1. The document describes a student management system project that uses rapid prototyping and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique. 2. Rapid prototyping was used in the methodology to reduce risks and easily visualize the system. AHP was used to determine the best student based on their academic results by generating weights for evaluation criteria. 3. Proof of concept interfaces were created for students to search for lecturers, upload proposals, check application status, and view their profile. Lecturers can view student applications and those under their supervision.

1. FINAL YEAR PROJECT
STUDENT MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM
(USING AHP TECHNIQUE)
(PRESENTATION II)
NAME : MUHAMMAD HAZWAN BIN MOHD FUAD
MATRIC NO : BTCL16043362
SUBJECT : CSF35104 FINAL YEAR PROJECT 1
SUPERVISOR NAME : DR. SUHAILAN BIN SAFEI

2. FR
METHODOLOGY

3. FRMETHODOLOGY :
RAPID PROTOTYPING
1. Lower risk
• Can reduce the risk of costly errors.
• The development team can identify design faults or usability problems and make
any modifications quickly.
2. Easier visualization
• The ability to create helps developers present new product concepts to
stakeholders, such as board members, who need to understand and approve the
development program.
REASON WHY USE RAPID PROTOTYPING.

4. FRREASON WHY USE RAPID
PROTOTYPING (cont.)
3. Can reduce the risk of costly errors
• The development team can identify design faults or usability problems and make
any modifications quickly.
4. Support for customization
• Customization can provide a strong competitive advantage by offering customers
greater choice and flexibility

5. FRRAPID PROTOTYPING
CONCEPT DIAGRAM

6. FR
TECHNIQUE

7. FRTECHNIQUE USED :
ANALYTHIC HIERARCHY PROCESS
• AHP considers a set of evaluation criteria, and a set of alternative options among
which the best decision is to be made.
• AHP generates a weight for each evaluation criterion according to the decision
maker’s pairwise comparisons of the criteria. The higher the weight, the more
important the corresponding criterion.

8. FR
AHP CONCEPT

9. FR
WHERE TO USE AHP?
• The problem now is we don’t have the way to sort the student according to the
lecturers.
• For this situation, we use AHP to determine the best student to choose based on
their academic result.
CGPA Weightage
(W)
3.50 > 4.00 0.65
3.00 > 3.49 0.25
< 3.00 0.10
Supervisor Student 1 Student 2 Student 3
Supervisor
A
3.67 3.33 2.89
Supervisor
B
3.85 3.45 2.76
Name CGPA W
Name 1 3.33 0.25
Name 2 3.67 0.65
Name 3 3.85 0.65
Name 4 2.89 0.10
Name 5 2.76 0.10
Name 6 3.45 0.25
“Assume all student are in same course”
Supervisor A
Weightage =0.65 + 0.25 +0.10
W=1

10. FR
FRAMEWORK

11. FR
MODEL VIEW CONTROLLER
(MVC)
STUDENT
KPP LECTURER

12. FR
CONTEXT DIAGRAM

13. FR
CONTEXT DIAGRAM

14. FR
ENTITY RELATIONSHIP
DIAGRAM
(ERD)

15. FRENTITY RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM
(ERD)

16. FR
DATA FLOW DIAGRAM
(DFD)

17. FR
DFD LEVEL 0

18. FRDFD LEVEL 1
(MANAGE PROPOSAL)

19. FRDFD LEVEL 1
(MANAGE LECTURER)

20. FR
PROOF OF CONCEPT

21. FR
Search For Lecturer @ Expertise Interface
PROOF OF CONCEPT
(STUDENT)

22. FR
Selection & Upload Proposal Interface
(STUDENT)
PROOF OF CONCEPT

23. FR
Application Status Interface
(STUDENT)
PROOF OF CONCEPT

24. FR
(LECTURER)
Student Application Interface
PROOF OF CONCEPT

25. FR
Student Under Supervision Interface
(LECTURER)
PROOF OF CONCEPT

26. FR
(KPP)
Project Approval Interface
PROOF OF CONCEPT

27. FR
INTERFACE PROTOTYPE

28. FRPROTOTYPE INTERFACE
Login Interface (All)
(STUDENT)

29. FRPROTOTYPE INTERFACE
(STUDENT)
Registration Form Interface

30. FR
Main Page (Student)
PROTOTYPE INTERFACE
(STUDENT)

31. FRPROTOTYPE INTERFACE
(STUDENT)
User Profile Interface