Teaching Quality Evaluation of Engineering Cost Courses Based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process

0Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The prosperous economic development and the investment and construction of several construction projects have substantially promoted the demands for talents in the engineering cost specialty. Nowadays the engineering cost specialty programs in many universities are faced with the strong applicability problem of specialized courses, and the teaching design for such specialized courses fails to meet the demands of the construction industry that enjoys high-speed development. A novel method to accurately evaluate the professional courses on the basis of the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) was proposed in this study. The weights of course evaluation indexes were determined by the FAHP, thus realizing the quantitative evaluation of course teaching quality. This study combined the teaching reform practice in analyzing the special characteristics of the engineering cost course. Based on the theory of outcomes-based education and multiple evaluation approaches, it established a closed-loop model for the progressive development of teaching management and expounded the evolutionary process and driving pattern of course teaching evaluation. Results demonstrate that an evaluation index system consisting of 22 evaluation indexes in 5 dimensions is suitable for the course, the teaching quality ratings can be quantified by this method, such as 81.43 points, and they can provide a certain reference for the course construction and teaching quality evaluation of this specialty. The proposed method provides a good prospect to optimize the teaching quality evaluation in the professional curriculums

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhang, Z., Ye, X., Wu, N., Cheng, Y., & Xu, N. (2023). Teaching Quality Evaluation of Engineering Cost Courses Based on Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(4), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i04.37203

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free