Kullanım Kılavuzu
Neden sadece 3 sonuç görüntüleyebiliyorum?
Sadece üye olan kurumların ağından bağlandığınız da tüm sonuçları görüntüleyebilirsiniz. Üye olmayan kurumlar için kurum yetkililerinin başvurması durumunda 1 aylık ücretsiz deneme sürümü açmaktayız.
Benim olmayan çok sonuç geliyor?
Birçok kaynakça da atıflar "Soyad, İ" olarak gösterildiği için özellikle Soyad ve isminin baş harfi aynı olan akademisyenlerin atıfları zaman zaman karışabilmektedir. Bu sorun tüm dünyadaki atıf dizinlerinin sıkça karşılaştığı bir sorundur.
Sadece ilgili makaleme yapılan atıfları nasıl görebilirim?
Makalenizin ismini arattıktan sonra detaylar kısmına bastığınız anda seçtiğiniz makaleye yapılan atıfları görebilirsiniz.
 Görüntüleme 59
 İndirme 1
Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Eğitim Kurumlarında En uygun Ders Dağıtım Programı Seçimi
2018
Dergi:  
II. Uluslararası Multidisipliner Çalışmaları Kongresi
Yazar:  
Özet:

Today, businesses are faced with more complex management problems every day and they have to try many scientific methods to solve them. It is clear that these decisions, which are becoming more and more intricate each day, businesses are superior to the competitors that implement scientific methods in the face of their problems. Recently, multi criteria decision making (MCDM) methods have attracted considerable attention among the numerical methods which give optimum results to the decision problems faced by the businesses. Objective: The purpose of the study is to demonstrate the usefulness of the MCDM methods in the evaluation, analysis and interpretation of decision problems faced by educational administrators. In the literature, there were no studies which analyzed the problems of selection of the most suitable course distribution program with the methods of MCDM in the educational institutions. Data Collection and Methodology: In the study, it was supported by the literature in which the enterprises analyze and evaluate the decision problem with the MCDM methods. In the application part, AHP and QUALIFLEX methods were used separately in the selection of the most suitable course distribution program which educational institutions need in general. The required data for the analysis were obtained from the managers of the relevant institution. These managers were also accepted as decision makers. Criteria and alternatives of the created model were determined by the decision makers and related literature. Criteria: K1- Support services speed and quality (Score) K2- Price (TL) K3- Consulting fee (TL) K4- How many years of the program (Year) K5- Functionality of the program (Score) Alternatives: A1-Asc A2- Mebre A3- Kaşif A4- Bilsa Conclusion and Evaluation: As a result of the analyzes carried out by two different MCDM methods; prioritization of the most appropriate course distribution programs; 1- A3 (Kaşif) 2- A2 (Mebre) 3- A4 (Bilsa) 4 - A1 (Asc) has come out. The relevant educational institution already uses a different course delivery program. However, the institution's teachers and students are not satisfied with the program. The results are shared with the managers of the relevant institution. It is stated in the proposal, if the results of the analysis are applied by the institution the students and teachers will be satisfied from course distribution program. In future studies, to obtain more actual and useful results the structure of similar decision problems or the method of analysis can be changed.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Atıf Yapanlar
Bilgi: Bu yayına herhangi bir atıf yapılmamıştır.
Benzer Makaleler


II. Uluslararası Multidisipliner Çalışmaları Kongresi
II. Uluslararası Multidisipliner Çalışmaları Kongresi