ArticleScientific reports2025
A faculty performance evaluation model based on MACBETH and fuzzy filter ranking methods.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The establishment of a robust faculty performance evaluation system has become a research hotspot, as it is crucial for the continuous improvement and sustainable development of higher education institutions. However, according to available literature, the need for an easy-to-use management tool for faculty performance evaluation-one that accounts for professional tracks-within the context of China's application-oriented universities remains unaddressed. This study presents a new evaluation framework for measuring and ranking faculty performance, tailored to the characteristics of application-oriented universities. The proposed model applies hybrid multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) techniques through a three-step approach. First, a set of measurement indicators is developed based on a comprehensive review of existing literature and faculty assessment forms used by application-oriented universities in practice. Second, in line with the classification of faculty members' career tracks, the MACBETH (Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique) method is utilized to determine the weights of evaluation criteria for each professional track. Finally, the FFR (Fuzzy Filter Ranking) approach is employed to rank faculty performance and identify outstanding faculty award winners. The applicability and utility of the proposed methodology are validated through a case study of an application-oriented university in China, which demonstrates its value as an effective evaluation tool and decision-aiding reference for faculty performance assessment. This study offers an intuitive and readily applicable solution for university stakeholders, streamlining the processes of weight assignment and faculty ranking within performance evaluations. Moreover, it can be extended to address other evaluation problems in academia, thereby contributing to the enhancement of educational quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.