RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기

    실무자를 중심으로 한 지식재산 교육 전략 제시 : 질적연구방법을 중심으로

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T17393190

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Intellectual property has increasingly been recognized as a core intangible asset
    that underpins the competitiveness of firms and organizations. Nevertheless,
    graduate-level intellectual property education is often criticized for remaining largely
    centered on legal doctrines and institutional knowledge, thereby providing insufficient
    support for practitioners to develop the competencies necessary to understand and
    apply intellectual property in real work settings. This study aims to qualitatively
    examine practitioners’ experiences of graduate intellectual property education and to
    explore a practice-oriented instructional model and pedagogical strategies. To this end,
    in-depth interviews were conducted with practitioner graduate students enrolled in the
    master’s program in the Department of Convergence Intellectual Property at
    Kyungpook National University, as well as with instructors responsible for intellectual
    property-related courses.
    Drawing on semi-structured interviews and document analysis, the data were
    analyzed through the lenses of training transfer theory and practice-oriented learning
    perspectives, including experiential learning, problem-based learning (PBL), and
    project-based learning (PjBL). The findings are threefold. First, while graduate
    intellectual property education was perceived to enhance understanding of fundamental
    intellectual property concepts and systems—such as patents, trademarks, designs, and copyright—its
    transfer to workplace practice was constrained by misalignments between academic
    learning tasks and organizational realities (e.g., document formats, internal procedures,
    and role structures). Second, practitioners strongly demanded instruction that
    emphasizes authenticity, experience, and mentoring—particularly through engagement
    with real patent filing documents, contracts, and technology transfer cases—yet
    institutional conditions such as limited instructional hours, heterogeneous learner
    profiles, and assessment structures were found to restrict the implementation of such
    approaches. Third, based on these insights, this study proposes a practice-oriented
    intellectual property education model and pedagogical strategies designed to strengthen
    intellectual property understanding and application competence: a bifurcated curriculum
    consisting of a common foundational component for all learners and advanced tracks
    tailored to job roles and interests; short, intensive field-embedded experiences and
    practice-based assignments grounded in authentic formats and cases; and the
    systematic design of transfer mechanisms that enable the reuse of course-based
    document templates, search tools, and evaluation criteria in workplace contexts.
    By integrating training transfer theory with experiential learning perspectives, this
    study offers actionable implications for designing and operating practitioner-centered
    intellectual property education in general graduate programs. However, as a qualitative
    case study limited to a single department and a small number of participants, the
    findings should be interpreted with caution. Future research should employ
    comparative designs across diverse institutions and incorporate quantitative approaches
    to more rigorously examine the effects of intellectual property education on workplace
    intellectual property understanding and application competence.
    Keywords: Intellectual property education, Practitioner graduate students, Intellectual
    property understanding and application competence, Practice-oriented instructional
    model, Pedagogical strategies
    번역하기

    Intellectual property has increasingly been recognized as a core intangible asset that underpins the competitiveness of firms and organizations. Nevertheless, graduate-level intellectual property education is often criticized for remaining largely cen...

    Intellectual property has increasingly been recognized as a core intangible asset
    that underpins the competitiveness of firms and organizations. Nevertheless,
    graduate-level intellectual property education is often criticized for remaining largely
    centered on legal doctrines and institutional knowledge, thereby providing insufficient
    support for practitioners to develop the competencies necessary to understand and
    apply intellectual property in real work settings. This study aims to qualitatively
    examine practitioners’ experiences of graduate intellectual property education and to
    explore a practice-oriented instructional model and pedagogical strategies. To this end,
    in-depth interviews were conducted with practitioner graduate students enrolled in the
    master’s program in the Department of Convergence Intellectual Property at
    Kyungpook National University, as well as with instructors responsible for intellectual
    property-related courses.
    Drawing on semi-structured interviews and document analysis, the data were
    analyzed through the lenses of training transfer theory and practice-oriented learning
    perspectives, including experiential learning, problem-based learning (PBL), and
    project-based learning (PjBL). The findings are threefold. First, while graduate
    intellectual property education was perceived to enhance understanding of fundamental
    intellectual property concepts and systems—such as patents, trademarks, designs, and copyright—its
    transfer to workplace practice was constrained by misalignments between academic
    learning tasks and organizational realities (e.g., document formats, internal procedures,
    and role structures). Second, practitioners strongly demanded instruction that
    emphasizes authenticity, experience, and mentoring—particularly through engagement
    with real patent filing documents, contracts, and technology transfer cases—yet
    institutional conditions such as limited instructional hours, heterogeneous learner
    profiles, and assessment structures were found to restrict the implementation of such
    approaches. Third, based on these insights, this study proposes a practice-oriented
    intellectual property education model and pedagogical strategies designed to strengthen
    intellectual property understanding and application competence: a bifurcated curriculum
    consisting of a common foundational component for all learners and advanced tracks
    tailored to job roles and interests; short, intensive field-embedded experiences and
    practice-based assignments grounded in authentic formats and cases; and the
    systematic design of transfer mechanisms that enable the reuse of course-based
    document templates, search tools, and evaluation criteria in workplace contexts.
    By integrating training transfer theory with experiential learning perspectives, this
    study offers actionable implications for designing and operating practitioner-centered
    intellectual property education in general graduate programs. However, as a qualitative
    case study limited to a single department and a small number of participants, the
    findings should be interpreted with caution. Future research should employ
    comparative designs across diverse institutions and incorporate quantitative approaches
    to more rigorously examine the effects of intellectual property education on workplace
    intellectual property understanding and application competence.
    Keywords: Intellectual property education, Practitioner graduate students, Intellectual
    property understanding and application competence, Practice-oriented instructional
    model, Pedagogical strategies

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 서 론 1
    • 1. 연구의 배경 1
    • 2. 문제 제기 3
    • 3. 연구의 목적 5
    • Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 7
    • Ⅰ. 서 론 1
    • 1. 연구의 배경 1
    • 2. 문제 제기 3
    • 3. 연구의 목적 5
    • Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 7
    • 1. 지식재산의 개념과 범주 7
    • 2. 지식재산의 중요성을 보여주는 성공 사례 8
    • 3. 지식재산 교육의 이론적 기초와 유형 분류 11
    • 3.1. 지식재산 교육의 이론적 기초 11
    • 3.2. 교육 대상 및 목적에 따른 유형 12
    • 3.3. 교육 방식에 따른 유형 15
    • 4. 지식재산 교육의 정책 및 운영 현황 18
    • 4.1. 국내 지식재산 교육 정책과 대학 교육 18
    • 4.2. 해외 지식재산 교육 정책과 전문 인력 양성 20
    • 4.3. 지식재산 교육의 긍정적 효과 21
    • 5. 학습 전이 이론 23
    • 5.1. 학습 전이의 개념과 핵심 모형 23
    • 5.2. 직무 기반 교육에서의 학습 전이 요인 24
    • 5.3. 지식재산 교육에 대한 학습 전이 이론의 시사점 25
    • 6. 실무 활용 중심 학습 이론 26
    • 6.1. 경험학습 이론 26
    • 6.2. 문제중심학습(PBL)과 프로젝트 기반 학습(PjBL) 28
    • 6.3. 직무-현장 기반 교육 및 맞춤형 직무교육 30
    • Ⅲ. 연구 문제 33
    • 1. 연구 설계 33
    • 2. 연구 문제 34
    • Ⅳ. 연구 방법 35
    • 1. 자료 수집 방법 35
    • 2. 자료 분석 방법 37
    • Ⅴ. 연구 결과 38
    • 1. 기초 지식의 효과와 실무 활용의 어려움 39
    • 1.1. 법리와 개념 수준에서의 기초 역량 형성 39
    • 1.2. 실무 활용 과정에서의 어려움: 전략적 판단으로의 연결 부족 41
    • 2. 실무 중심 수업 요구와 대학원 수업 운영의 차이 44
    • 2.1. 실무자 대학원생이 요구하는 수업 방향: 현장 경험과 멘토링 44
    • 2.2. 교수자의 현실 인식과 입장 차이: 팀 프로젝트에 대한 서로 다른 평가 ·· 45
    • 3. 실무 활용 수업을 위한 설계 방향 48
    • 3.1. 공통 기반과 심화 트랙 구조 48
    • 3.2. 단기 집중 경험과 표준화된 실무형 과제 49
    • 3.3. 문서도구평가 기준을 연계한 학습 설계 51
    • 4. 실무 활용 지식재산 교육 모델의 종합적 해석 54
    • Ⅵ. 결론 56
    • 1. 연구 결과 요약 및 논의 56
    • 2. 실무 활용 지식재산 교육을 위한 개선 방안 58
    • 2.1. 공통 기반 이후 여러 심화 트랙을 두는 교육과정 설계 59
    • 2.2. 단기 집중 현장 경험과 표준화된 실무 과제 59
    • 2.3. 학습 전이를 돕는 문서도구지표 묶음 설계 60
    • 3. 연구의 한계와 향후 연구 방향 62
    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼