Universidad Nacional Abierta y a Distancia

Academic and Research Vice-rector

Activities guide and evaluation rubric - Step 4 - Identify different
options to solve the problem

1. General description of the course

Faculty or Basic Science, Technology and Engineering

Academic Unit School
Academic Level Undergraduate
Academic Field Disciplinary
Course Name Valuation and dealmaking of technology
Course Code 212032
Course Type Theoretical Can be yes ☐ No ☐
enabled
Number of Credits 3

2. Description of the activity

Type of the Individ Collabora Number

☒ ☒ 5
activity: ual tive of weeks
Unit
Moment of
Initial ☐ Intermed ☒ Final ☐
evaluation:
iate:
Delivery Environment of the
Evaluative score of the activity:
activity: 100 Collaborative Learning
Monitoring and Evaluation
Starting date of the activity: Deadline of the activity:
26/10/2018 29/11/2018
Competence to develop:
The student is able to lead, manage and make decisions in order to
solve real problems related to valuation and negotiation of intangible
assets.

Topics to develop:
UNIT 3 The value of technology advances:

Valuation methods overview

Approaching to technology negotiation
Steps, phases of the learning strategy to develop
Step 4 - Identify different options to solve the problem

Activities to develop

The students develop the following activities:

Individual:

1. Read the following reference at the Knowledge Environment:

(Pages 125 to 126: 2.2. Previous research on technology

valuation) Baek, D., Sul, W., Hong, K., and Kim, H. (March 1,
2007) A technology valuation model to support technology
transfer negotiations.

Complete the following comparative chart:

Valuation Method Definition When is it applied?

Cost approach
Market approach
Income approach
Real options

2. Read the following reference at the Knowledge Environment:

(Pages 67 to 69) García-Delgado, D. (July 1, 2014). The

evolution of negotiations of intangible assets apart from
industrial property protection in biotechnology.

Draw a mind map describing what is goodwill, including the

three examples of intangible assets negotiations on the State of
negotiations of intangible assets in the world part of the reading.
3. Read the following reference at the Knowledge Environment:

(Pages 35 to 56) Kang, Y. (2009). Real Option Valuation of

Product Innovation.

Complete the following charts:

 Typology of Real Options

Real Option Description Potential applications
Delay
Abandon
Expand/ Contract
Switching
Compound Options

 Methodologies of Real Options Valuation

Methodology Description Formula
Black-Scholes
Model
Binomial Tree
Model

4. Once the student understands real options methods, visits the

Practice Environment and develop the Guide for the use of
educational resources - Black-Sholes Exercise, posting the
solution to selected exercise.
5. Each student has already chosen a case from Step 1 –
Understand general concepts within the framework of the
problem. (There were 5 cases, so, each student selected a
different case)
 Each group posts on the Collaborative Learning forum, a chart
reminding who has selected each case, from step 1, according to
the following chart:

Innovation case Student name

Touchable Earth
Get Water
3-D printers
Recycled plastic bricks
The shoe that grows

Once the case is identified from step 1, each student makes a

creative Power Point presentation answering the following:

a. Chosen innovation case name

b. What kind of valuation method would you use to value this kind
of innovation? Explain your reasons
c. Create a mind map explaining the answer to the following
question:

 Why is it recommended to use real options despite other

methods to value software and new technologies projects?

d. If the case should be value by real options, describe the type

of option you would apply, explaining your answer.

Collaborative:

6. According to the Technology based assets in the development

stages figure, each group searches on internet or at the Unad’s
Library, and makes a presentation describing all the steps
included along the process:
 Technology based assets in the development stages

Taken from: Vega-González, L., & Saniger Blesa, J. (2010).

Valuation methodology for technology developed at academic
R&D groups. Journal of Applied Research and Technology, 8(1),
26-43. Recovered from:
 http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co/login?url=http://searc
h.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselc&AN=e
dselc.2-52.0-84860870028&lang=es&site=eds-live
 http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/jart/v8n1/v8n1a2.pdf

7. As a conclusion each student writes one paragraph 100 to 200

words answering the following two questions (only one answer
per student):

 Do you find possible for micro and small companies, to make

money from technology innovation?

 Is technology innovation commercialization an opportunity to

eradicate poverty in undeveloped countries?

Each conclusion must be 100 to 200 words and include the student
writer name.
Environment
Collaborative Learning Environment
for the
Monitoring and Evaluation Environment
development
Individual:

Each student submits to the Collaborative Learning

Environment - Unit 3: Step 4 - Analyze main actors
and concepts to consider in a technology
negotiation, a Power Point presentation, including:

 Cover
 Valuation methods comparative chart (Act. 1)
 Goodwill mind map (Act. 2)
 Typologies of Real options chart (Act.3)
 Methodologies of Real options chart (Act. 3)
 Black-Sholes exercise solution screenshot
including process and final solution (Act. 4)
 Answer to innovation case questions (Act. 5)
 References (Use APA guidelines)
Products to
deliver by Collaborative:
student
Each group submits to the Monitoring and Evaluation
Environment a Power Point presentation, including:

 Cover
 Abstract
 Screenshot of each student participation to
answer the questions related to the Technology
based assets in the development stages figure
description (Act. 6)
 Collaborative Technology based assets in the
development stages figure description (Act. 6)
 Conclusions (One per student – Act. 7)
 References
 General guidelines for the collaborative work

Planning of
activities for References reading
the Individual contribution planning
development Group interaction based on individual contributions
of Products drafting
collaborative Products delivery
work
Roles to  Compiler
perform by  Reviewer
the student  Evaluator
in the  Deliveries
collaborative  Alerts
group
Compiler: Consolidate the document constituted as
the final product of the debate, taking into account that
the contributions of all the participants have been
included and that only the participants who participated
in the process are included.

Reviewer: Ensure that the writing complies with the

rules of presentation of work required by the teacher.

Roles and Evaluator: Ensure that the document contains the

responsibilit criteria present in the rubric. You must inform the
y for the person in charge of the alerts so that you inform the
delivery of other members of the team in case any adjustments
products by have to be made on the subject.
students
Deliveries: Notify delivery times of the products and
send the document in the stipulated times, using the
resources destined for the shipment, and indicate to the
other partners that the delivery has been made.

Warnings: Ensure that the members of the group are

notified of new developments and inform the teacher
through the work forum and messaging of the course,
which has been sent the document
 Use APA format. Edition 6th

The APA Standards is the most used style of

organization and presentation of information in the
area of social sciences. These are published under a
Manual that allows to have the scope in the forms in
which a scientific article must be presented. Here you
Use of will be able to find the most relevant aspects of the
references sixth edition of the Manual of the APA Rules, such as
references, quotations, elaboration and presentation of
tables and figures, headings and seriation, among
others. You can check how to implement them by
entering the page
http://centrodeescritura.javerianacali.edu.co/index.ph
p?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:normas-
apa&catid=45:referencias-bibliograficas&Itemid=

Plagiarism is defined by the dictionary of the Royal

Academy as the action of "substantially copying other
people's works, giving them as their own". Therefore,
plagiarism is a serious offense: it is the academic
equivalent, to theft. A student who plagiarizes does not
take his education seriously, and does not respect the
intellectual work of others.

There is no small plagiarism. If a student makes use of

any portion of another person's work, and does not
Plagiarism
document their source, they are committing an act of
policy
plagiarism. Now, it is clear that we all have the ideas of
others when it comes to presenting ours, and that our
knowledge is based on the knowledge of others. But
when we rely on the work of others, academic honesty
requires that we explicitly announce the fact that we
are using an external source, either by appointment or
by an annotated paraphrase (these terms will be
defined below). When we make an appointment or a
paraphrase, we clearly identify our source, not only to
give recognition to its author, but also to allow the
reader to refer to the original if he wishes.
 There are academic circumstances in which,
exceptionally, it is not acceptable to quote or
paraphrase the work of others. For example, if a
teacher assigns his or her students a task in which
students are clearly asked to respond using their ideas
and words exclusively, then the student should not
appeal to external sources even if they are properly
referenced

8. Evaluation rubric

Evaluation rubric

Collaborat
Activity
Individual Activity ☒ ive ☒
type:
Activity
Moment of Unit
the Initial ☐ Intermedi ☒ Final ☐
evaluation ate:
Assessed Performance levels of the individual activity Scor
Aspects High score Media score Low score e
The student
develops the The student
The student
proposed charts does not
develops just
and mind map develop the
part of the
Understandi evidencing mind map
activities or it is
ng of the reading and and charts
not evidencing a
technology understanding of 30
proper contents
valuation the proposed technology
reading and
contents contents about valuation
comprehension.
technology references
valuation
(up to 30 (up to 15 (up to 0
points) points) points)
The student The student The student
Black-
evidences a well- submits the does not
Sholes
developed Black-Sholes develop the 10
exercise
Black-Sholes exercise, but it Black-Sholes
solution
exercise, is not well- exercise
 calculating the developed, so,
right value final value is
wrong
(up to 10 (up to 5 (up to 0
points) points) points)
The student
posts a Power
The student
Point The
posts a creative
presentation, student does
Power Point
including the not post the
presentation,
analysis of the innovation
describing how
case, but it is case
to value the
Technology not evidencing analysis, or
innovation on the 20
innovation technology it is not
selected case,
valuation valuation related to
evidencing
understanding the selected
contents
or not all case
appropriation.
questions were
answered.
(up to 20 (up to 10 (up to 0
points) points) points)
Performance levels of the collaborative
Assessed Scor
activity
Aspect e
High score Media score Low score
The student The student The
contributes with participates on student does
relevant the forum, but it not
Collaborativ information to was not relevant participate
e the collaborative enough to in the
10
presentatio research and contribute to the collaborative
n drafting presentation collaborative presentation
building activities drafting
(Up to 10 (Up to 5 (Up to 0
points) points) points)
The student The student
conclusion is conclusion does The student
Activity answering both not include both does not
10
conclusions of the generative of the present a
questions, generative conclusion
evidencing the questions, or it
 contents studied does not fit the
along the step, 100 to 200
also it is 100 to words
200 words paragraph.
paragraph
(Up to 10 (Up to 5 (Up to 0
points) points) points)
The presentation
The document
is structured in
is structured in
accordance with
accordance with There is
all the items
some of the not product
required,
items required, delivery or
evidencing a
evidences a poor the
proper
Power Point technology document
description of the
Presentatio development does not 20
technology
n structure process match any
development
description or it of the items
process, also, it
has few spelling required
has not spelling
or grammar
or grammar
mistakes
mistakes
(Up to 20 (Up to 10 (Up to 0
points) points) points)
Final score 100