|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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.
Patent and innovation engineering, CIP061Status: AvslutadÖppen för svar: 2010-03-04 - 2010-03-11 Antal svar: 23 Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 71% Kontaktperson: Anneli Hildenborg»
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.23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.69 - Good workload» (Around 30 hours/week) 2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 4.91 - Missed some due to recruitment-events» (75%) 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?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.78 - The goals that are open for interpretation are:
- Design an innovation from different perspectives, especially from an R&D perspective and a market perspective
- Design a patent portfolio
- Value patented inventions
- Construct new knowledge-based business in the context of the above
These goals are all discussed during the course but since they are broad concepts a more narrow description would help in order to understand the goals. To be able to design an innovation from a market perspective and to be able to construct knowledge based businesses from that can be hard to grasp. Sub-goals with a clear definition would then help me when I reflect upon what I have learned and how well that fits the learning goals. It is hard to say now, when the course is over if I can in fact construct knowledge based business in the context of...
On the other hand I also understand the difficulties of writing goals that are measurable when it comes to knowledge.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer) 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.21 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2 - The seem reasonable, but still very high!» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable) 5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?21 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.28 - However, there should be more business focus. It almost always feels like the business perspective gets kind of neglected. In the Prosun case, for example, there were (which is interesting) a lot of marketing and financial information. However, none of the questions were directed at this subject, the absolute majority were pure technical, and some law, issues. I would appreciate a more business focus, and honestly, that goes for most of the courses. The business side is being MENTIONED a lot, but no classes seem that focused on this area. Unfortunately.» (To some extent) Teaching and course administration6. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?22 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.77 - But good as backbone of the course.» (Some extent) 7. To what extent has the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.47 - The focus in many of the readings are on administrative and judicial approaches and the business aspect might not be coverd in litterature but rather in lectures. The Granstrand book was however covering this to a larger extent then the articles, Patent it youself etc.» (Some extent) 8. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 2.86 - I had some problems with moddle during one simulation and my opinion is that is changes are made in the schedule the should be announced at least during work hours the day before the change. If this is not possible, send an e-mail in addition to posting it on moddle since this is checked more frequently. It would also be much appreciated if all slides were posted on moddle. My grading here is in between rather badly and rather well due to these reasons.» (Rather badly) Study climate9. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.52 - There were good opportunities to ask questions, but to actually get a good and clear answer was very rare.
There are a lot to win in being more transparent with the process when it comes to understanding questions and administrative matters. It would lower the irritation and it will not ruin the pedagogy of ICM to know what I am supposed to do.... Still, much better administration during this course compared to the fall!» (Rather good) 10. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.78 - We got the job done, but a change from my last group where we were just performing, this time it has been more about me pulling. » (Rather well) 11. How was the course workload?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.21 - It was reasonable, however the school projects and other activities linked to the school has been very demanding and taking a lot my time.» (Adequate) 12. How was the total workload this study period?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.43 - What exactly is the difference between this and Q11? » (High) Summarizing questions13. What is your general impression of the course?23 svarande
Genomsnitt: 3.86 - I missed some of the parta I thought it would cover like different patent strategies and such...» (Fair) 14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?- The learning by doing is very good. However, for the learning experience to be excellent a general feedback is not adequate. It is enough with a few bullets stating: - Improve this... by... - This was good... why... »- Live simulations» - The simulation serie, it was a very interesting and great way to learn. To be "forced" to battle these areas and to see what different decision can lead to in the coming simulation.» - Andrew"s lecture » - The labs - and that they are not graded. The last assignment as a base for graduation was good, but perhaps you should be aware of that some student did it in group while other really did it individual. Of course discussion in group for an assignment like this could be good, but at least I believe that an individual assignment at the end should be just individually. » - Simulations, the book Patent it yourself, Greg, Andrew and Ulf.» - The license agreement simulation!! » - The simulations! » - The live simulations.» - Most of the simulations. Good technologies - understandable even for a person with no technical background.» - The learning process through simulations was the highlight of the course. » - the pass/fail grades if they have a school project to think of aswell. The simulation regarding contracts was very nice for the lawyers. » - Henrik Olsson and Andrew Telles lectures, they were very good» - The intensity of the program» - ProSun» 15. What should definitely be changed to next year?- Simulation should be better structured»- See end of comment 14.» - The focus, please raise it a little bit from the claims. The strategy and more business lectures were often so fluffy that it was hard to grasp. Consider to change the ProSun questionnaire and the framing around the case» - The ProSun case is great but it needs some editional Q&A session before starting work with answers as there is literally no "ceiling" of how much work can be put into it.» - More and better feed back on assignments, both the individual and the ones done in groups. The structure was much better than it was during the autumn semester, but could still be better. Please also try to make the responses at the individual simulations better and faster (no bad jokes - more relevant answers) » - The exam maybe, and maybe add some more business and strategy books within the area.» - more feedback! It is very difficult to improve if you don"t know if you did something wrong. The class where divided into six different groups. I would argue that six different feedbacks is not to much to ask for. The competition law lectures should be extended and made into a simulation or removed completely. To only have two lectures does not give you much and without any connection to the rest of the course it feels rather pointless.» - Grading on the assignments. » - The exam, it took a lot of energy to answer those "fluffy" questions. Would it be possible to be more pragmatic?» - Simulation 7 needs clearer instructions. A bit more feedback would be good.» - Emphasis on a more comprehensive and holistic approach in the framing the questions for assignments, simulations or examinations. There are often confusing use of words and hence vague references to the context. » - The examination information need to be clearly explained.The material had lot of mistakes which changes the exact meaning sometime and then it becomes very difficult to understand the actual questions.» - ProSun was a great case, really liked the material. BUT the assignement was to large to do in 2 weeks with regular lectures and simulations in parallell. And the material and questions was very much towards the engineerstudents and really hard for the lawyers. » - Take away the Ipendo lecture. I don"t see why we had that lecture, it was a total waste of time. However, it would be interesting to have a more general lecture on how companies can benefit from working with IP management systems.» - Much more feedback on the simulations, both the individual ones and the group ones. I"m still not sure if I did good or bad, and some tips could be very useful for the future.» 16. Additional comments- The mix of external lecturers, the institute and the industry is excellent. The overall impression of the course is very good. Good job!»- The course was interesting and fun and it exceeds my expectations! I would highly appreciate some feedback on individual or group basis. We were six groups, it can not be too much of an effort to give feedback designated per group, I still feel I have no clue if our hand-in were good or bad and which error we made. For me this is important for my future learning and understanding of the subject. I very much enjoyed the technical focus! It felt very good after the fall to work with the more technical dimensions and it was a very interesting technology.» - Erik Hansson did a great job in this course.» - Thank you! Really looking forward to the Brand Management course that has started in a very awesome way! (except the schedule mess)» - N/A» - I would like more differences for the different backgrounds. Almost all simulations was directed towards the engineers, and the exam aswell. The legal parts in simulations are usually to general to feel interesting for us lawyers. I have now done 3 IAAs, which I will never do in the future, but just one license agreement and nothing on competition law. I belive that a solution would be taking one strategy assignement away for the law students and add something with competition law, and then do separate questions on the ProSun case for engineers/business students and lawyers. »
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0%