achong88,

The USUAL bolehland tactic. Instead having meritocracy, it is EASIER to spend money to look good.

Quantity over quality....

Look!! We have the world tallest twin tower.

But, 30% of our schools have NO WATER and ELECTRICITY.

Gaya mesti mahu!!!

Dreamer

This post has been edited by dreamer101: Apr 30 2010, 04:21 PM

This is practiced by universities in korea too, 20k USD reward :-)

This post has been edited by Human Nature: Apr 30 2010, 04:31 PM

Yes, actually this is long being practised in Korea and Taiwan. We are just following their footsteps.

Disgusting. Showing off more than ask. OK go enjoy your RM357,500. Mr. PHD

What's your qualifications?

Anyway, RM357,000 is not a lot over 10 years. I think Malaysian government can match that and RM357,000 probably goes a longer way over here (cheap, cheap labour).

Hi Azarimy,

My case:
Fast track from bachelor degree to do PHD in USM, Electronic engineering (image processing)

After PHD, I plan venture into academic career in IPTA/IPTS (depend on which come best and availability)
Hence, i will not have working experience as a lecturer. I can be consider Fresh Graduate all in all.

What will be my starting salary after i completed my PHD, assuming i go into IPTA since you are in IPTA, u will be able to provide me with an insight view.
THANKS in advaance!!

conferences be it top or low tier have very low impact and often neglected by examiners when students submitted their theses, no matter how many you have ... journals have better impact, but having only two journals seems average, while those from European PhD needed at least three journals published in high impact journals of their fields, before the theses are accepted for defense ... education wise you seem to have a good background ... but to personally claim that yourself is an ABOVE AVERAGE ACHIEVER is pretty arrogant, even in the western society ... make no mistake there are also cases when a phd research has no publication because the work was sponsored by the industry and the industry set the rules and most universities in the world allowed those theses to be kept from public view for two years in order to allow for security of patents, this can have higher impact than the one with journals

in terms of work experience anything less than a year is nearly "nothing" ... in manufacturing for example, being an engineer for five month just make you memorized where the screws and bolts, but very green when there are major problems in the line ... so you won't get any credits from this

your achievements are of course recognized by any IPTAs in Malaysia, as long as your university is a recognized institution and I don't think that RMIT is a bad uni

in terms of salary the steps are standardized ... there are DS 51/52, 53/54, and profs scale A/B/C .... your initial salary could be somewhere between 6k-7k ... but it is not impossible to be promoted to the higher scale as long as you meet what they call by KPI (Key Performance Index) ... in the Faculty of Engineering UPM for example, a guy was promoted to Professor when he was only 35 ... and yes he is excellent in both teaching and research

if you are looking for money, better go overseas ... the pay is much better and the research grant is a lot more ... or go to IPTS like Nottingham & Monash ... heard that UTP (petronas) has a strong research funding as well, anything less than RM1 million is considered a joke

if you don't really mind about the salary and wanted to contribute more on developing your nation, than better go to IPTAs ... if you really are good enough Professorship is not that far ... but you wont get an easy path because there are times when you need to spend so much for admin works, organizing, chairing, participating in this and that and in the end you'll find that the time that you have for research is very small, after all the IPTA is meant for providing service the people, not making money .... for example, if you are one of the best in the faculty, your Dean might ask you to organize a charity work such as "building shelters for the poor" and you as the director will need to do all sort of things, but at the end of the year all of these work are only counted for not more than 5% of your KPIs, but remember you have to do all those not for profit things ... plus in one class you will always have to teach at least 50 students ... grading is so %^&*()

the ball is in your court, don't ask what the country can give u, better ask what you can give to your country ... or else find the best place to earn as much as money as possible

Have to beg to differ. Top tier conferences are just as important as top tier journals. Many of the journals are much, much lower in quality compared to a top quality conferences.

Anyway, he didn't mention how many journal papers he has published, only that he has 15 papers in total - 2 top tier journals and 4 top tier conferences.

put aside the lecturer's salary... i think its important to know how much grant can a lecturer obtain for their research. Both from the uni itself or an association that sponsors the lecturer. As i notice, uni dun give too much grant and very dependable on the government's budget as well. Its good to look for private research projects. i think what makes a lecturer's wins big money is their research... hehe.. and to do a good research u need money... =) besides i think u have to look in the facilities they are providing you. some malaysia local unis did not provide enough equipment or materials for your research, ends up u have to buy through ur grant. one good machine also few hundred thousands ady...hahaha.. Thou all of this is what i have analyze during my FYP days, my lecturer lack of grant, very dificult to do research.

move out while u still can....

Well, I think it's highly dependent on the ranking system that is employed to calculate the impact factor for his publications.

To be honest, Australia's ERA ranking system is screwed and is as corrupted as it can be. But if the publications are based on ISI ranking per se, then at least the standard is guaranteed.

RMIT is a good university but I guess the G08 university is better recognised in Australia in terms of research capability.

Personally, I don't find that you are that above average scholarships are pretty to obtain as long as you have a decent academic transcript and publications is not that hard as long as your supervisor has good connections.

Well, I agree on the first part, but what do you mean by the 2nd? Why do you believe it is corrupted?

I think that the reputation of the professor does have a large impact on paper acceptance, more so nowadays than before. That's why I feel that most reviews should at least be double-blind and self-citations minimized as much as possible.

Unfortunately, even IEEE journals do not employ the double-blind process, and they are among the most highly rated journals in the EE/CS fields.

I may be wrong but if you take a look at the journal rankings by ERA and ISI, you will notice that there are huge discrepancies in some top ranking journals.

In fact, some of the top tier journals in ERA are ranked poorly in ISI and it is speculated at large that ERA rankings depends on how much the Australia university researcher publish at the said journals. The more the publications, the higher the journal rating and vice versa. Last I checked was a year ago but I assume the process is still on-going.

Research is as dirty as politics out there. As long as you got a strong name backing up your paper, it's definitely publisable based on the condition that the paper must be of some quality. Other tweaks involves using colour printing, requesting for additional page etc which may result in you paying more to the journal and they will have more income.

Having big names help a lot, but the game doesn't end there. It gets worse, because the reviewers (who remain anonymous) may very well be the competitors working on similar stuff, stalling the publication and in some cases even led to rejection (and depends on how the editor handles it).

Trust me, having witnessed this first hand, it's definitely not a pretty sight.

As they said, in research it's not so much about what you know, but who you know. Unfortunately this is very true for the academia.

This post has been edited by tester: Oct 17 2011, 11:44 AM

i agree with this, in fact there's already a discussion about the ERA rankings in www.

Seems that ERA's rankings have been dropped.

http://conservationbytes.com/2011/06/03/de...urnal-rankings/

Haven't really followed the issue closely, but I was surprised that one of the journals I have published in is considered top tier by the previous ERA ranking (I would consider it as at a level below the best journals), and another that is considered to be one of the top journals in the field I was working on being ranked a C by ERA.

Oh well, guess it doesn't really matter (anymore or anyway, since I'm not working in Oz).

I do not know about other universities in Malaysia, but for the University of Malaya (UM), under the new management, the following are the criteria to be appointed as lecturers and senior lecturers: for lecturer, at least one top tier ISI cited (i.e. top 50% in the ISI list) paper in a journal, plus a PhD. For senior lecturer, at least three top tier ISI cited papers in journals plus a PhD. (The PhD must be from a university listed in the Ministry of Eduction)

The reason to include ISI articles only is because these journals are the most-cited and thus of the highest impact, especially the top 50%. One of the three major world university rankings, the ARWU, uses ISI database as the main tool to rank the universities in the world. The other two being THE rankings and QS rankings, both using the SCOPUS database. UM has managed to get into the top 200 in these rankings many times, but never ARWU until last year, because the latter is much tougher to get into. SCOPUS includes a number of conferences, as well as journals, and ISI is a subset of SCOPUS, meaning most ISI articles are listed under SCOPUS, but most SCOPUS articles are not found in the ISI. ARWU focuses on research, as opposed to THE and QS, thus ARWU only uses ISI.

That is why UM is only looking at ISI now. The list of ISI articles is found in this link too http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php...tip=sid&clean=0 and also in the attachment.

The ISI journals do not include conferences. And when looking at possible candidates for lecturing positions, UM only considers the ISI journals you have published. So all the conferences will not be considered. So if you apply to UM, all your 15 conferences will not be considered, and if your 2 top tier journal articles are ISI, you will be eligible for the lecturer position (not the senior lecturer one).

As for the research grant, my internal grant is about RM 40k every year, which is 8313.13 quid per year, to be spent in Malaysia. The 6500 quid per year is, to be honest, peanuts in UK. I lived there for 8 years.

Just as a reference to the requirement to get into UM: I got 3 papers published in the top tier ISI journals during my PhD in UK, and after working for a couple of years in a government agency and after having filed for 3 patents in the USA, I got into UM as a senior lecturer. The pay was about RM 6200++ when I got in, with increments of about RM 200 every year. Hope it helps.

This post has been edited by worcheist: Jan 17 2012, 01:29 PM


Attached File(s)
 isi.txt ( 259.6k ) Number of downloads: 106

Malaysia don't want u la... over qualified.

Come to sg la.... or go back down under mate.

Yes, I am sure he is overqualified to enter a Malaysian university to lecture in Malaysia. The university he got his PhD from, RMIT, has never ever made it into the ARWU rankings. See the link http://www.arwu.org/Country2010Main.jsp?param=Australia

I am sure that's because the university is also overqualified to enter the rankings, too.

allo. have to respect Aussie uni ok? I am one of the Alumni. Dun pray pray. Basically, in sg and australia, there are more aussies grads who are bosses. they are more willing to hire aussies. Alumni ma...