1: Entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance.

H2: Entrepreneurial competence mediates the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

Comments 2: References-exclude duplicate citations (1-2, 45-46), please read the numbering carefully and exclude explanations

Respond 2: Similar references have been excluded from the document.

Comments 3 :The Discussion and Conclusion chapters could focus more on the novelty that your study brings to the table.

Respond 3:The discussion section of the paper delves into the moderated mediation effect and compares the extent of this moderation under varying conditions of environmental dynamics. Management recommendations are also proposed based on these findings.

Comments 4：Content-related:This will help to further explain how you determined entrepreneurial performance in your study and how you evaluated entrepreneurship education.

Respond 4:In the literature review, sections 2.1 and 2.3 provide detailed descriptions of the definitions and implications of entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance, respectively.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, the topic is of interest and can be well developed.

Please explain the choice of moderated mediation model analysis as relevant to your research focus and objectives. Please state the research objectives and relate your hypotheses to these. What are the actual findings you arrived at? What is the significance of your research and its novelty for other researchers?

In case you investigated the field of variables mentioned in your text, please provide sufficient literature review with broader scope of publications, including those containing research methods that allowed for systematic data analysis and thus conclusions , please provide opinions or data for the general statements given as conclusions in the current text, they can be more precisely written and more related to your research focus.

Please consider the requirements for writing the research hypothesis. The H 1-5 written can be given as conclusions after readings and still need more detalisation. Division of literature review into sections 2.1-2.4 by topics seems well balanced.

Please focus your introduction on a particular aspect. If COVID situation is within the focus of your interest, please state it in this research abstract, title, objectives and conclusions for your goals and findings for entrepreneurial performance in relation to COVID as you have put this topic in the very list line of Introduction – line 26.

Was it an attempt to provide an overview of entrepreneurship education in Introduction? This is quite general information presented. If China experience is in focus, please mention it and explain why.

Line 43 and primary fields of entrepreneurship include – among the mentioned fields which of them are of your research interest?

Line 66: base on the above research background – what research do you mean? In case you conducted a literature review;  please describe the type of review, its scope and findings.  Currently the Introduction contains general remarks that are not attributed to any reference by quotation or specific conclusion for specific situation with entrepreneurship education. Please consider revisiting this section of your paper as currently it carries information relevant for any topic in entrepreneurship education. What gaps in research and/or entrepreneurship education have you identified?

Line 71 Reference to Alene – the publication is about women in entrepreneurship within certain size enterprises. Your statement after this reference is wide and general. Please make proper citation or reference. Please consider the same for other references in your paper.

Line 76 … equips students with crucial skills … – please mention the page with the reference. The paper is about human capital.

Line 94- 97 based on what evidence the statement has been formulated: Improved entrepreneurship courses, better-trained instructors, a supportive entrepreneurial environment, hands-on experiences, and enhanced curriculum content are crucial in developing the entrepreneurial competence of students. Sounds like a general well agreed idea. Consider putting it into the language of scientific findings with detalisation for your research.

 

Section 2.2 goes as mentioning of seven publications. Shi, Q. H. (2018) is master degree dissertation which may contain some methods and conclusions for its own literature review. What are they? Is the level of master degree research objectives adequate for your research as well?

Line 126  … in Section 2.2 underscores the multifaceted ways …

Please make it clear through your text what conclusions you have made in each section of your literature review.

 

There is no difference between H1 and H 2 – lines 107 and 145. Hypotheses 3 and 4 are broad and general statements. Any other references can be put as well to conclude these hypotheses.

Reconsider H 5 for your research focus: what do you mean by environment dynamics for your research and indirect effect. Again, the statement is too general. In Line 234 there are two variables  EE and EC; are Entrepreneurial performance and Environmental dynamics in line 253 also variables? How environmental dynamics is different from environmental dynamism (line 419)?

Please explain the choice of four dimensions to measure entrepreneurship education. Refer to your research objectives.

Section 3.4 please explain if gender and age are important to your research. What are your criteria for enterprise size? Does it matter in your research? It is mentioned only once in the text in line 285.

Section 3.2: EE and competences; perhaps you can focus on these for the title, abstract, etc.

Table 1 is not self-explainable. Please provide logic and explanation for the numbers arrived at. Also, there is no comparison to understand which number is satisfactory for your research. Line 308 does not explain the weight of the numbers for your research settings.

Figure 2 what conclusions should be made? Is it the first and unique approach to test the variables?

Line 381 - 382 mentorship from experienced entrepreneurs and a robust alumni network play a critical role. Is it a part of your research focus or/and literature review? The statement seems out of place in this part of the text.

 

Section 4.2 what new is achieved in your research?

 

5. Managerial Implications

Please provide specific measures in relation to your research findings. The text given is currently in general wording.

Please provide the links to references 11; 50; could not find them online.

Please be more critical and analytical about referencing as many broad statements through the text may be attributed to many other works including non-science.

Please consider if you can prepare a separate paper on profound literature review within the aspects which are of interest to your research.

Please consider and formulate what exactly you were looking for (not in general statements) when writing section 3 and 4. What is your research input here? Should these sections be considered as preparatory and basic material for you main research work? You may wish to focus your paper on sections 3 and 4 only with transparent and measurable research objectives. Please consider.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please be more critical and analytical about referencing as many broad statements through the text may be attributed to many other works including non-science. Avoid general wording.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, this is a response to your comments. Please review.

 

Comments 1: Please explain the choice of moderated mediation model analysis as relevant to your research focus and objectives. Please state the research objectives and relate your hypotheses to these. What are the actual findings you arrived at? What is the significance of your research and its novelty for other researchers?

Respond 1: Two objectives: (1) Examine the relation-ships among entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial capability, and entrepre-neurial performance. (2) Investigate the impacts of entrepreneurship education, on en-trepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence with the varying con-ditions of environmental dynamics.

Hypothesis

H1: Entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance.

H2: Entrepreneurial competence mediates the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

H3: Environmental dynamics positively moderate the indirect effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence.

All three hypotheses in the study were supported. The research innovations include: 1. Developing a model linking entrepreneurship education with entrepreneurial performance, particularly discussing the definition and connotations of entrepreneurial performance to avoid irrational hierarchical structures. 2. Discovering that environmental dynamism positively moderates the impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence, with a stronger effect at higher levels than lower ones. Management recommendations have been made for schools, entrepreneurs, and governments respectively.

Comments 2: In case you investigated the field of variables mentioned in your text, please provide sufficient literature review with broader scope of publications, including those containing research methods that allowed for systematic data analysis and thus conclusions , please provide opinions or data for the general statements given as conclusions in the current text, they can be more precisely written and more related to your research focus.

Respond 2: The literature review section of the thesis has been rewritten and structured as follows: 2.1 Theoretical foundation, 2.2 Entrepreneurship education, 2.3 Entrepreneurial competence, 2.4 Entrepreneurial performance, 2.5 Environmental dynamics, 2.6 Hypothesis development. This reorganization aims to clarify the theoretical underpinnings and contextual framework guiding the research, providing a systematic approach to discussing the interconnected domains relevant to the study.

Comments 3: Please consider the requirements for writing the research hypothesis. The H 1-5 written can be given as conclusions after readings and still need more detalisation. Division of literature review into sections 2.1-2.4 by topics seems well balanced.

Respond 3: The research hypotheses have been rewritten.

H1: Entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance.

H2: Entrepreneurial competence mediates the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

H3: Environmental dynamics positively moderate the indirect effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence.

Comments 4: Please focus your introduction on a particular aspect. If COVID situation is within the focus of your interest, please state it in this research abstract, title, objectives and conclusions for your goals and findings for entrepreneurial performance in relation to COVID as you have put this topic in the very list line of Introduction – line 26.

Respond 4: The introduction section has been rewritten. It starts by outlining the current real-world context, then highlights existing problems in research, and finally introduces the specific research questions and objectives of this paper.This research aims to elucidate two primary objectives: (1) Examine the relation-ships among entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial capability, and entrepre-neurial performance. (2) Investigate the impacts of entrepreneurship education, on en-trepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence with the varying con-ditions of environmental dynamics.

Comments 5: Was it an attempt to provide an overview of entrepreneurship education in Introduction? This is quite general information presented. If China experience is in focus, please mention it and explain why.

Respond 5: The section 2.2 has been revised to provide an updated literature review on entrepreneurship education. It now includes descriptions of the definition, dimensions, and the current state of research in the field.

Comments 6:  Line 66: base on the above research background – what research do you mean? In case you conducted a literature review;  please describe the type of review, its scope and findings.  Currently the Introduction contains general remarks that are not attributed to any reference by quotation or specific conclusion for specific situation with entrepreneurship education. Please consider revisiting this section of your paper as currently it carries information relevant for any topic in entrepreneurship education. What gaps in research and/or entrepreneurship education have you identified?

Respond 6: This part has been rewritten, see the literature review for details.

Comments 7: Line 76 … equips students with crucial skills … – please mention the page with the reference. The paper is about human capital.

Respond 7: The citations have been correctly re-marked.

Comments 8: Line 94- 97 based on what evidence the statement has been formulated: Improved entrepreneurship courses, better-trained instructors, a supportive entrepreneurial environment, hands-on experiences, and enhanced curriculum content are crucial in developing the entrepreneurial competence of students. Sounds like a general well agreed idea. Consider putting it into the language of scientific findings with detalisation for your research.

Respond 8: The literature review has been significantly revised.

Comments 9: Section 2.2 goes as mentioning of seven publications. Shi, Q. H. (2018) is master degree dissertation which may contain some methods and conclusions for its own literature review. What are they? Is the level of master degree research objectives adequate for your research as well?

Respond 9: This point has already been removed in the revised paper.

Comments 10:  Please provide specific measures in relation to your research findings. The text given is currently in general wording.

Respond 10: The discussion section of the paper delves into the moderated mediation effect and compares the extent of this moderation under varying conditions of environmental dynamics. Management recommendations are also proposed based on these findings.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A brief summary: 

The aim of this research is to find out how entrepreneurship education improves entrepreneurial performance in university students in China. To achieve this, we explore the relationships between entrepreneurial education, entrepreneurial competencies and entrepreneurial performance, focusing on the role of environmental dynamics in them. The methodology chosen is quantitative, the final sample being 424 students (70.67%). The instrument chosen for the collection of information is the questionnaire with a Likert scale of 1-5. The questionnaire was created by adapting other referenced questionnaires and was subjected to expert review. The Smart PLS 4 software was used to analyse the information. The results show the positive influence of entrepreneurial education on entrepreneurial performance, as well as on the development of entrepreneurial competences, especially in dynamic environments.

Article: 

In terms of improvements for the validation of this article for publication, it is recommended to include in the Abstract that it is about Chinese university students.

In the section on the theoretical review, the last three paragraphs of sub-section 2.2 should be reworked as they repeat what has been presented. Focus this sub-section on what its title indicates, entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial skills (lines 126-146). There is a lot of literature on this. Hypothesis 1 and 2 are the same correct (lines 104-108 and 141-146).

Also, I recommend expanding subsection 2.4 (line 184) with knowledge about Chinese entrepreneurship and its dynamics. As this is a contextualised study, there is a lack of mention of Chinese entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs.

With regard to the methodology, it is recommended that the characteristics of the sample be mentioned in section 3.1 (line 233) and not in 3.4 (line 275). On the other hand, it is recommended to clarify which strata are chosen and how to access it.

In relation to the information collection instrument, the questionnaire (line 245), it is recommended that further information be provided on the characteristics of the experts, e.g. experts in which subject or area, how the questionnaire is carried out, in person, by post, etc. And finally, whether the questionnaires from the pilot study are taken into account for analysis.

The ethical aspects followed during the research have not been detailed. Concerning the anonymous and confidential nature of the answers to the questionnaires.

It is advisable to make a short introduction in section 4 and, above all, not to start a subsection with a table, e.g. subsection 4.1 (line 292) with Table 1, subsection 4.2 (line 312) with Table 2, subsection 4.3 (line 323) with Table 3, etc.

Correct the name of Table 4.31 which should be Table 3 (line 329). Also avoid presenting a figure and table without comments as this makes continuity of reading difficult, e.g. Figure 2 and Table 4 or Figure 3 and Table 5 (line 336-337 and 352-353). As well as ending a subsection with a Figure or Table, e.g. Figure 4 (line 369).

Correct the capitalisation in the title of section 6. Limitations (line 449).

For citations, follow the rules and format established by the journal. Revise the citation (Monitor, 2023 on line 38) and the absence of the year in the citation on line 47. Delete in the References section the instructions.

Apply the journal's rules for references. Check repeated references in lines 558 and 559. 

The topic is relevant and there are very current studies on it, I recommend reviewing the literature and updating the references. Only 24% of the references are less than 5 years old. 

Review: 

The article presents research on one of the most relevant and researched topics today, entrepreneurship. Specifically, it explores the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial development mediated by entrepreneurial competences and dynamic environments.

Based on the assessments already made above, it must be said that the methodology used as well as the sample size is adequate. The variables are well defined, as are the hypotheses. The questionnaire has been developed with adequate justification and has been reviewed by experts. The tests carried out for the analysis of the responses are well explained and detailed. Furthermore, they are complemented by Figures and Tables that facilitate understanding and clarify the results. The results are presented in the discussion section in an organised and clear manner and are structured with reference to the hypotheses put forward. The implications and limitations are coherent.

Finally, it should be pointed out that this research is relevant in that it broadens the knowledge we have on the relationship between entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial development mediated by aspects such as competences and dynamic environments, specifically in China.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, this is a response to your comments. Please review.

Comments 1: In terms of improvements for the validation of this article for publication, it is recommended to include in the Abstract that it is about Chinese university students.

Respond 1: Rewrite the content “Using SPSS and Smart PLS software, this quantitative research analyzed survey data from 424 college students in China who have started their own businesses.”

Comments 2: In the section on the theoretical review, the last three paragraphs of sub-section 2.2 should be reworked as they repeat what has been presented. Focus this sub-section on what its title indicates, entrepreneurial education and entrepreneurial skills (lines 126-146). There is a lot of literature on this. Hypothesis 1 and 2 are the same correct (lines 104-108 and 141-146).

Respond 2: The literature review and hypotheses have been completely rewritten

Hypothesis

H1: Entrepreneurship education has a positive impact on entrepreneurial performance.

H2: Entrepreneurial competence mediates the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

H3: Environmental dynamics positively moderate the indirect effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence.

Comments 3: Also, I recommend expanding subsection 2.4 (line 184) with knowledge about Chinese entrepreneurship and its dynamics. As this is a contextualised study, there is a lack of mention of Chinese entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs.

Respond 3: The author has conducted extensive research on Chinese entrepreneurs but unfortunately did not find any authoritative sources to provide a detailed introduction. The author apologizes for this oversight.

Comments 4: With regard to the methodology, it is recommended that the characteristics of the sample be mentioned in section 3.1 (line 233) and not in 3.4 (line 275). On the other hand, it is recommended to clarify which strata are chosen and how to access it.

In relation to the information collection instrument, the questionnaire (line 245), it is recommended that further information be provided on the characteristics of the experts, e.g. experts in which subject or area, how the questionnaire is carried out, in person, by post, etc. And finally, whether the questionnaires from the pilot study are taken into account for analysis.

Respond 4: In the literature review, the author has specified the positioning and dimensions of each variable. In Chapter 3, the questionnaire, research methods, and sampling techniques are included.

Comments 5: The ethical aspects followed during the research have not been detailed. Concerning the anonymous and confidential nature of the answers to the questionnaires.

Respond 5: In this survey, all respondents' personal information will be kept confidential, and their sensitive data will not be shared with third parties. Research data will be analyzed collectively (rather than individually) and honestly.

Comments 6: The ethical aspects followed during the research have not been detailed. Concerning the anonymous and confidential nature of the answers to the questionnaires.

Respond 6: The content has been added to the paper：In this survey, all respondents' personal information will be kept confidential, and their sensitive data will not be shared with third parties. Research data will be analyzed collectively (rather than individually) and honestly.

 

Comments 7: It is advisable to make a short introduction in section 4 and, above all, not to start a subsection with a table, e.g. subsection 4.1 (line 292) with Table 1, subsection 4.2 (line 312) with Table 2, subsection 4.3 (line 323) with Table 3, etc.

Respond 7: Each table is no longer used as the beginning of a section.

Comments 8: The topic is relevant and there are very current studies on it, I recommend reviewing the literature and updating the references. Only 24% of the references are less than 5 years old

Respond 8: Many recent references from the past five years have been updated.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Colleagues,

I enclose my response.

 

I wish you success in improving the manuscript.

 

All the best,

 

The Reviewer

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments 1: In the "Introduction" section, delete the first sentence. It is misleading to the reader.

Respond 1: the first sentence has been deleted.

Comments 2: Provide references to sources in accordance with the MDPI standard. Respond 2: the first sentence has been deleted.

Respond 2: The template for the journal in EndNote has been updated.

Comments 3: The "Abstract," "Introduction," and "Materials and Methods" sections do not show the purpose of the study. The authors write only about what the study investigates (lines 8, 67-68, 234, 236-237). Please formulate the purpose of the study. It is very difficult to review a manuscript that does not have a purpose.

Respond 3: The abstract and introduction have both been updated to include the research objectives. “This research aims to elucidate two primary objectives: (1) Examine the relationships among entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial capability, and entrepreneurial performance. (2) Investigate the impacts of entrepreneurship education, on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence with the varying conditions of environmental dynamics.

Comments 4 and 5:  4 In line 4 the authors use the definition "moderated mediation model", in lines 294-295, 308 the authors use "the model", and in lines 331 and 333 the authors use the definition "the structural model". Is this the same model or are these different models?

5. In lines 113-140, the authors of the manuscript refer to scientific articles (Chen, 2023, Bae et al., 2014, Unger et al., 2011 and others), the authors of which claim that entrepreneurship education imparts of enhancing entrepreneurial performance. In lines 144-146, the authors formulate Hypothesis H2, which does not compete with previously obtained scientific knowledge (lines 113-140). In lines 343-348, the authors of the manuscript obtained a statistically significant result (Hypothesis H2), confirming previously published data (lines 113-140). In lines 393-394, the authors again write about the positive impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance (lines 113-140).

Respond 4 and 5: The author has reorganized the structure of the literature review and made adjustments. Please read it again.

Respond 5: For what purpose do the authors draw the attention of readers, reviewers, and MDPI staff to reading research results (H2) that have no scientific novelty?

Comments 5: The discussion section of the paper delves into the moderated mediation effect and compares the extent of this moderation under varying conditions of environmental dynamics. Management recommendations are also proposed based on these findings.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for introducing well-balanced changes to the earlier version of the text. However, your research description may look stronger and more consistent. Please consider below.

Line 11 : please specify what is meant by different condition. This is vague language.

Please explain how references 1-3 work for explaining the situation in Taiwan or China; there is no mention of the locations in the papers cited.

How do you unite references 1-3? Are there citations or an opinion, what page? Please be precise with referencing

Lines 29-31: This is especially true in countries with advanced market economies

the references is about Vietnam.

Please specify what are the countries of advanced economies which are of interest in your research; how you identify them.

What is the first paragraph lines 27-31 is about? Why have you considered adding it?

Please specify if entrepreneurial capability in line 84 stands for competence? Then, why? Figure 1 also lacks the notion of “competence”.

Please provide the text below Fig 1; lines 80-81 – the same comment as for objective 2; please be more precise in describing the relationship among the three notions from the title (four notions in Fig 1).

Objective 2: line 85: perhaps there is more complex interrelationship among the education, competence and performance in entrepreneurship. The title says “interplay” which is not a science word but reflect more complexity than objective two formulation. Is it only education that influences competence? Please consider revising.

Section 2.1 Are you discussion motives and motivation for entrepreneurial performance?  The last paragraph of this section lines 113-115 is of general wording. Have you read this conclusion by referencing to some statistical data about competences measurement or by any other research method? Currently, this is quite reasonable statement that can be produced out of logic.

Please join your section 2.3 about the competence with Fig 1 and earlier mentioned entrepreneurial ability. Should lines 169-172 also reflect in research framework? Please consider

Reference 50 in section 2.4: please provide more precise formulation of your idea here about the relationship for performance and success. Perhaps this focusing can impact your research objective 2 and statement in line 85.

Lines 250-253 : how is H2 different from research objective 2? Please consider the rules for formulating research hypothesis: cause and reason; what influences what. You have this recommendation in my first review. Your H 1 and H2 and H 3 are to support research objectives and demonstrate the means by which you will reach research outcomes.

 

Please mention in Section 3.1 the relation of Table 1 to one of the research objectives and hypotheses. What is the conclusion for Table 1?

What is the conclusion for the use of Table 2? The good example is your text for table 6.

Please put a couple of lines how table 1 and table 2 work for section 3.3 and further.

 

managerial implications can be given the credit for rewriting and expanding. Please through this section, refer to the sections or parts of your text which enable these conclusions.

As a recommendation it can be added that as a way of expanding your work for further publications, sections 2.1-2.5 may be extended and put in more detail demonstrating the analytical work you have done to elicit the information.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

quite well written

Author Response

Comments 1: Line 11: please specify what is meant by different condition. This is vague language.

Respond 1: Rewrite as: focusing on the moderating role of environmental dynamics under conditions of high and low environmental dynamics.

Comments 2: Please explain how references 1-3 work for explaining the situation in Taiwan or China; there is no mention of the locations in the papers cited. How do you unite references 1-3? Are there citations or an opinion, what page? Please be precise with referencing

Respond 2: Taiwan is part of China and cannot be compared separately, Deleted one of the references and corrected the page number of the reference.

Comments 3: Lines 29-31: This is especially true in countries with advanced market economies the references is about Vietnam. Please specify what are the countries of advanced economies which are of interest in your research; how you identify them.

Respond 3: Rewritten with updated references

Comments 4: What is the first paragraph lines 27-31 is about? Why have you considered adding it?

Respond 4: The main purpose of this paragraph is to elaborate on the importance of entrepreneurship globally, and the next paragraph immediately follows with China's attitude towards entrepreneurship.

Comments 5: Please specify if entrepreneurial capability in line 84 stands for competence? Then, why? Figure 1 also lacks the notion of “competence”.

Respond 5: capability competence has been changed to competence.

Comments 6: Objective 2: line 85: perhaps there is more complex interrelationship among the education, competence and performance in entrepreneurship. The title says “interplay” which is not a science word but reflect more complexity than objective two formulation. Is it only education that influences competence? Please consider revising.

Respond 6: Title changed: A Moderated Mediation Model of Entrepreneurship Education, Competence, and Environmental Dynamics on Entrepreneurial Performance

Comments 7: Section 2.1 Are you discussion motives and motivation for entrepreneurial performance?  The last paragraph of this section lines 113-115 is of general wording. Have you read this conclusion by referencing to some statistical data about competences measurement or by any other research method? Currently, this is quite reasonable statement that can be produced out of logic.

Respond 7: This is an expansion of some of the current research on entrepreneurship education and the concept of entrepreneurship education, which is currently conceptualized as more than just educating students but also includes things such as feedback on student learning.

Comments 8: Please join your section 2.3 about the competence with Fig 1 and earlier mentioned entrepreneurial ability. Should lines 169-172 also reflect in research framework? Please consider

Respond 8: 169-172 have only the dimensions EE and EC, followed by EP and ED, and if a frame is to be added, it is before subsection 2.6.

Comments 10: Please join your section 2.3 about the competence with Fig 1 and earlier mentioned entrepreneurial ability. Should lines 169-172 also reflect in research framework? Please consider

Respond 10: 169-172 have only the dimensions EE and EC, followed by EP and ED, and if a frame is to be added, it is before subsection 2.6.

Comments 11: Reference 50 in section 2.4: please provide more precise formulation of your idea here about the relationship for performance and success. Perhaps this focusing can impact your research objective 2 and statement in line 85.

Respond 11: Modified to: Entrepreneurial performance is widely regarded as a critical indicator of business success, as it encompasses various aspects that reflect the overall effectiveness and impact of business activities. These aspects include financial metrics, such as revenue growth and profitability, as well as non-financial metrics, such as market share expansion and customer satisfaction. Together, these factors provide a comprehensive assessment of how well an entrepreneur or a business is performing in achieving its objectives, maintaining competitiveness, and contributing to economic development.

Comments 12: Lines 250-253: how is H2 different from research objective 2? Please consider the rules for formulating research hypothesis: cause and reason; what influences what. You have this recommendation in my first review. Your H 1 and H2 and H 3 are to support research objectives and demonstrate the means by which you will reach research outcomes.

Respond 12: Objective 1: Examine the relationships among entrepreneurship education, entrepreneurial capability, and entrepreneurial performance.

H1 directly addresses this objective by proposing that entrepreneurship education positively impacts entrepreneurial performance, which establishes a direct relationship between these two variables.

H2 further supports this objective by introducing entrepreneurial competence as a mediating variable, thereby exploring the role of entrepreneurial capability (competence) in the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

Objective 2: Investigate the impacts of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence under varying conditions of environmental dynamics.

H2 also supports this objective by examining how entrepreneurial competence mediates the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial performance.

H3 specifically addresses this objective by proposing that environmental dynamics moderate the indirect effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial performance through entrepreneurial competence. This hypothesis explores the conditions under which the relationship between entrepreneurship education and performance, mediated by competence, is stronger or weaker, thus considering varying environmental conditions.

Comments 13: Please mention in Section 3.1 the relation of Table 1 to one of the research objectives and hypotheses. What is the conclusion for Table 1? What is the conclusion for the use of Table 2? The good example is your text for table 6.

Respond 13: Table 1 shows the sampling process. Table 2 is reorganized and detailed in the article

Comments 14: managerial implications can be given the credit for rewriting and expanding. Please through this section, refer to the sections or parts of your text which enable these conclusions.

Respond 14: The Management Revelations section has been revised, see article.

Comments 15: As a recommendation it can be added that as a way of expanding your work for further publications, sections 2.1-2.5 may be extended and put in more detail demonstrating the analytical work you have done to elicit the information.

Respond 15: Not quite sure what that means?

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In my view the authors have made the recommended changes and the article meets the journal's requirements for publication.

Just a note, revise the name of the appointment on line 59 and change it to the surname.

Author Response

Thank you very much for your review!

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Colleagues,

You have done a lot to improve the manuscript. However, the manuscript is still not related to the SDGs.

 

Regards,

The reviewer

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

can be understood as a sustainable approach to entrepreneurship education

Round 3

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Colleagues,

I was very pleased to read the improved manuscript. The authors added another co-author (this is a new co-author). The authors have done a lot. This is a very interesting and useful manuscript. However, his role is not clear, since the manuscript did not approach the area of ​​"Sustainability".

 

The authors did not link the manuscript to any of the SDGs again.

 

So:

- The manuscript is not related to sustainability. The authors did not write which SDG this manuscript is related to.

- The manuscript writes about the general business environment, but not the natural environment. The manuscript relates to areas of science such as pedagogy, management, entrepreneurship.

 

During the next check by Scopus experts, there will be a lot of problems about both the journal and the manuscript.

For this reason, I recommend "reject" due to inconsistency with the scope of the journal "Sustainability".

The manuscript may be published in another MDPI journal, for example, on pedagogy or entrepreneurship.

 

 

Best Regards

Professor AH

Author Response

my paper not meet the standard of this journal. I reject this journal.thank you.