The Analytical Hierarchy Process is a very common method used in Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) to analyze participative assessments. However, due to the qualitative nature of this methodology, a high percentage of inconsistencies need to be addressed when analyzing user preferences. This work analyzes the efficiency of the Goal Programming model in order to reduce inconsistencies with pairwise comparisons when working with inexpert participants and time limitations. A case study has been carried out that assesses online courses in higher education with the Analytical Hierarchy Process in order to understand the usefulness and feasibility of the method. Evaluation of four e-learning tools (collaboration tools, content tools, tutorial sessions and evaluation tools) used in an online business degree were collected from 72 students through a ‘Saaty-type’ survey, and the model was applied to improve the consistency of these results. This model has been able to minimize the inconsistencies of individual preferences while avoiding the loss of primary information.
Goal Programming, Inconsistencies, e-learning, Analytical Hierarchy Process, Participative Decision Making
Belton V, Stewart T (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer, Boston: Springer Science and Business Media.
Bozkurt A, Akgun-Ozbek E, Yilmazel S et al. (2015) Trends in distance education research: A content analysis of journals 2009-2013. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 16(1): 330-363. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.1953
Brunelli M (2017) Studying a set of properties of inconsistency indices for pairwise comparisons. Annals of Operations Research 248(1-2): 143-161. doi: 10.1007/s10479-016-2166-8
Chen K, Kou G, Li C (2018) A linear programming model to reduce rank violations while eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrix. Journal of the Operational Research Society 69(1-12). doi: 10.1080/01605682.2017.1409156
de Castro M, de la Fuente-Cabrero C, Laguna Sánchez MDP (2017) Assessment of Autonomous Learning Skill Through Multi-criteria Analysis for Online ADE Students in Moodle. In: M. Peris-Ortiz, J. Gómez, J. Merigó-Lindahl, and C. Rueda-Armengot (Eds) Entrepreneurial Universities. Exploring the Academic and Innovative Dimensions of Entrepreneurship in Higher Education (pp. 197-2013). Washington, DC, USA: Springer.
García-Peñalvo FJ, Seoane-Pardo AM (2015) Una revisión actualizada del concepto de eLearning. Décimo Aniversario Education in the Knowledge Society 16(1): 119-144. doi: 10.14201/eks2015161119144
González-Pachón J, Romero C (2004) A method for dealing with inconsistencies in pairwise comparisons. European Journal of Operational Research 158(2): 351-361. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2003.06.009
Ho W (2008) Integrated analytic hierarchy process and its applications–A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research 186(1): 211-228. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2007.01.004
Jeong HY, Yeo SS (2014) The quality model for e-learning system with multimedia contents: a pairwise comparison approach. Multimedia Tools and Applications 73(2): 887-900. doi: 10.1007/s11042-013-1445-5
Li HL, Ma LC (2007) Detecting and adjusting ordinal and cardinal inconsistences through a graphical and optimal approach in AHP models. Computers and Operations Research 34(3): 780-798. doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2005.05.010
Lin TC, Ho HP, Chang CT (2014) Evaluation model for applying an e-learning system in a course: an analytic hierarchy process-Multi-Choice Goal programming approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research 50(1): 135-157.doi: https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.50.1.g
Martínez-Caro E, Cegarra-Navarro JG, Cepeda-Carrion G (2015) An application of the performance-evaluation model for e-learning quality in higher education. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence 26(5-6): 632-647. doi: 10.1080/14783363.2013.867607
Mohammed HJ, Kasim MM, Shaharanee IN (2018) Evaluation of E-Learning Approaches Using AHP-TOPSIS Technique. Journal of Telecommunication, Electronic and Computer Engineering (JTEC) 10(1-10): 7-10.
Owen D (2015) Collaborative decision making. Decision Analysis 12(1): 29-45. doi: 10.1287/deca.2014.0307
Romero C (1991) Handbook of critical issues in Goal Programming. Oxford,
United Kingdom: Pergamon Press.
Saaty TL (1990) How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 48(1): 9-26. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
Saaty TL, Vargas L (2001) Models, methods, concepts and applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. London, United Kingdom: Kuwer’s Academic Publishers.
Shee DY, Wang YS (2008) Multi-criteria evaluation of the web-based e-learning system: A methodology based on learner satisfaction and its applications. Computers and Education 50 (3): 894-905. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.005
Strother JB (2002) An assessment of the effectiveness of e-learning in corporate training programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning 3(1).
Tamiz M, Jones D, Romero C (1998) Goal programming for decision making: An overview of the current state-of-the-art. European Journal of Operational Research 111(3): 569-581. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00317-2
Copyright of all articles published in IJAHP is transferred to Creative Decisions Foundation (CDF). However, the author(s) reserve the following:
- All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
- The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain permission from CDF as well. However, CDF may grant rights with respect to journal issues as a whole.
- The right to use all or parts of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, textbooks, or reprint books.
- The authors affirm that the article has been neither copyrighted nor published, that it is not being submitted for publication elsewhere, and that if the work is officially sponsored, it has been released for open publication.
The only exception to the statements in the paragraph above is the following: If an article published in IJAHP contains copyrighted material, such as a teaching case, as an appendix, then the copyright (and all commercial rights) of such material remains with the original copyright holder.
CDF will receive permission for publication of copyrighted material in IJAHP. This permission is not transferable to third parties. Permission to make electronic and paper copies of part or all of the articles, including all computer files that are linked to the articles, for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage.
This permission does not apply to previously copyrighted material, such as teaching cases. In paper copies of the article, the copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date should be visible. To copy otherwise is permitted provided that a per-copy fee is paid.
To republish, to post on servers, or redistribute to lists requires that you post a link to the IJAHP article, which is available in open access delivery mode. Do not upload the article itself.
Authors are permitted to present a talk, based on a paper submitted to or accepted by IJAHP, at a conference where the paper would not be published in a copyrighted publication either before or after the conference and where the author did not assign copyright to the conference or related publisher.