The Proposed Model TOPSIS – AHP – Kansei Model for Improvement of Learning Courses at University Economic of Ho Chi Minh City
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24311/jabes/2023.34.5.7Keywords:
Decision support system, TOPSIS – AHP – Kansei, Course evaluationAbstract
Evaluating the quality of courses at universities plays an important role in ensuring the quality of education. This work involves understanding students' desires and goals, the problems they are facing, and giving appropriate advice. Course evaluation based on traditional methods will not be applicable to criteria of varying importance. This paper has presented a novel approach using TOPSIS - AHP and Kansei approach which is applied to evaluate courses’ quality. In the proposed model, TOPSIS and AHP techniques in order to evaluate courses, quantified by both qualitative and quantitative factors. Kansei evaluation is applied to quantify the sensibilities of students’ emotions, sensibilities while evaluating courses at universities. In case studies of the University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City, experimental results showed that the proposed model indicates the effectiveness of course evaluation for the improvement of courses through online and offline methods. The authors posit that our proposed approach has the potential to address student feedback engagement issues.
References
Akoka, & Jacky. (1981). A framework for decision support systems evaluation. Journal Information Management, 4(3), 133–141.
Chang, D.-Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95(3), 649–655. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(95)00300-2
Hwang, C.-L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for Multiple Attribute Decision Making. In Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications A State-of-the-Art Survey (pp. 58–191). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Kaynak, S., Altuntas, S., & Dereli, T. (2017). Comparing the innovation performance of EU candidate countries: An entropy-based TOPSIS approach. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 31–54. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2016.1265895
Ksenija, M., Boris, D., Snežana, K., & Sladjana, B. (2017). Analysis of the efficiency of insurance companies in Serbia using the fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 30(1), 550–565. doi: 10.1080/1331677X.2017.1305786
Kumar, A., Baldea, M., Edgar, T. F., & Ezekoye, O. A. (2015). Smart manufacturing approach for efficient operation of industrial steam-methane reformers. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 54(16), 4360–4370. doi: 10.1021/ie504087z
Li, S.-T. T., Klein, M. D., Balmer, D. F., & Gusic, M. E. J. A. P. (2020). Scholarly evaluation of curricula and educational programs: Using a systematic approach to produce publishable scholarship. Academic Pediatrics, 20(8), 1083–1093.
Li, X., Su, J., Zhang, Z., & Bai, R. (2021). Product innovation concept generation based on deep learning and Kansei engineering. Journal of Engineering Design, 32(10), 559–589. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2021.1928023
Lin, C., & Kou, G. (2021). A heuristic method to rank the alternatives in the AHP synthesis. Journal Applied Soft Computing, 100, 106916. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106916
Marković, L., Marković, L. M., Mitrović, S., & Stanarević, S. (2017). Vrednovanje varijantnih rešenja trase autoputa E-763 Beograd - Južni Jadran: studija slučaja u Srbiji. Journal Tehnički vjesnik – Technical Gazette, 24, 1951–1958.
Oliva, G., Setola, R., & Scala, A. (2017). Sparse and distributed Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal Automatica, 85, 211–220. doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2017.07.051
Popkova, E. G., Ragulina, Y. V., & Bogoviz, A. V. (2019). Industry 4.0: Industrial Revolution of the 21st Century (Vol. 169). Springer.
Rădulescu, C. Z., & Rădulescu, I. C. (2017). An extended TOPSIS approach for ranking cloud service providers. Journal Studies in Informatics Control, 26(2), 183–192.
Saaty, T. L. (1984). The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Decision Making in Complex Environments. In R. Avenhaus & R. K. Huber (Eds.), Quantitative Assessment in Arms Control: Mathematical Modeling and Simulation in the Analysis of Arms Control Problems (pp. 285–308). Boston, MA: Springer US.
Seyedmohammadi, J., Sarmadian, F., Jafarzadeh, A. A., Ghorbani, M. A., & Shahbazi, F. (2018). Application of SAW, TOPSIS and fuzzy TOPSIS models in cultivation priority planning for maize, rapeseed and soybean crops. Journal Geoderma, 310, 178–190. doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2017.09.012
Somasundaram, M., Junaid, K. M., & Mangadu, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence (AI) enabled intelligent quality management system (IQMS) for personalized learning path. Procedia Computer Science, 172, 438–442.
Vavrek, R., & Bečica, J. (2020). Population size and transport company efficiency – Evidence from Czech Republic. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 6, 100145. doi: 10.1016/j.trip.2020.100145
Yin, J., Yang, X., Zheng, X., & Jiao, N. (2017). Analysis of the investment security of the accommodation industry for countries along the B&R: An empirical study based on panel data. Tourism Economics, 23(7), 1437–1450. doi: 10.1177/1354816617698523
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 JOURNAL OF ASIAN BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC STUDIES
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
