The use of information technology (IT) in today’s classrooms is crucial due to the very rapid pace at which technological developments are created. Information technology provides a unique set of possibilities in the field of political and ideological education for grabbing students’ interest, encouraging critical thinking, and generating knowledgeable citizens. However, choosing the best information technology-enabled solution is a challenging challenge, especially for companies like Central Universities. To properly address this challenge, it is essential to establish a rigorous assessment system that considers a multitude of state characteristics, such as authenticity, resource efficiency, inclusiveness, and ethical values. Using the q-ROFS environment and the ENTROPY and WASPAS techniques, our study demonstrates a contemporary approach to tackling this important problem. Therefore, Central University and other similar institutions will benefit from this integration by receiving accurate data and practical solutions to the challenges of technology integration, which they can then handle in a precise and firm way. In this opening section, we lay the framework for a substantial investigation into the ways in which our proposed paradigm has the potential to revolutionize political and ideological education in the contemporary digital era.
WangHB. The mechanism of ideological-political education exchange and sharing platform in colleges under the new media era based on internet web technology. Rev Cercet Interv Soc2018; 63: 85–104.
2.
BennettWLSegerbergA. The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society. Abingdon, United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis, 2012, 15(5), pp. 739–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
3.
CouldryNMejiasUA. The costs of connection: how data are colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Soc Forces2020; 99(1): e6.
4.
LankshearCKnobelM. New literacies: Everyday practices and classroom learning. Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open: University Press, 2006.
5.
HendlerJA. Net smart: how to thrive online. Science2012; 336(6085): 1108–1109.
6.
YueSWeiJAzizH, et al.A study on the effectiveness of self-assessment learning system of ideological and political education for college students. Learn Motiv2023; 84: 101929.
7.
LoHCWangTHChenRS. Enhancing critical digital literacy of preservice preschool teachers through service learning: the moderator of online social capital. Sustainability2024; 16(6): 2253.
8.
BroccaNMasiaVGarassinoD. Empowering critical digital literacy in EFL: Teachers’ evaluation of didactic materials involving the recognition of presupposed information. Language Teaching Research2024; 28(3): 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688241235019
9.
AbulibdehAZaidanEAbulibdehR. Navigating the confluence of artificial intelligence and education for sustainable development in the era of industry 4.0: challenges, opportunities, and ethical dimensions. J Clean Prod2024; 437: 140527.
LiDFChengCT. New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions. Pattern Recognit Lett2002; 23(1-3): 221–225.
12.
MitchellHB. On the Dengfeng-Chuntian similarity measure and its application to pattern recognition. Pattern Recognit Lett2003; 24(16): 3101–3104.
13.
ParkJSKwunYCParkJH. Some results and example for compatible maps of type (beta) on intuitionistic fuzzy metric space. Fuzzy Inform Eng2009; 62(2): 629–638.
14.
TorraVNarukawaY. On hesitant fuzzy sets and decision. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems. Korea: Jeju Island, 2009, pp. 1378–1382.
15.
YagerRRAbbasovAM. Pythagorean membership grades, complex numbers, and decision making. Int J Intell Syst2013; 28(5): 436–452.
16.
ZhangXLXuZS. Extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst2014; 29(12): 1061–1078.
17.
YangYDingHChenZS, et al.A note on extension of TOPSIS to multiple criteria decision making with Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst2016; 31(1): 68–72.
18.
WeiGWeiY. Similarity measures of Pythagorean fuzzy sets based on the cosine function and their applications. Int J Intell Syst2018; 33(3): 634–652.
19.
LiDQZengWYQianY. Distance measures of Pythagorean fuzzy sets and their applications in multiattribute decision making. J Control Decis2017; 32(10): 1817–1823.
20.
ZhangX. A novel approach based on similarity measure for Pythagorean fuzzy multiple criteria group decision making. Int J Intell Syst2016; 31(6): 593–611.
21.
ZengWLiDYinQ. Distance and similarity measures of Pythagorean fuzzy sets and their applications to multiple criteria group decision making. Int J Intell Syst2018; 33(11): 2236–2254.
22.
PengXDGargH. Multiparametric similarity measures on Pythagorean fuzzy sets with applications to pattern recognition. Appl Intell2019; 49: 4058–4096.
23.
PengXDYuanH. Pythagorean fuzzy multi criteria decision making method based on multiparametric similarity measure. Cogn Comput2021; 13: 466–484.
LiuPWangP. Some q-rung orthopair fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute decision making. Int J Intell Syst2018; 33(2): 259–280.
26.
ZavadskasEKTurskisZAntuchevicieneJ, et al.Optimization of weighted aggregated sum product assessment. ElAEE2012; 122(6): 3–6.
27.
LukićRKljenakDVAnđelićS, et al.Application of WASPAS method in the evaluation of efficiency of agricultural enterprises in Serbia. Ekonomika Poljoprivrede2021; 68(2): 375–388.
28.
TurudijaRRadovićLStankovićA, et al.Multi-criteria decision making in turning operations using AHP, TOPSIS and WASPAS methods. In: Conference on Information Technology and its Applications. Cham: Springer, 2024, pp. 193–205.
29.
Heidary DahooieJHusseinzadeh KashanAShoaei NaeiniZ, et al.A hybrid multi-criteria-decision-making aggregation method and geographic information system for selecting optimal solar power plants in Iran. Energies2022; 15(8): 2801.
30.
SenapatiTChenG. Picture fuzzy WASPAS technique and its application in multi-criteria decision-making. Soft Comput2022; 26(9): 4413–4421.
31.
KhodaeiDHamidi-EsfahaniZRahmatiE. Effect of edible coatings on the shelf-life of fresh strawberries: a comparative study using TOPSIS-Shannon entropy method. NFS J2021; 23: 17–23.
32.
WuJChenXLuJ. Assessment of long and short-term flood risk using the multi-criteria analysis model with the AHP-Entropy method in Poyang Lake basin. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2022; 75: 102968.
33.
YanXF. Research on the action mechanism of circular economy development and green finance based on entropy method and big data. J Enterprise Inf Manag2022; 35(4/5): 988–1010.
34.
ZhangLChengQQuS. Evaluation of railway transportation performance based on CRITIC-relative entropy method in China. J Adv Transp2023; 2023: 5257482.
35.
SariF. Identifying anthropogenic and natural causes of wildfires by maximum entropy method-based ignition susceptibility distribution models. J Res2023; 34(2): 355–371.
36.
AliSILaljiSMHaiderSA, et al.Risk prioritization in a core preparation experiment using fuzzy VIKOR integrated with Shannon entropy method. Ain Shams Eng J2024; 15(2): 102421.
37.
YinLYiJLinY, et al.Evaluation of green mine construction level in Tibet based on entropy method and TOPSIS. Resour Policy2024; 88: 104491.
AkdagHCMenekseA. Breast cancer treatment planning using a novel spherical fuzzy CRITIC-REGIME method. J Intell Fuzzy Syst2023; 44(5): 8343–8356.
40.
AliJ. A novel score function based CRITIC-MARCOS method with spherical fuzzy information. Comput Appl Math2021; 40(8): 280.
41.
AnafiJKhanAADongK. Enhancing medical waste management using T-spherical fuzzy CRITIC-MAUT methodology. J Green Econ Low-Carbon Dev2023; 2(3): 137–152.
42.
ZhangHWangHWeiG. Spherical fuzzy TODIM method for MAGDM integrating cumulative prospect theory and CRITIC method and its application to commercial insurance selection. Artif Intell Rev2023; 56(9): 10275–10296.
