Evaluation of e-learning web sites using fuzzy axiomatic design based approach

International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 28-42

  Büyüközkan, Gülçin ^a   Arsenyan, Jbid ^b   Ertek, Gürdal ^c  

^a GALATASARAY UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b BAHCESEHIR UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^c SABANCI UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

E Learning web sites; Fuzzy axiomatic design; Fuzzy TOPSIS; Group decision making; Web site quality

Indexed keywords

AXIOMATIC DESIGN; FUZZY TOPSIS; GROUP DECISION MAKING; WEBSITE QUALITY;

DESIGN; E-LEARNING; FUZZY SETS; QUALITY CONTROL; WORLD WIDE WEB;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 77952388228     PISSN: 18756891     EISSN: 18756883     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2991/ijcis.2010.3.1.4     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. A.M. Aladwani and P.C. Palvia, Developing and validating an instrument for measuring user-perceived web quality, Information & Management 39 (2002) 467-476.
2. E. Colette, Electronic education system model, Computers & Education 36 (2001) 171-182.
3. H. Chao, Assessing the quality of academic libraries on the Web: The development and testing of criteria, Library & Information Science Research 24 (2002) 169-194.
4. J. Cox and B.G. Dale, Key quality factors in web site design and use: an examination, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management 19 (2002) 862-888.
5. M. Jeong, H. Oh, and M. Gregoire, Conceptualizing web site quality and its consequences in the lodging industry, International Journal of Hospitality Management 22 (2003) 161-175.
6. S-E. Kim, T. Shaw, and H. Schneider, Web site design benchmarking within industry groups, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 13 (2003) 17-26.
7. S-E. Kim and L. Stoel, Dimensional hierarchy of retail website quality, Information & Management 41 (2004) 619-633.
8. E.G. Toms and A.R. Taves, Measuring user perceptions of web site reputation, Information Processing and Management 40 (2004) 291-317.
9. R. van der Merwe and J. Bekker, A framework and methodology for evaluating e-commerce web sites, Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy 13 (2003) 330-341.
10. S.J. Barnes and R. Vidgen, Measuring Web site quality improvements: a case study of the forum on strategic management knowledge exchange, Industrial Management & Data Systems 103 (2003) 297-309.
11. F.J.M. Gonzalez and T.M.B. Palacios, Quantitative evaluation of commercial web sites: an empirical study of Spanish firms, International Journal of Information Management, 24 (2004) 313-328.
12. G-J. Hwang, T.C.K. Huang, and J.C.R. Tseng, A group-decision approach for evaluating educational web sites, Computers & Education, 42 (2004) 65-86.
13. R.U. Bilsel, G. Büyüközkan, and D. Ruan, A fuzzy preference-ranking model for a quality evaluation of hospital web sites, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 21 (2006) 1181-1197.
14. N.P. Suh, Axiomatic design; advanced applications. (Oxford University Press, New York, 2001).
15. S.J. Kim, N.P. Suh, and S. Kim, Design of software systems based on AD, Annals of CIRP 40(1) (1991) 165-170.
16. N.P. Suh, Designing-in of Quality Through Axiomatic Design, IEEE Transactions On Reliability 44(2) (1995a) 256-264.
17. N.P. Suh, Design and operation of large systems, Annals of CIRP 44 (3) (1995b) 203-213.
18. N.P. Suh, Design of systems, Annals of CIRP 46(1) (1997) 75-80.
19. N.P. Suh, D.S. Cochran, and C.L. Paulo, Manufacturing system design, CIRP Annals 47(2) (1998) 627-39.
20. D.S. Cochran, J.A. Arinez, W.D. Duda, and J. Linck, A decomposition approach for manufacturing system design, Journal of Manufacturing Systems 20(6), 371-389.
21. M.G. Helander and L. Lin, Axiomatic design in ergonomics and an extension of the information axiom, Journal of Engineering Design 13(4) (2002) 321-339
22. M.D. Guenov and S.G. Barker, Application of axiomatic design and design structure matrix to the decomposition of engineering systems, Systems Engineering 8(1) (2005) 29-40.
23. J. Thielman and P. Ge, Applying axiomatic design theory to the evaluation and optimization of large-scale engineering systems, Journal of Engineering Design 17(1) (2006) 1-16.
24. M. Durmusoglu and O. Kulak, A methodology for the design of office cells using axiomatic design principles, Omega 36 (2008) 633 - 652.
25. S.B. Martin and A.K. Kar, Axiomatic Design for the development of enterprise level e-commerce strategies, in Proceedings of ICAD 2002, Second International Conference on Axiomatic Design (MIT, Cambridge, USA, 2002).
26. M.M. Yenisey, Axiomatic Design Approach for E-Commercial Web Sites, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4550 (2007) 308-315.
27. C. Kahraman and O. Kulak, Fuzzy multi-attribute decision making using an information axiom based approach, in Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making theory and applications with recent developments (Springer, New York, 2005).
28. L.A. Zadeh, The concept of a linguistic variable and its applications to approximate reasoning, Information Sciences 8 (1975) 199-249 (I); 301-357 (II).
29. O. Kulak and C. Kahraman, Multi-attribute comparison of advanced manufacturing systems using fuzzy vs. crisp axiomatic design approach, International Journal of Production Economics 95 (2005a) 415-424.
30. O. Kulak and C. Kahraman, Fuzzy multi-attribute selection among transportation companies using axiomatic design and analytic hierarchy process, Information Sciences 170 (2005b) 191-210.
31. O. Kulak, A decision support system for fuzzy multi-attribute selection of material handling equipments, Expert Systems with Applications 29(2) (2005) 310-319.
32. G. Yücel and E. Aktas, An Evaluation Methodology for Ergonomic Design of Electronic Consumer Products Based on Fuzzy Axiomatic Design, Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing 15(2-3) (2008) 181-208.
33. C. Kahraman and S. Cebi, A new multi-attribute decision making method: Hierarchical fuzzy axiomatic design, Expert Systems with Applications 36(3) (2009) 4848-4861.
34. M. Celik, C. Kahraman, S. Cebi, and I.D. Er, Fuzzy axiomatic design-based performance evaluation model for docking facilities in shipbuilding industry: The case of Turkish shipyards, Expert Systems with Applications 36(1) (2009a) 599-615.
35. M. Celik, C. Kahraman, S. Cebi, and I.D. Er, Application of axiomatic design and TOPSIS methodologies under fuzzy environment for proposing competitive strategies on Turkish container ports in maritime transportation network, Expert Systems with Applications 36(3) (2009b) 4541-4557.
36. M. Celik, S. Cebi, C. Kahraman, and I.D. Er, An integrated fuzzy QFD model proposal on routing of shipping investment decisions in crude oil tanker market source, Expert Systems with Applications 36(3) (2009c) 6227-6235.
37. M. Celik, A hybrid design methodology for structuring an Integrated Environmental Management System (IEMS) for shipping business, Journal of Environmental Management 90(3) (2009) 1469-1475.
38. E. Cevikcan, S. Cebi, and I. Kaya, Fuzzy VIKOR and Fuzzy Axiomatic Design Versus to Fuzzy Topsis: An Application of Candidate Assessment, Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing 15(2-3) (2009) 181-208.
39. P. Tzouveli, P. Mylonas, and S. Kollias, An intelligent e-learning system based on learner profiling and learning resources adaptation, Computers & Education 51 (2008) 224-238.
40. W.-C. Poon, K.L.-T. Low, and D.G.-F. Yong, A study of Web-based learning (WBL) environment in Malaysia, The International Journal of Educational Management 18(6) (2004) 374-385.
41. T. Ahn, S. Ryu, and I. Han, The impact of Web quality and playfulness on user acceptance of online retailing, Information & Management 44 (2007) 263-275.
42. H.W. Webb and L.A. Webb, SiteQual: an integrated measure of Web site quality, The Journal of Enterprise Information Management 17 (2004) 430-440.
43. I. Mahdavi, H. Fazlollahtabar, A. Heidarzade, N. Mahdavi-Amiri, and Y.I. Rooshan, A Heuristic Methodology for Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Web-Based E-Learning Systems Based on User Satisfaction, Journal of Applied Sciences 8(24) (2008) 4603-4609.
44. S.W. Kim and M.G. Lee, Validation of an evaluation model for learning management systems, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 24(4) (2008) 284-294.
45. M. McPherson and J. Nunest, Critical issues for e-learning delivery: what may seem obvious is not always put into practice, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 24(5) (2008) 433-445.
46. A.G. Smith, Applying evaluation criteria to New Zealand government websites, International Journal of Information Management 21 (2001) 137-149.
47. N-G. Dragulanescu, Website quality evaluations: criteria and tools, International Information & Library Review 34 (2002) 247-254.
48. Y-S. Wang, Assessment of learner satisfaction with asynchronous electronic learning systems, Information & Management 41 (2003) 75-86.
49. S.J. Barnes and R. Vidgen, Data Triangulation and Web Quality Metrics: A Case Study in E-Government, Information & Management, 43(6) (2006) 767-777.
50. G. Büyüközkan, D. Ruan, and O. Feyzioǧlu, Evaluating e-learning web site quality in a fuzzy environment, International Journal of Intelligent Systems 22(5) (2007) 567-586.
51. E. Grigoroudis, C. Litos, V.A. Moustakis, Y. Politis, and L. Tsironis, The assessment of user-perceived web quality: Application of a satisfaction benchmarking approach, European Journal of Operational Research 187(3) (2008) 1346-1357.
52. M.J. van den Haak, M.D.T. de Jong, and P.J. Schellens, Evaluating municipal websites: A methodological comparison of three think-aloud variants, Government Information Quarterly 26(1) (2009) 193-202
53. R. Gonzalez, J. Gasco, and J. Llopis, E-government success: some principles from a Spanish case study, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 107 (2007) 845-861.
54. F. Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, and F. Chiclana, Multiperson decision-making based on multiplicative preference relations, European Journal of Operational Research, 129 (2001) 372-385.
55. J. Lu, G. Zhang, F. Wu, Team Situation Awareness Using Web-based Fuzzy Group Decision Support Systems, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 1(1) 2008 50 - 59.
56. X. Li, D. Ruan, J. Liu, Y. Xu, A Linguistic-Valued Weighted Aggregation Operator to Multiple Attribute Group Decision Making with Quantative and Qualitative Information, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 1(3) (2008) 274 - 284.
57. L-S. Chen and C-H. Cheng, Selecting IS personnel use fuzzy GDSS based on metric distance method, European Journal of Operational Research 160 (2005) 803-820.
58. Y-M. Wang and C. Parkan, Optimal aggregation of fuzzy preference relations with an application to broadband internet service selection, European Journal of Operational Research 187 (2008) 1476-1486.
59. C-H. Yeh and Y-H. Chang, Modeling subjective evaluation for fuzzy group multicriteria decision making, European Journal of Operational Research 194 (2009) 464-473.
60. N. P. Suh, The principles of design (Oxford University Press, New York, 1990).
61. T. L. Saaty, The analytic hierarchy process (McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1980).
62. L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy Sets, Information & Control 8 (1965) 338-353.
63. T.L. Saaty, 1989. Decision making, scaling, and number crunching, Decision Sciences 20 (1989) 404-409.
64. A.R. Lee, Application of Modified Fuzzy AHP Method to Analyze Bolting Sequence of Structural Joints (UMI Dissertation Services, A Bell & Howell Company, 1999).
65. S.M. Chen, Aggregating fuzzy opinions in the group decision making environment. Cybernetics and Systems 29 (1998) 363-376.
66. S.J. Chen and C.L. Hwang, Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992)
67. S. Saghafian and S.R. Hejazi, Multi-criteria Group Decision Making Using A Modified Fuzzy TOPSIS Procedure, in Proceedings of the Computational Intelligence for Modelling, Control and Automation, 2005 and International Conference on Intelligent Agents, Web Technologies and Internet Commerce.
68. S.H. Tsuar, T.Y. Chang, and C.H. Yen, The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM, Tourism Management 23 (2002) 107-115.
69. H. Deng, C.H. Yeh, and R.J. Willis, Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights, Computers & Operations Research 27 (2000) 963-973.
70. R.C. Wang and T.F. Liang, Application of fuzzy multi-objective linear programming to aggregate production planning, Computers & Industrial Engineering 46 (2004) 17-41.
71. T.C. Chu, Facility location selection using fuzzy TOPSIS under group decisions, International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 10(6) (2002) 687-701.
72. M.A. Abo-Sina and A.H. Amer, Extensions of TOPSIS for multiobjective large-scale nonlinear programming problems, Applied Mathematics and Computation 162 (1) (2005) 243-256
73. M.N. Qureshi, P. Kumar, and D. Kumar, 3PL Evaluation and Selection Under a Fuzzy Environment: A Case Study, The Icfai Journal of Supply Chain Management 5 (2008) 38-53.
74. H-S. Shih, Incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS, European Journal of Operational Research 186 (2008) 720-734.
75. C-T. Chen, Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 114 (2000) 1-9.
76. M-S. Kuo, G-H. Tzeng, and W-C. Huang, Group decision-making based on concepts of ideal and anti-ideal points in a fuzzy environment, Mathematical and Computer Modeling 45 (2007) 324-339.
77. Statistics Institute of the Government of Turkey, Yaş Grubu ve Cinsiyete Göre Nüfus 2000 (Population statistics based on age group and gender), http://tuik.gov.tr/PreIstatistikTablo.do?istab_id=219
78. Student Placement Center, ÖSYM 2008 Yili Faaliyet Raporu (Annual Report 2008), page 58. Retrieved on October 2009, http://www.osym.gov.tr
79. G. Kizilsu, Dimensions of E-Learning Education in Turkey, in FIG Workshop on eGovernance, Knowledge Management and eLearning (Budapest, Hungary, 2006).