SINTA

0.0

Impact

Google Scholar

14

H-Index

SYNAPSI: Journal of Information Systems and Informatics Education

an Open Access Journal


Development of a Decision Support System for Selecting College Majors Based on an Expert System Using the Forward Chaining Method

Share
  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to develop a decision support system for selecting higher education majors based on users' personality characteristics using the RIASEC theory. The study also aims to analyze the software quality in terms of correctness, functionality, usability, and maintainability and to examine the suitability of system recommendations with users' preferred majors.

    Methodology: This study employed a Research and Development (R&D) approach with the Waterfall software development model. The system was developed using Visual Basic 6.0 and MySQL. RIASEC theory was used as the knowledge base, while decision tree representation and forward chaining were applied for the inference process. Software quality was evaluated through correctness, functionality, usability, and maintainability testing, involving 60 respondents and the Computer System Usability Questionnaire (CSUQ).

    Main Findings: The developed system achieved an error/KLOC value of 0 and passed all 34 functionality tests with a 100% success rate. Usability obtained an average score of 72 and was categorized as feasible. All three maintainability aspects instrumentation, consistency, and simplicity meet the criteria. Furthermore, 46 of 60 respondents showed at least one preference matching the system recommendation, resulting in a feasibility rate of 76.67%.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: The novelty of this study lies in integrating RIASEC personality theory, decision tree knowledge representation, and forward chaining inference into a decision support system for higher education major selection. The study also combines recommendation development with comprehensive software quality evaluation, providing an integrated approach for educational decision support based on personality characteristics.

  • How to cite

    Cahyana, & Hartono, N. (2026). Development of a Decision Support System for Selecting College Majors Based on an Expert System Using the Forward Chaining Method. SYNAPSI: Journal of Information Systems and Informatics Education, 1(2), 110-120. https://doi.org/10.37251/synapsi.v1i2.3842
  • 38
    Abstract views
    18
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. [1] R. Fatteh, Y. Phayo, M. Raza, T. T. Naing, Z. Phyo, and S. B. Arja, “A Multi-Institutional Study Regarding the Perceptions of Students and Faculty Members About Constructive Feedback for Medical Students in Medical Education,” Adv. Med. Educ. Pract., vol. Volume 15, no. 1, pp. 1361–1371, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S488620.
    2. [2] D. Jakavonytė-Staškuvienė and J. Ponomariovienė, “Competency-based practice in conducting natural science research and presenting its results in primary classes: A case study,” Cogent Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1–19, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2267962.
    3. [3] F. Osei-Wusu et al., “A pedagogical framework to enhance students’ perception of mathematics relevance in Information Technology education,” Cogent Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–19, Dec. 2026, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2026.2655019.
    4. [4] T. Ahmad, N. Ali, B. Jing, and F. Gao, “The influence of in-service computer science teachers’ demographic characteristics on their self-efficacy,” Cogent Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2026, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2026.2696655.
    5. [5] D. Hamman-Fisher and V. McGhie, “Towards decoloniality of the education training and development third-year curriculum: Employing situated learning characteristics to facilitate authentic learning,” Cogent Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1–18, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2237301.
    6. [6] Z. Zhang, F. Yang, J. Zhu, and G. Chen, “Using visual methods to foster Chinese students’ core competencies and learning outcomes: a qualitative study based on public affairs management major,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–8, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2581820.
    7. [7] O. Alrashidi, “Assessing language learning strategies employed by university English major students in Saudi Arabia,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–18, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2074935.
    8. [8] M. Koça and E. Kokalari, “Representation of Greek female authors in Greek language textbooks for Greek ethnic minority schools in Albania,” Cogent Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–30, Dec. 2026, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2612344.
    9. [9] M. Abraha, “Analyzing the gender representation status of Ethiopian primary school textbooks and teachers’ insight,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–20, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2474301.
    10. [10] L. A. S. Messerer, B. Merkle, K. Karst, and S. Janke, “Interest–Major Fit predicts study satisfaction and/or achievement? Comparing different ways of assessment,” Stud. High. Educ., vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 2404–2416, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2024.2413867.
    11. [11] B. Naik, J. Chandiramani, and S. Majumdar, “Is India’s higher education system a case of elusive inclusive development?,” Cogent Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2024.2428874.
    12. [12] E. K. Lotey, F. O. Boateng, Y. D. Arthur, B. Adu-Obeng, and J. F. Gordon, “Exploring GeoGebra acceptance: an implication for pre-service mathematics teachers’ professional development,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2514980.
    13. [13] T. L. Tinnell, J. Z. Zhong, T. R. Tretter, and P. A. S. Ralston, “Professional development of STEM-H faculty: Implications of a cross-disciplinary workshop series for improving research on student learning,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–34, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2043995.
    14. [14] E. Valerio, R. Spence, and S. Adapa, “Women’s leadership development in agricultural research: an empirical study in Southeast Asia and the Pacific,” Cogent Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2024.2351240.
    15. [15] L. Kes, G. N. Saunders-Smits, and M. M. Specht, “Towards new educational standards for aircraft maintenance: analysing transversal competencies on industry safety priorities and assessment challenges,” Cogent Educ., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2026, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2026.2629672.
    16. [16] X. H. Huang and X. Y. Huang, “Effects of a 16-week structured functional music-based physical activity program on attitude toward sports among rural Chinese high school students: a quasi-experimental study,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2566985.
    17. [17] S. Polatuly et al., “Empowering future physicists: the role of case technology in research competency development,” Cogent Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2024.2362547.
    18. [18] E. Mandinach, “Artificial intelligence in data-driven decision making: the challenges and opportunities of data ethics,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–25, Dec. 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2584802.
    19. [19] J. Bowen, B. Weyers, and B. Liu, “Creating Formal Models from Informal Design Artefacts,” Int. J. Human–Computer Interact., vol. 39, no. 15, pp. 3141–3158, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2022.2095833.
    20. [20] T. Fukuzaki, S. Liu, and M. Butler, “DevFemOps: enhancing maintainability based on microservices using formal engineering methods,” Conn. Sci., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 2125–2138, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/09540091.2022.2099347.
    21. [21] N. Kaushik, H. Kumar, and V. Raj, “Maintainability improvement of microservices based applications using micro frontend,” Int. J. Comput. Appl., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 188–196, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1080/1206212X.2025.2450250.
    22. [22] M. Zainuba, A. Rahal, O. Kutlubay, and J. Wright, “Students’ choice of major: An approach for academic advising,” J. Educ. Bus., vol. 98, no. 8, pp. 502–510, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1080/08832323.2023.2232922.
    23. [23] G. Rayner and T. Papakonstantinou, “The use of self-determination theory to investigate career aspiration, choice of major and academic achievement of tertiary science students,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 1635–1652, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2020.1774092.
    24. [24] R. W. Liu, X. D. Xia, Q. Q. Wang, Y. F. Mo, and R. Q. Huang, “Improving conceptual clarity in high school biology: Evaluating the 5C method’s effectiveness among Chinese students,” Cogent Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, p., 2025, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2025.2562348.
    25. [25] S. Ntoa, “Usability and User Experience Evaluation in Intelligent Environments: A Review and Reappraisal,” Int. J. Human–Computer Interact., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–30, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2394724.
    26. [26] S. O. Barraood, H. Mohd, and F. Baharom, “An initial investigation of the effect of quality factors on Agile test case quality through experts’ review,” Cogent Eng., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–10, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2022.2082121.
    27. [27] C. Kang, H. Jo, S. W. Han, and L. Weis, “Shattering monolithic myths: gender gaps in STEM major selection across Asian American ethnic subgroups,” Br. J. Sociol. Educ., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 54–74, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1080/01425692.2024.2418404.
    28. [28] W. Xie, “Cultural Capital and Dual Modes of Decision-Making: A Typology of Major Selection Among Chinese Elite University Students,” Chinese Educ. Soc., vol. 58, no. 1–2, pp. 45–67, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1080/10611932.2025.2500306.
    29. [29] X. Hu and H.-Y. Chan, “Preparing for the STEM Pathways? Dual Enrollment and College Major Choice in STEM,” J. Higher Educ., vol. 95, no. 5, pp. 607–638, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1080/00221546.2023.2241331.
    30. [30] L. Herskovic and J. Silva, “Links between performance in high school and the decision to major in STEM fields: evidence from Chile,” Educ. Stud., vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 1575–1602, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1080/03055698.2022.2117540.