Master of Built Environment [ by Research ]

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:

1. introduction, statement of problem and scope of research;
2. research objective;
3. summary of literature review;
4. description of conceptual framework or summary of experimental methods or summary of research design and required equipment;
5. importance and relevance of study;
6. preliminary findings / pilot test (initial findings, if any)
7. proposed work schedule based on the designated date of submission of thesis/dissertation; and
8. 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:

1. introduction, statement of problem and scope of research;
2. research objective;
3. complete literature review;
4. credible research methodology;
5. importance and relevance of study;
6. initial findings (preliminary findings) / pilot test (if any)
7. proposed work schedule based on the designated date of submission of thesis/dissertation; and
8. 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:

1. abstract (500 words in Malay and English);
2. objective and Statement of Problem
3. importance and relevance of study;
4. brief and concise literature review;
5. credible research methodology;
6. research findings that have been obtained to this point;
7. brief and concise bibiliography;
8. research plan that will lead to the submission of the dissertation/thesis on the designated date; and
9. 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

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%

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:

Conversion of candidature status from Master's programme by research to a Doctoral programme by research


A program leading to a doctoral degree (PhD) within the same research area is possible and conversion from Master to PhD is based on merits. The PhD Candidacy is for a period of four (4) semesters (minimum) and up to twelve (12) semesters (maximum). Application for this option should be made before the expiry of the third semester of study (no later than 15 months from registration).

Terms and Requirements

1. A full-time Master’s by research candidate may be considered for a change in his candidature status to a full-time Doctoral programme by research, subject to the following conditions:
   1. the duration of application for the change of candidature is between twelve (12) to fifteen (15) months from the commencement date of the registration for the Master's programme;
   2. submit a written application to the Supervisor using the form provided (Download application form);
   3. submit one (1) research report not exceeding 6,000 words regarding:
      1. introduction and scope of research;
      2. research objectives;
      3. research methodology;
      4. research plans leading to the Doctoral programme.
   4. submit research findings during the duration of the Master’s programme which is:
      1. a journal paper accepted for publication and a seminar presentation at the university or national or international level;
      OR
      2. a patent application pending approval or approved and a seminar presentation at the university or national or international level;
2. A full-time candidate must present their research findings in one (1) seminar in front of a panel of assessors consisting of two (2) experts from within or outside the University in the field concerned as determined by the Faculty.
3. The candidature duration of the Master's degree is taken into account in the duration of the Doctoral programme by research.
4. A full-time candidate who has been approved for a change in candidature status shall register for the Doctoral programme by research not later than the second lecture week of the following semester.
5. A full-time candidate who has been approved for a change in candidature status need not to retake the Research Methodology course at the Doctoral programme by research level.
6. A full-time candidate who has been approved for a change in candidature status shall meet the graduation requirement

• Bachelor of Science Architecture, Urban & Regional Planning, Quantity Surveying, Building Surveying, Real Estate or equivalent in a related field from a recognized university with a CGPA of at least 3.0 or equivalent; or
• Applicants with a Bachelor’s CGPA of 2.7-2.99 can be considered if they meet at least one of the following criteria*; or
• Applicants with a Bachelor’s CGPA of 2.50-2.69 can be considered if they meet at least two of the following criteria*; or
• Applicants with a Bachelor’s CGPA of 2.10-2.49 can be considered if they meet the following criteria:
  1. Graduate of the University of Malaya; AND
  2. Possess relevant work experience at least five (5) years or have published in respective fields.

     or

  3. Other qualification approved by Senate from time to time. 

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR INTERNATIONAL APPLICANTS
A minimum score:

• International English Language Testing System (IELTS) (Academic): Band 5.5; or
• Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL): 550 (PBT), 213 (CBT) or 80 (IBT). 

• *CRITERIA:

1. Possess relevant work experience;
2. Have published in respective fields;
3. Scholarship recepient;
4. Graduate of the University of Malaya;
5. Government agency staff.

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