Advertisement

A Hierarchical Fuzzy Model for Assessing Student’s Competency

  • Zhengbing Hu
  • Yurii KoroliukEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1126)

Abstract

The aim of the study is to improve a system of competency’ assessment, described in the Educational Program of the specialty. This assessment is based on a hierarchical fuzzy model in the fuzzyTECH program. The adequacy of proposed elaborated model is confirmed by a statistic agreement with thesis attestation results of Master of Arts. Besides, the model showed that combining the competency in the course of writing and attestation the Master of Arts thesis shall result in synergy effects.

The model input parameters consist of the data of academic assessment and the structure of the educational-professional program. These inputs simplify the process of assessing the competency while comparing with the existing approaches. Thus, stakeholders are able to assess the professional qualities of a graduate without requiring additional resources, because the model is built on the open source data such as the Educational Program of the specialty and the diploma supplement. The proposed model can assess the quality of educational-professional programs, and assist their comparative evaluation. The model’s uniqueness is that output results of competency assessment are described both by linguistic terms, more common for employers, and numeric assessment, using 100-point scale, more common for students and teaching staff.

The main innovation of the model is its ability to assess adequately the obtained competency not only by the final learning outcomes, but also at any stage of the curriculum implementation. Therefore, the fuzzy model can also be utilized to predict the graduates’ final performance, which enables students to apply the model for self-assessing of their own competency in a learning process. Such self-assessment may help students promote learning scores in the courses which is relevant to determined competency.

Keywords

Competency Fuzzy logic Fuzzy system Students’ assessment Competency-centered curricula 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This scientific work was partially supported by RAMECS and self-determined research funds of CCNU from the colleges’ primary research and operation of MOE (CCNU19TS022).

References

  1. 1.
    Berestneva, O., Marukhina, O., Benson, G., Zharkova, O.: Students’ competence assessment methods. Proc. - Soc. Behav. Sci. 166, 296–302 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    European Commission: The Bologna process and the European higher education area (2014). http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/higher-education/bologna-process_en.htm. Accessed 18 July 2019
  3. 3.
    McClelland, D.C.: Testing for competence rather than for ‘intelligence’. Am. Psychol. 28, 1–14 (1973).  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baartman, L.K.J., Bastiaens, T.J., Kirschner, P.A., van der Vleuten, C.P.M.: Evaluating assessment quality in competence-based education: a qualitative comparison of two frameworks. Educ. Res. Rev. 2, 114–129 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lizzio, A., Wilson, K.: Action learning in higher education: an investigation of its potential to develop professional capability. Stud. High. Educ. 29, 469–488 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    van der Vleuten, C.P.M., Schuwirth, L.W.T.: Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes. Med. Educ. 39, 309–317 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02094.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    van der Klink, M.R., Boon, J.: Competency: the triumph of a fuzzy concept. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Dev. Manag. 1, 327–334 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bergsmann, E., Schultes, M.-T., Winter, P., Schober, B., Spiel, C.: Evaluation of competence-based teaching in higher education: from theory to practice. Eval. Program Plann. 52, 1–9 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wesselink, R., Dekker-Groen, A.M., Biemans, H.J.A., Mulder, M.: Using an instrument to analyse competence-based study programmes: experiences of teachers in Dutch vocational education and training. J. Curric. Stud. 42, 813–829 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220271003759249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ma, J., Zhou, D.: Fuzzy set approach to the assessment of student-centered learning. IEEE Trans. Educ. 43, 237–241 (2000).  https://doi.org/10.1109/13.848079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Golec, A., Kahya, E.: A fuzzy model for competency-based employee evaluation and selection. Comput. Ind. Eng. 52, 143–161 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2006.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jevšček, M.: Competency assessment using fuzzy logic. J. Univers. Excell. 5(2), 187–202 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Suleman, A., Suleman, F.: Ranking by competence using a fuzzy approach. Qual. Quant. 46(1), 323–339 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-010-9357-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kavcic, A., Pedraza-Jimenez, R., Molina-Bulla, H., Valverde-Albacete, F.J., Cid-Sueiro, J., Navia-Vazquez, A.: Student modeling based on fuzzy inference mechanisms. In: The IEEE Region 8 EUROCON 2003. Computer as a Tool, vol. 2, pp. 379–383. IEEE (2003).  https://doi.org/10.1109/EURCON.2003.1248223
  15. 15.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets-information and control-1965. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bezdek, J.: Fuzziness vs. probability: again (?). IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2, 1–3 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gokmen, G., Akinci, T.Ç., Tektaş, M., Onat, N., Kocyigit, G., Tektaş, N.: Evaluation of student performance in laboratory applications using fuzzy logic. Proc. - Soc. Behav. Sci. 2, 902–909 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Otero, L.D., Otero, C.E.: A fuzzy expert system architecture for capability assessments in skill-based environments. Expert Syst. Appl. 39, 654–662 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    PROSPECTUS ‘European Credit and Transfer System (ECTS)’ Field of Science 05 ‘Social and Behavioral Sciences’ Field of Specialty 051 ‘Economics’ Specialization ‘Economic Cybernetics’ Academic Degree ‘Master’. KNUTE, Kyiv (2018). https://knute.edu.ua/file/NjY4NQ==/b8e5c2999e2f64e19a132aae0a218e33.pdf (in Ukrainian)
  20. 20.
    Krouska, A., Troussas, C., Sgouropoulou, C.: Fuzzy logic for refining the evaluation of learners’ performance in online engineering education. Eur. J. Eng. Res. Sci. 4, 50–56 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.24018/ejers.2019.4.6.1369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mamoria, P., Raj, D.: Comparison of Mamdani fuzzy inference system for multiple membership functions. Int. J. Image Graph. Sig. Process. (IJIGSP) 8, 26–30 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.5815/ijigsp.2015.09.04CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Educational Information TechnologyCentral China Normal UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.Independent ResearcherChernivtsiUkraine

Personalised recommendations