An integrated multiple criteria decision making approach for resource allocation in higher education

Resource allocation is one of the major decision problems arising in higher education. Resources must be allocated optimally in such a way that the performance of universities can be improved. This paper applies an integrated multiple criteria decision making approach to the resource allocation problem. In the approach, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is first used to determine the priority or relative importance of proposed projects with respect to the goals of the universities. Then, the Goal Programming (GP) model incorporating the constraints of AHP priority, system, and resource is formulated for selecting the best set of projects without exceeding the limited available resources. The projects include 'hardware' (tangible university's infrastructures), and 'software' (intangible effects that can be beneficial to the university, its members, and its students). In this paper, two commercial packages are used: Expert Choice for determining the AHP priority ranking of the projects, and LINDO for solving the GP model. Copyright © 2007 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

A quest for helpful feedback to programming coursework

The 2011 National Student Survey (NSS) revealed that 40% of full-time students in England did not think that the feedback on their work has been helpful, even though 66% of these students agreed that the feedback was detailed and 62% of them agreed that the feedback has been prompt. Detailed feedback that is not considered helpful by students means a waste of tutors' time while students continue to struggle with their learning. What do students consider as helpful feedback? What are the qualities of helpful feedback? What are the preferred forms of feedback? How should tutors write feedback so that students will find it helpful? Can ICT help to improve the quality of feedback? In our ongoing search for answers to the above questions, we have trialled the use of a novel Internet application, called eCAF, to assess programming coursework from Engineering, Mathematics and Computing students and have collected their views on the feedback received through a survey. The survey reveals that most students prefer electronic feedback as given through eCAF, with verbal feedback ranked second and hand-written feedback ranked even lower. The survey also indicates that the feedback from some tutors is considered more helpful than others. We report on the detailed findings of the survey. By comparing the kinds of feedback given by each tutor who took part in the trial, we explore ways to improve the helpfulness of feedback on programming coursework in a bid to promote learning amongst engineering students.

Multiple criteria decision-making techniques in higher education

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to review the literature which focuses on four major higher education decision problems. These are: resource allocation; performance measurement; budgeting; and scheduling. Design/methodology/approach: Related articles appearing in the international journals from 1996 to 2005 are gathered and analyzed so that the following three questions can be answered: "What kind of decision problems were paid most attention to?"; "Were the multiple criteria decision-making techniques prevalently adopted?"; and "What are the inadequacies of these approaches?" Findings: Based on the inadequacies, some improvements and possible future work are recommended, and a comprehensive resource allocation model is developed taking account of these factors. Finally, a new knowledge-based goal programming technique which integrates some operations of analytic hierarchy process is proposed to tackle the model intelligently. Originality/value: Higher education has faced the problem of budget cuts or constrained budgets for the past 30 years. Managing the process of the higher education system is, therefore, a crucial and urgent task for the decision makers of universities in order to improve their performance or competitiveness. © Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

A quest for helpful feedback to programming coursework

The 2011 National Student Survey (NSS) revealed that 40% of full-time students in England do not think that the feedback on their work has been helpful, even though 66% of these students agreed that the feedback was detailed and 62% of them agreed that the feedback has been prompt. Detailed feedback that is not considered helpful by students means a waste of tutors' time while students continue to struggle with their learning. What do students consider as helpful feedback? What are the qualities of helpful feedback? What are the preferred forms of feedback? How should tutors write feedback so that students will find it helpful? Can ICT help to improve the quality of feedback? In our ongoing search for answers to the above questions, we have trialled the use of a novel online application (eCAF) to assess programming coursework from engineering, mathematics and computing students and, through a survey, have collected their views on the feedback received. The survey reveals that most students prefer electronic feedback as given through eCAF, with verbal feedback ranked second and hand-written feedback ranked even lower. The survey also indicates that the feedback from some tutors is considered more helpful than others. We report on the detailed findings of the survey. By comparing the kinds of feedback given by each tutor who took part in the trial, we explore ways to improve the helpfulness of feedback on programming coursework in a bid to promote learning amongst engineering students.