Determining the priorities of Industry 4.0 from the view of technology acquisition using Fuzzy TOPSIS method

Gholamzadeh, Z.; Khamseh, A.

doi:10.22061/tej.2023.9350.2835

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

Z. Gholamzadeh ¹
A. Khamseh ²

¹ Department of Technology Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research University, Tehran, Iran

² Department of Industrial Management, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2023.9350.2835

Abstract

Background and Objectives: With the emergence of Industry 4.0 at the beginning of the 21st century and the introduction of technologies related to it such as Internet of Things, virtual reality, augmented reality, big data, automatic robots, etc., many developments took place, the results of which also affected the field of education and gave birth to a concept called education 4.0. Students affected by this concept in the near future should acquire the capacity to learn and develop skills in the real and virtual world and technologies such as virtual reality, augmented reality and cyber-physical technologies and their integration with the classroom become doubly important in these conditions, so that today many schools in the world use this technology to achieve the goals of education 4.0. They consider them essential in their educational programs. Therefore, knowing, choosing appropriate technology and using it in schools can facilitate the path of education and training of students in the field of learning. Since many of the technologies of Industry 4.0 are emerging and are in the stage of increasing growth, it is important to pay attention to the technology transfer process and its first stage, i.e., the selection and acquisition phase. Therefore, the purpose of the current research is to investigate the background of the studies and introduce some of these technologies, explain some of their applications, and identify the factors affecting the selection of the appropriate technology for the acquisition of priority technology in the studied school.
Methods: The study adopted a mixed-methods approach (qualitative-quantitative) and at first by searching documents, books and articles, with mata-synthesis method, 13 factors affecting the choice of Industry 4.0 technologies to be used in the school were extracted. The participants of this research included the girls in an educational complex located in Tehran and the time of the research was the academic year of 1400-1401. Also, according to the upcoming requirements in the short-term period of 5 years, as well as by reviewing the articles and opinions of system experts, 5 technologies from the industry 4.0 (Internet of Things, digital twin, virtual reality, augmented reality and automatic robots) were selected and then, using the Fuzzy TOPSIS method, the expert opinion of seven experts, who were selected in a purposeful way for this research, was elicited regarding the priority of choosing selected technologies through the decision matrix questionnaire.
Findings: The results of Fuzzy TOPSIS calculations showed that augmented reality technology with a number of 6.836 had the smallest distance from the positive ideal, and by calculating the similarity index and with a final score of 0.522, it had a higher priority among the selected technologies. Moreover, virtual reality technology with a number of 7.654 was the second the option was far from the ideal, and ranked as the second one with a final score of 0.473. Also, Internet of Things technology was ranked as the third one with a final score of 0.459.
Conclusion: According to the findings and based on the thirteen main factors affecting the choice of technology, the use of augmented reality in the classroom environment and its integration with education in the studied school can lead to productivity in the use of this technology and the context it provided for the development of learning capacities in students according to the requirements of education 4.0.

Keywords

20.1001.1.20080441.1402.17.3.5.8

Main Subjects

Educational Technology - Public education

COPYRIGHTS
©2023 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, as long as the original authors and source are cited. No permission is required from the authors or the publishers.

References

[1] Bettiol M, Di Maria E, Micelli S. Knowledge management and industry 0.4: new paradigms for value creation. Springer; 2020.

[2] Kovacs O. The dark corners of industry 0.4 –Grounding economic governance 2.0. Technology in Society. 2018; 55: 140-5.

[3] Kolesnichenko EA, Radyukova YY, Pakhomov NN. The role and importance of knowledge economy as a platform for formation of industry 0.4. Industry 40: Industrial Revolution of the 21st Century. Springer; 2019.

[4] Roblek V, Meško M, Krapež A. A complex view of industry 0.4. Sage open. 2016; 6(2): 2158244016653987.

[5[ Xu M, David JM, Kim SH. The fourth industrial revolution: Opportunities and challenges. International journal of financial research. 2018; 9(2): 90-5.

[6] Asadi, Marzieh. [The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Digital Economy: Drivers of Sustainable Economic Growth]. Two scientific-specialist Journals of Applied Studies in Management and Development Sciences. 2019;) 3(17: 9-33. Persian.

[7] Moraes EB, Kipper LM, Kellermann ACH, Austria L, Leivas P, Moraes JAR, et al. Integration of Industry ‎0.4 ‎technologies with Education ‎0.4‎: advantages for improvements in learning. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2022(ahead-of-print).

[8] Hughes L, Dwivedi Y K, Rana N P, Williams M D, Raghavan V. Perspectives on the future of manufacturing within the Industry ‎0.4 ‎era. Production Planning & Control. 2022; 33(3-2):138-158.

[9] Tambare P, Meshram C, Lee C-C, Ramteke RJ, Imoize AL. Performance Measurement System and Quality Management in Data-Driven Industry ‎0.4‎: A Review. Sensors. 2021; 22(1): 224.

[10] Mousavi Seyed Mohsen, Amiri Aghdaei, Seyed Fathollah. [Marketing Research in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Using Macro Data Analysis and Machine Learning to Provide Value to the Customer]. Scientific Journal of Modern Marketing Research. 2020; (10)4: 37-54. Persian.

[11] Álvarez Gil N, Rosillo Camblor R, Ponte Blanco B, López Brugos JA. Effect of Industry 0.4 on Education Systems: An Outlook. 2018.

[12] Kazimirov A. editor Education at university and industry ‎0.4. Global Smart Industry Conference (GloSIC): 2018: IEEE.

[13] Maisiri W, Darwish H, Van Dyk L. An investigation of Industry ‎0.4 ‎skills requirements. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering. 2019; 30(3): 90-105.

[14] Yavuztürk H, Kalender ZT, Vayvay O. The Role of Universities in Industry 0.4 Era: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Perspectives. Technological Developments in Industry 40 for Business Applications: IGI Global. 2019; 50-70.

[15] Mohd Adnan AH, Abd Karim R, Mohd Tahir MH, Mustafa Kamal NN, Yusof AM. Education ‎0.4 ‎technologies, Industry 0.4 skills and the teaching of English in Malaysian tertiary education. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ). 2019; 10(4): 330-43.

[16] Demartini C, Benussi L. Do web 0.4 and industry 0.4 imply education X. 0? It Professional. 2017; 19(3): 4-7.

[17] Abolhassani Zahra, Dehghani Marzieh, Javadi Poor Mohammad, Salehi Keivan, Mohammad Hassani Nasrin. [An Analysis of the Role of Design Thinking in improving 21st Century Skills: A Systematic Review]. Scientific education technology. 2021; ( 16)1: 82-98. Persian.

[18] Cropley A. Creativity-focused technology education in the age of industry 0.4. Creativity Research Journal. 2020; 32(2): 184-91.

[19] Zakeri Ali, Taheri Demneh Mohsen. [A futuristic research on various aspects of education; Providing a perspective of the Ayande interdisciplinary school]. New educational approaches. 2020; (5)1: 133-156. Persian.

[20] Kassab M, DeFranco J, Laplante P. A systematic literature review on Internet of things in education: Benefits and challenges. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2020; 36(2): 115-27.

[21] Khojasteh Saeed. [The effect of cell phone use on organizational learning]. Information and communication technology in educational sciences. 2022; (12)3: 5-23. Persian.

[22] Pervez S, ur Rehman S, Alandjani G. Role of internet of things (iot) in higher education. Proceedings of ADVED. 2018; 792-800.

[23] Bogusevschi D, Muntean C, Muntean G-M. Teaching and learning physics using 3D virtual learning environment: A case study of combined virtual reality and virtual laboratory in secondary school. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching. 2020; 39(1): 5-18.

[24] Wu J, Guo R, Wang Z, Zeng R. Integrating spherical video-based virtual reality into elementary school students’ scientific inquiry instruction: effects on their problem-solving performance. Interactive Learning Environments. 2021; 29(3): 496-509.

[25] Willner-Giwerc S, Rogers C, Wendell KB. The SymbIOTics System: Designing an Internet of Things Platform for Elementary School Students. International Journal of Designs for Learning. 2020; 11(2): 64-79.

[26] El Mrabet H, Ait Moussa A. IoT-school guidance: A holistic approach to vocational self-awareness & career path. Education and Information Technologies. 2021; 26(5): 5439-56.

[27] Bondaryk LG, Hsi S, Van Doren S. Probeware for the Modern Era: IoT Dataflow System Design for Secondary Classrooms. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2021; 14(2): 226-37.

[28] Davies D, Beauchamp G, Davies J, Price R. The potential of the ‘Internet of Things’ to enhance inquiry in Singapore schools. Research in Science & Technological Education. 2020; 38(4): 484-506.

[29] Fernández-Caramés TM, Fraga-Lamas P. A review on human-centered IoT-connected smart labels for the industry 0.4. IEEE access. 2018; 6: 25939-57.

[30] Bortolini M, Ferrari E, Gamberi M, Pilati F, Faccio M. Assembly system design in the Industry 0.4 era: a general framework. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 2017; 50(1): 5700-5.

[31] Hyun Park S, Seon Shin W, Hyun Park Y, Lee Y. Building a new culture for quality management in the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2017; 28(9-10): 934-45.

[32] Jagatheesaperumal SK, Rahouti M, Ahmad K, Al-Fuqaha A, Guizani M. The Duo of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data for Industry 0.4: Review of Applications, Techniques, Challenges, and Future Research Directions. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2021; 9(15): 12861-85.

[33] Rüßmann M, Lorenz M, Gerbert P, Waldner M, Justus J, Engel P, et al. Industry 0.4: The future of productivity and growth in manufacturing industries. Boston consulting group. 2015; 9(1): 54-89.

[34] Yang C, Huan S, Yang Y. Application of big data technology in blended teaching of college students: a case study on rain classroom. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET). 2020; 15(11): 4-16.

[35] Bühler C, Knops H. Robots in the classroom-tools for accessible education. Assistive technology on the threshold of the new millennium. 1999; 6: 448.

[36] Inkulu AK, Bahubalendruni MR, Dara A, Sankaranarayana Samy K. Challenges and opportunities in human robot collaboration context of Industry 0.4 -a state of the art review. Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application. 2021.

[37] Reich-Stiebert N, Eyssel F, editors. Robots in the classroom: What teachers think about teaching and learning with education robots. International conference on social robotics; 2016: Springer.

[38] Rodič B. Industry 0.4 and the new simulation modelling paradigm. Organizacija. 2017, 50(3): 193-207.

[39] Rojek I, Macko M, Mikołajewski D, Sága M, Burczyński T. Modern methods in the field of machine modelling and simulation as a research and practical issue related to Industry 0.4. Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences Technical Sciences. 2021; 69(2).

[40] Arianezhad Parasto, Muzaffar Farhang, Khanmohammadi Mohammad Ali, Saleh Sadeghpour Bahram. [Determining simulator features in interior design education with a competency approach from the perspective of experts]. Scientific technological education. 2021; (16)1: 119-134. Persian.

[41] Tufford L, Katz E, Etherington C, Gauthier L. Simulation as Vicarious Learning in the BSW Classroom. Journal of Teaching in Social Work. 2021; 41(3): 257-74.

[42] Hamzeh F, Theokaris C, Rouhana C, Abbas Y. Application of hands-on simulation games to improve classroom experience. European Journal of Engineering Education. 2017; 42(5): 471-81.

[43] Mouha RARA. Internet of Things (IoT). Journal of Data Analysis and Information Processing. 2021; 9(02): 77.

[44] Mohammed A H K, Jebamikyous H H, Nawara D, Kashef R. IoT text analytics in smart education and beyond. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2021; 33(3): 779-806.

[45] Mohammed AHK, Jebamikyous H-H, Nawara D, Kashef R. IoT text analytics in smart education and beyond. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2021; 33(3): 779-806.

[46] Ampera D, Fibriasari H. Implementation of Cloud Computing System in Learning System Development in Engineering Education Study Program. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (IJEMST). 2021; 9(4): 728-40.

[47] Avila-Garzon C, Bacca-Acosta J, Duarte J, Betancourt J. Augmented Reality in Education: An Overview of Twenty-Five Years of Research. Contemporary Educational Technology. 2021; 13(3).

[48] Elmqaddem N. Augmented reality and virtual reality in education. Myth or reality? International journal of emerging technologies in learning. 2019; 14(3).

[49] Garzón J, Baldiris S, Gutiérrez J, Pavón J. How do pedagogical approaches affect the impact of augmented reality on education? A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Educational Research Review. 2020; 31: 100334.

[50] Paszkiewicz A, Salach M, Dymora P, Bolanowski M, Budzik G, Kubiak P. Methodology of implementing virtual reality in education for industry 0.4. Sustainability. 2021; 13(9): 5049.

[51] Stepan K, Zeiger J, Hanchuk S, Del Signore A, Shrivastava R, Govindaraj S, et al., editors. Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy. International forum of allergy & rhinology. 2017: Wiley Online Library.

[52] Sirotová M, Michvocíková V. Virtual Reality--Part of Supervised Teaching Practice for University Students--Future Teachers? European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2021; 10(1): 127-36.

[53] Bowen MM. Effect of virtual reality on motivation and achievement of middle-school students. The University of Memphis; 2018.

[54] Soleimani, Hassan; Jalilifar, Hassan; Rahmanian Rouhi, Afsar. [augmented reality and virtual reality in a collective context: The structure of the abstract genre in a language learning study with a mobile]. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies. 2020; (7) 3: 1-22. Persian.

[55] Alikhani, Parasto; Rezaeizadeh; Vahidi Asl. [Analysis of group game based on augmented reality technology called food ordering in collaborative learning]. New educational ideas. 2018; I(13) 4: 39-62.

[56] Vachálek J, Bartalský L, Rovný O, Šišmišová D, Morháč M, Lokšík M, editors. The digital twin of an industrial production line within the industry 0.4 concept. 21st international conference on process control (PC): 2017: IEEE.

[57] Jones D, Snider C, Nassehi A, Yon J, Hicks B. Characterising the Digital Twin: A systematic literature review. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology. 2020; 29: 36-52.

[58] Shuguang L, Lin B, editors. Holographic classroom based on digital twin and its application prospect. IEEE 3rd International Conference on Electronics and Communication Engineering (ICECE): 2020: IEEE.

[59] Bozeman B. Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research policy. 2000; 29(4-5): 627-55.

[60] Uusitalo P, Lavikka R. Technology transfer in the construction industry. The Journal of Technology Transfer. 2021; 46(5): 1291-320.

[61] Bagherzadeh Majid, Meftahi Jalal. [Examining the factors affecting the success of technology transfer of screw compressor industries in Iranian companies]. Beyond management. 2011; 125-154. Persian.

[62] Mendoza XPL, Sanchez DSM. A systematic literature review on technology transfer from university to industry. International Journal of Business and Systems Research. 2018; 12(2): 197-225.

[63] Nahar N, Lyytinen K, Huda N, Muravyov SV. Success factors for information technology supported international technology transfer: Finding expert consensus. Information & management. 2006; 43(5): 663-77.

[64] Kumar S, Luthra S, Haleem A, Mangla SK, Garg D. Identification and evaluation of critical factors to technology transfer using AHP approach. International Strategic Management Review. 2015; 3(1-2): 24-42.

[65] Marandi Vahid. [Technology transfer mechanisms: features, effects, and patterns]. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Technology Development. 2015; 25: 59-74. Persian.

[66] Shafiee Nikabadi, Mohsen; Ahmadi, Zahra. [ The barriers to information technology transfer in Iran]. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Technology Development. 2016; 27: 69-82. Persian.

[67] Eliassy Mehdi, Mirzaei Hossein, Safardoost Atieh. [Pathology of the technology transfer process (Case study: technology transfer of a kind of hunting rifles from Turkey)]. Bi-Quarterly Journal of Technology Development. 2017; 29: 89-100. Persian.

[68] Safaei Qadiklaei Abdolhamid, Madhoshi Mehrdad, Ali Akbari Nouri Fahimeh. [Analysis of factors affecting the effectiveness of technology transfer based on fuzzy if-then rules]. Industrial management perspective. 2012; 6: 87-67. Persian.

[69] Karim Khanloui Giti. [Adaptation of new technologies to effective theories of education: the role of new technologies in the quality of education]. Quarterly Journal of Studies and Development Center of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences;2014; 13: 283-293. Persian.

[70] Veiga FJM, Andrade AMVd. Critical success factors in accepting technology in the classroom. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning. 2021; 16(18): 4-22.

[71] Yildirim B, TOPALCENGİZ ES, ARIKAN G, Timur S. Using virtual reality in the classroom: Reflections of STEM teachers on the use of teaching and learning tools. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health. 2020; 6(3): 231-45.

[72] Hsu YC. Exploring the Effectiveness of Two Types of Virtual Reality Headsets for Teaching High School Mathematics. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2021; 17(8): em1986.

[73] Almeida F, Simoes J. The role of serious games, gamification and industry 0.4 tools in the education 0.4 paradigm. Contemporary Educational Technology. 2019; 10(2): 120-36.

[74] Silva VL, Kovaleski JL, Pagani RN. Technology transfer and human capital in the industrial 0.4 scenario: A theoretical study. Future Studies Research Journal: Trends and Strategies. 2019; 11(1): 102-22.

[75] Karacay G. Talent development for Industry 0.4. Industry 40: Managing the digital transformation: Springer; 2018.