Abstract
Every student encounters some kind of obstacle in their education life, and they need some tools that help them to take correct decision. They need extra support for selecting specific interests during their university education. This kind of support increases their success.
As known, decision-making tools help managers, from business or academic environment, to take better decision in their professional life. Especially, those tools are necessary to solve semi-structured problems. AHP and TOPSIS are two very popular multi criteria decision-making methods and these methods help users to solve their decision problems via some complex methods or methodologies.
In this study, computer-based decision-making process is designed for students who want to determine which course content is appropriate for them regarding academic expectation (plan). Senior lecturers’ experiences are used to choose specific decision points for each chosen contents. A specific course is chosen which helps students to improve their academic knowledge for business or academic life. Every content in the course is expressed as a decision point. Numerical density, verbal density, and reachability of resource compose decision parameters. Variable values of decision parameters are determined by the senior lecturers of the course. The decision points that are chosen by the students are used in the AHP and TOPSIS process as inputs. The system solves the problem with two methods and gives two results as a best choice and worst choice for student. Also, the system recommends to them some information about which educators are interested in the best choice content and some educational materials such as e-book, pdf, or some Internet resource (Wikipedia, YouTube, etc.).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Alexander, M. (2012). Decision-making using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and SAS/IML. Durham, NC: The Proceedings of the South East SAS Users Group.
Hanine, M., Boutkhoum, O., Tikniouine, A., & Agouti, T. (2016). Application of an integrated multi-criteria decision making AHP-TOPSIS methodology for ETL software selection. Springer Open, Springer Plus, 5, 263.
Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2012). Comparative analysis of topsis and fuzzy topsis for the evaluation of travel website service quality. International Journal for Quality Research, 6(3), 169–185.
Mancev, D. (2016). The application of the TOPSIS method in selecting the best academic library at the University of Nis/L’application de la method TOPSIS en vue d’un choix de la meilleurebibliotheque de l’Universite de. Nis. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 40(1), 81–96.
Markovic, Z. (2010). Modification of TOPSIS method for solving of multicriteria tasks. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 20(1), 117–143.
Saaty, T. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences (IJSSCI), 1(1), 83–98.
Singaravel, B., & Selvaraj, T. (2015). Optimization of machining parameters in turning operation using combined TOPSIS and AHP method. Technical Gazette, 22(6), 1475–1480.
Singh, R., Kumar, H., & Singla, R. K. (2014). TOPSIS based multi-criteria decision making of feature selection techniques for network traffic dataset. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 5(6), 4598–4604.
Triantaphyllou, E., & Mann, S. H. (1995). Using the analytic hierarchy process for decision making in engineering applications: Some challenges. International Journal of Industrial Engineering: Applications and Practice, 2(1), 35–44.
Uygurtürk, H., & Korkmaz, T. (2012). Finansal performansin TOPSIS Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemi ile Belirlenmesi: Ana Metal Sanayi Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 7(2), 95–115.
Wu, Q., Ren, H., Gao, W., & Ren, J. (2016). Multi-criteria assessment of building combined heat and power systems located in different climate zones: Japan-China comparison. Energy and Buildings, 103, 502–512.
Yaralıoğlu, K. (2010). Karar Verme Yöntemleri. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
Yaralıoğlu, K., & Köksal, H. (2003). Analytic hierarchy process as a managerial decision tool in the evaluation of new product ideas. Ege Academic Review, 3(1), 119–137.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Karagöz, E., Tecim, V. (2018). Defining Decision-Making Process for Student Learning Support System. In: Karasavvoglou, A., Goić, S., Polychronidou, P., Delias, P. (eds) Economy, Finance and Business in Southeastern and Central Europe. Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70377-0_43
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70377-0_43
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70376-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70377-0
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)