|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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.
Ethics and Intellectual Property, FTEK040Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2009-03-23 - 2009-03-31 Antal svar: 13 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 28% Kontaktperson: Anneli Hildenborg» Klass: Övriga
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?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.38 - I must however say that the syllabus did not seem to match the lectures all that well.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn) Study climate2. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.15 - Discussion improve deep understanding.» (Very good) 3. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.23 - Since we had not any group work this question is hard to answer, I have worked together with one student (who I knew from a former course) on the assignements.» (Rather well) 4. How was the course workload?13 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.23 - course workload was more or less optional, which I think was good.» (Adequate) Part I: General Questions5. What is your overall impression of the course? Please motivate your answer!- Good introduction to the subject. The important questions were brought up to surface»- It was good even though too much focused on the ethic part. I was expecting more patenting -licensing strategies explanations. It was more about point of view and general ideas. I would have appreciated some more "practical guidelines"» - Interesting discussions, could be more structured» - As it stands the course is very much a course of IP and less so of ethics. I was a bit disappointed at this fact. Given the choice again I would have taken the other ethics course.» - Really interesting but also a big area which might be filled up with a second course?!» - chaotic - the course structure did not become apparent in the lecture» - it"s nice to know something about IP, since I"ve never have such courses before» - It is very good, and I think it is necessary for my work now and future.» - It was an interesting course. For me I gained a better understanding about IP issues, but i think I have more question now after the course than I had before...For me it would have been interesting if the focus were more general and not that much into the biotech area.» - It was an appropriate course which gave the possibility to hear and learn about topics which are not well-defined or clearly stated elsewhere. There were cases about importance of loging the work and having it aproved which are not clarified at the departments but was mentioned to be very critical if any claims are to be made. Some good hints on how to handle relations with industry was mentioned. it was good to hear that there are cases where resources are "legally" used for other reasons and how it is justified. Overall the impression was that, many topics were brought up, and many more came to my mind. Very little clear answer were given which I guess was intentional but at least it made me start to look for answers. » - Philosophically interesting. Unstructured with unclear goals. Difficult to connect to own research.» - the course was nice, helpfull and informative» 6. What would you recommend us to do differently next year, do you have suggestions for improvements?- Maybe a choice of three different ways of assignments per handing in.. since Phd students come from a broad spectrum of institutions»- Shorter exercises» - Communicate and/or improve the structure of the content» - Put more focus on the ethical side of things.» - Maybe include some group works during the course so that not only the teaching person is holding in the course.» - improve the power point presentation so that it actually matches the lecture and is understandable even one or two weeks after hearing the lecture The lectures were good and entertaining but as we didn"t have any handout the were soon forgotten. The Powerpoint slides would have been most likely not enough as they had not that much to do with the lecture itself.» - I think it"s just fine» - If you can supply more cases to read as the homework, it will be better from my point of view.» - I think that a group excercise would be quite good in this subject. At least for me, i would have felt more comfortable discussing in smaller groups. And i also thought that i would gain more out of it.» - I cannot think of much improvement at the moment. However some discussions on copyright rules, use of material and referencing could be useful» - Differentiated handins depending on subject.» - I think it will be better if you increase the number of Lectures to be more clearer» 7. What was your general impression of the administration of the course?- na»- good» - GOOD» - ok» - OK» - Good.» - Good.» - very good» - very good» 8. Course literature- good»- good» - Some links were good, some not.» - too long and too extensive for such a short overview course» - no formal literature» - It is good, but if you can supply more cases in the literature it will be perfect.» - Maybe it is the nature of this issues that there are no clear answers but I dont think that the course litterature answered the questions in the case exceercises.» - some of them are helpfull but not all» 9. Miscellaneous comments- na»- no» - I hope it can be continue and if possible more time with a highe credit.» Part II: Lectures, Exercises and Assignments10. Ulf Petrusson’,s lectures- good open climate, questions welcome»- Very nice guy, easy to talk» - Very interesting discussions, hard to get overview of the discussed topics» - Highly interesting, explanatory and relevant. » - As mentioned above, more group works or other small activities would have been good to include.» - good» - Yes, he is very great. Thanks for his wonderful lectures.» - Good, i like the idea of having a discussion about this issues and i think that is the best way to learn.» - very good, very helpful discussions and friendly atmosphere. What I liked about Ulf was his ability to introduce problems, cases and possible treats without scaring us. A lot of good alerts» - He was really nice, helpfull and cleaver» 11. The lecture by Boo Edgar and Mats Lundqvist- Really nice input»- Very good!» - Do not recall Mats but Boo"s lecture was interesting and amusing. It seemed to be the only lecture where ethics was the main focus.» - I missed that.» - good» - ...» - good» - It was differetn with Boo. He kind of made me scared of some bad guys who are out there and are very well capable. It was anyways good,» - I didn"t attend this one» 12. The case- na»- allright but not that clear. It would have been better if Ulf would have explained it in the class before the assigment» - Interesting and relevant» - Did not like the minimum page requirement.» - OK» - very bio-dominated» - Give an example of how the court dealt with the case will be beneficial for us.» - The case-excercises were good but a bit hard for students that is not working in the biotech area.» - The case was not related to me at all. In Genetics or biology there are lots of IP related examples but why not take another field and also use it as an example. Microelectronics is a victim of stealing ideas and designs. However the case presented captured many different aspects and gave a good possibility to discuss different topics » - The case assignments could be more specific in relation to the students research area. Its hard to brainstorm about the intellectual property issues in a field that one has never been into. » - the case was very nice and I would prefare if you include the claims of the patent so as to be clear for students » 13. The hand-ins- Maybe a choice of three different ways of assignments per handing in.. since Phd students come from a broad spectrum of institutions»- I did not understand why we were proposed to write five pages, most of us would have liked to concentrate the writing on maybe 3 pages but had to fill up with maybe not necessary stuff in the text only to get 5 pages. » - very bio-dominated» - maybe it"s better not to request specific pages. I"t not the length of the writing that matters.» - Very useful.» - ok» - The second hand in was a bit unclear. could have been anything. maybe that was the idea» - Difficult to connect to own research» - they were nice but to write 5 pages it was really hard for me »
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0%