Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Developing an Android Mobile Bluetooth Chat Messenger as an Interactive and Collaborative Learning Aid Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Towards Formally Prioritizing the Activities of Group Course Work Inside Student Teams

verfasst von : Osman Ibrahim, M. Samir Abou El-Seoud

Erschienen in: Interactive Collaborative Learning

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Learning to prioritize different activities effectively can help many students to become more efficient towards their work, managing time, energy, and stress. This paper presents an automated tool that helps students and teaches them how, as a team, can prioritize group work. The tool is based on a formal prioritization mechanism that encompasses a model and related process that takes into account the relative importance of each activity from each individual of the group. From individual judgment, the tool works out a prioritized list that reflects the group prioritization. The model is based on a sound mathematical basis to provide the automated support for the prioritization process that will be conducted by each team member while keeping the subjective viewpoint of each member. As a final step, the tool automatically computes the group final prioritized list of activities that reflects the team consensus.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Towards an Ontology Approach in Teaching Geometry
Nächstes Kapitel Augmented Reality in Engineering
Literatur
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
NourRazia et al.: A comparative study for prioritization techniques. In: the 1st Informatics Conference (ICF – 2015), 27–29 November 2015, Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia (2015)
7.
Gosenheimer, C.: Project prioritization: a structured approach to working on what matters most. University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents (2012)
8.
9.
10.
Berander, P., Andrews, A.: Requirements prioritization. In: Aurum, A., Wohlin, C. (eds.) Engineering and Managing Software Requirements, pp. 69–94. Springer, Berlin (2005)CrossRef
11.
12.
13.
14.
Karlsson, J., Wohlin, C., Regnell, B.: An evaluation of methods for prioritizing software requirements. Inf. Softw. Technol. 39(14–15), 939–947 (1998)CrossRef
15.
Avesani, P., Bazzanella, C., Perini, A., Susi, A.: Facing scalability issues in requirements prioritization with machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of 13th IEEE International Conference on Requirements Engineering, pp. 297–305 (2015)
16.
Karlsson, J., Ryan, K.: A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Softw. 14, 67–74 (1997)CrossRef
17.
Jawale, B., Bhole, A.T.: Adaptive fuzzy hierarchical cumulative voting: a novel approach toward requirement prioritization. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 4(5), 365–370 (2015)CrossRef
18.
Saaty, T.L.: The analytic hierarchy process. NY, McGraw-Hill, New York (1980)MATH
19.
Aaqib Iqbal, Farhan, M. Khan, Shahbaz, A. Khan, “A Critical Analysis of Techniques for Requirement Prioritization and Open Research Issues.” International Journal of Reviews in Computing. Vol. 1., 2009
20.
Saaty, T.L.: Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 1(1), 83–98 (2008)MathSciNet
21.
Danesh, S., Ahmad, R.: Study of prioritization techniques using students as subjects. In: Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Information Management and Engineering, ICIME 2009, pp. 390–394. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2009)
22.
23.
Firesmith, D.: Prioritizing requirements. J. Object Technol. 3(8), 35–47 (2004)CrossRef
24.
Herrmann, A., Daneva, M.: Requirements prioritization based on benefit and cost prediction: an agenda for future research. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pp. 125–134 (2008)
25.
Khari, M., Kumar, N.: Comparison of six prioritization techniques for software requirements. J. Global Res. Comput. Sci. 4(1), 38–43 (2013)
26.
Ramzan, M., Jaffar, M.A., Shahid, A.A.: Value based intelligent requirement prioritization (Virp): expert driven fuzzy logic based prioritization technique. Int. J. Innov. Comput. Inf. Control 7(3), 1017–1038 (2011)
27.
Thakurta, R.: A framework for prioritization of quality requirements for inclusion in a software project. Softw. Qual. J. 21(4), 573–597 (2013). SpringerCrossRef
28.
Saranya, B., Subha, R., Palaniswami, S.: A survey on prioritization methodologies to prioritize non-functional requirements. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Bus. Inf. 12(1), 32–44 (2014)
29.
Zajarosova, M.: CRM factors assessment using analytic hierarchy process. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Education and Social Sciences, INTCESS 2015, 2–4 February 2015, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 641–647 (2015)
30.
Badri, M., Al Qubaisi, A., Mohaidat, J., Al Dhaheri, H., Yang, G., Al Rashedi, A., Greer, K.: An analytic hierarchy process for school quality and inspection. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 30(3), 437–459 (2016)CrossRef
31.
Norddin, N., Ahmad, N., Yusof, Z.M.: Selecting best employee of the year using analytical hierarchy process. J. Basic Appl. Sci. Res. 5(11), 72–76 (2015)
Metadaten
Titel
Towards Formally Prioritizing the Activities of Group Course Work Inside Student Teams
verfasst von
Osman Ibrahim
M. Samir Abou El-Seoud
Copyright-Jahr
2017
Buch
Interactive Collaborative Learning

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50339-4

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-50340-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50340-0_17