Scholarship recipient selection for higher education with AHP, SAW and TOPSIS

Öz

Higher education students need financial support from various sources to meet their needs throughout their education life. Besides non-profit organizations and governmental authorities, public charities also provide scholarship to these students who have financial difficulties. These institutions provide scholarship to a number of students chosen from a pool of applicants based on various criteria. This study develops a model for selecting the most suitable higher-education students among the ones applying for a scholarship at a public charity organization. The organization takes applications on an annual basis. A total of eight selection criteria are determined based on literature review and expert opinions. Multi criteria decision making methods of AHP, SAW and TOPSIS are employed together to identify scholarship recipients. AHP is used to weigh the selection criteria. Ranking of applicants is achieved by SAW and TOPSIS. The opinions of the members of the organization’s board of directors are used throughout the study. The proposed model provides a means for a time-efficient and more objective selection of scholarship recipients.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AHP
• TOPSIS
• SAW
• Higher education
• Scholarship
• Public charity

Kaynakça

1. Abalı Y.A., Kutlu, B. S., and Eren, T. (2012), Çok Ölçütlü Karar Verme Yöntemleri ile Bursiyer Seçimi: Bir Öğretim Kurumunda Uygulama. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi İdaribilimler Dergisi, 26(3-4): 259-272. Access Link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/atauniiibd/issue/2707/35752
2. Ameri, A.A., Pourghasemi H.R., and Cerda A., (2018), Erodibility prioritization of sub-watersheds using morphometric parameters analysis and its mapping: A comparison among TOPSIS, VIKOR, SAW, and CF multi-criteria decision-making models, Science of Total Environment, 613-614: 1385-1400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.210
3. Ibrahim, A. and Surya, R.A. (2019), The Implementation of Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method in Decision Support System for the Best School Selection in Jambi, Journal of Physics: Conference Series. Access Link: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1338/1/012054/pdf
4. Aytaç, M. and Gürsakal, N. (2015), Karar Verme, 243 - 270. Bursa: Dora Yayınları. Access Link: https://dorayayincilik.com.tr/kitap-karar-verme-284.html
5. Cristobal, J. S. (2011), Multi-Criteria Decision-Making in The Selection of a Renewable Energy Project in Spain: The VIKOR Method. Renewable Energy, 36: 498-502. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2010.07.031
6. Ersöz, F., Kabak, M. and Yılmaz, Z. (2011), Lisansüstü Öğretimde Ders Seçimine Yönelik Bir Model Önerisi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İibf Dergisi, 13(2): 227-249. Access Link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/18922
7. Ertuğrul, İ. and Karakaşoğlu, N. (2009), Banka Şube Performanslarının VIKOR Yöntemi İle Değerlendirilmesi. Journal Of Industrial Engineering (Turkish Chamber of Mechanical Engineers, 20(1):19-28. Access Link: https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/makale/T1RJMU1UTXo/banka-sube-performaslarinin-vikor-yontemi-ile-degerlendirilmesi
8. Hacıköylü, E. B. (2006), Analitik Hiyerarşi Karar Verme Süreci İle Anadolu Üniversitesi’nde Beslenme Ve Barınma Yardımı Alacak Öğrencilerin Belirlenmesi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Eskişehir. Access Link: https://earsiv.anadolu.edu.tr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/11421/9324/354210.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

9. Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K (1981), Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York. Access Link: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9
10. Jati, H. (2011), Web Impact Factor: A Webometric Approach for Indonesian Universities. In International Conference for Informatics for Development. Access Link: http://staffnew.uny.ac.id/upload/132231621/penelitian/C1_74-77+Web+Impact+Factor+-+a+Webometric+Approach+for+Indonesian+Universities.pdf
11. Kittur Javeed (2015), Optimal Generation Evaluation using SAW, WP, AHP and PROMETHEE Multi-Criteria Decision Making Techniques, IEEE International Conference on Technological Advancements in Power & Energy. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TAPENERGY.2015.7229636
12. Mančev, M.D. (2014). Ranking the Libraries of the University of Niš Faculties Using the VIKOR Method. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 38(1), 22-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ils.2014.0007
13. Widianta, M. M. D., Rizaldi, T., Setyohadi D. P. S. and Riskiawan H. Y. (2018), Comparison of Multi-Criteria Decision Support Methods (AHP, TOPSIS, SAW & PROMENTHEE) for Employee Placement, Journal of Physics: Conference Series. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/953/1/012116
14. Ömürbek, N., Karaatli, M. and Yetim, T. (2014), Analitik Hiyerarşi Sürecine Dayalı Topsis Ve Vikor Yöntemleri ile ADIM Üniversitelerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (Dr. Mehmet Yildiz Özel Sayısı),189-207. Access Link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/susbed/issue/61810/924747
15. Özkan, Ö., (2007), Personel Seçiminde Karar Verme Yöntemlerinin İncelenmesi: AHP, TOPSIS, ELECTRE Örneği (Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul. Access Link: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=9B2V9_dZ-ivmbUPDCRmqCg&no=pyJqmEK65_X-XKWRwSLNvQ
16. Pençe, İ., Tarhan, L. and Çetinkaya, Ö. (2017), Türk Eğitim Vakfı Bursu Verilecek Uygun Adayların AHP ve TOPSIS Yöntemi Kullanılarak Belirlenmesi: Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Örneği. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 37-49. Access Link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/358096
17. Pekkaya, M., Çolak N., (2015), Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Meslek Seçimini Etkileyen Faktörlerin Önem Derecelerinin AHP İle Belirlenmesi. International Journal of Social Science, 6(2), 797‐818. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9761/jasss_643
18. Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, USA, 1980. Access Link: https://books.google.com.tr/books/about/The_Analytic_Hierarchy_Process.html?id=Xxi7AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y
19. Sulaiman, N.H., Mohamad, D., (2006), A Fuzzy Logic Model for Students' Scholarship Selection, Jurnal Teknologi Maklumat Dan Sains Kuantitatif, 8,1, 35-41. Access Link: https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/11655/1/AJ_NOR%20HASHIMAH%20SULAIMAN%20JTMSK%2006%201.pdf
20. Urfalıoğlu, F. and Genç, T. (2015), Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Teknikleri ile Türkiye’nin Ekonomik Performansının Avrupa Birliği Üye Ülkeleri ile Karşılaştırılması. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 35 (2), 329-360. Access Link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/muiibd/issue/494/4376
21. Wimatsari G.A.M.S., Putra, I.K.G.D., Buana, P.W. (2013), Multi-Attribute Decision Making Scholarship Selection Using A Modified Fuzzy TOPSIS, IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 10,(1)2,309-317. Access Link: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.697.9152&rep=rep1&type=pdf
22. Yeh, C.H., (2003), The Selection of Multiattribute Decision Making Methods for Scholarship Student Selection, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11,4, 289-296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0965-075X.2003.00252.x