Utvärderingar
Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida
|
Visa resultat
Här 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.
09lp1 Strategic Management and Economics of Intellectual Property, TEK315, TEK315
Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-26 - 2009-11-26
Antal svar: 34
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 48%
Kontaktperson: Marcus Holgersson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Your own effort1. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.34 svarande
| At most 15 hours/week» | | 7 | |  20% |
| Around 20 hours/week» | | 13 | | 38% |
| Around 25 hours/week» | | 9 | | 26% |
| Around 30 hours/week» | | 4 | | 11% |
| At least 35 hours/week» | | 1 | | 2% |
Genomsnitt: 2.38 - More towards the end of the course.» (Around 20 hours/week)
2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend? 34 svarande
| 0%» | | 1 | | 2% |
| 25%» | | 1 | | 2% |
| 50%» | | 5 | | 14% |
| 75%» | | 15 | | 44% |
| 100%» | | 12 | | 35% |
Genomsnitt: 4.05 - two courses in the same time» (50%)
- Since half of the lectures were schedueled at the same time as my other course, Organizational Behavior (where all classes are mandatory) it was difficult to participate» (50%)
- Early course, there was a lot of repetition from our previous course in 3"rd grade, little need to attend that. Later in course higher attendance. » (50%)
- I would say 90%» (75%)
- Had mandatory lectures in another course most wednesdays. Really annoying when two courses are scheduled at the same time. » (75%)
- all the lectures except seminaries» (100%)
- 95%» (100%)
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.3. How understandable are the course goals?34 svarande
| I have not seen/read the goals» | | 5 | | 14% |
| The goals are difficult to understand» | | 2 | | 5% |
| The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» | | 17 | | 50% |
| The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» | | 10 | | 29% |
Genomsnitt: 2.94 - In the course syllabus it is clear what we are supposed to learn, but in relation to the classes they have been confusing. During class we have spent more time talking about concepts and anecdotes rather than following the outlined schedule.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Did not correspond to what actually was expected» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- I haven"t paid much attention to the syllabus but it was clear if I remember correctly.» (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)
4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.28 svarande
| No, the goals are set too low» | | 3 | | 10% |
| Yes, the goals seem reasonable» | | 20 | | 71% |
| No, the goals are set too high» | | 5 | | 17% |
Genomsnitt: 2.07 - See comment above.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- I think they are set too high with regards to that we are supposed to know more than what classes, articles and the literature provide.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Two different components of the course (IP law and economics) could"ve been splitted in two different courses, because they are not connected and it gives no sense to be in a rush and learn both in such a short period of time.» (No, the goals are set too high)
5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?29 svarande
| No, not at all» | | 0 | | 0% |
| To some extent» | | 14 | | 48% |
| Yes, definitely» | | 12 | | 41% |
| I don"t know/have not been examined yet» | | 3 | | 10% |
Genomsnitt: 2.62 - The final exam has shown my own expectations from the course, but not exactly what was tough and expected by the teacher.» (To some extent)
- The goals do not say anything about the time factor, which Ove during one lecture said is important as an explaination to why there is/was such a huge time pressure during the written exam. » (To some extent)
- Reflected the course content well.» (Yes, definitely)
- Very good and varied exam.» (Yes, definitely)
Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?32 svarande
| Small extent» | | 3 | | 9% |
| Some extent» | | 11 | | 34% |
| Large extent» | | 14 | | 43% |
| Great extent» | | 4 | | 12% |
Genomsnitt: 2.59 - the lectures weren"t interesting created and often far away from topic» (Small extent)
- You missed some important info if you did not attend the classes, which was difficult to do since they were at the same time as my other course (which was mandatory)» (Some extent)
- Granstrand is an inspiring lecturer.» (Large extent)
- The lectures were very relevant for the two written exams. » (Great extent)
7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?34 svarande
| Small extent» | | 4 | | 11% |
| Some extent» | | 11 | | 32% |
| Large extent» | | 16 | | 47% |
| Great extent» | | 3 | | 8% |
Genomsnitt: 2.52 - The course book did not feel necessary» (Small extent)
- The book is very outdated, get a new one. Many other courses within the MEI program that presents newer articles on similar issues takes a standpoint against many things in the book. Also, the result of surveys done in early 90"s can be interesting of historical perspective, but not to build methods that would work today.» (Small extent)
- Too much literature, it seemed like a djungle you didn"t know what to read first, unstructured information» (Small extent)
- The text book was good but could be more brief (less extensive) with respect to what was needed for the exams. » (Large extent)
- The book was very good, very well written and provided you with a good understanding of the subject.» (Great extent)
8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?34 svarande
| Very badly» | | 1 | | 2% |
| Rather badly» | | 5 | | 14% |
| Rather well» | | 20 | | 58% |
| Very well» | | 8 | | 23% |
Genomsnitt: 3.02 - The whole administration around the case was terrible, we got the groups 2-3 weeks too late compared to PM, the specifications were unclear and the presentation never occurred. » (Rather badly)
- Would like to see more structuring of different file types. Also descriptions of each file. » (Rather badly)
- I would prefer if the handouts were available about one day before lecture so you have time to print them.» (Rather well)
- Al the files posted on the course portal was a mess. Is it impossible to make some sort of order on the web page, so that you can find the thinks you look for more easily?» (Rather well)
- I think the webpage could be better organized. It would be much easier if you could put the handouts and articles in folders on the student portal. For instance, one folder called articles, one lectures etc. It would give an overview of what the course consists of and make it easier to find all the material. » (Rather well)
- I would prefer OHs before the lecture.» (Rather well)
Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Rather poor» | | 2 | | 5% |
| Rather good» | | 16 | | 47% |
| Very good» | | 13 | | 38% |
| I did not seek help» | | 3 | | 8% |
Genomsnitt: 3.5 - It was easy to ask questions but the answers wasn"t always that good» (Rather good)
- It was a bit unclear who you should turn to if you had questions. » (Rather good)
10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?34 svarande
| Very poorly» | | 2 | | 5% |
| Rather poorly» | | 7 | | 20% |
| Rather well» | | 12 | | 35% |
| Very well» | | 13 | | 38% |
| I did not seek cooperation» | | 0 | | 0% |
Genomsnitt: 3.05 - My casegroup was not very interested in spending alot of time. One dropped the course, two couldn"t attend "all" (2) of our meetings and the workload was unevenly distributed among us. » (Rather poorly)
- Too varied background. I have studied the MEI program and I came in the same group as electrical engineers as never had done an economic case before. That did not develop my learning so much.» (Rather poorly)
11. How was the course workload?34 svarande
| Too low» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Low» | | 2 | | 5% |
| Adequate» | | 19 | | 55% |
| High» | | 11 | | 32% |
| Too high» | | 2 | | 5% |
Genomsnitt: 3.38 - Much to read. Had to read very fast. » (High)
- mid-term exam, unnecessary complicated assignment which no one ever evaluated and an exam were too much» (Too high)
12. How was the total workload this study period?34 svarande
| Too low» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Low» | | 5 | | 14% |
| Adequate» | | 13 | | 38% |
| High» | | 14 | | 41% |
| Too high» | | 2 | | 5% |
Genomsnitt: 3.38 - Did not have time/energy for searching for employments. » (High)
Summarizing questions13. What is your general impression of the course?34 svarande
| Poor» | | 2 | | 5% |
| Fair» | | 4 | | 11% |
| Adequate» | | 7 | | 20% |
| Good» | | 17 | | 50% |
| Excellent» | | 4 | | 11% |
Genomsnitt: 3.5 - for example it has been said that we should present the assignments but yet we don"t have results no one told us when to present , no one ever told us about the law exam the information was only at the homepage» (Poor)
- I think the course could have been better structured. I really liked Tom"s part and I liked the content of Ove"s part. However, Ove"s lectures were sometimes a bit difficult to follow because he didn"t really follow his own outline.» (Adequate)
- I think it was a new management issue for me and I learned many new things through the seminars, team project and lectures.» (Excellent)
- Ove impressed with his extensive knowledge about business economics and engineering in general. However, I would prefer to choose my own group members. » (Excellent)
- I liked it» (Excellent)
14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- Team working»
- Tom Ewing"s part on IP law»
- The seminars and the law part with Tom.»
- lot of guest»
- Tom Ewings great law exam.
The final exam was also good.»
- Good lectures with reflection time.»
- THe IPR days with inputs from different industries was very good.»
- Ewing"s law-part with midterm. Course book. »
- the book»
- Cant say»
- I think the case really improved our understanding for the subject.»
- Damage calculations»
- seminar with guests»
- Video speech with Volvo CEO»
- Guestlectures»
- IP law part of the course, and more deep»
- The broad business perspective. »
- future of capitalism»
- The case. Guest lecturer»
- teachers, debates, assigment»
- IP law courses»
15. What should definitely be changed to next year?- I think the lecturer can teach in a easier way and he should not to think that all students have a management background to understand him immediately because some concepts are very new for some technical students and it takes time to be along with the class trend.»
- Maybe some more backdround on damage calculations on the lectures before the case work.»
- Olle need to reduce the course material and give the students a better idea on what to focus on. Power point pictures should not be presented if they are not explained in the lecture. Hearing "this you can read about in the book" over and over again was very frustrating.»
- To large exam, difficult to compleat the exam in 4 hours. That the law dugga can give bonus points to the final exam»
- The planning of the lectures. It felt like we skipped some parts or went through them to quick since we were behind schedule»
- just pass or fail exam or project»
- State more clearer how big share of the course is calculated base (it should not be more calculations).»
- the group size for the assignement should be reduced to avoid free riders.»
- Perhaps the groupwork. An idea is to make one more overarching question instead of some independent or linked questions so the labor is not so easily divided but instead forces the students to cooperate. »
- seminary not included in the course»
- the schedule!»
- Cant say»
- Maybe you could add seminars where we could discuss articles.»
- The seminars should not be at the beginning of the course
The IP Law exam»
- assessment because project + IP law exam + Last examination should have to be linked. For example the first would be on 20, then 20 and 60.»
- The calculations should either be in their own course and emphazished heavily, or be left out of the lectures. "Härleda" formulas during lecture time is a waste at this level when they"re so irrelevant to any other course material. If you wish to spend lecture time on formulas, take an example and use them. »
- nothing»
- Keep IP law part and rethink the economics part of the course, which sometimes confuses students in what direction to think and what"s the connection with acual intellectual property.»
- Less time pressure during the exam. »
- more finance»
- Better supervision during the case. Sometimes it was difficult to understand if we aimed in the right direction.»
- include other literature (most of 90% of the literature has been Written by the professor) should be good to know other perspectives»
16. Additional comments- Presence of Tom was very useful for all students. I had never seen some ones like him in my prevous courses. He was frank,well-educated,serious and skilled in his own job.»
- I don"t agree with the last years students that the course need more calculations.»
- regarding the law part, it would be funny to argue against each other in a fake trial. Each opponent would have to prepare his arguments and this kind of fun competition between students could be very effective to learn.»
- No.»
Specific questions for this course17. How would you assess Tom Ewing"s qualities as a lecturer?33 svarande
| Very poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Average» | | 9 | | 28% |
| Good» | | 13 | | 40% |
| Very Good» | | 10 | | 31% |
| No opinion» | | 1 | | |
Genomsnitt: 4.03 - Very knowledgeable. Uses slides to strictly, not always able to inspire.» (Average)
- He has a clear outline that he follows, and have good examples that underline his points and make it easier to follow. » (Very Good)
- Perhaps need to catch the listeners interest even more by using common techniques for this. I.e. esxpressing more entusiasm etc. » (Very Good)
18. How would you assess Ove Granstrand"s qualities as a lecturer?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 2 | | 6% |
| Poor» | | 2 | | 6% |
| Average» | | 5 | | 15% |
| Good» | | 17 | | 51% |
| Very Good» | | 7 | | 21% |
| No opinion» | | 1 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.75 - It would be nice to have the lectures more concrete, but also more open for discussion and different opinions.» (Poor)
- Too much sidetracking into old stories, and paying too much attention to 1 questionnaire, sometimes dedicating 15 minutes to explain a scenario to answer 1 question. Invite that student to come forward in the break instead, the crowd for the course was too varied so what was new to 1 student many others had heard 5 times before, e.g. betamax/vhs case.» (Poor)
- Sometimes it can feel like the main message of the lecture is that you could read about it in the book and thereby it would not be explained in the lectures. Otherwise good teaching» (Average)
- Very good at talking from the top of his head, not restricted by slides. Using blackboard in a good way. The concepts being written on the black board feels unnecessary, most of them (all?) are anyway provided in a document on the study portal. Since not all info is in slides it is hard to read in everything if you can"t attend the lecture. Classmates notes are usually not that good either.» (Good)
- good that he writes on the board and not just talks to his powerpoint slides» (Good)
- He has a very interesting and wide perspective on the subject. But he tends to not follow his outline and jump back and forth which makes it quite difficult to follow.» (Good)
- he seems has a lot of experience» (Good)
19. How would you assess the day "IP in Creative Industries"?32 svarande
| Very poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Average» | | 10 | | 35% |
| Good» | | 12 | | 42% |
| Very good» | | 5 | | 17% |
| No opinion» | | 4 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.71 - too long» (Very poor)
- Maybe need some more guest lectures and a little more focus on IP. Especially the guest lecture regarding the movie industry» (Average)
- i was feeling bored after half a day, you do have to remember that students were coming back from holidays (during wich most of us have not attending lectures) and we were not used to listen to a one day seminar. It was interesting, but i think it would have been more usefull one or two week later.» (Average)
- the reason was the this seminar was carried on at the beginning of the course.. when peoplo don"t have big knowledge and can"t take advantage in a better way of the seminar» (Average)
- Didnt feel it was much, to me, new knowledge» (Good)
- the room was too big for the purpose, sometimes difficult to hear» (Very good)
20. How would you assess the day "IP in Software Industries"?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Average» | | 10 | | 34% |
| Good» | | 13 | | 44% |
| Very good» | | 4 | | 13% |
| No opinion» | | 5 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.62 - too long» (Very poor)
- the speaker"s accent was sometimes making it incredibly difficult to understand the message» (Average)
- the reason was the this seminar was carried on at the beginning of the course.. when peoplo don"t have big knowledge and can"t take advantage in a better way of the seminar» (Average)
- the room was too big for the purpose, sometimes difficult to hear» (Very good)
21. How would you assess the video interview with Leif Johansson (Volvo"s CEO)?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 1 | | 4% |
| Poor» | | 2 | | 8% |
| Average» | | 6 | | 25% |
| Good» | | 8 | | 33% |
| Very good» | | 7 | | 29% |
| No opinion» | | 10 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.75 - cut down your questions, why did you ask questions in such as verbose way? i was honnestly loosing focus during this time.» (Poor)
- Was a fun idea and a nice substitute for having him come but I had a hard time listening and concentrating. » (Poor)
- Maybe it would be even better with a discussion of the answers afterwards.» (Average)
- Hard to get all of what he said down, and then when it showed up on the exam..» (Average)
- It would have been very nice as a starting point for discussion but in this form it was only his opinions.» (Average)
- The video should not have been presented on the last lecture when the student expected Olle to talk about the content of the exam!» (Good)
- it can be good to add it on the handout page» (Good)
- Probably good for the students to read the questions before looking at the video. » (Good)
- Good that you clearly stated the questions.» (Very good)
- Nice that Ove had taken his time to do it.» (Very good)
22. Do you think it would be suitable with a few more CEO video-interviews in the course?32 svarande
| Yes» | | 21 | | 87% |
| No» | | 3 | | 12% |
| No opinion» | | 8 | | |
Genomsnitt: 1.12 - It would be interesting with more intervieews so that we could compare them.» (Yes)
- it"s much more interesting to see the ceo front of us.It got sleepy as soon as i"m watching a movie or a screen: it"s not interactive/dynamic.» (No)
- the interviews are hard to understand without any introduction couldn"t see the sense of it» (No)
23. How would you assess the form of examination, with an IP law exam (pass/fail) and a case (pass/fail) and a final exam (graded)?33 svarande
| Very poor» | | 2 | | 6% |
| Poor» | | 4 | | 12% |
| Average» | | 10 | | 30% |
| Good» | | 13 | | 39% |
| Very good» | | 4 | | 12% |
| No opinion» | | 0 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.39 - IP law exam is fair and reasonable.
Case solving is a little bit too narrow according to what the course is generally about. » (?)
- To see above» (Very poor)
- IP exam was ok, I made the project more or less with one other guy, the four other did not partipated (and dropped the course)=> it allows free riders.» (Poor)
- The case should be graded » (Poor)
- Have the case add points, or make it simpler.» (Average)
- I think it would be better to become a grad for every examination so that the final result reflect more the work done during the semester.» (Average)
- Some bonus points from the case to the exam might be a good idea.» (Good)
- Good since you learned a lot. Good that the presentation was remowed since there was more then enough of examination moments.» (Good)
- The IP law exam can be grade as well, very easy to pass.» (Good)
- But too work load!!!give points to the work group!!!» (Good)
- I passed the law exam without studying at all, so you could perhaps take away that exam.» (Good)
- I think the combination is good, but that you could earn some extra points from the case.» (Good)
- If the law part is necessary to include I fins this to be ok.» (Good)
- Groupwork often feels unfair to use for grading. Not even a good measure tool. » (Very good)
24. How would you assess the final exam"s relevance in relation to the general course content as presented during the course?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Average» | | 10 | | 34% |
| Good» | | 11 | | 37% |
| Very good» | | 7 | | 24% |
| No opinion» | | 5 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.82 - It was very specific, you have very little chans of getting point on these questions if you for instans have been sick on that lecture(Music industry question)» (Average)
- however difficult to answer a few questions that I think came from the lectures, when you had not been able to attend» (Very good)
25. How would you assess the difficulty of the final exam?34 svarande
| Too easy» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Adequate» | | 22 | | 73% |
| Too hard» | | 8 | | 26% |
| No opinion» | | 4 | | |
Genomsnitt: 2.26 - To many questions» (Too hard)
- an exam is always too hard» (Too hard)
- It"s almost impossible to get a five that is not fair compared to other courses» (Too hard)
- Hard with respect to the time pressure or scarcity of time. » (Too hard)
26. How would you assess the value and helpfullnes of the case for your learning?33 svarande
| Very poor» | | 2 | | 6% |
| Poor» | | 7 | | 21% |
| Average» | | 8 | | 25% |
| Good» | | 12 | | 37% |
| Very good» | | 3 | | 9% |
| No opinion» | | 1 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.21 - Did not know much about damage calculations before and my knowledge did not improve drastically.» (Poor)
- Only did the damage calculation so I learnt that pretty good but nothing about the rest. » (Poor)
- Not time effective learning. I have already learned to work in groups. » (Poor)
- It was hard to find materials as chalmers don"t have law databases. I could have learned more with more hints about what to look for. To be really helpful for learning I would like to get some kind of feedback.» (Average)
27. How would you assess the course book?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Poor» | | 3 | | 9% |
| Average» | | 10 | | 32% |
| Good» | | 13 | | 41% |
| Very good» | | 4 | | 12% |
| No opinion» | | 3 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.51 - Very old and a lot of diagrams/numbers that no longer feel relevant unless updated with columns for at least 2005 and onwards.» (Poor)
- well written!» (Very good)
- didn t buy...too expensive» (No opinion)
28. How would you assess the rest of the written course material?34 svarande
| Very poor» | | 1 | | 3% |
| Poor» | | 2 | | 6% |
| Average» | | 14 | | 48% |
| Good» | | 10 | | 34% |
| Very good» | | 2 | | 6% |
| No opinion» | | 5 | | |
Genomsnitt: 3.34 - Some good, some less good... some contained very much repetition from the book. » (Average)
- need of more other suggested literature from other authors» (Average)
- Didn t read most of them...too many!!!should be discussed at class!!!» (No opinion)
- did not read» (No opinion)
- had not time to read. the lecture slides were good. » (No opinion)
29. How would you assess the value of the subject in this course in general?34 svarande
| Very low» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Low» | | 0 | | 0% |
| Average» | | 8 | | 25% |
| High» | | 16 | | 50% |
| Very high» | | 8 | | 25% |
| No opinion» | | 2 | | |
Genomsnitt: 4 - The most value come from the broad business perspective around the IP. Sometimes it felt like a general business management course and i like that. » (High)
30. Is there a need for a course in strategy and finance on master level at Chalmers?34 svarande
| Yes» | | 22 | | 91% |
| No» | | 2 | | 8% |
| No opinion» | | 10 | | |
Genomsnitt: 1.08 - i think i"ve already seen one, if not, yes it would be good!» (Yes)
- There should be a course in finance!» (Yes)
- Dont need if there is a need but I would take that course. » (Yes)
- Definitely, corporate finance is an important subject. The lack of finance at Chalmers made me take courses at School of economics to complement my educational background. » (Yes)
- at least to have an approach to "finance innovations"» (Yes)
Kursutvärderingssystem från 
|
