The Outcome - Faculty Level

End of November 2007.

I received a mail from Shah Alam. Obviously it came from Dr R. Earlier, she had promised the candidates that our "Grading Sheet" for the evaluation of our proposals as well as the candidates' presentation session be mailed to us prior than our interview session with BLPS (Bhgn Latihan dan Pembangunan Staf - scheduled at 3 December 2007).

I ignored completely the Grading Sheet outcome for my dissertation proposal. The reason - it was the first draft that I had sent earlier when I applied for the scholarship. The one that I had presented for the faculty level was actually my third draft.

I then browsed all the four Grading Sheets of the evaluation outcome for my presentation session (because there were 4 panelists for my session) However, their names on each sheets were sealed to remain anonymous! (it was photocopied). Their comments were as follows (direct quotation):

Panelist A - her only comment
"Look at the sampling and methodology"

Panelist B
"I think the candidate is ready to embark on a PhD program. Prof Malcom Smith is the best person to supervise him on this topic. The candidate has obtained a lot of input from the industry and the professional. Nevertheless, the candidate need to refine the research methodology, particularly on the instrument to be used to collect data for this research. I suggest that he be allowed to go to ECU, Australia."

Panelist C
"My only concern is the candidate's availability to respondends. Using experimental approach may cause problems later."

Panelist D
"contribution is there to understand [the study] but sensitive issue! Where do you get the idea to do on [the study] - too confidential.

1. Need to present fully in English - avoid using "apa dia"
2. Need to keep within time. You have gone beyond / allocated time.
3. "Initial evidence" in your objective - what good will this do to the practice?
4. How open will the participants to this kind of study? Which participants would want to come forward?
5. Theories should support / explain practice. Intention will influence behaviour but there's no guarantee, so this is where you should find the gap.
6. Need to observe research methodology
7. Do preliminary fieldwork."

In the Grading Sheet, the panelists also need to suggest (one only) either:

A. The proposal is accepted and recommended for PhD research.

B. The proposal needs improvement.

C. The proposal needs to be reviewed before accepted for PhD research.

D. Not recommended for and need to be changed; to be resubmitted to the faculty.

The result - one of the panelist gave me A, while the rest of them, B.

It's not easy to please everyone.!!