Table of Contents

1 Case Problem: ..................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 Project Scope: .............................................................................................................. 2

1.2 Background Research:................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Problem Domain: ........................................................................................................ 3

1.4 Module Selection Strategy: ......................................................................................... 3

1.4.1 Prioritizing Content Interest:................................................................................ 3

1.4.2 Considering Instructor Reputation: ...................................................................... 3

1.4.3 Managing Timing Preferences: ............................................................................ 4

1.4.4 Balancing Core and Industry-Based Modules: .................................................... 4

2 Literature Review: ............................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Weighted Average Models: ......................................................................................... 4

2.2 Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA): ................................................................ 4

2.3 Decision Support Systems (DSS): .............................................................................. 5

2.4 Optimization Algorithms:............................................................................................ 5

2.5 Simulation Models: ..................................................................................................... 5

2.6 Industry-Based Module Integration: ........................................................................... 6

3 Problem modelling: ............................................................................................................ 6

3.1 Objective: .................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Decision Variables: ...................................................................................................... 7

3.3 Objective Function: ..................................................................................................... 7

 3.4 Constraints:.................................................................................................................. 7

3.5 Binary Variable Constraint: ....................................................................................... 11

4 Problem solving: .............................................................................................................. 11

4.2 Experiment Description: ........................................................................................... 11

4.3 Evidence of Approach: .............................................................................................. 12

5 Evaluation of the solution: ............................................................................................... 12

5.1 Real-world Applicability: .......................................................................................... 12

6 Reflection: ........................................................................................................................ 13

References: ............................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix:................................................................................................................................. 15
 List of Figures

Figure 1 Solver Parameters ...................................................................................................... 18

Figure 2 Co Efficient of Objective Function along with Results............................................. 18

Figure 3 Constraints of Model ................................................................................................. 19

Figure 4 Selected Modules....................................................................................................... 19

Figure 5 Optimal Solution ....................................................................................................... 19

1 Case Problem:

Sophie, who is studying Finance at the University of London and is in her third year, is having

trouble deciding which five classes to take over the next semester. There is a class on Business

Strategy, as well as a class on International Finance, a topic that is particular to the industry, as

well as two optional finance courses. There are primarily three things that worry Sophie: the

content of the classes, the credibility of the teachers, and the flexibility of the timetable. Due

to the fact that she works part-time, she is unable to enrol in early classes. In order to make an

informed decision, Sophie has gathered information on the many component parts of the

module, taking into consideration factors such as her level of interest in the subject matter, the

reputation of the instructors, and the amount of time she has available.

1.1 Project Scope:

This project aims to develop a decision support system (DSS) that will assist first-year college

students like Sophie in selecting the courses that would best prepare them for their chosen

major. The DSS will include weighted average models, multi-criteria decision analysis, and

optimisation algorithms, and it will provide individualised recommendations based on

preferences for content, instructor reputation, and time constraints. In addition to that, the

system will incorporate simulation models for speculating on the possible outcomes. A course

that is focused on a certain sector emphasises the integration of networking opportunities,

internships, and hands-on experience. Through the dissemination of a user-friendly decision-

making tool, the ultimate objective of the project is to provide students access to a learning

environment that is adaptable to their individual needs and personally fulfilling.

1.2 Background Research:

Students sometimes confront challenges that are similar to those that were outlined above when

it comes to choosing the academic program that they will be pursuing. It is standard practice to

place a high focus on criteria such as the subject matter of the course, the standing of the

instructor, and the accessibility of the sessions. The learning outcomes for students are most

likely to be favourable when their instructors discover a means to strike a balance between the

academic interests of the students and the practical concerns they face in their daily lives. In

addition, there is a push in higher education toward integrating what is taught in the classroom

with what is done in professional practice; as a result, the significance that is placed on

industry-based courses as well as internships makes perfect sense.

1.3 Problem Domain:

The breadth of this issue include the difficult decisions that students have to make on the order

in which they take their classes. This choice is tough because it is complicated not just by

subjective factors like course interest and teacher reputation, but also by objective factors like

the quantity of time that is available. The situation in which Sophie finds herself is an example

of the difficulties of this option. The difficult element is making sure that not only Sophie's

academic and personal goals, but also those of the school where she is enrolled, are met by the

courses that she selects.

1.4 Module Selection Strategy:

1.4.1 Prioritizing Content Interest:

Sophie should provide higher ratings to courses that pertain to her academic interests, since

this may improve both her learning outcomes and her level of engagement with the material.

1.4.2 Considering Instructor Reputation:

Modules taught by well-regarded lecturers should obtain better scores. Sophie may use student

feedback and recommendations to evaluate teachers' credibility.

1.4.3 Managing Timing Preferences:

Since Sophie has a part-time job and must schedule her studies around her shifts, she should

try to avoid taking lessons first thing in the morning.

1.4.4 Balancing Core and Industry-Based Modules:

Sophie has to make sure she gets a well-rounded education in finance by choosing programs

that cover both fundamentals and those specific to the field.

2 Literature Review:

Students in colleges and universities have a challenging decision when trying to choose which

classes to enroll in, and as a result, a wide variety of theoretical frameworks and practical

strategies have been researched in an effort to assist these students in making the most informed

choices. An in-depth review of the published literature on the subject of "Sophie's dilemma"

may be able to provide some insight on the approaches that are presently being taken in the

academic community to find solutions to problems of this kind.

2.1 Weighted Average Models:

When evaluating and contrasting the many characteristics of the available modules, weighted

average models are often used. The production of weighted scores in academic literature often

makes use of mathematical models, very similar to Sophie's way of providing different amounts

of weight to different factors such as content, instructor repute, and amount of time. Students

are better equipped to make decisions that are well-informed with the assistance of these

models since they take into consideration both personal and objective factors.

2.2 Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA):

Another method that sees considerable use in the educational decision-making process is called

multi-criteria decision analysis. Decision makers are able to consider a multitude of

considerations concurrently with the assistance of MCDA. Students have the option to evaluate

and contrast different modules based on a wide range of factors, such as their level of interest

in the topic, the standing of the instructor, and the availability of available time slots. Given

that Sophie is interested in doing an exhaustive analysis, the MCDA seems like the most logical

method for reaching a conclusion.

2.3 Decision Support Systems (DSS):

The use of decision support systems in schools as a means of assisting students in becoming

better decision makers is becoming more common. These systems incorporate data obtained

from a variety of sources, including the preferences of individual students, their historical

performance, and the comments provided by their respective instructors. Students like Sophie

are able to more easily traverse the complexity of module selection with the assistance of DSS,

which uses a combination of data analytics and machine learning algorithms to give

individualized recommendations.

2.4 Optimization Algorithms:

Optimization algorithms have shown to be helpful in identifying effective solutions to

scheduling problems for students who have restricted time owing to responsibilities such as

part-time employment. These algorithms provide a solution that is as good as it gets by boosting

utility while adhering to a predetermined list of constraints. It may be beneficial for Sophie to

use such algorithms to match her module choices with the timetables she has selected and the

commitments she has outside the university.

2.5 Simulation Models:

Students are given a dynamic approach to decision-making via the use of simulation models.

This is accomplished by modelling a number of different scenarios and comparing the

outcomes to one another. The way that students feel about the classes they have chosen might

be affected by the weights and preferences they assign to different factors. By using this

strategy, it's possible that Sophie will be able to find a more favourable balance between the

level of interest she has in the subject matter, the calibre of the class, and her own schedule.

2.6 Industry-Based Module Integration:

Academic literature places a strong emphasis on the incorporation of real-world experiences,

such as internships and practical projects, in order to address the one-of-a-kind need for an

industry-based module. Students like Sophie who are trying to bridge the gap between what

they learn in the classroom and what they can use in the real world might benefit from decision-

making models that include the relevance of the industrial sector.

The analysis of relevant literature indicates a wide variety of models and approaches that have

been used to find solutions to issues pertaining to educational decision-making, most notably

in the context of module selection. Students who are experiencing similar issues may benefit

from the creation of a complete framework thanks to the contributions made by weighted
average models, multi-criteria decision analysis, decision support systems, optimization

algorithms, simulation models, and industry-based module integration, amongst other things.

In order for Sophie to make a module selection for her third year at the University of London

that is both well-informed and gratifying, she should take inspiration from the aforementioned

strategies and then customize that plan so that it corresponds with her priorities and the

limitations she faces.

3 Problem modelling:

3.1 Objective:

Maximize Overall rating

3.2 Decision Variables:

xij = 1 if Sophie selects Module i

xi = 0 otherwise

3.3 Objective Function:

Max Z = ∑ R i ∗ x_i
i

Where:

R i = Rating factor for module i

Max Z = 4.3 ∗ x1 + 3.8 ∗ x2 + 3.5 ∗ x3 + 3.5 ∗ x4 + 4.6 ∗ x5 + 2.7 ∗ x6 + 3.5 ∗ x7 + 3.3

∗ x8 + 4.4 ∗ x9 + 3.1 ∗ x10 + 3.7 ∗ x11 + 3.5 ∗ x12 + 3 ∗ x13 + 3.7 ∗ x14

+ 3.6 ∗ x15 + 3.9 ∗ x16 + 3.2 ∗ x17 + 3.4 ∗ x18 + 3 ∗ x19 + 3.5 ∗ x20

3.4 Constraints:

Business Strategy:

∑ BSTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

BSTI = Time for i modules of buiness strategy

International Computing

∑ ICTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

ICTI = Time for i modules of international finance

Web Design for Non-profit Organizations

∑ WBTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

WBTI = Time for i modules of web design

International Finance:

∑ IFTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

IFTI = Time for i modules of international finance

Data Analysis in finance:

∑ DATi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

DATI = Time for i modules of data analysis

Risk Management:

∑ RMTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

RMTI = Time for i modules of risk management

Options, Future and Swaps:

∑ OFSTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i
Where:

OFSTI = Time for i modules of options future and swaps

Fixed instruments and Markets:

∑ FMTi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

FMTI = Time for i modules of fixed instruments and markets

Business Type:

I=6

∑ Bi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

Bi = Type of buiness for module i

Industry Based Type:

I=4

∑ IBi ∗ xi ≤ 1
i

Where:

IBi = Type of industry based buisness for module i

Finance Based Type:

 I=10

∑ Fi ∗ x i ≤ 1
i

Where:

Fi = Type of finance based buisness for module i

Module Clash:

∑ Ti ∗ xi ≤ 5
i

Where:

Ti = Time for all modules i

3.5 Binary Variable Constraint:

xij = 0 or 1

4 Problem solving:

4.1 Model Implementation:

A mathematical model was built and implemented in Excel with the intention of supporting

Sophie in making the best educated choice possible on the courses that she should study as part

of her education. The conclusions, which are presented in Excel format, comprise the

coefficients of the objective function, decision values for each module, and the answer to the

question of how Sophie may pick the most appropriate modules.

4.2 Experiment Description:

The model was used to figure out which of Sophie's classes would be the most advantageous

for her to attend after taking into consideration both her own objectives and the needs of the

educational establishment. According to the findings, Sophie ought to select certain portions

of Business Computing, International Finance, Intergenerational Computing, Data Analysis in

Finance, and Web Design for Non-profit Organisations in order to maximise her total grade

while still satisfying all of the standards that have been provided. This is the best way for her

to accomplish both of these goals. The value of the goal function, which is 5, demonstrates the

highest amount of fulfilment that can be attained when Sophie's preferences are taken into

consideration. Sophie is able to make well-informed judgements on the course selection for her

third year thanks to the use of Excel, which provides a tool that is not only functional but also

systematic in nature.

4.3 Evidence of Approach:

See appendix.

5 Evaluation of the solution:

By enhancing module selections in light of Sophie's interests and limitations, the approach

provides an effective solution to the challenges she has in selecting the classes she needs to

take. The fact that Sophie's module choices are in line with her preferences is shown by the

fact that the analysis produces an aggregate rating of 20. In addition, it satisfies all of the limits

that have been outlined, which ensures that Sophie satisfies the prerequisites for participation.

In order to assist Sophie in making decisions that are in her best interest, we have included

specific suggestions for each section of the Practical Decision Values. Because of the

Interpretation of Coefficients, Sophie is able to maintain a healthy balance between her

enthusiasm for the material being covered and her admiration for the teacher. The specific
examples and processes demonstrate how the solution may be implemented by other students

in circumstances that are similar to the one being addressed.

5.1 Real-world Applicability:

The solution's practicality is shown by its provision of a measurable and workable strategy for

selecting modules for Sophie to utilize in practice. Sophie's third year at the University of

London requires her to use educated judgment. She has the practical assistance she needs to

make these choices thanks to the decision values and the objective function score.

Solution evaluation shows that the model effectively optimises Sophie's module selection

within the constraints of her unique set of requirements, demands, and restrictions. When it

comes to supporting university students with the decision-making processes, the reliability and

applicability of the mathematical model is improved when it is paired with the practical

interpretation of the results and the satisfaction of all given limits.

6 Reflection:

My contribution to the projects was creating a mathematical model for solving Sophie's module

selection conundrum. To address Sophie's concerns about course requirements, teacher

reputation, and time restrictions, I designed the choice variables, goal function, and constraints.

My Excel model helped Sophie optimize her modules by providing a systematic overview of

the tradeoffs involved. As a consequence of my efforts, Sophie was able to make an informed

choice since I analyzed the coefficients, decision values, and objective function.

When deciding what classes to take, the model and its proposed solution were quite helpful.

Given Sophie's personal preferences and the requirements of her school, the computer quickly

determined the best possible set of classes to increase her level of happiness. Students were
able to better see and comprehend the repercussions of their choices because to Excel's practical

and user-friendly nature. I learnt more about the possible uses of mathematical models to

illuminate real-world decisions. The initiative pounded home the requirement of having a

complete strategy, with equal focus on quantitative and qualitative variables. Working on this

project also allowed me to hone my abilities in issue formulation, model construction, and

outcome interpretation. In conclusion, this project was a great way to get experience and

information that would be useful in future studies and careers.

References:

1. Hall, T., Beecham, S., Bowes, D., Gray, D., & Counsell, S. (n.d.). A Systematic

Literature Review on Fault Prediction Performance in Software Engineering.

2. Hart, C. (1998). Doing a Literature Review. London: Sage Publications. Lawrence, C.

N. (2011). Writing a Literature Review in the Social Sciences. Retrived from

www.academic.edu.

3. Okoli, C., & Schabram, K. (2010). A Guide to Conducting a Systematic Literature

Review of Information Systems Research. Sprouts: Working Papers on Information

Systems, 10(26).
Appendix:

Figure 1 Solver Parameters

Module Type Time Day Start Time End Time Rating Decision Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Monday 18:00 20:45 4.3 0 Not Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Tuesday 18:00 20:45 3.8 0 Not Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Wednesday 18:00 20:45 3.5 0 Not Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Friday 18:00 20:45 3.5 0 Not Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Monday & Wednesday 13:25 14:20 , 15:15 4.6 1 Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Tuesday & Thursday 13:25 15:15 , 14:20 2.7 0 Not Selected

FIN 300 Finance International Finance Wednesday 18:00 20:45 3.5 1 Selected

FIN 300 Finance International Finance Tuesday & Thursday 13:25 15:15 , 14:20 3.3 0 Not Selected

CS101 Industry BasedIntergenerational Computing Wednesday 14:30 17:15 4.4 1 Selected

CS101 Industry BasedIntergenerational Computing Thursday 14:30 17:15 3.1 0 Not Selected

CS102 Industry BasedWeb Design for Nonprofit organizations Tuesday 18:00 20:45 3.7 0 Not Selected

CS102 Industry BasedWeb Design for Nonprofit organizations Wednesday 14:30 17:15 3.5 0 Not Selected

FIN 315 Finance Data Analysis in finance Thursday 18:00 20:45 3 0 Not Selected

FIN 315 Finance Data Analysis in finance Monday & Wednesday 13:25 14:20 , 15:15 3.7 1 Selected

FIN 316 Finance Risk management Monday 18:00 20:45 3.6 0 Not Selected

FIN 316 Finance Risk management Monday & Wednesday 13:25 15:15 , 14:20 3.9 1 Selected

FIN 317 Finance Options, future and swaps Tuesday 18:00 20:45 3.2 0 Not Selected

FIN 317 Finance Options, future and swaps Tuesday & Thursday 13:25 15:15 , 14:20 3.4 0 Not Selected

FIN 318 Finance Fixed Instruments and Markets Monday 18:00 20:45 3 0 Not Selected

FIN 318 Finance Fixed Instruments and Markets Wednesday 18:00 20:45 3.5 0 Not Selected

Figure 2 Co Efficient of Objective Function along with Results

 Constraint Value Opr Limit
Business Strategy 1 <= 1
International Computing 0 <= 1
Web Design for Nonprofit Organizations0 <= 1
International Finance 1 <= 1
Data Analysis in finance 1 <= 1
Risk Management 1 <= 1
Options, Future and Swaps 0 <= 1
Fixed instruments and Markets 0 <= 1
Business 1 <= 1
Industry Based 1 = 1
Finance 2 2
Time Desireable 13:00
Module Clash 0 <= 5

Figure 3 Constraints of Model

Module Type Time Day Start Time End Time Rating Decision Selected

BS101 Business Business Strategy Monday & Wednesday 13:25 14:20 , 15:15 4.6 1 Selected

FIN 300 Finance International Finance Wednesday 18:00 20:45 3.5 1 Selected

CS101 Industry BasedIntergenerational Computing Wednesday 14:30 17:15 4.4 1 Selected

FIN 315 Finance Data Analysis in finance Monday & Wednesday 13:25 14:20 , 15:15 3.7 1 Selected

FIN 316 Finance Risk management Monday & Wednesday 13:25 15:15 , 14:20 3.9 1 Selected

Figure 4 Selected Modules

Selected Module Rating 20

Figure 5 Optimal Solution