Docstoc

IJAIEM-2013-11-30-110

Document Sample
IJAIEM-2013-11-30-110 Powered By Docstoc
					 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

        Decision Support Systems In Determining
      Lecturer’s Performance Appraisal Using Fuzzy
       Database Method of Mamdani's Model (Case
         Study at the University of Serang Raya)
                                                Sumiati1, Shodik Nuryadhin2 .

                               Department of Informatics - University of Serang Raya – Banten

                                                             Abstract
In determining the lecturer’s performance evaluation by the university both private and state is important, in order to improve the
academic quality assurance. There are several factors that assessment. For the sake of efficiency and effectiveness of work then
making the right decision is needed. With the aim to build and provide an alternative of a decision support system which has the
ability of Lecturers performance appraisal analysis, in which each of the criteria in this case factors and alternative assessment in
this case the lecturers compared to one another so as to provide the output intensity value priorities produce a score value of
lecturers who provide an assessment of the performance of each lecturer.

This study will analyze Lecturers Performance Appraisal-based intelligent computing system using Fuzzy Inference System with
Mamdani method. The focus of research is more focused on faculty performance appraisal process. This assessment is based on
the assessment of faculty performance, namely Tridarma and internal activity. The specific objective of this study was to evaluate
the performance of lecturers in universities. Performance evaluation is an important issue for an institution of higher education,
because it can be used as a reference in making decisions regarding the improvement of the performance, especially improved
performance in the field of teaching. This decision support system to help and provide an alternative to the assessment of each
faculty, the criteria change, It is useful to facilitate decision-makers on issues related to faculty performance appraisal, so it will
at least get a decent lecturers were given rewards or awards

Keywords: Performance Assessment Lecturer, Fuzzy Inference System, Mamdani Method

I. Preface
The importance of performance measurement is not needed and is done only in business but also in education. Thus the
importance of performance measurement in the management of universities or education, the Directorate General of
Higher Education put it in the format of the new management that aims to improve the quality of education on an
ongoing basis. Improving the quality of education is done in a sustainable manner by incorporating assessment,
accreditation and institutional self-evaluation conducted on universities both public and private (Soehendro, 1996).
Either private or public university always working to improve the status of quality improvement / internal quality on an
ongoing basis to obtain an increase in the quality of lecturers. To maintain the quality of the faculty, institutions routinely
perform the monitoring and evaluation of faculty performance. Routine monitoring and evaluation of faculty performance
bottleneck in its development with the increasing number of students and the limited number of officers. In addition to
data processing only processed using Microsoft Excel software, until now there is no special software to process the data
as a tool for monitoring and evaluation of faculty performance. The results of the monitoring and evaluation of faculty
performance during this form of recapitulation sourced from questionnaire data related to student learning process and do
not include the activities of lecturers in the field of research and community service. These problems have an impact on:

1. Takes a long time in doing student questionnaire data processing by the academic part.
2. Lecturer’s performance evaluation results are still incomplete because not include field research and community
service.
3. Lecturer performance evaluation results are not in accordance with the guidance lecturer performance evaluations that
have been established by the institution.
4. Institutional difficulty in determining policies related quality improvement lecturer as: further studies, training and
rewards, no historical data of lecturer performance.
5. Become an obstacle to the improvement of institutional accreditation status as one of the accreditation assessment is a
history of the activities Tridharma college by the lecturer within a certain time.

This study will analyze Lecturers Performance Appraisal-based intelligent computing system using Fuzzy Inference
System with Mamdani method. The focus of research is more focused on lecturer performance appraisal process. This

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                                       Page 302
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

assessment is based on the assessment lecturer performance, namely Tridarma and internal activity. This decision support
system to help and provide an alternative to the assessment of each lecturer, the criteria change, It is useful to facilitate
decision-makers on issues related to lecturer performance appraisal, so it will at least get a decent lecturers were given
rewards or awards

II. Fuzzy Logic
One of the components forming the study of soft computing are fuzzy logic was first introduced in 1965 by Lotfi A.
Zadeh. Fuzzy logic is used as a way to map the problem of inputs leading to the expected output. The role of degree of
membership is the cornerstone of a fuzzy set to determine the presence of certain elements [13], [14].
Some basic operations are most often used to combine and modify the fuzzy set is, the combined operation (union), slices
operations (Intersection) and complement operator (Complement). The workings of fuzzy logic includes several stages as
follows (see Figure 1) [15]:

1) Fuzzification Process
2) Fuzzy knowledge base formation (Rule in the form of IF ... THEN)
3) Inference Engine (Max-Min implication function or Dot-Product)
4) Defuzzyfication, which can be done in several ways, including the
a. Average Methode
                                                                                                               (1)
b. Center of Area Methode
                                                                                                               (2)




                                 Figureure 1. The structure of the fuzzy inference system

III. Analysis And Design
3.1 Input Requirements Analysis
Activities and evaluating lecturer performance appraisal carried out by the Head of Quality Assurance Unit of each
semester that are accumulated in one academic year. The elements are the basis for performance evaluation include:
primary data and secondary data. Primary data consist of accuracy in the assessment, preparation of the material, the
ability to present the material, give examples relating to the material being taught. Secondary data consists of Tridarma
College include teaching, research and community service. The data used in this study is primary data, the study used
variable input variables and two output variables. These variables are as follows:

X1 = Mastery Matter
Based on the above data consists of 3 teaching variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)
X 2 = Explain, Elaborate and Presenting
Based on the above data consists of 3 variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)
X3 = Variable Answering Questions
Based on the above data consists of 3 variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)
X4 = Variable Discipline
Based on the above data consists of 3 variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)
X5 = Variable Performance / Appearance
Based on the above data consists of 3 variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)
X6 = Variable Interactions with Students
Based on the above data consists of 3 variable fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)

3.2 Logic Process analysis
Sistem Penilaian kinerja dosen tetap Universitas Serang Raya dirancang dan dibangun dengan menerapkan logika fuzzy
Inference System dengan metode Mamdani yang disesuaikan dengan kondisi dari ketentuan penilaian kinerja dosen tetap
Universitas Serang Raya yang ada.


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                              Page 303
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

The performance evaluation system of permanent lecturers of University Serang Raya designed and built by applying
fuzzy logic Inference System with Mamdani methods adapted to the conditions of the terms of performance assessment of
permanent lecturers of University Serang Raya.

3.3 Output Requirement Analysis
The results or output of this research is a decision in the assessment of lecturer performance at the University of Serang
Raya.

3.4 Design
The design is done on the stage Use Case Diagrams, and Class Diagrams. The user of a decision support system (DSS) is
the Head of University Serang Raya quality assurance Unit, then this lecturer performance appraisal process is a process
of typing the assessment data, lecturers data and the value for the performance of each lecturer data.

3.4.1 Use Case Diagram
Use case is a construction to describe how the system looks in the eyes of the user. Target modeling use case include
defining the functional and operational needs of the system.
                                                                Input Batas Atas dan Batas Bawah Variabel


                                                                                                                  Input Penguasaan Materi


                                                                                                                                Menjelaskan menguraikan dan memaparkan


                                                                                                                                                  Variabel Menjawab

                                                                         Input Variabel
                                                                                                                                    Variabel Kedisiplinan
                                      Akademik
                                                                          Fuzzy Madani
                                                                                                                                    Variabel Performance


                                                                           View Hasil
                                                                                                                          Variabel Interaksi dengan Mahasiswa




                                             Figureure 3.1 Use Case Diagram
3.4.2 Activity Diagram
Activity diagrams are part of UML is used to describe the stages of any existing business processes in order to more easily
understand the business processes that occur. In the activity diagram for each activity presented by the rounded rectangle
is linked with arrows to illustrate the transition from one activity to another. Activity diagrams starting from the initial
state and ends with the final state


                                                                            Input Batas atas dan Bawah Variable




                                                                                                     Proses Input




                                                                                                           Hasil




                       Figureure 3.2 Activity Diagram Input upper limit and lower limit variable


                                                                                          Input Variabel




                                Input Penguasaan Materi                                 Variabel Menjawab                           Variabel Performance    Variabel Interaksi dengan Mahasiswa

                                             Menjelaskan, Menguraikan dan memaparkan                        Variabel Kedisiplinan




                                                                                         Proses Variabel




                                                                                             Hasil




                                            Figureure 3.3 Activity Diagram Input Variable

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                                                                                                                 Page 304
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847



                                                                 Fuzzy Madani




                                                                     Cek



                                                                            Benar

                                                                      Hasil




                                    Figureure 3.4 Activity Diagram Fuzzy Mamdani



                                                          Hasil Laporan Kinerja Kerja




                                                                Lihat Laporan




                               Figureure 3.5 Activity Diagram Work Performance Report

3.4.3 Sequence Diagram
Sequence diagrams describe interactions between objects in and around the system. Sequnce diagram between dimensions
comprises vertical and horizontal dimensions. Sequence diagrams illustrate commonly used scenario or series of steps
carried out in response sebuag event to produce a given output. Beginning of what is to trigger the event, the process and
what changes are going on internally and what the resulting output. Each object includes actors have the vertical lifeline.
Message berpanah described as a line other than an object. In the next design phase, the message will be mapped into the
operating methods of the class Activation bar indicates the length of the execution of a process, generally begins with the
receipt of a massage.



                                                                Input Batas Atas dan Batas Bawah Variabel
                                          : Akademik



                                                         1 : Input Batas()



                                                              2 : Hasil()




                      Figureure 3.6 Sequence Diagrams Input upper limit and lower limit variable

                                                                                           Input Variabel


                                  : Akademik

                                                 1 : Input Penguasaan Materi()

                                       2 : Menjelaskan, Menguraikan dan memaparkan()

                                                        3 : Variabel Menawab()


                                                       4 : Variabel Kedisiplinan()

                                                   5 : Variabel Performance()

                                            6 : Variabel Interaksi dengan mahasiswa()




                                    Figureures 3.7 Sequence Diagram Input Variable

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                            Page 305
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847


                                                                             Fuzzy Madani

                                                 : Akademik
                                                              1 : Input()



                                                               2 : Hasil()




                                   Figure 3.8 Sequence Diagram Input Fuzzy Madani


                                                                   Laporan Hasil Kinerja Kerja

                                            : Akademik
                                                         1 : Cetak()



                                                           2 : Lihat()




                                Figure 3.8 Sequence Diagram Work Performance Report

4. Research Methodology
This study uses the descriptive method of research, because it was felt that the issue being studied now by the facts that
occurred in the performance of a lecturer at the University of Serang Raya. This study is expected to provide enter or
support decisions about the relative value of two or more relative measures.

5. Results and Discussion
The process of data collection and data cleaning resulted in 81 studies lecturer at the Faculty of Information Technology,
77 lecturer in the Faculty of Engineering, 54 lecturer at the Faculty of Economics and lecturer at the Faculty of Social
Politics 7. Data lecturer of the Faculty of Information Technology to the Faculty of Social Politics (see table 5.1). Value
NR_Content Mastery, NR_ Describes outlining and describing and an average value of the respondents, value of
NR_Answer Questions, NR_Discipline, NR_Performance and NR_Interaction with students is the average value of the
respondents.
Based on the above data were grouped into 6 model of fuzzy variable fuzzy set on 3 (LOW MEDIUM HIGH) and the
variable and the universe of discourse in this case as shown in (Table 5.2). While the fuzzy set is established based on the
data values above, as shown in (Table 5.3).

Based on the above data were grouped into 6 models are fuzzy variables, NR_ material mastery, consisting of three fuzzy
sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH), NR_ Describes outlining and describing, consisting of three fuzzy sets LOW and MEDIUM
HIGH NR_ Answering Questions, consisting of 3 fuzzy set (LOW MEDIUM HIGH), NR_ discipline consists of three
fuzzy sets (LESS, MEDIUM, GOOD), NR_Performance consists of three fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH) and NR_
Interaction with students with 3 fuzzy sets (LOW MEDIUM HIGH)

Fuzzyfikasi initial process begins with a test of the first data named Yanto Adjie Setya, SE., M.Sc. and has a value
NR_Material Mastery = 4:19, NR_ Describes outlining and describing = 3.81 = 4.06 The NR_ NR_Question answering
Discipline = 3.66 and NR_ NR_Performance = 3.75 = 4.00 The Interaction with students. To determine whether Yanto
Adjie Setya get reaward or not get the reward, the first degree of membership value calculation for each value that is
owned (NR_Material Mastery, NNR_ Describes outlining and describing, NR_Question answering, NR_ Discipline,
Performance and NR_ NR_ Interaction with students. calculation results show that the value of Mastery NR_Material
possessed a degree of membership in the set LOW at -1.58 and 0:47 on the set iS (see chart NR_Material degree of
membership for Mastery in Figure 5.1).

The calculation of the value of membership degree and then continued in outlining and describing NR_Describes
variable, which after calculation, the value NR_ Describes outlining and describing fit into the set members with degrees
of membership -1.08 LOW, MEDIUM and set the degree of membership of 0:57 (see chart degree of membership NR_
Describes outlining and describing in Figure 5.2).



Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                             Page 306
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

The calculation of the value of membership degree and then continued on answering NR_Question variables which after
calculation, the value of answering Question NR_
entered into by members of the set LOW -1.4 degrees of membership and the degree of membership MEDIUM set of 0.63
(see chart degree of membership in the picture NR_ answering Question 5.3)
The calculation of the value of membership degree and then continued on NR_Discipline variables which after
calculation, the value NR_ Discipline entered into by members of the set LOW -0.88 degrees of membership and the
degree of membership MEDIUM set of 0.88 (see chart NR_ Discipline degree of membership in the Figure 5.4).
The calculation of the value of membership degree and then continued on NR_Performance variables which after
calculation, the value NR_ Performance fit into the set of members with degrees of membership -0.75 LOW and
MEDIUM set with a membership degree of 0.86 (see chart degree of membership NR_ Performance in Figure 5.5).
The calculation of the value of membership degree and then continued on NR_Interaction with students variables which
after calculation, the value NR_ Interaction with students fit into the set of members with degrees of membership -1.33
LOW and MEDIUM set with a membership degree of 0.63 (see chart membership degree of NR_ Interaction with
students with the image 5.6).

Here are samples of data taken from several faculty lecturer shown in Table 5.1

                                               Table 5.1 Sample Data lecturer
                                                   AVERAGE OF DESCRIPTION TO
                               Lecturer’s                        ASSESS
                     No.                                                                   Output
                                 Name
                                                  1     2      3      4       5     6

                              Yanto Adjie        4,1   3,8    4,0    3,6
                      1                                                     3,75   4,00     3,91
                            Setya, SE., M.Si.     9     1      6      6
                                 Irwan
                                                 3,9   3,8    3,9    3,7
                      2      Agustiansyah,                                  3,88   3,81     3,86
                                                  7     4      4      5
                             S.Pd., M.Hum.
                                 H. Uus
                                                 4,2   4,0    4,1    4,0
                      3       Muhammad                                      4,00   4,18     4,12
                                                  9     6      2      6
                               Husain, Lc.
                            Nana Umdiana,        4,4   4,3    4,3    3,7
                      4                                                     4,15   3,88     4,15
                                   SE.            5     6      3      0
                              Sulasno, SH.,      3,8   3,2    3,7    4,2
                      5                                                     3,80   3,32     3,71
                                M.Hum.            4     4      6      8
                            H. Anizir Ali        3,9   4,0    4,0    4,1
                      6                                                     4,29   4,16     4,11
                           Murad, SE., MM.        7     3      0      9
                             Imam Fauzi,         4,6   4,5    4,5    4,7
                      7                                                     4,71   4,35     4,59
                                M.Pd              2     0      9      6
                               Shodik
                                                 4,0   3,7    3,7    3,5
                      8       Nuryadhin,                                    3,88   3,88     3,80
                                                  3     8      5      0
                               S.Kom.
                            Bohari Muslim,       4,5   4,2    4,2    3,5
                      9                                                     4,33   4,43     4,23
                                M.Pd.             7     4      4      7
                             Drs. Rustaman       4,0   3,4    3,6    4,2
                      10                                                    3,86   3,95     3,86
                                Ridwan            0     5      4      3
                            Santi Octaviani,     3,0   2,4    2,8    1,8
                      11                                                    3,19   3,19     2,77
                              SE., M.Ak           5     8      6      6
                             Boy Perihatin,      2,2   2,2    1,8    1,8
                      12                                                    2,00   1,88     2,02
                                 S.Pd.            5     5      8      8
                           Deviyantoro, SE.,     3,8   3,2    3,5    4,1
                      13                                                    3,67   3,90     3,73
                                MM.               6     9      2      4
                            Rafiudin, S.Ag.,     4,0   3,7    3,6    3,9
                      14                                                    3,97   3,26     3,76
                                 M.Si             6     1      3      4

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                        Page 307
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

                      Hendriyastuti,     3,9   3,6   3,8   4,0
                15                                               4,00   3,68   3,85
                       S.Pd., M.Pd        6     0     4     0
                        M. Taufik        4,6   4,4   4,3   4,6
                16                                               4,36   4,23   4,45
                     Harsana, S.Kom.      4     5     2     8
                      Syifa Sulfiah,     4,4   4,0   4,3   3,6
                17                                               4,20   3,60   4,02
                       S.Si., MM.         0     0     0     0
                      Dayat Hidayat,     4,3   4,2   4,4   4,0
                18                                               4,35   4,35   4,29
                       SE., M.Akt.        5     2     8     0
                                         4,3   4,1   4,1   3,9
                19   Kodriyah, S.Pd.                             3,75   4,00   4,06
                                          1     9     9     4
                         H. Ade
                                         4,1   3,8   4,0   3,8
                20    Manggala, SE.,                             4,10   3,94   3,98
                                          3     4     3     7
                         M.Akt.
                      Drs. Bambang       3,9   3,6   3,6   3,2
                21                                               3,68   3,45   3,59
                         Setiadi          4     1     5     3
                       Drs. Abdul        3,7   3,3   3,3   3,7
                22                                               3,68   3,26   3,54
                       Fatah, MM.         4     7     7     9
                     Join Satria, SE.,   4,4   3,9   4,2   4,0
                23                                               4,00   4,42   4,19
                           MM.            2     6     5     8
                     Sayifullah, SE.,    4,3   4,0   4,1   4,1
                24                                               4,19   4,33   4,17
                          M.Akt           0     0     1     1
                         M. Johan
                                         3,8   3,8   3,7   3,7
                25   Widikusyanto,                               4,09   3,32   3,76
                                          2     2     7     3
                          M.Sc
                          Erma
                                         3,5   3,1   3,1   2,5
                26     Perwitasari,                              3,24   3,00   3,13
                                          9     7     7     9
                          M.Pd.
                      Jainul Abidin,     4,5   4,5   4,3   4,6
                27                                               4,20   4,30   4,42
                        SE., M.Si.        3     3     0     7
                        Ir. H. Eddy      4,3   4,1   4,0   4,0
                28                                               4,09   4,23   4,15
                         Nugroho          2     4     9     5
                      Deni Hermana,      4,3   4,2   4,3   4,0
                29                                               4,50   4,31   4,30
                        SE., MM           8     8     1     0
                       Denny Putri       3,1   2,9   3,1   2,1
                30                                               2,90   2,71   2,84
                        Hapsari, SE       9     0     9     4
                       Ir. H. Zaenal
                                         3,5   3,1   3,4   3,6
                31     Abidin Afifi,                             3,71   3,41   3,49
                                          9     8     1     2
                            MM
                                         3,5   3,3   3,4   3,7
                32     Dr. Mahdani                               3,47   3,79   3,57
                                          3     7     7     9
                        Imam Abu
                                         4,3   4,0   4,2   4,0
                33     Hanifah, SE.,                             4,07   4,19   4,14
                                          0     0     2     4
                          M.Akt.
                         Eka Satia       3,5   3,1   3,3   3,1
                34                                               3,24   3,00   3,25
                     Laksmana, S.Sos.     9     2     5     8
                      Karkono, SE.,      4,0   4,0   4,1   3,8
                35                                               3,75   4,13   3,99
                          MM.             8     0     3     3
                     Restu Wahyuni,      3,4   3,0   3,2   2,0
                36                                               3,48   2,87   3,01
                         S.Sos.           3     0     2     9
                       As'ary, SS.,      4,0   3,8   3,9   4,1
                37                                               4,00   3,84   3,97
                        M.Hum             7     8     3     2


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                     Page 308
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

                                              4,0    3,9    3,9    4,0
                   38    Suhud, S.Kom.                                      4,00    3,84     3,97
                                               5      1      3      9
                          Roy Ritonga,        3,6    3,6    3,6    3,2
                   39                                                       3,40    3,20     3,43
                            M.Kom.             0      0      0      0
                        Muizzudin, SE.,       4,0    3,5    3,6    3,6
                   40                                                       3,67    3,17     3,61
                            MM.                0      0      7      7
                                              4,2    4,0    4,0    3,0
                   41   Oji Fauzi, M.Pd.                                    3,84    4,12     3,89
                                               4      0      4      8
                        Syamsudin, S.Si.,     4,1    3,7    3,6    4,3
                   42                                                       3,95    3,71     3,93
                             MM.               4      6      2      8
                         Abdul Halim,         4,3    4,1    3,9    4,5
                   43                                                       4,38    4,13     4,24
                           S.Kom.              1      3      4      6
                        Achmad Firdaus,       2,1    1,9    2,0    1,4
                   44                                                       2,00    1,77     1,89
                            MM.                5      6      4      2

                                 Table 5.2 Variables and Universe Discussion

          Function              Variable Name               Universe Discussion            Explanation
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_ Material Mastery             [ 2.25 – 4.64]           respondents variabel
                                                                                    Material Mastery
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_ Describes outlining                                   respondents variabel
                                                           [2.25 – 4.50 ]
                          and describing                                            Describes outlining and
                                                                                    describing
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_ Variabel Question
                                                           [1.88 – 4.59]            respondents variabel
                          answering
      Input                                                                         Question answering
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_Variabel Discipline           [1.42- 4.76]             respondents variabel
                                                                                    Discipline
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_ performance                  [ 2.00- 4.71]            respondents variabel
                                                                                    Performance
                                                                                    Average scores of
                          NR_Interaction with
                                                           [1.77 – 4.43]            respondents variabel
                          students
                                                                                    Interaction with students
                                                                                    Value that meets lecturer
                          Lecturers Performance
      output                                               [ 1.89 – 4.59]           performance appraisal so
                          Appraisal
                                                                                    get reward


                                            Table 5. 3. The Set of Fuzzy
                             Nama                                    Semesta
               Fungsi                        Himpunan Fuzzy                                Domain
                            Variabel                               pembicaraan
                                            Low                                     [2.25 – 3.00]
                         NR_ Material
                                            Middle                [ 2.25 –4.64]     [2.25 – 4.64]
                         Mastery
                                            High                                    [ 3.50 - 4.64 ]
                         NR_
                         Menjelaskan        Low                                     [2.25 – 3.00 ]
          Input
                         Menguraikan        Middle                 [2.25 – 4.50 ]   [2.25 – 4.50 ]
                         danmemapark        High                                    [ 3.50 - 4.50 ]
                         an
                         NR_ Variabel       Low                                     [1.88 – 3.00 ]
                                                                   [1.88 – 4.59]
                         Question           Middle                                  [2.25 – 4.59 ]


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                        Page 309
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

                       answering        High                                 [ 3.50 - 4.59]
                                        Low                                  [1.42 – 3.00 ]
                       NR_Variabel
                                        Middle              [1.42- 4.76]     [2.25 – 4.76 ]
                       Discipline
                                        High                                 [ 3.50 - 4.76 ]
                                        Low                                  [2.00 – 3.00]
                       NR_
                                        Middle              [ 2.00- 4.71]    [2.00 – 4.71]
                       performance
                                        High                                 [ 3.50 - 4.71 ]
                       NR_Interactio    Low                                  [1.77– 3.00 ]
                       n with           Middle              [1.77 – 4.43]    [2.25 – 4.43 ]
                       students         High                                 [ 3.50 - 4.43]
                                        Medium                               [ 1.89 – 3.50]
                       Penilaian
          output                        Good                [ 1.89 – 4.59]   [ 3.00- 4.59]
                       Kinerja Dosen
                                        Very Good                            [4.00 - 4.59]




                     Figure 5.1. Grafik derajat keanggotaan untuk NR_ Material Mastery




               Figure 5.2. Graphs degree of membership to Explain Describe NR_and \Exposing




                          Figure 5.3 . Grafik derajat keanggotaan untuk NR_ Question
                                                Answering




                       Figure 5.4 . Grafik derajat keanggotaan untuk NR_ Discipline




                       Figure 5.5. Graphs degree of membership to NR_ Performance

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                              Page 310
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847




                       Figure 5.6. Graphs degree of membership to NR_ Interactions with Students

Proses selanjutnya adalah melakukan inferensi terhadap Variabel Penilaian Kierja Dosen dengan cara yang sama di atas,
pada kasus ini kami menggunakan fungsi trapesium untuk mendefinisikan nilai linguistik nya sebagai berikut (lihat
gambar 5.7) :




                        Figure 5.7. Inference Graph Variable Performance Assessment lecturer

By using Mamdani inference method, obtained by using a process of inference rules CONJUNCTION (^) of the eight new
rules above, to take a minimum degree of membership from the existing linguistic value. Here is a new temporary rule
obtained:

1) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Menjelaskan Menguraikan danmemaparkan Rendah (1.08)
     AND NR_ Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_
     NR_ performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
2.) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.57)
3) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.47)
4) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57)AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang ( 0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.47)
5) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.75)
6) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.47)
7) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.57)
8) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Menjelaskan Penilaian Kinerja Menguraikan dan memaparkan
     Sedang (0.57) AND NR_ Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang
     (0.88) AND NR_ NR_ performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then
     Penilaian Kinerja Sedang (0.47)

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                       Page 311
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

9) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah ( 1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
10) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.47)
11) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.88)
12) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang( 0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
13) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students rendah (1.33) ThenVariabel Then Penilaian
     Kinerja Sedang (0.75)
14) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
15) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah ( 1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah ( 1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
16) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57)AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
17) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
18) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
19) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.86)
20) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang ( 0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
21) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
22) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
23) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                               Page 312
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

    performance Rendah (0.75)AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.63)
24) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
25) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
26) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88)AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86)     AND NR_ Interaction with students      Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian
    KinerjaSedang (0.63)
27)If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33)Then Variabel Then Penilaian
    Kinerja Sedang (0.47)
28) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang ( 0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
29) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
30) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang(0.57)
31) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
32) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
33) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88)AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
34) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.57)
35) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
36) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang( 0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
37) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                            Page 313
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

38) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang(0.57)
39)If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (0.57)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
40) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
41) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
42) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.57)
43) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
44) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
45) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah ( 0.75)AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
46) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
47) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang(0.57)
48) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
49) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.75)
50) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
    Sedang (0.47)
51) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
    performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
    (0.57)
52) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
    Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                             Page 314
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
53) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75)AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
54) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
55) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.57)
56) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0,47)
57) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah( 1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
58) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang ( 0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
59) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah ( 1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang( 0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75)AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.57)
60) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
61) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah( 1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah ( 1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
62) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
63) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.63)
66) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
67) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah ( 1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
68) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang( 0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang( 0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Penilaian Kinerja Sedang
     (0.47)

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                               Page 315
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

69) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah ( 1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.63)
70)If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
71) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah ( 1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
72) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
73) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.57)
74) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
75) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
76) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88)AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
77) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah( 1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
78) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
79) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
80) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
81) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang (0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
82) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
83) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah( 1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah (0.88) AND NR_ NR_

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                              Page 316
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
84) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
85) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang(0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.63)
86) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
87) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah(1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
88) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah(1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang((0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang (0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.63)
89) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang (0.63)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah (0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) The Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
90) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47)AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang(0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)
91) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08)AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah (1.4)AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
92) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang(1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Rendah(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Rendah(0.75) AND NR_ Interaction with students Rendah (1.33) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.75)
91) If NR_Material Mastery Rendah (1.58) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Rendah (1.08) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Rendah(1.4) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63)Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0,63)
92) If NR_Material Mastery Sedang (0.47) AND NR_ Describes outlining and describing Sedang (0.57) AND NR_
     Variabel Question answering Sedang(0.63) AND NR_Variabel Discipline Sedang(0.88) AND NR_ NR_
     performance Sedang(0.86) AND NR_ Interaction with students Sedang (0.63) Then Then Penilaian Kinerja
     Sedang (0.47)

Based on the above calculation , obtained 92 linguistic values with different degrees of membership values , namely :
   1 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   2 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:57 )
   3) Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   4 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
   5 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   6) Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   7 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:57 )
   8 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   9 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   10 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                           Page 317
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

  11 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.88 )
  12 Assessment of Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  13 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  14 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  15 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  16 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  17 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  18 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  19 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.86 )
  20 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  21 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  22 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  23 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
  24 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  25 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  26 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
  27 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  28 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  29 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.88 )
  30 ) Medium Performance Assessment . ( 0.57)
  31 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  32 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  33 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  34 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  35 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47 )
  36 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  37 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  38 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  39 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  40 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  41 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  42 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  43 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  44 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  45 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  46 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
  47 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:57 )
  48 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  49 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  50 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  51 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  52 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  53 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  54 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  55 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  56 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47 )
  57 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  58 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  59 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.57)
  60 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  61 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  62 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  63 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
  66 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  67 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
  68 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
  69 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
  70 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
  71 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                              Page 318
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

   72 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   73 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:57 )
   74 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   75 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   76 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   77 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   78 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   79 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   80 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
   81 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   82 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47 )
   83 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   84 ) Assessment Performance Medium ( 0:47 )
   85 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
   86 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47 )
   87 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   88 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
   89 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   90 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47)
   91 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   92 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.75 )
   91 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.63 )
   92 ) Performance Assessment Medium ( 0.47 )

The next step is, using the rule disjunction (V) to determine the maximum value of the membership degree of linguistic
values associated:
Medium Performance Assessment (0.47)
Medium Performance Assessment (0.57)
Medium Performance Assessment (0.63)
Medium Performance Assessment (0.88)
Medium Performance Assessment (0.75)
Medium Performance Assessment (0.63)

The next step is, using the rule disjunction (V) to determine the maximum value of the membership degree of linguistic
values associated:
• Performance Assessment Department is moderate (0.47) ᴠ Performance Assessment Lecturer moderate (0.57) v Medium
Performance Assessment (0.63) v Performance Assessment Lecturer medium (0.88) v Performance Assessment Lecturer
medium (0.75) v Performance Assessment Lecturer medium (0.63) generated Ratings faculty performance was (0.88)

By using the process of clipping on Mamdani, 3 fuzzy sets can be described in graphic form in accordance with variable
degrees of membership in accordance with the departments of Lecturer Performance Assessment being, Assessment of
faculty performance is good and very good performance assessment




Testing of the other data then done using tools Fuzzy inference System (FIS) in MATLAB and obtained the following
results:
                                                                                                    Outp
               No.                                        RATA – RATA URAIAN YANG DINILAI
                     Nama Dosen                                                                     ut
                                                          1      2      3      4      5      6
               1     Yanto Adjie Setya, SE., M.Si.        4,19   3,81   4,06   3,66   3,75   4,00   3,84
               2     Irwan Agustiansyah, S.Pd., M.Hum.    3,97   3,84   3,94   3,75   3,88   3,81   3,86
               3     H. Uus Muhammad Husain, Lc.          4,29   4,06   4,12   4,06   4,00   4,18   3,88
               4     Nana Umdiana, SE.                    4,45   4,36   4,33   3,70   4,15   3,88   3,85


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                          Page 319
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

           5    Sulasno, SH., M.Hum.                      3,84   3,24   3,76   4,28   3,80   3,32   3,8
           6    H. Anizir Ali Murad, SE., MM.             3,97   4,03   4,00   4,19   4,29   4,16   3,87
           7    Imam Fauzi, M.Pd                          4,62   4,50   4,59   4,76   4,71   4,35   3,96
           8    Shodik Nuryadhin, S.Kom.                  4,03   3,78   3,75   3,50   3,88   3,88   3,83
           9    Bohari Muslim, M.Pd.                      4,57   4,24   4,24   3,57   4,33   4,43   3,84
           10   Drs. Rustaman Ridwan                      4,00   3,45   3,64   4,23   3,86   3,95   3,78
           11   Santi Octaviani, SE., M.Ak                3,05   2,48   2,86   1,86   3,19   3,19   3,78
           12   Boy Perihatin, S.Pd.                      2,25   2,25   1,88   1,88   2,00   1,88   3,92
           13   Deviyantoro, SE., MM.                     3,86   3,29   3,52   4,14   3,67   3,90   3,78
           14   Rafiudin, S.Ag., M.Si                     4,06   3,71   3,63   3,94   3,97   3,26   3,80
           15   Hendriyastuti, S.Pd., M.Pd                3,96   3,60   3,84   4,00   4,00   3,68   3,82
           16   M. Taufik Harsana, S.Kom.                 4,64   4,45   4,32   4,68   4,36   4,23   3,93
           17   Syifa Sulfiah, S.Si., MM.                 4,40   4,00   4,30   3,60   4,20   3,60   3,84
           18   Dayat Hidayat, SE., M.Akt.                4,35   4,22   4,48   4,00   4,35   4,35   3,89
           19   Kodriyah, S.Pd.                           4,31   4,19   4,19   3,94   3,75   4,00   3,84
           20   H. Ade Manggala, SE., M.Akt.              4,13   3,84   4,03   3,87   4,10   3,94   3,86
           21   Drs. Bambang Setiadi                      3,94   3,61   3,65   3,23   3,68   3,45   3,79
           22   Drs. Abdul Fatah, MM.                     3,74   3,37   3,37   3,79   3,68   3,26   3,77
           23   Join Satria, SE., MM.                     4,42   3,96   4,25   4,08   4,00   4,42   3,88
           24   Sayifullah, SE., M.Akt                    4,30   4,00   4,11   4,11   4,19   4,33   3,89
           25   M. Johan Widikusyanto, M.Sc               3,82   3,82   3,77   3,73   4,09   3,32   3,81
           26   Erma Perwitasari, M.Pd.                   3,59   3,17   3,17   2,59   3,24   3,00   3,75
           27   Jainul Abidin, SE., M.Si.                 4,53   4,53   4,30   4,67   4,20   4,30   3,91
           28   Ir. H. Eddy Nugroho                       4,32   4,14   4,09   4,05   4,09   4,23   3,89
           29   Deni Hermana, SE., MM                     4,38   4,28   4,31   4,00   4,50   4,31   3,89
           30   Denny Putri Hapsari, SE                   3,19   2,90   3,19   2,14   2,90   2,71   3,77
           31   Ir. H. Zaenal Abidin Afifi, MM            3,59   3,18   3,41   3,62   3,71   3,41   3,80
           32   Dr. Mahdani                               3,53   3,37   3,47   3,79   3,47   3,79   3,77
           33   Imam Abu Hanifah, SE., M.Akt.             4,30   4,00   4,22   4,04   4,07   4,19   3,89
           34   Eka Satia Laksmana, S.Sos.                3,59   3,12   3,35   3,18   3,24   3,00   3,75
           35   Karkono, SE., MM.                         4,08   4,00   4,13   3,83   3,75   4,13   3,84
           36   Restu Wahyuni, S.Sos.                     3,43   3,00   3,22   2,09   3,48   2,87   3,77
           37   As'ary, SS., M.Hum                        4,07   3,88   3,93   4,12   4,00   3,84   3,87
           38   Suhud, S.Kom.                             4,05   3,91   3,93   4,09   4,00   3,84   3,88
           39   Roy Ritonga, M.Kom.                       3,60   3,60   3,60   3,20   3,40   3,20   3,77
           40   Muizzudin, SE., MM.                       4,00   3,50   3,67   3,67   3,67   3,17   3,78
           41   Oji Fauzi, M.Pd.                          4,24   4,00   4,04   3,08   3,84   4,12   3,77
           42   Syamsudin, S.Si., MM.                     4,14   3,76   3,62   4,38   3,95   3,71   3,84
           43   Abdul Halim, S.Kom.                       4,31   4,13   3,94   4,56   4,38   4,13   3,89
           44   Achmad Firdaus, MM.                       2,15   1,96   2,04   1,42   2,00   1,77   3,95




                                        Figure. 5.8 Variaabel ouput Kinerja dosen

Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                          Page 320
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847




                                Figure. 5.9 Variaabel Material matery




                       Figure. 5.10 Variaabel describes outlining and describing




                              Figure. 5.11 Variaabel question answering




                                 Figure. 5.12 Variaabel Performance



Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                  Page 321
International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847




                                 Figure. 5.13 Variaabel Interaction with students




                              Figure. 5.14 variabel lecturers performance appraisal




                                                Figure. 5.15 Fuzzyfication

             No.                                   RATA – RATA URAIAN YANG DINILAI           Output
                   Nama Dosen
                                                   1      2      3      4      5      6
                   Yanto Adjie Setya, SE.,
             1                                     4,19   3,81   4,06   3,66   3,75   4,00   Good
                   M.Si.
                   Irwan Agustiansyah, S.Pd.,                                                Good
             2                                     3,97   3,84   3,94   3,75   3,88   3,81
                   M.Hum.
                   H. Uus Muhammad Husain,                                                   Good
             3                                     4,29   4,06   4,12   4,06   4,00   4,18
                   Lc.
             4     Nana Umdiana, SE.               4,45   4,36   4,33   3,70   4,15   3,88   Good

             5     Sulasno, SH., M.Hum.            3,84   3,24   3,76   4,28   3,80   3,32   Good
                   H. Anizir Ali Murad, SE.,                                                 Good
             6                                     3,97   4,03   4,00   4,19   4,29   4,16
                   MM.
             7     Imam Fauzi, M.Pd                4,62   4,50   4,59   4,76   4,71   4,35   Good

             8     Shodik Nuryadhin, S.Kom.        4,03   3,78   3,75   3,50   3,88   3,88   Good

             9     Bohari Muslim, M.Pd.            4,57   4,24   4,24   3,57   4,33   4,43   Good

             10    Drs. Rustaman Ridwan            4,00   3,45   3,64   4,23   3,86   3,95   Good

             11    Santi Octaviani, SE., M.Ak      3,05   2,48   2,86   1,86   3,19   3,19   Good

             12    Boy Perihatin, S.Pd.            2,25   2,25   1,88   1,88   2,00   1,88   Good

             13    Deviyantoro, SE., MM.           3,86   3,29   3,52   4,14   3,67   3,90   Good



Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                     Page 322
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

                  14    Rafiudin, S.Ag., M.Si         4,06   3,71   3,63   3,94   3,97   3,26   Good

                  15    Hendriyastuti, S.Pd., M.Pd    3,96   3,60   3,84   4,00   4,00   3,68   Good

                  16    M. Taufik Harsana, S.Kom.     4,64   4,45   4,32   4,68   4,36   4,23   Good

                  17    Syifa Sulfiah, S.Si., MM.     4,40   4,00   4,30   3,60   4,20   3,60   Good

                  18    Dayat Hidayat, SE., M.Akt.    4,35   4,22   4,48   4,00   4,35   4,35   Good

                  19    Kodriyah, S.Pd.               4,31   4,19   4,19   3,94   3,75   4,00   Good
                        H. Ade Manggala, SE.,                                                   Good
                  20                                  4,13   3,84   4,03   3,87   4,10   3,94
                        M.Akt.
                  21    Drs. Bambang Setiadi          3,94   3,61   3,65   3,23   3,68   3,45   Good

                  22    Drs. Abdul Fatah, MM.         3,74   3,37   3,37   3,79   3,68   3,26   Good

                  23    Join Satria, SE., MM.         4,42   3,96   4,25   4,08   4,00   4,42   Good

                  24    Sayifullah, SE., M.Akt        4,30   4,00   4,11   4,11   4,19   4,33   Good
                        M. Johan Widikusyanto,                                                  Good
                  25                                  3,82   3,82   3,77   3,73   4,09   3,32
                        M.Sc
                  26    Erma Perwitasari, M.Pd.       3,59   3,17   3,17   2,59   3,24   3,00   Good

                  27    Jainul Abidin, SE., M.Si.     4,53   4,53   4,30   4,67   4,20   4,30   Good

                  28    Ir. H. Eddy Nugroho           4,32   4,14   4,09   4,05   4,09   4,23   Good

                  29    Deni Hermana, SE., MM         4,38   4,28   4,31   4,00   4,50   4,31   Good

                  30    Denny Putri Hapsari, SE       3,19   2,90   3,19   2,14   2,90   2,71   Good
                        Ir. H. Zaenal Abidin Afifi,                                             Good
                  31                                  3,59   3,18   3,41   3,62   3,71   3,41
                        MM
                  32    Dr. Mahdani                   3,53   3,37   3,47   3,79   3,47   3,79   Good
                        Imam Abu Hanifah, SE.,                                                  Good
                  33                                  4,30   4,00   4,22   4,04   4,07   4,19
                        M.Akt.
                  34    Eka Satia Laksmana, S.Sos.    3,59   3,12   3,35   3,18   3,24   3,00   Good

                  35    Karkono, SE., MM.             4,08   4,00   4,13   3,83   3,75   4,13   Good

                  36    Restu Wahyuni, S.Sos.         3,43   3,00   3,22   2,09   3,48   2,87   Good

                  37    As'ary, SS., M.Hum            4,07   3,88   3,93   4,12   4,00   3,84   Good

                  38    Suhud, S.Kom.                 4,05   3,91   3,93   4,09   4,00   3,84   Good

                  39    Roy Ritonga, M.Kom.           3,60   3,60   3,60   3,20   3,40   3,20   Good

                  40    Muizzudin, SE., MM.           4,00   3,50   3,67   3,67   3,67   3,17   Good

                  41    Oji Fauzi, M.Pd.              4,24   4,00   4,04   3,08   3,84   4,12   Good

                  42    Syamsudin, S.Si., MM.         4,14   3,76   3,62   4,38   3,95   3,71   Good

                  43    Abdul Halim, S.Kom.           4,31   4,13   3,94   4,56   4,38   4,13   Good

                  44    Achmad Firdaus, MM.           2,15   1,96   2,04   1,42   2,00   1,77   Good


Conclusion
From the results, analysis and discussion has been done in this study, several conclusions can be taken as follows:
1. Decision support system for evaluation of the performance of the lecturer at the University of Serang City, which refers
to high school drama tri integrated using Fuzzy inference System and method Mamdani
2. This decision support system to assist and provide alternatives in conducting an assessment of each faculty to change
the criteria, decision makers associated with the problem of performance assessment professors, lecturers get to be the
most worthy of reward or recognition.

Daftar Pustaka
[1] Hamzah,Suyoto,Paulus Mudjihartono(2010). Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Penilaian Kinerja Dosen dengan metode
    balance Scorecard ( Studi Kasus: Universitas Respati Yogyakarta), Seminar Nasional informatika 2010
    (SemnasIF2010) UPN” veteran” Yogyakarta
[2] Handoyo Soemantri, (2011). Rancangan Pengukuran Kinerja Dosen menggunakan Fuzzy MCDM, Proceedings
    Jurnal Informatika &Komputasi STIMIK Indonesia,Vol 5 (1),ISSN 141-0232
[3] Jogiyanto. 2008. Sistem Teknologi Informasi. Penerbit Andi. Yogyakarta. Linda Atika , (2010) .Sistem Penunjang
    Keputusan Penilaian Kinerja Pemilihan Dosen berprestasi menggunakan metode AHP, Proceedings jurnal ilmiah
    Vol.12 No.3


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                            Page 323
 International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
        Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org, editorijaiem@gmail.com
Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                       ISSN 2319 - 4847

[4] Shofwatul ‘Uyun .(2010).Analisis pengaruh Indeks Kinerja Dosen terhadap Prestasi Nilai MataKuliah menggunakan
     Fuzzy Quantification Theory I,Jurnal Informatika Vol 4,No.1
[5] Sutabri, Tata. 2004. Analisa Sistem Informasi. Penerbit Andi.Yogyakarta.
[6] Sri Kusumadewi, Hari Purnomo, 2004.Aplikasi Logika Fuzzy untuk Pendukung Keputusan,Edisi Pertama-
     Yogyakarta, Penerbit Graha Ilmu,
[7] Jogiyanto, 2001. Analisis dan Desain Sistem Informasi : Pendekatan Terstruktur Teori dan Aplikasi bisnis.
     Yogyakarta: Andi offset
[8] Khoirudin, Akhmad Arwan. 2008. SNATI Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Penentuan Kelayakan Calon Rintisan
     Sekolah Bertaraf Internasional Dengan Metode Fuzzy Associative Memory. Jurusan Teknik Informatika, Fakultas
     Teknologi Industri, Universitas Islam Indonesia.
[9] Kusumadewi, Sri., Hartati, S., Harjoko, A., dan Wardoyo, R. 2006. Fuzzy Multi-Attribute Decision Making (FUZZY
     MADM). Yogyakarta: Penerbit Graha Ilmu.
[10] Rivai & Basri, 2004. Penilaian Kinerja Karyawan. Jurnal-sdm.blogspot.com, diakses tanggal 10-11-2010
[11] Ayuningtyas, I. K, Saptono, F, & Hidayat T. ( 2007). Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Penanganan Balita
     menggunakan Penalaran Fuzzy mamdani, Seminar nasional Aplikasi teknologi Informasi 2007 (SNATI 2007), L65-
     L71
[12] Djunaedi, M, Setiawan E.,E& Andista ,F.W (2005). Penentuan Jumlah Produksi Dengan Aplikasi Metode Fuzzy
     Mamdani, Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri, 95-104
[13] Kusumadesi, S., & Purnomo , H 9 2010), Aplikasi Logika Fuzzy untuk Pendukung Keputusan, Yogyakarta: Graha
     Ilmu.
[14] Purwati, N,M( 2009) . rancang Bangun Sistem pendukung Keputusan pemilihan Karyawan Teladan Menggunakan
     Metode Fuzzy AHP ( Studi kasus: PT BTDC Nusa Dua bali, Surabaya Stikom Surabaya.
[15] Rahman, A ( 2011) Sistem penujunang Keputusan dalam penentuan penerima Kredit Mobil Berbasis Analitical
     Hierarchy Proces (AHP). Banjarmasin: STIMIK Banjarbaru.
[16] Saputra, Eko, Wahyu., Sistem Penunjang Keputusan Untuk Penentuan Jurusan Pada SMA Negeri 10 Yogyakarta,
     Skripsi Mahasiswa AMIKOM Yogyakarta, 2011, Unpublished.
[17] Munfaikoh, Tri., Sistem Informasi Penjurusan Pada SMA Negeri 1 Klirong Kebumen, Skripsi Mahasiswa
     AMIKOM Yogyakarta, 2011, Unpublished.
[18] Sugiyanto., Suprapedi., Himawan, Heribertus., Penentuan Kompetensi Mahasiswa Berdasarkan Prestasi Akademik,
     Sertifikasi Kompetensi, Minat, Dan Kegiatan Pendukung, Jurnal Teknologi Informasi, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2009, pp.766 –
     774.
[19] Setyadjit, Kukuh., Mujiono, Totok., P, Hery, Mauridhi., Otomatisasi Pemberian Pakan Ayam Petelor Berbasis Fuzzy
     Logic, Proceeding Seminar Nasional Aplikasi Teknologi Informasi 2007 (SNATI 2007), 2007, pp. D11 – D14.
[20] Resmana., Ferdinando, Hany., Thiang., Widagdo, Suryo, Agus., Implementasi Fuzzy Logic Pada Microcontoller
     Untuk Kendali Putaran Motor DC, Proceedings Industrial Electronic Seminar 1999 (IES’99), 1999,.
[21] Sofwan, A., Penerapan Fuzzy Logic Pada Sistem Pengaturan Jumlah Air Berdasarkan Suhu Dan Kelembaban,
     Proceeding Seminar Nasional Aplikasi Teknologi Informasi 2005 (SNATI 2005), 2005, pp. C89 – C93
[22] M. Hamzah H., Unas, El, Saifoe., Widiarsa., Penjadwalan Proyek Konstruksi Dengan Metode Flash (Fuzzy Logic
     Application For Scheduling), 2012, Unpublished.
[23] Triayudi, Agung., AZ, Nazori., Analisa Sistem Penilaian Kinerja Guru Menggunakan Fuzzy Inference System
     Mamdani: Studi Kasus UPT Dinas Pendidikan Kec. Penengahan Lampung Selatan, Jurnal TICOM Vol.1 No.1
     September, 2012, pp. 24 – 28.
[24] Sumiyati, Sutiarso, Lilik., Windia, Wayan., Sudira, Putu., Evaluasi Kinerja Fisik Sistem Subakyang Berorientasi
     Agroekowisata Menggunakan Pendekatan Logika Fuzzy, Jurnal Teknik Industri, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2011, pp. 147–155
[25] Supriyono., Analisis Perbandingan Logika Fuzzy Dengan Regresi Berganda Sebagai Alat Peramalan, Proceeding
     Seminar Nasional III SDM Teknologi Nuklir Yogyakarta, 2007, pp. 221 – 228.
[26] Gautama, Glesung, Mohammad., Penentuan Jurusan Di SMA N 8 Surakarta Dengan Fuzzy Inference System (Fis)
     Mamdani, Skripsi Mahasiswa FMIPA Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta, 2010, Unpublished.
[27] Ariani, Dwi, Pepi., Kusuma, Martiana, Entin., Basuki, Kurnia, Dwi., Sistem Pendukung Keputusan Pemilihan
     Jurusan Smk Menggunakan Neuro-Fuzzy, 2010, Unpublished.
[28] Kusumadewi, Sri., Purnomo, Hari., 2010, Aplikasi Logika Fuzzy Untuk Pendukung Keputusan, Edisi 2, Penerbit
     Graha Ilmu, Yogyakarta.
[29] Kusumadewi, Sri., Artificial Intelligence : Teknik dan Aplikasinya, , Yogyakarta : Penerbit Graha Ilmu, 2003.
     Sutojo, T., Mulyanto, Edy., Suhartono, Vincent., Kecerdasan Buatan, Yogyakarta : Penerbit ANDI, 2011.


AUTHOR


Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013                                                                      Page 324

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:5
posted:12/24/2013
language:Latin
pages:23