IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v128y2023i1d10.1007_s11192-022-04534-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A novel hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate universities based on student perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Ertugrul Ayyildiz

    (Karadeniz Technical University)

  • Mirac Murat

    (Karadeniz Technical University)

  • Gul Imamoglu

    (Karadeniz Technical University)

  • Yildiz Kose

    (İstanbul Technical University)

Abstract

University rankings are an essential source of comparisons between universities according to specific combinations of criteria. International or national rankings have an increasing impact on higher education institutions, stakeholders, and their environments. Thereby, on behalf of effective decision-making, university-ranking efforts should be a process involving some conflicting criteria and uncertainties in a more sensitive manner. This study presents a detailed university evaluation procedure under certain service criteria via multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) methodologies and provides an appropriate clustering of universities according to teaching and research factors. A hierarchical cluster-based Interval Valued Neutrosophic Analytic Hierarchy Process (IVN-AHP) integrated VIKOR methodology that includes two stages, clustering and ranking, is proposed for the university evaluation problem. The hierarchical clustering method is performed using teaching and research factors in the first stage. The second stage addresses the determination weights of service criteria through IVN-AHP and the ranking of universities by using VIKOR according to service criteria under determined clusters. This study, in which the proposed methodology is applied to Turkish universities, is the most comprehensive in terms of the number of universities evaluated and participating students. Furthermore, the integration of IVN-AHP and VIKOR to solve MCDM problems is presented for the first time. This study differs from other studies in terms of novelties both methodological-based and application based. Moreover, categorizing universities with similar characteristics into groups using cluster analysis and ranking them with the MCDM methodology provide a more realistic and effective interpretation of the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Ertugrul Ayyildiz & Mirac Murat & Gul Imamoglu & Yildiz Kose, 2023. "A novel hybrid MCDM approach to evaluate universities based on student perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(1), pages 55-86, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04534-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-022-04534-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-022-04534-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-022-04534-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. AbdulHafeez Muhammad & Ansar Siddique & Quadri Noorulhasan Naveed & Uzma Khaliq & Ali M. Aseere & Mohd Abul Hasan & Mohamed Rafik N. Qureshi & Basit Shahzad, 2021. "Evaluating Usability of Academic Websites through a Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Griffith, Amanda & Rask, Kevin, 2007. "The influence of the US News and World Report collegiate rankings on the matriculation decision of high-ability students: 1995-2004," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 244-255, April.
    3. Sarfaraz Hashemkhani Zolfani & Abdolhamid Safaei Ghadikolaei, 2013. "Performance evaluation of private universities based on balanced scorecard: empirical study based on Iran," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 696-714, September.
    4. González-Cabrera, Nestor & Ortiz-Bejar, Jose & Zamora-Mendez, Alejandro & Arrieta Paternina, Mario R., 2021. "On the Improvement of representative demand curves via a hierarchical agglomerative clustering for power transmission network investment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    5. Murat Perit Çakır & Cengiz Acartürk & Oğuzhan Alaşehir & Canan Çilingir, 2015. "A comparative analysis of global and national university ranking systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 813-848, June.
    6. Chuanyi Wang & Qiang Zha, 2018. "Measuring systemic diversity of Chinese universities: a clustering-method approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 1331-1347, May.
    7. Nojavan, Majid & Heidari, Atefeh & Mohammaditabar, Davood, 2021. "A fuzzy service quality based approach for performance evaluation of educational units," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    8. Javier Puente & Isabel Fernandez & Alberto Gomez & Paolo Priore, 2020. "Integrating Sustainability in the Quality Assessment of EHEA Institutions: A Hybrid FDEMATEL-ANP-FIS Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, February.
    9. Abbott, M. & Doucouliagos, C., 2003. "The efficiency of Australian universities: a data envelopment analysis," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 89-97, February.
    10. Tzeng, Gwo-Hshiung & Lin, Cheng-Wei & Opricovic, Serafim, 2005. "Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 1373-1383, July.
    11. Oğuzhan Alaşehir & Murat Perit Çakır & Cengiz Acartürk & Nazife Baykal & Ural Akbulut, 2014. "URAP-TR: a national ranking for Turkish universities based on academic performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 159-178, October.
    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. Kübra Akyol Özcan, 2023. "Sustainability Ranking of Turkish Universities with Different Weighting Approaches and the TOPSIS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Sahin, Aleyna & Imamoglu, Gul & Murat, Mirac & Ayyildiz, Ertugrul, 2024. "A holistic decision-making approach to assessing service quality in higher education institutions," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).

    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. Bao, Tiantian & Liu, Yifan & Yang, Zhongzhen & Wu, Shanhua & Yan, Zhenli, 2024. "Evaluating sustainable service quality in higher education from a multi-stakeholder perspective: An integrated fuzzy group decision-making method," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Yang Zhang & Yu Xiao & Jun Wu & Xin Lu, 2021. "Comprehensive world university ranking based on ranking aggregation," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 1139-1152, June.
    3. Yifan Liu & Tiantian Bao & Dan Zhao & Huiyun Sang & Benwei Fu, 2022. "Evaluation of Student-Perceived Service Quality in Higher Education for Sustainable Development: A Fuzzy TODIM-ERA Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-21, April.
    4. Sumeer Gul & Nahida Tun Nisa & Tariq Ahmad Shah & Sangita Gupta & Asifa Jan & Suhail Ahmad, 2015. "Middle East: research productivity and performance across nations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 1157-1166, November.
    5. Samira El Gibari & Trinidad Gómez & Francisco Ruiz, 2022. "Combining reference point based composite indicators with data envelopment analysis: application to the assessment of universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4363-4395, August.
    6. Cai, Yanpeng & Applegate, Scott & Yue, Wencong & Cai, Jianying & Wang, Xuan & Liu, Gengyuan & Li, Chunhui, 2017. "A hybrid life cycle and multi-criteria decision analysis approach for identifying sustainable development strategies of Beijing's taxi fleet," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 314-325.
    7. Boud Verbrugge & Mohammed Mahedi Hasan & Haaris Rasool & Thomas Geury & Mohamed El Baghdadi & Omar Hegazy, 2021. "Smart Integration of Electric Buses in Cities: A Technological Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Mira Fischer & Patrick Kampkötter, 2017. "Effects of German Universities' Excellence Initiative on Ability Sorting of Students and Perceptions of Educational Quality," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 173(4), pages 662-687, December.
    9. Kuang-Hua Hu & Wei Jianguo & Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng, 2017. "Risk Factor Assessment Improvement for China’s Cloud Computing Auditing Using a New Hybrid MADM Model," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 737-777, May.
    10. Dapeng Huang & Renhe Zhang & Zhiguo Huo & Fei Mao & Youhao E & Wei Zheng, 2012. "An assessment of multidimensional flood vulnerability at the provincial scale in China based on the DEA method," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 64(2), pages 1575-1586, November.
    11. Alexandr Gedranovich & Mykhaylo Salnykov, 2012. "Productivity analysis of Belarusian higher education system," BEROC Working Paper Series 16, Belarusian Economic Research and Outreach Center (BEROC).
    12. Hisham Alidrisi, 2021. "An Innovative Job Evaluation Approach Using the VIKOR Algorithm," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-19, June.
    13. Horne, Jocelyn & Hu, Baiding, 2008. "Estimation of cost efficiency of Australian universities," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 266-275.
    14. El Gibari, Samira & Gómez, Trinidad & Ruiz, Francisco, 2018. "Evaluating university performance using reference point based composite indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1235-1250.
    15. Valentinas Navickas & Adriana Grenčíková & Karol Krajčo, 2021. "DEA model and efficiency of universities - case study in Slovak Republic," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 9(1), pages 348-362, September.
    16. David L. Anderson & John Tressler, 2009. "The Excellence in Research for Australia Scheme: An Evaluation of the Draft Journal Weights for Economics," Working Papers in Economics 09/07, University of Waikato.
    17. Caetani, Alberto Pavlick & Ferreira, Luciano & Borenstein, Denis, 2016. "Development of an integrated decision-making method for an oil refinery restructuring in Brazil," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 197-210.
    18. Büyüközkan, Gülçin & Ruan, Da, 2008. "Evaluation of software development projects using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision approach," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 77(5), pages 464-475.
    19. Daraio, Cinzia & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Simar, Léopold, 2015. "Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 918-930.
    20. Oleg V. Leshukov & Daria P. Platonova & Dmitry S. Semyonov, 2015. "Does Competition Matter? The Efficiency of Regional Higher Education Systems and Competition: The Case of Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 29/EDU/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    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:spr:scient:v:128:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-022-04534-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.