Faculty of Built Environment

PhD students will carry out focused research in their area of specialisation, which is of immediate relevance to their research interest. Additionally, they will be exposed to new developments and challenges in their research topic in the international arena through media, seminars, conferences and keynote addresses and also through research attachments and collaborative exchange arrangements with international recognised research centres.

This Ph.D programme is purely based on individual supervised research. Candidates will be exposed to Research Methodology Course to strengthen their research knowledge. At the end of the candidate's study, a thesis must be submitted and upon successful defence, the candidate will be granted Ph.D status. Candidates are required to complete their studies within 12 semesters.

BENEFITS

The Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Built Environment is an interdisciplinary program offered by Faculty of Built Environment, University of Malaya (UM). The program provides students with a common core of extensive, integrated knowledge focused upon all the facets of the built environment specialization. The Faculty of Built Environment UM has an internationally renowned reputation. Its international focus and diverse body of students makes it a stimulating environment for ambitious PhD candidates who wish to obtain a doctoral degree from a leading design academy/research institute. PhD candidates benefit from close interaction with world-class researchers and educators and are well supervised throughout their education.

CAREER OPPORTUNITY

Students who have undertaken the PhD programme may pursue their careers in academia and industry related to the built environment.

COURSE STRUCTURE

Research is the principal requirement and candidates will produce a thesis, Candidates may be required to attend some pre-requisite courses as prescribed by the University.

The length of time required for the completion of a programme depends on the progress of the individual candidate. In general, the minimum, maximum and average durations are as follows:

Program Duration
Minimum: 4 semesters
Maximum :12 semesters
Average : 6 semesters (Average semester is the length of time when candidates usually complete their programme)

CANDIDATURE SEMINAR

1. Submission for the Proposal Defence (PD)

Candidates are required to submit four (4) copies of complete research proposal report of 3,000 – 7,000 words the Postgraduate Office not later than two (2) weeks before the date of the presentation, which includes the following:

introduction, statement of problem and scope of research;
research objective;
summary of literature review;
description of conceptual framework or summary of experimental methods or summary of research design and required equipment;
importance and relevance of study;
preliminary findings / pilot test (initial findings, if any)
proposed work schedule based on the designated date of submission of thesis/dissertation; and
brief bibliography

2. Submission for the Confirmation Defence

(for direct admission candidates) Candidates are required to submit four (4) copies of complete research proposal report of 4,000 – 7,000 words the Postgraduate Office not later than two (2) weeks before the date of the presentation, which includes the following:

introduction, statement of problem and scope of research;
research objective;
complete literature review;
credible research methodology;
importance and relevance of study;
initial findings (preliminary findings) / pilot test (if any)
proposed work schedule based on the designated date of submission of thesis/dissertation; and
brief bibliography

3. Submission for the Candidature Defence (CD)

Candidates are required to submit four (4) copies of complete research proposal report of 5,000 – 10,000 words the Postgraduate Office not later than two (2) weeks before the date of the presentation, which includes the following:

abstract (500 words in Malay and English);
objective and Statement of Problem
importance and relevance of study;
brief and concise literature review;
credible research methodology;
research findings that have been obtained to this point;
brief and concise bibiliography;
research plan that will lead to the submission of the dissertation/thesis on the designated date; and
list of publications or conference papers presented during the candidature period.

4. Submission for the Thesis Seminar

Candidates shall submit presentation notes with abstract to the Postgraduate Office not later than three (3) working days before the date of presentation

ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

Evaluation Rubric for Proposal Defence (PD) and Candidature Defence (CD)

The assessment of Proposal Defence (PD) is based on the evaluation criteria below:

EXCELLENT (acceptable with minor or no revision)	GOOD (acceptable with minor revision)	SATISFACTORY (acceptable with major revision)	UNSATISFACTORY (unacceptable & requires major revision)
6 scale	5 scale	4 scale	3-1 scale
Title and Abstract (5%)
The title and abstract clearly and precisely: state the research purpose and objectives summarize methods used describe major findings in relation to the objectives highlight major implications/findings abstracts must not exceed 500 words	The title and abstract clearly: state the research purpose and objectives summarize methods used describe major findings highlight major implication abstracts must not exceed 500 words	The title and abstract attempt to address all or most of the following: state the research purpose and objectives summarize methods used describe major findings highlight major implication abstracts must not exceed 500 words	The title and abstract fail to address all or most of the following: state the research purpose and objectives summarize methods used describe major findings highlight major implication abstracts must not exceed 500 words
Introduction (25%)
The introduction clearly, convincingly and precisely (in relation to or within the research context) provides the following: states the problem/issues provides a research framework gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction clearly provides the following: states the problem/issues provides a research framework gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction attempts to address all or most of the following: states the problem/issues provides a research framework gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction fails to address all or most of the following: states the problem/issues provides a research framework gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions
Literature review (25%)
The review achieves the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review achieves most of the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review attempts to address all or most of the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review fails to address all or most of the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.
Conceptual Framework / Methods / Approach (20%)
The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is clear and corresponding justification is convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. This includes: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is quite clear and corresponding justification is mostly convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. This includes: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is somewhat clear and corresponding justification is marginally convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. Attempts to address all or most of the following, but could be more convincing: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is not clear and corresponding justification is unconvincing and not in accordance with acceptable research conventions. Fails to address all or most of the following, but could be more convincing: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures
Discussion and Conclusion (5%)
The discussion and conclusion clearly, convincingly and precisely: Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the findings Relate back to the introduction and tie everything together	The discussion and conclusion quite clearly, convincingly and precisely: Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the findings Relate back to the introduction and tie everything together	The discussion and conclusion attempts to address all or most of the following, but could be more clear and convincing: Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the findings Relate back to the introduction and tie everything together	The discussion and conclusion fail to address all or most of the following clearly and convincingly: Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the findings Relate back to the introduction and tie everything together
Academic Style, Language and References (10%)
Consistently applied standards of language composition, and APA guidelines, especially in regards to citations, references, headings, table of contents, page numbers, and running headers. Limited errors in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and/or punctuation. The reference list is complete and accurate.	Manuscript conformed to most standards of language composition and APA guidelines. Few errors per page that do not impede the meaning in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and/or punctuation The reference list is mostly complete and accurate.	Weak, incomplete, ambiguous, or inconsistent application of APA; manuscript organization, rules of language composition. Noticeable errors that do not impede readability. Moderate editing needed. The reference list is incomplete and / or contains some inaccuracies.	Failure to apply standard rules for manuscript presentation and language composition Errors begin to impede readability. Significant editing needed. Several errors per paragraph informal language used in multiple instances The reference list is incomplete and inaccuracies.
Communication / Presentation (Q&A) (10%)
The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information is presented in logical, interesting and effective sequence and easy to follow. Very clear voice, fluent, confident, very good body-language.	The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information is presented in sequence that can be followed. Clear voice, fluent, confident, good body-language.	The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information is presented in less logical sequence. Clear voice, fluent, confident, good body-language.	The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information is presented in no logical sequence. Voice not clear, hesitation and no body-language
TOTAL MARKS: 100%

The assessment of Candidature Defence (CD) is based on the evaluation criteria below:

EXCELLENT (acceptable with minor or no revision)	GOOD (acceptable with minor revision)	SATISFACTORY (acceptable with major revision)	UNSATISFACTORY (unacceptable & requires major revision)
6 scale	5 scale	4 scale	3-1 scale
Introduction (10%)
The introduction clearly, convincingly and precisely (in relation to or within the research context provides the following: states the problem/issues gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction clearly provides the following: states the problem/issues gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction attempts to address all or most of the following: states the problem/issues gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions	The introduction fails to address all or most of the following: states the problem/issues gives the research questions /objectives states the significance of the study defines operational terms/ definitions
Literature review (15%)
The review achieves the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review achieves most of the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review does not achieve most of the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.	The review fails to achieve the following: Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion vs. evidence.
Conceptual Framework / Methods / Approach (20%)
The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is clear and corresponding justification is convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. This includes: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures data analysis technique validity and reliability / trustworthiness approaches critical awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of approach, techniques, or procedures used	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is quite clear and corresponding justification is mostly convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. This includes: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures data analysis technique validity and reliability / trustworthiness approaches ethical aspects and issues some awareness of the strengths and weakness of approach, technique, or procedures used	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is somewhat clear and corresponding justification is marginally convincing and in accordance with acceptable research conventions. Attempts to address all or most of the following, but could be more convincing: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures data analysis technique validity and reliability / trustworthiness approaches ethical aspects and issues emerging awareness of the strengths and weakness of approach, technique, or procedures used	The description of the conceptual framework and methodology is not clear and corresponding justification is unconvincing and not in accordance with acceptable research conventions. Fails to address all or most of the following, but could be more convincing: theoretical framework research sample, sample procedure and technique instrumentation data collection procedures data analysis technique validity and reliability / trustworthiness approaches ethical aspects and issues strengths and weakness of approach, technique, or procedures used
Results / Data Analyses / Findings (20%)
The analyses and results illustrate the following: are appropriate align with the questions / hypotheses raised show sophistication (e.g. recognize complex patterns in the data) and iteratively explore questions raised by analyses In addition, the amount and quality of data or information is sufficient well presented well interpreted The author also: Critically uses the best available analytical techniques and appropriately created new ones.	The analyses and results illustrate much of the following: are appropriate align with the questions / hypotheses raised show sophistication (e.g. recognize complex patterns in the data) and iteratively explore questions raised by analyses In addition, the amount and quality of data or information is mostly quite: sufficient well presented well interpreted	The analyses and results do not illustrate much of the following: are appropriate align with the questions / hypotheses raised how sophistication (e.g. recognize complex patterns in the data) and iteratively explore questions raised by analyses In addition, the amount and quality of data or information is mostly not: sufficient well presented well interpreted	The analyses and results fail to illustrate the following: are appropriate align with the questions / hypotheses raised show sophistication (e.g. recognize complex patterns in the data) and iteratively explore questions raised by analyses In addition, the amount and quality of data or information is not: sufficient well presented well interpreted
Discussion and Conclusion (20%)
The discussion and conclusion clearly, convincingly and precisely: Restate the objectives Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the finding Relate back to the introduction and ties everything together Discuss research implications Provide recommendations for future research Highlight the correlation between title proposed and research findings/outcomes.	The discussion and conclusion quite clearly, convincingly and precisely: Restate the objectives Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the finding Relate back to the introduction and ties everything together Discuss research implications Provide recommendations for future research Highlight the correlation between title proposed and research findings/outcomes.	The discussion and conclusion attempts to address all or most of the following, but could be more clear and convincing: Restate the objectives Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the finding Relate back to the introduction and ties everything together Discuss research implications Provide recommendations for future research Highlight the correlation between title proposed and research findings/outcomes.	The discussion and conclusion fails to address all or most of the following clearly and convincingly: Restate the objectives Summarize the findings Provide perspective on the finding Relate back to the introduction and ties everything together Discuss research implications Provide recommendations for future research Highlight the correlation between title proposed and research findings/outcomes.
Academic Style, Language and References (10%)
Consistently applied standards of language composition, and APA guidelines, especially in regards to citations, references, headings, table of contents, page numbers, and running headers. Limited errors in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and/or punctuation. The reference list is complete and accurate	Manuscript conformed to most standards of language composition and APA guidelines. Few errors per page that do not impede the meaning in spelling, grammar, word order, word usage, sentence structure, and/or punctuation The reference list is mostly complete and accurate.	Weak, incomplete, ambiguous, or inconsistent application of APA; manuscript organization, rules of language composition. Noticeable errors that do not impede readability. Moderate editing needed. The reference list is incomplete and / or contains some inaccuracies.	Failure to apply standard rules for manuscript presentation and language composition Errors begin to impede readability. Significant editing needed. Several errors per paragraph informal language used in multiple instances The reference list is incomplete and inaccuracies.
Communication / Presentation (Q&A) (5%)
The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information presented in logical, interesting and effective sequence and easy to follow. Very clear voice, fluent, confident, very good body-language.	The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information presented in sequence that can be followed. clear voice, fluent, confident, good body-language.	T he candidate demonstrates the following: Research information presented in less logical sequence. clear voice, fluent, confident, good body-language.	The candidate demonstrates the following: Research information presented in no logical sequence. Voice not clear, hesitation and no body-language
TOTAL MARKS: 100%

PROGRESS REPORT

A candidate is required to submit a research progress report latest between week sixteen and week eighteen of each semester before the registration of the subsequent semester in accordance with the prescribed procedure. The Supervisor, Co-Supervisor and Consultant shall evaluate the candidate’s research progress report in accordance with the prescibed procedures and complete the said evaluation within one (1) week from the date of receipt of progress report for the semester concerned.

A candidate whose progress is satisfactory shall be recommended to continue with his candidature. A candidate whose progress is not satisfactory for two (2) consecutive semesters shall have his candidature terminated by the University. Please make sure the following steps are followed to ensure successful submission of your progress report:

LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT

ENGLISH LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-CITIZEN APPLICANT

A band 5.5 in the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) (Academic); or
A score of 550 in Paper Based Total (PBT) or a score of 213 for Computer-Based Total (CBT) or a score of 46 for internet-Based Total (iBT- Centre based) for Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL).; or
Band 4.0 and above in the Malaysian University English Test (MUET); or
A score of 51 and above in the Pearson Test of Academic English (PTE Academic); or
A Grade C and above in English for General Certificate of Education (A Level), University of Cambridge; or
A Grade C and above in the Cambridge Assessment English: First (FCE); or
A Grade C and above in the Cambridge Assessment English: Advanced (CAE); or
A Grade C and above in the Cambridge Assessment English: Proficiency (CPE).

BAHASA MALAYSIA REQUIREMENT

For Malaysian citizen, candidate shall be required to possess at least a Pass in Bahasa Melayu or Bahasa Malaysia at the level of Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) or a Level III in Sijil Kecekapan Bahasa Malaysia or a Level III in the Sijil Intensif Bahasa Malaysia of the University or an equivalent level before being conferred the Degree.
International candidate shall be required to attend at a satisfactory level a Bahasa Malaysia course that is conducted by the University before being conferred the Degree. However candidate can be exempted from taking the Bahasa Malaysia course if they possesses at least a Pass in Bahasa Melayu or Bahasa Malaysia at the level of Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia or Level III in Sijil Kecekapan Bahasa Malaysia or Level II in the Sijil Intensif Bahasa Malaysia of the University or a Bahasa Malaysia course recognised by the University.

ENTRY REQUIREMENTS

Non-University of Malaya Graduates

Master’s degrees by research; OR
Master’s degree by coursework or mixed mode with a CGPA of at least 3.70; OR
Master’s degree by coursework or mixed mode with a CGPA of at least 2.00 to 3.69 AND Bachelor’s degree with CGPA 2.50 to 2.99. Can be considered if it meets one (1) of the following criteria
- Have at least one (1) year of work experience in related field; OR
- Produce publications in related fields; OR
- scholarship recipient; OR
- A Malaysian Government agency personnel; OR
- Passed an interview; OR
- Pass Special Assessment
Master's Degree by Course or mixed mode with a CGPA of 2.00 to 3.69 AND Bachelor with CGPA of 2.00 to 2.49
Can be considered if it meets two (2) of the following criteria
- Have at least five (5) year of work experience in related field; OR
- Produce one (1) publication in related fields; OR
- Passed an interview; OR
- Pass Special Assessment

University of Malaya Graduates (UM Alumni)

Master’s degrees by research; OR
Master’s degree by coursework or mixed mode with a CGPA of at least 3.70; OR
Master’s degree by coursework or mixed mode with a CGPA of at least 2.00 to 3.69 AND Bachelor’s degree with CGPA 2.50 to 2.99; OR
Master's Degree by Course or mixed mode with a CGPA of 2.00 to 3.69 AND Bachelor with CGPA of 2.00 to 2.49.
Can be considered if it meets one (1) of the following criteria
Have at least five (5) year of work experience in related field; OR
Produce one (1) publication in related fields; OR
Passed an interview; OR
Pass Special Assessment

Application for Programme by Research

Applicants for programmes by research are required to submit a brief statement of the research programme which they propose to carry out.
A research intent produced should contain a maximum of 1,000 words comprising all the items as listed below.
- Field of Research
- Topic of Research
- Statement of Problems
- Research Objective
- Research Methodology
- Significance of Research
- Reference
List of potential supervisor(s) can be found on the following website: https://umexpert.um.edu.my
Applicant are advised to get in touch with the potential supervisor(s) prior to your application to heighten the chances for enrolment.

INTAKE SCHEDULE

Application and admission are open throughout the year. For online application, please visit https://pgadmission.um.edu.my

FEES

Programme Fees

CONTACT US

Programme Coordinator

Sr DR. RAHA SULAIMAN
Coordinator for Postgraduate Program (By Research)
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Malaya

Telephone : +603-7967 6836
Email : rahasulaiman@um.edu.my

Administrative Staff

NORLINA BINTI MOHAMAD ISTAR
Senior Administrative Assistant (Doctor of Philosophy)
Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Malaya

Telephone : 03 – 7967 6856
Email : nor_lina@um.edu.my

Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D)