Student selection in a Brazilian university: using a multi-criteria method

References

• Altunok, T., Özpeynirci, O., Kazançoglu, Y., & Ylmaz, R. (2010). Comparative analysis of multicriteria decision making methods for postgraduate student selection. Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 10(40), 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behzadian, M., Khanmohammadi, S. O., Yazdani, M., & Ignatius, J. (2012). A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(17), 13051–13069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson, C., Fullér, R., & Fullér, S. (1997). OWA operators for doctoral student selection problem. In R. R. Yager & J. Kacprzyk (Eds.), The ordered weighted averaging operators: Theory, methodology, and applications (pp. 167–177). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Chamodrakas, I., Leftheriotis, I., & Martakos, D. (2011). In-depth analysis and simulation study of an innovative fuzzy approach for ranking alternatives in multiple attribute decision making problems based on TOPSIS. Applied Soft Computing, 11(1), 900–907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creech, C. J., & Aplin-Kalisz, C. (2011). Developing a selection method for graduate nursing students. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 23(8), 404–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davey, A., Olson, D., & Wallenius, J. (1994). The process of multiattribute decision making: A case study of selecting applicants for a Ph.D. program. European Journal of Operational Research, 72(3), 469–484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deliktas, D., & Ustun, O. (2017). Student selection and assignment methodology based on fuzzy MULTIMOORA and multichoice goal programming. International Transactions in Operational Research, 24(5), 1173–1195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Farias Aires, R. F. (2014). Multicriteria decision model for selection of students in the new interdisciplinary bachelors: The case of Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte ( Master’s thesis). Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, in Portuguese.
   Google Scholar
• Figueira, J. R., & Roy, B. (2009). A note on the paper, Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods, by Wang and Triantaphyllou, Omega (2008). Omega, 37(3), 731–733.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gale, J., Ooms, A., Grant, R., Paget, K., & Marks-Maran, D. (2016). Student nurse selection and predictability of academic success: The multiple mini interview project. Nurse education today, 40, 123–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attributes decision-making methods and applications. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kabak, M., & Dağdeviren, M. (2014). A hybrid mcdm approach to assess the sustainability of students’ preferences for university selection. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 20(3), 391–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ketkar, M., & Vaidya, O. S. (2014). Evaluating and ranking candidates for MBA program: Mahalanobis Taguchi system approach. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 654–664.
   Google Scholar
• Leyva López, J. C. (2005). Multicriteria decision aid application to a student selection problem. Pesquisa Operacional, 25(1), 45–68.
   Google Scholar
• Mato, J. (2012). Multi-criteria analysis in the renewable energy industry. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Mavrotas, G., & Rozakis, S. (2009). Application in a students selection problem. Journal of Decision Systems, 18(2), 203–229.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill, L., Korsholm, L., Wallstedt, B., Eika, B., & Hartvigsen, J. (2009). Generalisability of a composite student selection programme. Medical Education, 43(1), 58–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pomerol, J. C., & Romero, S. B. (2000). Multicriteria decision in management: Principle and practice. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Rangel, L. A. D., & Gomes, L. F. A. M. (2010). Multicriteria decision aid in the evaluation of candidates. Production, 20(1), 92–101.
   Google Scholar
• Roy, B. (1990). The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. In C. A. Bana e Costa (Ed.), Readings in multiple criteria decision aid (pp. 155–183). Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Schripsema, N., van Trigt, A., Borleffs, J. C., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2014). Selection and study performance: Comparing three admission processes within one medical school. Medical Education, 48(12), 1201–1210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwager, I. T. L., Hulsheger, U. R., Bridgeman, B., & Lang, J. W. B. (2015). Graduate student selection: Graduate record examination, socioeconomic status, and undergraduate grade point average as predictors of study success in a western European University. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 23(1), 71–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shih, H. S. (2008). Incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 186(2), 720–734.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, X., & Triantaphyllou, E. (2008). Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega, 36(1), 45–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon, P. K., & Hwang, C. (1995). Multiple attribute decision making: An introduction. California: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Zanakis, S. H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., & Dublish, S. (1998). Multi-attribute decision making: A simulation comparison of select methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3), 507–529.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zandi, A., & Roghanian, E. (2013). Extension of fuzzy ELECTRE based on VIKOR method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 66(2), 258–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar