A Multiple Criteria Decision Making Approach to Designing Teaching Plans in Higher Education Institutions

Abstract

The involvement of competences in the teaching–learning planning process in Higher Education is essential for their success in the European Higher Education Area. This study presents a participatory multi-criteria model based on Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process (VAHP) analysis, focusing on the attainment of competences that permits consensus between lecturers and students in the design of teaching plans using two assessments: the assessment of competences by students and the lecturers’ assessment of the contribution of teaching strategies to the attainment of each competence. To validate the methodology, a survey was carried out to determine the preferences of 211 students on the competences of a quantitative subject in several business degrees and a survey of 11 lecturers to assess the contribution of the teaching strategies in the acquisition of each competence. The results show that practical lessons and group work should receive more importance in the teaching plans of the subject Financial Management according to the defined competences, the students’ preferences and the criterion of each lecturer for each teaching strategy. The results show the applicability of the participatory methodology proposed to formally agree on the design of teaching plans in higher education organizations between lecturers and students.

A Hybrid Analytic Hierarchy Process and Likert Scale Approach for the Quality Assessment of Medical Education Programs

“…The AHP, as well as other tools based on multi-attribute utility functions such as the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), the analytic network process (ANP) and the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART), has been applied in several contexts [9][10][11][12] including the fields of energy renewal [13][14][15], education [9,16,17], urban areas and mobility [18][19][20] and, more recently, health technology assessment [21][22][23][24][25][26][27] and quality improvement in the healthcare sector [11,[28][29][30][31]. From the basic AHP principles, many other hybrid approaches for multicriteria decision making have been developed such as the fuzzy AHP [32][33][34][35], aimed at handling imprecise criteria with the use of fuzzy logic [34,36], the Interval Rough AHP-Multi-Attributive Border Approximation Area Comparison (IR-AHP-MABAC) [37], aimed at treating uncertainties in group multicriteria decision-making problems, and other hybrid approaches combining the AHP with other methodologies such as AHP-fuzzy TOPSIS, fuzzy AHP-PROMETHEE or AHP-Simple Additive Weighting [38][39][40].…”

Group decision support system model to determine supervisor lecturers for student creativity programs

“…This weight is calculated using (1) following the weight criteria in Table 1 so that the weight normalization is obtained as follows: W= (5,4,3,3,5) W1=5/(5+4+3+3+5)=0.25 W1=4/(5+4+3+3+5)=0.20 W1=3/(5+4+3+3+5)=0.15 W1=3/(5+4+3+3+5)=0.15 W1=5/(5+4+3+3+5)=0.25 Furthermore, it is ensured that the accumulated value of this weight is equal to 1 as follows: w1+w2+w3+w4+w5=1 0.25+0.20+0.15+0.15+0.25=1 Table 10 is the result of the normalization of the weights of the criteria that have been defined in Table 1 obtained by using (1). The normalized value of Wj also has the same value, because all criteria categories are in the form of benefits, so they are multiplied by 1.…”

“…Higher education is an ever-changing environment, so its sustainability depends on the ability to adapt to these changes [1]. The student creativity program (PKM) is a manifestation of the implementation of the Tridharma of Higher Education launched by the Directorate General of Higher Education in 2021.…”

Analyzing the Impact of Spanish University Funding Policies on the Evolution of Their Performance: A Multi-Criteria Approach

“…The issue of constructing an overall composite measure has been regarded by several authors as a multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) problem [31][32][33][34]. Specifically, according to [35], in higher education, MCDM methods are adjusted perfectly to planning and evaluating complex projects and are used to design public policies when it is necessary to obtain a comprehensive assessment from multiple criteria and a high number of stakeholders.…”