13 Evaluation of the Learning Models Using Multi-criteria …
121
13.5 Results and Discussion
The complete ranking of the alternative learning methods with regard to their
linguistic fuzzy parameters can be seen in Table 13.3. Positive flow values show the
strength of the alternatives, while negative flow shows the lack of the alternatives.
The net flow provides the complete ranking.
These results show that the most effective learning methods are the gamified
flipped classroom method, and the flipped classroom method because of their high
parameters, such as employing technologies for information (see in Table 13.1),
while the collaborative and traditional methods were the least effective learning
models because of their low parameters.
The positive and negative properties of these learning models according to their
parameters are shown in Fig. 13.1. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages
of these models can provide valuable information to decision makers so they can
select the best option according to their specific needs.
This study can be extended in order to analyze different academic disciplines and
levels (Kiral and Uzun 2017; Uzun and Kıral 2017). In this context, we intend to
use the Fuzzy PROMETHEE technique to evaluate learning models for primary and
secondary schools in future studies. Additionally, by using the Fuzzy PROMETHEE
Table 13.3 Complete ranking of alternative learning methods
Rank
Learning models
Net Flow
Positive flow
Negative flow
1
Gamified flipped classroom model
0.1768
0.1768
0.0000
2
The flipped classroom model
0.1246
0.1321
0.0072
3
The collaborative learning
−0.0127
0.0497
0.0615
4
The traditional learning method
−0.2887
0.0000
0.2887
Fig. 13.1 Evaluation of the alternative learning methods
121
13.5 Results and Discussion
The complete ranking of the alternative learning methods with regard to their
linguistic fuzzy parameters can be seen in Table 13.3. Positive flow values show the
strength of the alternatives, while negative flow shows the lack of the alternatives.
The net flow provides the complete ranking.
These results show that the most effective learning methods are the gamified
flipped classroom method, and the flipped classroom method because of their high
parameters, such as employing technologies for information (see in Table 13.1),
while the collaborative and traditional methods were the least effective learning
models because of their low parameters.
The positive and negative properties of these learning models according to their
parameters are shown in Fig. 13.1. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages
of these models can provide valuable information to decision makers so they can
select the best option according to their specific needs.
This study can be extended in order to analyze different academic disciplines and
levels (Kiral and Uzun 2017; Uzun and Kıral 2017). In this context, we intend to
use the Fuzzy PROMETHEE technique to evaluate learning models for primary and
secondary schools in future studies. Additionally, by using the Fuzzy PROMETHEE
Table 13.3 Complete ranking of alternative learning methods
Rank
Learning models
Net Flow
Positive flow
Negative flow
1
Gamified flipped classroom model
0.1768
0.1768
0.0000
2
The flipped classroom model
0.1246
0.1321
0.0072
3
The collaborative learning
−0.0127
0.0497
0.0615
4
The traditional learning method
−0.2887
0.0000
0.2887
Fig. 13.1 Evaluation of the alternative learning methods