|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ENKÄTER | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Visa resultatHär kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.
Technology and patent lab, CIP061Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2009-03-02 - 2009-03-16 Antal svar: 12 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 30% Kontaktperson: Anneli Hildenborg»
Goals and goal fulfilmentThe course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course.1. How understandable and reasonable are the course goals?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.58 - I did not see the goals stated in the syllabus, but regardless I consider it being very clear what was required during the course.» (I have not seen/read the goals) 2. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.5 - I have not seen the goals, but since we got a very limited amount of feedback regarding the simululations(which are the examination) it is of course very hard to asses whether you reach the goals or not.» (No, not at all) Study climate3. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.5 - Of course you could always ask on Moodle but I would prefer if the teachers were physically "närvarande" sometimes.» (Rather good) 4. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.33 - Some have been working hard without charing and others overly passive. It"s easier to do things your own way and not put trust in others. If we would have been fewer (three), the necessity of everyone contributing would have been greater and demanded better communication.» (Very poorly) 5. How was the course workload?12 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.33 - I did not find it to be as challenging as the business design module. The work load is very high during simulations but it goes down a lot in rest - I was expecting a constant, fairly high tempo. The lack of organization in lectures does not help this matter.» (Low) Part I: General Questions6. What is your overall impression of the Patent Lab course/module? Please motivate your answer!- I thought it was very good....»- Fairly good. I did not find the patent lab to be as challenging as i expected it, the organization was overall bad, the communication between teachers and teacher and students was poor.» - In the patent lab we were asked to put in practice our learnig from the fall. We had a lot of administrative work regaring patent issues, wich was good to undesrtand the real life work with patents.» - Somewhat good. I would have prefered more lectures and much more feedback from the teachers. I really missed the consultations at the latter simulations.» - The course was very good and the tempo was quite high.» - My impression is that it was pretty educational. I learnt a lot.» - Patent lab was rather good but could include a lot more guidance and feedback during the lab. » - I think it was good, but I also think that the organization was poor. Many cancelled lectures and no organization to make sure that they came when we needed them.» 7. What would you recommend us to do differently next year, do you have suggestions for improvements?- We should get the handout before the class.»- Faster and more feedback in order to know how you"re doing before movig on to the next thing - would eable faster improvement and development.» - If the course is to be held the same emphasize on the literature list - expand it. If not, find a way to better communicate with the students, improve the moodle platform - it cannot handle so many users, organize the module from time so there is low risks of course canceling, handle out materials in time.» - More organization in the course and feedback for the students.» - Make something better of the Ipendocase, perhaps integrate it into a simulation. » - More specifik individual feedback, feedback regarding presentation technique(could easily be done directly after the presentations during two minutes), consulatations during each group simulation, more lectures. » - Give more feedback of the assigments to the student.s» - I was absent the first day of the course, so I might have missed this, but I would have liked a course-PM outlining the red thread for us in greater detail than we got by the spontaneous instructions received throughout the course. Teh wrap-up lecture could have spent 30 minutes on briefly going through all topics and simulations to stress the red thread. This is actually something that "ordinary" courses does automatically because of the "tentaplugg" when we have to go through all the material one more time. But when I work on a week-to-week basis I don"t get forced to revisit the material from week one after we have leftit. Heh, I should probably do this on my own anyway.. Heh2, I am doing it to be able to answer the questions about the lecture below...» - Having the lecture before the simulation.» - See answer at quiestion 6» - To examine students before you have tought them is not the best way of learning according to me. So, make sure that the students understand what they are suppose to do in the simulations so that they can prepare-» 8. What was your general impression of the administration of the course?- Could be better, my time and effort is valuable we all have cellphones when things such as room assignments change why not simply send out SMS"s to class members so that you save us all of this trouble it is rather demoralizing.»- Good.» - Bad, the organization of the course was at low standards, the administration tried to manage the situation but it performed below my expectations.» - They lack in organization. We had a lot of cancelled lectures, many changes in the schedule, not good information about the assignemts (if they were in group or individual).» - The feedback could have been made faster in my mind. » - Good. Nothing to complain about.» - We got our grades to late» - As always we expect a lot since you expect a lot from us. The feedback from the first simulation (a live lecture with examples) was great while the rest of the feedback could be improved and delivered earlier to really connect to the task. Moodle has a few flaws, why not use pingpong?» - Some miscommunication, but overall not bad.» - The labs floated well but the questions at the forums remained unanswered for quite a long time which was sometimes unfortunate. » - So-so. Some mistakes, but to the amount can be forgiven.» - See above...» 9. What did you think about having assignments instead of an exam?- I thought that it made it more LEARNING intensive, »- Assignments work much better than an exam, provided that they are assessed and judged as objectively and accurately as exams. » - Very good idea. I think that assignment provide the perfect way to learn tools and adapt to the a very fast pace.» - It is much better to have assignments instead of exams because the avaliation and learnig is continuous. It is much better to learn continuous than be in a hurry to study to have a good grade in the exam.» - I think assignments are much better, although it is more difficult getting higher grades. » - Both advantages and disadvantages of course. Perhaps we could have a shorter examan (quiz?) which makes you read more extensivelly.» - I think it was good since you learn for life and not for the exam. » - I think it"s great! However, see 7. Something to think of maybe.» - I feel that is it natural to not have an examination because of the nature of the work. (case studies)» - That is a really good way to learn. Exams are so static and a really bad way to both learn but also to evaluate what a student have learned. » - A better way to learn! However, the individual ones especially lacked the repetition aspect so it is easy to forget fast. Instead the assignments could have overlapped some.» - That was good, and this program builds on it. But I also need to say that after an exam that you have studied for, it doesn"t feel that bad which it does when you have made a simulation. An exam cannot test the ability to or skills to do something, it only tests which results you can come up with. » 10. What did you think about the feedback and support given?- Huh?»- Quite poor.» - Good. I think, even though not a personal feedback was give, in general the feedback received until now was more comprehensive that the one received during business design.» - Not good, we have to little and late feedback about the assignemts. » - Jens B held a lecture after Sim 1 which was very good and we had a few consultations, great! Otherwise very poor feedback (so far). » - More indiviudal feedback than generall feedback» - The feedback from the first simulation (a live lecture with examples) was great while the rest of the feedback could be improved and delivered earlier to really connect to the task.» - Rather sparse feedback.» - quite poor.» - Havent read it.» - It came to late, you forget after a while how you felt about the assignment so when you have forgotten, you don"t take the feedback in. I still haven"t gotten feedback on all assignments. On the oral presentations we didn"t get any feedback at all????» 11. Any other comments?- GOOD quality laptops should be provided to those who need them during the course just like for Swedish HS students are we not worth it.....?»- No.» - Have the same template of the schedule as in the fall.» - Nope.» - - As during the fall it sometimes feels like a lottery when looking at the grades. - When you give feedback you have a clear opinion on what we were supposed to have covered. This is rarely as clear in the assignments. Could this be improved or is it a planned feature of the labs? - Some people handed in late, some skipped simulations and did extra work. What is the grading policy with regard to this? Can we get a 10 even if we hand in 15 minutes late or are we limited to a 5? Since some seem to be late by default some of us have though of it as a clever strategy if is not penalized.» Part II: Lectures, Exercises and AssignmentsPlease give at least a short statement about each lecture that you attended.12. Technology market analysis by Jens Bördin- excellent»- Very good.» - A very insightful lecture.Jens is always to the point.» - Good imput to start the patent lab.» - Very good to show us the importance to look at technology market in addition to product markets.» - Great, Jens is always interesting listening to.» - Very good» - I was away Monday 19th.» - I like his teaching style.» - Jens is always focused and well structured. The lecture is easy to understand and he is prepared for unexpected questions. Good!» - There is no way I can remember this. Please check my journal for any reflections.» - Good, did put the Lab in a contexr» 13. Using patent information to analyze markets by Erik Hansson- excellent»- A more detailed and practical approach would have been useful for the following simulation assignment.» - A short, but good lecture.» - Good imput for the assignemnt.» - A few more practical examples would have been good. There was time for that. » - Great, Erik is always interesting listening to.» - Good» - Good approach. Gave valuable insight for the simulation!» - Good introduction, I liked this consultation.» - A bit confusing, but this is a hard thing to comunicate and I dont blame Erik for that. » - Good, since we read the article for that day he didn"t bring anything new, but if you hadn"t read it it was sure good. » 14. The IA/IP approach by Ulf Petrusson- excellent»- Very good.» - As always a lecture that requires a lot of attention –, but after 2 hours you feel like you got something good» - Good lecture that were supported by the readings.» - Ulf"s lectures are excellent. » - Somewhat difficult to understand.» - Very good» - Great to give us that top-level approach.» - Don"t remember much.» - Ulf is the thing!....always! He has the way to explain something really hard in a easy way and a magican when it ccomes to make a good punchline in the end leaving us speachless with 100 thoghts in the head. Ulf lectures is always something special and I always loooking forwaard to thoses lectures. » - The philosofy in this lecture is hard to grasp but very important, Very Good. » 15. Drafting license agreements by MAQS law firm- excellent»- Good, practical knowledge that could be applied in the following simulation.» - The lecture was good in the sense that it showed practical, up to date information/» - Good information and base for the students to do our assignment.» - A bit too basic in my mind. The agreement check-list was helpful.» - Good, interesting discussions.» - intresting lecture» - Not much new stuff here. I think it could have been much more specific. Using examples?» - Very informative.» - Very good and professional! Easy to understand and to grasp. » - Very Good, they really knew what they were talking about and they were on the right level, not lecturing for children like many others do.» 16. IP Portfolio strategy and organization by Ulf Petrusson- excellent»- Very good.» - I appreciated the lecture because it put more of a strategic, business perspective on the patent lab.» - Very good lecture with a clear picture of all the readings.» - Again very good, although a bit too theoretical. I know that is the purpose, but more practical examples would have been good. Also this should have been split up into several lectures.» - Good and inspiring.» - very good» - Great to give us that top-level approach.» - Don"t remember much.» - See above at question nr 14» - This was more of a continuation of the last lecture, it was good, but he needs more time to explain these things. » 17. Technology transfer and deal structuring by Andrew Telles- excellent»- Not so good. » - An interesting lecture. » - Good lecture to understand the transfer from the technology to industry.» - Very good lecture. Good communication of licensing use as different tools (e.g. business).» - Very good, but a lot of information.» - His lecture was very good and instrutive» - Good content of the lecture, but this is still the only time I have seen a teacher behave in such a bad way towards a student. Regardless of how he interpreted things he went far outside what is acceptable. One discussion wihin the class aftewards was concering how we are supposed to dare to ask questions if this can happen...» - Don"t remember much.» - very confused and unfriendly lecture. I dont know what happened to Andrew but he had a odd attitude that kind of clouded the lecture very effectively. » - This was very good, I like his passion for this. He lectured very good and it was of big bractical help.» 18. Patent Claims by Pontus Winqvist (VALEA)- excellent»- Did I miss that one?» - For engineers.» - Did not attend.» - I was very positively surprised. The workshop was excellent.» - Very good! Really interesting to write patent claims ourselves.» - Great lecutre/exercise! Good approahc to get insight in the claims from a technical point of view.» - Very good. I liked his friendly demeanor and abundance of examples.» - Only for engineers so I dont know. Lawyers FTW!» - From what I heard many of the engineers thought that this was so good that the other students should go to. » 19. IP and Antri-trust laws by Filip Bladini- excellent»- Very good. Very interesting field. Actually too bad that the second part only was for the law students.» - I appreciated the lecture because it showed some basic general rules that i have to keep in mind when developing a business strategy.» - Good overview for the lawyers about competition law. » - Boring, but good to know briefly.» - Hm cannot remember this one, sorry.» - To much focus for the law students, I wanted a more generall lecture about competion law » - Not much to comment on. I didn"t really like the lecture style / missing a red thread.» - N/A» - Thius I heard before since we had almost the same lecture at law school with the same Bladini. The lectures itself are rather easy to understand and I think they are good. » - He was on a to easy level and he thought that we were suppose to do a competition law assignment, which he refered to all the time. He was not so good informed and he needs to step it up.» 20. Licensing from a business perspective by Nhils Forslund (Ericsson)- excellent»- Very useful.» - Very good lecture. The lecture kept to he point, offered meaningful information in an easy to understand way.» - Very good and real information.» - Interesting to hear it from a company that works very strategic with patenting/licensing, especielly within telecom.» - I really loved it. Ericsson is an interesting company.» - good» - Again I really enjoy lectures with examples on how things are done in the real world. He also entered on a high enough level!» - Very good. I liked the real industry outlook that he had.» - This was also a nice hands on lecture with IRL experience delivered in a good and easy way. » - Great! He talked about it from a real life perspective and answered all questions good. I had a lot of help doing the assignments by his lecture» 21. IP Audit by Stephen Trotter (Thomson Reuters)- good»- Not so good. It was rather difficult to see what it was for.» - Although the lecture was good, it should have been before our first assignment. It seem quite meaningless to have it then, especially since it was in the middle of a group assignment.» - Not very good explanation about their system. They lack in commnication.» - Good information, but too late. We should have had this lecture months earlier. » - Very good but this lecture had been a lot more rewarding if we have had it BEFORE some of the simulations.» - very good» - A good lecture building on what EH talked about in week 1. It was also interesting to see the tools they had!» - Also very good, but everything was a rehash of the Ove Grandstrand book.» - A long and complicated lecture but still good. Much to grasp thoe but thats in the nature of the subject. » - Good lecture, but it was of no help in the end, it should have been in the beginning. We didn"t use this tool anymore, and we should be able to try, because he only said,you can do this and this, but not how to do it. » Part III: Simluations22. Simulation 1: Technology market case- see number 1 above..»- Difficult, demanding and alright.» - Fairly Bad. The information given was blurry, the amount of work needed very high, the requirements were not clear.» - The basis of the assignemnt was the same that we had in the fall. There were a lack of information of how to present the powerpoint information.» - Too advanced and explain what the PPT-format is used for.» - Very good since we got good FEEDBACK directly afterwards.» - it was to confusing to know what we had to do» - Don"t remember much.» - This was a hard and confusing simulation with hardly nothing to lean on. No introduction and no knowledge what so ever, perhaps that was the purpose...» - Much work to do in a short period of time, the lecture with thomson should be helpful before this assignment.» 23. Simulation 2: IA Audit report- see number 1 above..»- The IAA felt a little bit like when we did it last semester - a rather forced work method.» - Good. It seem a bit repetitive to what we did in the business creation module.» - Did not give much more input that we had in the fall. And we recieved just writen feedback. I would like to have a lecture feedback.» - Very good, similar to the fall.» - Good and you recognized that you had learned alot since the fall. Very disapointed regarding the grade however.» - It was very good» - Don"t remember much.» - Also a bit confused. What was the meaning again?» - I do not remember this assignment...» 24. Simulation 3: Agreement analysis- see number 1 above..»- Very difficult for me as a non-lawyer but worthwhile.» - Very good. Although no one was experience or prepared for it, the assignment was one from which i learned the most during the patent lab.» - Good assignment to analyse the legal and technical aspects at the same time. The disadvantage is that the lawyers were very dependant on the engineers informations and because of that the time frame wasn"t enought to do the assignment.» - -» - For lawyers only.» - It was challenging but instrucive.» - N/A» - I liked this one. Quite easy to understad and funny to do. Learn quite a lot also. » - Good, but the grading is I don"t know what, have you picked grades out of a tombola? I sat next to a friend and we made the same changes, that person got two steps higher grades than I did....» 25. Simulation 4: Object analysis- see number 1 above..»- Does not apply.» - Did not attend.» - Good, but quite difficult to know what to include.» - Very hard to understand but it became clearer when Andrew explained at the lecture some days afterwards.» - I was really unclear about this assignment. Had never seen a "schedule" before and was unclear if I should include IAs that are encapsulated by something transferrable. It"s fine to say KH in academia, what it doesn"t really relate to real life? (Unless it"s just a marker to remind yourself to hire the researchers?)» - I think tyhis one was for the engineers. We had nr 3» - I do not remember this assignment...» 26. Simulation 5: Technology IP Strategy- see number 1 above..»- Very good. The simulation presented a very challenging mental process, due to all the variables to be taken into consideration.» - Very good assignment to analyse the best companies to work with and the best negotiations. At this assignment we used our knowledge from the fall. Very good.» - The best of them all.» - A group simulation with a presentation if I do not remember wrong. A very good one but it had been better if we got a consultation.» - very good» - Don"t remember much.» - It was hard to know exactly what and how much that were asked for.» - I do not remember this assignment...» 27. Simulation 6: IP and working with a patent agent- see number 1 above..»- Crazy! It didn"t even feel any analytic at all, but more rather like just passing on tens of messages for four hours.» - Good. I appreciated the simulation as it made me review some of the theoretical aspects of patenting.» - Individual simulation that tested our patent skills. The tme for the simulation was enought.» - Quite far from real-world application in my mind. » - I loved it but it was very stressy.» - to messy» - Was quite hectic as a few years were shrunk into a few hours. Overall good simulation as I think I got a good picture of working with a patent agent.» - This felt like a bit odd simulation. At least I got the feeling of floating around guessing aa lot. » - I do not remember this assignment...» 28. Simulation 7: Prosecution case- Bad. Exchanging email from one person to another does not really require a lot of mental effort, plus - the time restriction being considered - not all the information given in the documents can be processed. Thus, the learning is diminished.»- Individual and demanding simulation. Most of the simulation work was to foward information to Ofelia in a short period of time. The goal with this assignment was not clear. » - stressful, but rewarding. » - good» - Don"t remember much.» - This was a fast going simulation but really funny and teaching as it went on. » - This was very stressed, and you feelt like you were behind all the time. But fun. » 29. Simulation 8: Non-core licensing- see number 1 above..»- Interesting! Strategic approach.» - Good. A challenging mental exercise and an interesting debate on strategic moves. The questions addressed during the presentation were objective and realistic - it was overall a good learning experience.» - Good exercise to think about the consequences of each path for a company. It simulated real life decisions. Very good.» - Excellent! Keep it the way it is.» - Group simulation with presentation. Once again, it would have been better if there was a consultation. The only feedback we got from it was the questions.» - very good» - Some of the SMT focussed too much on the technology and others on the risks. » - This assignment was rather clear and funny. Good to learn this!» - I do not remember this assignment...» 30. Simulation 9: Patent wars- Fairly good. The different simulations during the day seem to be a bit repetitive.»- Individual simulation to deal with patent infringment and know the best way to deal with it. Very good.» - I would have liked to taken this a bit further.» - I liked it.» - very good» - I liked this, as it feels like it could actually happen in real life.» - This simulation was also really good and I fealt like a learned a lot. » - I do not remember this assignment...» 31. Myriad Genetics- Interesting to get the ethical aspect to patenting. Fun to have debates in contrast to the other simulations.»- Bad. Although the introduction was good the case was treated as a negotiation instead of a debate. The case was suppose to be individual - no one came prepared fro group work, the reading material was handed out too late» - The goal of the assignment was not clear enought to understand if the group had to be prepared for a debate or a negotiation. Not very well organized.» - Very good, because the debates forced you to answer from the top of your head as well.» - Interesting discussions during the negotiations. I like when you have to "respond at the second", very hard but you learn a lot. However, it could be clearer stated that it was a negotiation and not a debate.» - intresting lecture» - Maybe a bit unclear as to what we were supposed to discuss (general debate or business focus). Could have been better with an active moderator perhaps?» - I still don"t understand the goal as Myriad Genetics? To not give out a license or try to get a win win situation?» - The debates vere more like negotiations. I thoght there were a deeper level missing in this simulation.I could have been good but it were to static. » - Not good at all, first of all, make clear if it is a debate or a negotiation, because it was not fun to debate against someone that was negotiating. I also belive that the teacher should be more informed..» 32. Ipendo case- Worthless»- Very bad. There were no specifications as to bringing the computer (the cases were supposed to be discussions), the room did not have plugs,so half of the computers died during the 1st hour. There was little if any initial presentation, the assignment was a disaster. As i did not bring my computer i did not manage to complete the case.» - Not clear presentation. In some extend useless since the database information was not actual.» - See comments about this one above.» - Interesting to try one of the IP software tools.» - the guest lecture was a really nice guy and so helpfull and the lecture was also fun» - Didn"t really see the point as the product was not used.» - what kind of lab was this?» - I learned a new platform, that I havn"t used, and it was quit unnessessary for me. The lecturer was nervous and he didn"t hold the lecture in a good way»
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33%