Optimizing Pedagogy for ECO415 (Economics) Part-Time Students: An AHP Analysis

This study ranks five educational techniques (Constructivist, Collaborative, Inquiry-based, Integrative, and Reflective) for part-time degree programme students enrolled in the ECO415 (Economics) course at the UiTM Perak Branch Sri Iskandar Campus using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). We apply the given pairwise geometric-mean ratios to construct the full 5×5 reciprocal matrix. We compute final weights to four decimal places and display all calculation processes, including row averages, column sums, normalisation, and the geometric mean approach. A consistency check (λmax, CI, CR using RI=1.12) confirms acceptable consistency (CR ≈4.79%). The resulting ranking is: Constructivist > Collaborative > Inquiry-based > Integrative > Reflective. Lastly, we provide ECO415 lecturers with practical teaching suggestions. The favoured approaches are constructivist and collaborative, which is consistent with research showing that adult and part-time learners favour hands-on, active learning. Group work, real-world projects, and flexible delivery to meet the needs of part-time economics students are among the recommendations.

Pedagogical Approaches, Economics Education

1. Acar, S., & Tunçdoğan, K. (2018). The effects of inquiry-based learning approach on students’ attitudes and achievements towards physical science in elementary schools. International Journal of Education and Research, 6(9), 123–138. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Azamatovna, I. Z. (2020). Integrative teaching technology and its role in improving the quality of vocational training. Theoretical & Applied Science, 11, 131–133. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Boyle, E. (2021). Adult learners in higher education: characteristics and needs. Journal of Adult Learning, 49(3), 193–205. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Brunelli, M. (2014). Introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Brunelli, M. (2015). Introduction to the analytic hierarchy process. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cosgun, E. N. (2022). Differences in academic motivation between part-time and full-time students. International Journal of Education and Development, 47, 1–12. (Doctoral dissertation) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dagar, V., & Yadav, N. (2016). Impact of constructivist learning approach on academic achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Education, 8(1), 45–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fiorini, L. A., Borg, A., & Debono, M. (2022). Part-time adult students’ satisfaction with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 28(2), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/14779714221082691 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Forman, E., & Peniwati, K. (1998). Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hussain, H. (2012). Social skills learning through collaborative projects. International Journal of Learning, 19(1), 1–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ishizaka, A., & Labib, A. (2011). Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(11), 14336–14345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.04.143 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning Together and Alone (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Khan, A., & Arch, M. (2020). Involving Inquiry-Based & Reflective Pedagogical Approaches in Architecture Education. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT). Volume 8, Issue 5 May 2020. ISSN: 2320-28820 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kori, K. (2021). Designing and implementing inquiry-based learning in higher education. College Teaching, 69(3), 157–165. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Cambridge Adult Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kumari, P. (2022). Facilitating knowledge construction: teacher’s role in constructivist classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 1579–1598. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kusairee, M.A.Z.A, Nasir, Z. A., Nasir, N. M., Syeddin, S. N. A., & Salim, N. Z. M. (2024). Determining the Most Critical Pedagogical Approach for Principle of Economics (ECO120) Through Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Analysis in Higher Education. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH, 8, 5291-5300. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. McKinney, K. (2014). Inquiry-based learning in action: UK university case studies. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36(1), 73–84. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Mishra, S. (2023). Constructivism in higher education: learner-centered active learning. Journal of Educational Innovations, 12(4), 45–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Moberg, E. (2006). Pedagogy is for kids: Andragogy is for adults. Eduventures. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED507785 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Moon, J. A. (2013). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Navaneedhan, A. (2011). Reflective practice as pedagogic tool in teacher education. International Journal of Teacher Education, 2(2), 44–51. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Piaget, J., & Cook, M. T. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Poquet, O., & De Laat, M. (2025). Balancing the books: part-time students as resilient learners in higher education. International Review of Education, 71(2), 391–414. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Saaty, T. L. (1980) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Saaty, T. L. (2012). Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. Third Revised Edition. Pittsburgh: RWS Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Saaty, T. L., & Alexander, J. M. (2013). Conflict resolution: The analytic hierarchy approach. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Saaty, T. L., & Peniwati, K. (2007). Group decision-making: Drawing out and reconciling differences. Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Scott, G. R., & Ghosh, S. (2016). Collaborative learning in engineering education: The ASC competition. Journal of Construction Education and Research, 12(2), 67–83. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Sheng-Li, X., Yeyao, T., & Shabaz, M. (2023). Multi-criteria decision making for determining best teaching method using fuzzy AHP. Soft Computing, 27, 2795–2807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-022-07554-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Slavin, R. E. (2011). Educational Psychology (10th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Trochim, W. M. (2006). Analytic Hierarchy Process. Research Methods Knowledge Base. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Ujeyo, D. J., & Najjuma, R. (2022). Integrative pedagogical methods in sustainable development education. International Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 16(1), 55–72. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (Vol. 86). Harvard university press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Xu, S.-L., Tang, Y., & Shabaz, M. (2023). Multi-criteria decision making for selecting teaching methods using fuzzy AHP. Soft Computing, 27(6), 2795–2807. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Impact of Foreign Direct Investment in India
• Issues Involved in Digitalisation Special Reference to Indian Tourism Growth
• Relationship Marketing and Customer Loyalty in the Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG) Industry in Nairobi County
• Financial Literacy or Financial Inclusion? Which is Which, What is What—To Achieve Uganda’s 10-Fold Economic Growth By 2040
• Harnessing Natural Gas for Economic Transformation: Overcoming the Regulatory and Infrastructural Bottlenecks in Nigeria