IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i4p409-d502371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comprehensive Assessment of Distance Learning Modules by Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Method

Author

Listed:
  • Svajone Bekesiene

    (General Jonas Zemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania, Silo 5a, LT- 10322 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Aidas Vasilis Vasiliauskas

    (General Jonas Zemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania, Silo 5a, LT- 10322 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Šárka Hošková-Mayerová

    (Department of Mathematics and Physics, University of Defence in Brno, Kounicova 65, 662 10 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Virgilija Vasilienė-Vasiliauskienė

    (Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

This survey is focussed on distance learning studies, where there can be met a lot of technical obstacles, which creates complications in decision making. To get an ideal solution for these kinds of problems, the Fuzzy TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarities to Ideal Solution) is one of the best solutions. Therefore, this paper presents the distance learning quality assessment surveys when the Fuzzy AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) and TOPSIS methods are used. Research results describe the application of the Fuzzy AHP—TOPSIS hybrid method. MCDM (Multi-Criteria Decision Making) programs with MATLAB (R2020b) mathematical package were written to calculate the evaluation results for three distance learning courses. In the practical implementation of the proposed distance learning module evaluation methodology, the experts’ evaluation method was applied. Thirty-four judges were chosen with specific knowledge and skills and with very different competencies to assess three alternatives by fourteen criteria. Following the experts’ evaluation, a statistical analysis method was used to process the data. After applying the complex evaluation, the comparative analysis method was used to summarize the obtained results. This work further provides useful guidelines for the development of an easily understandable hierarchy of criteria model that reflects the main goal of study quality assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Svajone Bekesiene & Aidas Vasilis Vasiliauskas & Šárka Hošková-Mayerová & Virgilija Vasilienė-Vasiliauskienė, 2021. "Comprehensive Assessment of Distance Learning Modules by Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-25, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:409-:d:502371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/4/409/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/4/409/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chan, Lai-Kow & Wu, Ming-Lu, 2005. "A systematic approach to quality function deployment with a full illustrative example," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 119-139, April.
    2. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Valentinas Podvezko, 2016. "Integrated Determination of Objective Criteria Weights in MCDM," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(02), pages 267-283, March.
    3. Meimei Xia & Zeshui Xu, 2014. "A Novel Method for Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(03), pages 497-519.
    4. Goumas, M. & Lygerou, V., 2000. "An extension of the PROMETHEE method for decision making in fuzzy environment: Ranking of alternative energy exploitation projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 606-613, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Liangkun Fang & Zhangjie Wu & Yuan Tao & Jinfeng Gao, 2023. "Light Pollution Index System Model Based on Markov Random Field," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-18, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Li, Yan-Lai & Tang, Jia-Fu & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Jiang, Yu-Shi & Han, Yi & Pu, Yun, 2011. "Estimating the final priority ratings of engineering characteristics in mature-period product improvement by MDBA and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 575-586, June.
    2. Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Fausto Cavallaro & Valentinas Podvezko & Ieva Ubarte & Arturas Kaklauskas, 2017. "MCDM Assessment of a Healthy and Safe Built Environment According to Sustainable Development Principles: A Practical Neighborhood Approach in Vilnius," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-30, April.
    3. Ni, Lei & Chen, Yu-wang & de Brujin, Oscar, 2021. "Towards understanding socially influenced vaccination decision making: An integrated model of multiple criteria belief modelling and social network analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(1), pages 276-289.
    4. J-B Yang & D-L Xu & X Xie & A K Maddulapalli, 2011. "Multicriteria evidential reasoning decision modelling and analysis—prioritizing voices of customer," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1638-1654, September.
    5. Marco Rogna, 2019. "A First-Phase Screening Device for Site Selection of Large-Scale Solar Plants with an Application to Italy," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS57, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    6. Elias Carayannis & Pantelis Kostis & Hasan Dinçer & Serhat Yüksel, 2024. "Quality Function Deployment-Oriented Strategic Outlook to Sustainable Energy Policies Based on Quintuple Innovation Helix," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 6761-6779, June.
    7. Pratibha Rani & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Abbas Mardani & Fausto Cavallaro & Dalia Štreimikienė & Syed Abdul Rehman Khan, 2020. "Pythagorean Fuzzy SWARA–VIKOR Framework for Performance Evaluation of Solar Panel Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-18, May.
    8. Marcio Pereira Basilio & Valdecy Pereira & Fatih Yigit, 2023. "New Hybrid EC-Promethee Method with Multiple Iterations of Random Weight Ranges: Applied to the Choice of Policing Strategies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-34, October.
    9. Huibing Cheng & Shanshui Zheng & Jianghong Feng, 2022. "A Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Ferry Operator Selection: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Aikaterini Papapostolou & Charikleia Karakosta & Kalliopi-Anastasia Kourti & Haris Doukas & John Psarras, 2019. "Supporting Europe’s Energy Policy Towards a Decarbonised Energy System: A Comparative Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-26, July.
    11. Lin, Ling-Zhong & Yeh, Huery-Ren & Wang, Ming-Chao, 2015. "Integration of Kano’s model into FQFD for Taiwanese Ban-Doh banquet culture," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 245-262.
    12. Hernandez-Perdomo, Elvis A. & Mun, Johnathan & Rocco S., Claudio M., 2017. "Active management in state-owned energy companies: Integrating a real options approach into multicriteria analysis to make companies sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 487-502.
    13. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    14. Carnevalli, Jose A. & Miguel, Paulo Cauchick, 2008. "Review, analysis and classification of the literature on QFD--Types of research, difficulties and benefits," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 737-754, August.
    15. Heidarzadeh, Elham & Sajadnia, Sahar, 2017. "Using Simulation and Six-Sigma Tools in Improving Process Flow in Outpatient Clinics," MPRA Paper 82436, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    17. Kangas, Annika S. & Kangas, Jyrki, 2004. "Probability, possibility and evidence: approaches to consider risk and uncertainty in forestry decision analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 169-188, March.
    18. Ji, Zhengsen & Li, Wanying & Niu, Dongxiao, 2024. "Optimal investment decision of agrivoltaic coupling energy storage project based on distributed linguistic trust and hybrid evaluation method," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PA).
    19. Mahsa Montajabiha, 2016. "An Extended PROMETHE II Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Technique Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Logic for Sustainable Energy Planning," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 221-244, March.
    20. Jun-Jie Dong & Jian-Zhang Wu & Endre Pap & Aniko Szakal, 2017. "A Choquet Capacity and Integral Based Method to Identify the Overall Importance of Engineering Characteristics in Quality Function Deployment," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 51(4), pages 297-314.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:409-:d:502371. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.