alumni relations - iium

D I V I S I O NALUMNI RELATIONS

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA

9 789671 396971

ISBN 978-967-13969-7-1

Contributors:Selamah Abdullah Yusof (Head Researcher)

Muhamad Karimi SulaimanHusna JamaluddinZaireena Wan Nasir

© International Islamic University Malaysia, 2018

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, stored in any information storage and retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise; without prior written permission of the publisher.

Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloging-in-Publication Data

2017 Tracer Study Report

ISBN 978-967-13969-7-1

International Islamic University Malaysia / Selamah Abdullah Yusof, Muhamad Karimi Sulaiman, Husna Jamaluddin, and Zaireena Wan Nasir

Published by:Alumni Relations Division,Level 1, Rectory Building,International Islamic University Malaysia,53100 Gombak, Selangor.Tel : 03-6196 6301Fax : 03-6196 4751E-mail : [email protected]

Printed by:CiME ADV SDN BHD15-1, Jalan 2/27E,Seksyen 10, Wangsa Maju,53300 Kuala Lumpur.Tel: 03 4141 6004Email: [email protected]

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Abbreviations viiFigures ixTables xi

Introduction 1

1 BACHELOR’S DEGREE GRADUATES 31.1 Profileofgraduates 4 1.1.1Demographicprofile 4 1.1.2 Distribution by kulliyyah 5 1.1.3 Sponsorship 5 1.1.4 Mode of study 6 1.1.5Entryqualification 6 1.1.6 Academic performance 7 1.1.7 Co-curricular activities 9 1.1.8 Internship 9 1.1.9 Determinants of academic performance 101.2 Evaluation of academic programmes, facilities, and services 12 1.2.1 Relevance and helpfulness of study programme 12 1.2.2 Curriculum 13 1.2.3 Acquired skills 14 1.2.4 Facilities and services 17 1.2.5 Degree and University 22 1.2.6 Islamisation, integration, and internationalisation 23 1.2.7 Career enhancement training 24 1.2.8 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM 251.3 Employmentprofile 26 1.3.1 General overview of employment characteristics 26 Box 1: Technical notes 27 1.3.2Employmentprofileofemployedgraduates 31 1.3.3Comparativeprofileofgraduateswithdifferentemploymentstatuses 34 1.3.4 Determinants of employment 37

2 MASTER’S DEGREE GRADUATES 432.1 Profileofgraduates 44 2.1.1Demographicprofile 44 2.1.2 Distribution according to kulliyyah 44 2.1.3 Sponsorship 45 2.1.4 Employment while studying 45 2.1.5 Mode and duration of study 462.2 Evaluation of academic programmes, facilities, and services 49 2.2.1 Relevance and helpfulness of study programme 49 2.2.2 Curriculum 49 2.2.3 Acquired skills 50 2.2.4 Facilities and services 52 2.2.5 Degree and University 54 2.2.6 Islamisation, integration, and internationalisation 56 2.2.7 Advantages and disadvantages of studying at IIUM 572.3 Employmentprofile 58 2.3.1 General overview of employment characteristics 58 2.3.2 Determinants of monthly income 63

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLE OF CONTENTvi

3 PHD GRADUATES 653.1 Profileofgraduates 66 3.1.1Demographicprofile 66 3.1.2 Distribution according to kulliyyah 66 3.1.3 Sponsorship 67 3.1.4 Employment while studying 67 3.1.5 Mode and duration of study 683.2 Evaluation of academic programmes, facilities, and services 70 3.2.1 Relevance and helpfulness of study programme 70 3.2.2 Curriculum 70 3.2.3 Acquired skills 71 3.2.4 Facilities and services 74 3.2.5 Degree and University 76 3.2.6 Advantages and disadvantages of studying at IIUM 773.3 Employmentprofile 78

4 SUMMARY, SUGGESTIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 814.1 Summary 82 4.1.1 Bachelor’s degree graduates 82 4.1.2 Master’s degree graduates 85 4.1.3 PhD degree graduates 874.2 Suggestions and recommendations 88

APPENDICES 90 Appendix 1: Number of participants and total number of 2017 IIUM graduates 90

Appendix 2: Employment characteristics by undergraduate programme 91

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

AIKOL : Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of LawsLLB : Bachelor of LawsLLB_S : Bachelor of Laws (Shari’ah)

KENMS : Kulliyyah of Economics and Management SciencesBACC : Bachelor of AccountingBBA : Bachelor of Business AdministrationBECS : Bachelor of EconomicsISFIN : Bachelor of Science (Islamic Finance) KICT : Kulliyyah of Information and Communication TechnologyBCS : Bachelor of Computer ScienceBIT : Bachelor of Information Technology

KIRKHS : Kulliyyah of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Human SciencesBARB : Bachelor of Human Sciences (Arabic Language and Literature)BENL : Bachelor of Human Sciences (English Language and Literature)COMM : Bachelor of Human Sciences (Communication)HIST : Bachelor of Human Sciences (History and Civilizations)PSCI : Bachelor of Human Sciences (Political Science)PSYC : Bachelor of Human Sciences (Psychology) RKFQ : Bachelor of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Heritage (Fiqh and Usul al-Fiqh)RKQS : Bachelor of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Heritage (Qur’an and Sunnah Studies)RKUD : Bachelor of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Heritage (Usul al-Din and Comparative Religion)SOCA : Bachelor of Human Sciences (Sociology and Anthropology)

KAED : Kulliyyah of Architecture and Environmental DesignAAD : Bachelor of Applied Arts and DesignALA : Bachelor of Landscape ArchitectureAQS : Bachelor of Quantity SurveyingARCH : Bachelor of Science (Architectural Studies)URP : Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning

KOED : Kulliyyah of EducationGUIDE : Bachelor of Education (Guidance and Counselling)ISED : Bachelor of Education (Islamic Education)TAASL : Bachelor of Education (Teaching Arabic as a Second Language)TEASL : Bachelor of Education (Teaching English as a Second Language)

KAHS : Kulliyyah of Allied Health SciencesAUD : Bachelor of AudiologyBIOMD : Bachelor of Biomedical ScienceDIET : Bachelor of DieteticsOPT : Bachelor of Optometry PHYT : Bachelor of PhysiotherapyRDI : Bachelor of Radiography and Diagnostic Imaging

List of Abbreviations

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSviii

KLM : Kulliyyah of Languages and ManagementARCOM : Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Arabic for International Communication ENCOM : Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in English for International CommunicationTPHM : Bachelor in Tourism Planning and Hospitality Management

KOE : Kulliyyah of EngineeringAERO : Bachelor of Engineering (Aerospace)AUTOM : Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical-Automotive)BIO : Bachelor of Engineering (Biochemical-Biotechnology)CIE : Bachelor of Engineering (Electronics-Computer and Information)COMEG : Bachelor of Engineering (Communication)MATER : Bachelor of Engineering (Materials)MCT : Bachelor of Engineering (Mechatronics)MFG : Bachelor of Engineering (Manufacturing)

KOS : Kulliyyah of ScienceBSMS : Bachelor of Biomedical ScienceBSBT : Bachelor of BiotechnologyCHEM : Bachelor of Science (Applied Chemistry) PHYS : Bachelor of Science (Physics)

KOM : Kulliyyah of MedicineMBBS : Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery

KOP : Kulliyyah of PharmacyPMACY : Bachelor of Pharmacy

KON : Kulliyyah of NursingNURS : Bachelor of Nursing

KOD : Kulliyyah of DentistryDENT : Bachelor of Dental Surgery

ix

Figure 1.1 Graduates by gender and origin 4Figure 1.2 Malaysian graduates by state of origin. 4Figure 1.3 Graduates by family income 5Figure 1.4 Graduates by kulliyyah 5Figure 1.5 Graduates by sponsorship 6Figure 1.6 Graduates by mode of study 6Figure1.7 Graduatesbyentryqualification 7Figure 1.8 Graduates by CGPA 7Figure 1.9 Graduates by class of degree 7Figure 1.10 Mean CGPA by kulliyyah 8Figure 1.11 Mean CGPA of Malaysian graduates by sponsorship 8Figure 1.12 Mean CGPA of non-Malaysian graduates by sponsorship 8Figure 1.13 Co-curricular involvement by gender 9Figure 1.14 Graduates by internship placement 10Figure 1.15 Graduates by internship duration 10Figure 1.16 Graduates by internship allowance 10Figure 1.17 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes by kulliyyah 12Figure1.18 Languageproficiencybykulliyyah 17Figure 1.19 Evaluation of library facilities and services 18Figure 1.20 Evaluation of other facilities and services 18Figure 1.21 Worthwhileness of degree 22Figure 1.22 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others 22Figure 1.23 Evaluation of aspects of Islamisation by kulliyyah 23Figure 1.24 Advantages of studying at IIUM 24Figure 1.25 Demand for additional training 24Figure 1.26 Demand for additional training by kulliyyah 25Figure 1.27 Preferred training programme by kulliyyah 25Figure 1.28 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM 25Figure 1.29 Overview of employment characteristics 26Figure 1.30 Employment category by gender 27Figure 1.31 Employment category by kulliyyah 29Figure 1.32 Reasons for not participating in the labour force 30Figure 1.33 Graduates by type of employment status 31Figure 1.34 Employment status by type of occupation 31Figure 1.35 Type of occupation by employment type 31Figure 1.36 Type of occupation, employment status, and gender 32Figure 1.37 Mean monthly income by kulliyyah. (.) number of observations 34Figure 1.38 Total monthly income (including allowance) by employment status 36Figure 1.39 Top criteria in searching for a job among those not working 36Figure 2.1 Graduates by gender and origin 44Figure 2.2 Graduates by kulliyyah 44Figure 2.3 Graduates by sponsorship 45Figure 2.4 Employment while studying 45Figure 2.5 Graduates by mode of study 46Figure 2.6 Graduates by programme mode of study 46Figure 2.7 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes 49

FIGURES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

FIGURESx

Figure2.8 Languageproficiencybykulliyyah 52Figure 2.9 Evaluation of career guidance services 52Figure 2.10 Evaluation of library facilities and services 52Figure 2.11 Evaluation of other facilities and services 53Figure 2.12 Worthwhileness of degree 55Figure 2.13 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others 55Figure 2.14 Evaluation of aspects of Islamisation by kulliyyah 56Figure 2.15 Advantages of studying at IIUM 57Figure 2.16 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM 57Figure 2.17 Graduates by type of occupation 60Figure 2.18 Employed graduates by economic sector 60Figure 2.19 Total monthly income by type of occupation 61Figure 2.20 Employed Malaysian graduates by type of employment status 62Figure 2.21 Employed non-Malaysian graduates by type of employment status 62Figure 2.22 Total monthly income by employment status 62Figure 3.1 Graduates by gender 66Figure 3.2 Graduates by kulliyyah 66Figure 3.3 Graduates by sponsorship 67Figure 3.4 Employment while studying 67Figure 3.5 Graduates by mode of study 68Figure 3.6 Graduates by programme mode of study 68Figure 3.7 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes 70Figure3.8 Languageproficiencybykulliyyah 73Figure 3.9 Evaluation of library facilities and services 74Figure 3.1 Evaluation of other facilities and services 74Figure 3.11 Worthwhileness of degree 76Figure 3.12 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others 76Figure 3.13 Advantages of studying at IIUM 76Figure 3.14 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM 77Figure 3.15 Employed graduates by type of employment status 80Figure 3.16 Employed graduates by employment sector 80Figure 3.17 Employed graduates by economic sector 80

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

xi

Table 1.1 Non-Malaysian graduates by country of origin 4Table 1.2 Co-Curricular involvement by activity 9Table 1.3 Determinants of academic achievement (CGPA) by kulliyyah 11Table 1.4 Evaluation of curriculum by kulliyyah 13Table 1.5 Top ICT skills by kulliyyah 15Table 1.6 Soft skills by kulliyyah 16Table 1.7 Life skills by kulliyyah 16Table 1.8 Evaluation of career guidance services by kulliyyah 17Table 1.9 Evaluation of facilities and services by kulliyyah, IIUM Tracer Study 20Table 1.10 Worthwhileness of degree by kulliyyah 22Table 1.11 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others by kulliyyah 23Table 1.12 Employment characteristics by kulliyyah and gender 28Table 1.13 Top economic sectors by kulliyyah 33Table 1.14 Characteristics of different employment statuses 35Table1.15 Durationofwaitingforthefirstjob 37Table 1.16 Determinants of duration until getting full-time job by kulliyyah 39Table 1.17 Determinants of monthly income from employment by kulliyyah 42Table 2.1 Duration of study by mode of study 47Table 2.2 Duration of study by mode of study and kulliyyah 48Table 2.3 Evaluation of curriculum by kulliyyah 50Table 2.4 Top ICT skills by kulliyyah 50Table 2.5 Soft skills by kulliyyah 51Table 2.6 Life skills by kulliyyah 51Table 2.7 Evaluation of facilities and services, IIUM Tracer Study 54Table 2.8 Worthwhileness of degree by kulliyyah 55Table 2.9 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others by kulliyyah 56Table 2.10 Key employment statistics 58Table 2.11 Employment characteristics by kulliyyah and gender 59Table 2.12 Determinants of monthly income from employment 63Table 3.1 Duration of study by mode of study 69Table 3.2 Duration of study by mode of study and kulliyyah 69Table 3.3 Evaluation of curriculum by kulliyyah 71Table 3.4 Soft skills by kulliyyah 72Table 3.5 Life skills by kulliyyah 73Table 3.6 Evaluation of facilities and services, IIUM Tracer Study 75Table 3.7 Worthwhileness of degree by kulliyyah 76Table 3.8 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others by kulliyyah 77Table 3.9 Employment characteristics by kulliyyah and nationality 79

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TABLES

1

viii

INTRODUCTION

The Ministry of Higher Education (now Ministry

of Education) conducts the online tracer study

annually on university graduates to obtain

information about their employment, evaluation

of the curriculum, facilities, and services provided

by their respective universities, and other related

matters. The graduates taking part in the survey

each year are those who attend their convocation

in that year. The graduates’ personal information

and courses pursued are provided by the

respective universities and uploaded to the

system prior to the conduct of the survey. All

graduates who wish to attend their convocation

are required to partake in the survey, which

normally starts two to three weeks before and

ends one week after the convocation. The data

collected will then be given to the respective

universities for analysis.1

Like previous years, the Graduate Tracer Study

2017 questionnaire consists of seven parts (A-G).

Part A contains the graduate’s background

information and questions about: (i) challenges

encountered by graduates with disabilities, (ii)

involvement in co-curricular activities, and (iii)

industrial training or internship. Part B comprises

only one question about the graduate’s current

employment status. If the graduate is working at

the time of the survey, they are required to answer

part C, which relates to their employment status,

occupation, income, and other work-related

information.

Graduates who are not working at the time of the

survey are asked to respond to questions in part

D, which ask their reason for not working, job

1 All matters pertaining to the tracer study for IIUM is managed by the Alumni Relations Division.

search, and preferences. Those who are furthering

their studies are asked to complete part E of the

questionnaire. All graduates are asked to

complete Parts F and G, which pertain to their

evaluation of the programmes, services offered by

the University, and the effectiveness of the study

programmes in developing their “self-readiness”

to life after graduation.

Beside the study conducted by the Ministry, IIUM

also carried out a supplementary survey, the

IIUM Tracer Study 2017, on the same graduates.

The survey includes more questions on the

evaluation of the academic programmes,

involvement in student activities, and facilities

and services provided by the University. Several

open-ended questions on the advantages and

disadvantages of studying at IIUM are also

included.

A total of 4,686 IIUM graduates took part in the

two surveys. Analyses of the data obtained from

these surveys are presented in this report. Some

of the information obtained from the IIUM survey

that is redundant—as they are covered in the

ministry survey—are omitted from the report.

Also, this report does not include analysis of

graduates with disabilities as the sample size is

too small to provide a meaningful conclusion and

interpretation.

This report consists of four parts. The first three

parts comprise corresponding analyses for the

bachelor’s (Part 1), master’s (Part 2), and PhD

(Part 3) degree graduates. Each part consists of

three sections. The first section presents the

2INTRODUCTION

ix

profile of the graduates who took part in the

survey. The second section presents their

evaluation of the academic programmes, the skills

that they have acquired, factors affecting their

academic performance, and the facilities and

services provided by the University. The last

section analyses the graduates’ employment

status and profile as well as the factors that

contribute to the duration before getting full-time

employment and the level of income. The fourth

and last part of the report summarizes the

findings and offers some suggestions and

recommendations.

This report endeavours to provide an accurate

presentation of the state of affairs of IIUM

graduates. It is hoped that this effort will be

beneficial in contributing towards the planning

and formulation of strategies and action plans in

the University’s pursuit to achieve its noble vision

and missions.

BACHELOR’S DEGREE GRADUATES

1PART

IIUM TRACER STUDY 20174

2

1.1 Profile of graduates

1.1.1 Demographic profile

Figure 1.1 Graduates by gender and origin

A total of 3,964 bachelor’s degree graduates took

part in the Graduate Tracer Study 2017 upon the

33rd IIUM Convocation.

The majority (93.6 per cent) of the graduates were

Malaysian. In terms of gender, 61.6 per cent of all

graduates were female and Malaysian. Females

outnumbered males among both Malaysian and

non-Malaysian graduates (see Figure 1.1 above).

Among the 3,709 Malaysian graduates, the most

were from Selangor (33.3 per cent), followed by

Kelantan (10.7 per cent), and WP Kuala Lumpur

(8.7 per cent) (see Figure 1.2 below).

Figure 1.2 Malaysian graduates by state of origin.

Most of the 255 non-Malaysian graduates were

from Southeast Asian countries such as Singapore

(20.8 per cent), Indonesia (12.9 per cent), and

Thailand (8.6 per cent) (see Table 1.1 below).

Table 1.1 Non-Malaysian graduates by country of origin

Country % Country % Singapore 20.8 China 2.4 Indonesia 12.9 India 2.4 Thailand 8.6 Afghanistan 1.6 Bangladesh 6.3 Vietnam 1.6 Saudi Arabia 6.3 Yemen 1.2 Brunei, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Turkey, UAE 2 graduates each Algeria, Bosnia Herzegovina, Chad, Comoros, Egypt, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Mali, Mauritius, Oman, Somalia, Botswana 1 graduate each

Family income refers to total family monthly

income. Among Malaysian graduates, 41 per cent

were from low-income families earning below

RM2,500 while the rest came equally from

middle-income families earning between

RM2,500 and RM5,000 and higher-income

families earning more than RM5,000 a month.

On the other hand, 36 per cent of non-Malaysian

graduates were from low-income families while

slightly more of the remaining non-Malaysian

graduates came from higher-income (35 per cent)

than middle-income (29 per cent) families (see

Figure 1.3 below).

61.6%

32.0%

3.8%2.6%

Malaysian female

Malaysian male

Non-MalaysianfemaleNon-Malaysian male

3,964graduates

33.3%

10.7%8.7%7.4%

7.0%

7.0%

6.2%

5.2%

SelangorKelantanWP Kuala LumpurTerengganuJohorPahangKedahPerakPenangNegeri SembilanMelakaSarawakSabahWP PutrajayaPerlisWP Labuan

3,709Malaysiangraduates

BACHELOR’S DEGREE GRADUATES5

3

Figure 1.3 Graduates by family income

1.1.2 Distribution by kulliyyah

Figure 1.4 Graduates by kulliyyah

There are 14 kulliyyahs offering undergraduate

programmes at IIUM. The number of graduates

from each kulliyyah correlates with the number of

programmes offered by the respective kulliyyahs.

Thus, the highest number of graduates were from

KIRKHS, which offers ten programmes. The

second highest number of graduates were from

KENMS, which offers four programmes, followed

by KOE, which offers eight programmes.

There were more female than male Malaysian

graduates from all kulliyyahs except KICT and

KOE. Meanwhile, the number of female non-

Malaysian graduates exceeded that of their male

counterparts from all kulliyyahs except KOE and

KAED.

No non-Malaysian graduated from KAHS, KOD,

and KON (see Figure 1.4 above).

1.1.3 Sponsorship

Sponsorship refers to any financial support the

graduates received during their studies at IIUM.

About half of Malaysian graduates borrowed from

PTPTN to support their studies, while 29 per cent

were self-sponsored. The remaining quarter of the

graduates received scholarships from either

JPA/MARA, state governments or foundations,

or the Ministry of Education.

41%

36%

30%

29%

29%

35%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Malaysian

Non-Malaysian

< RM2,500 RM2,500–RM,5000 > RM5,000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

KIRKHS KENMS KOE AIKOL KAED KOS KAHS KOM KICT KOED KOP KLM KOD KON

Non-Malaysian female Non-Malaysian male Malaysian female Malaysian male


4

On the other hand, 90 per cent of non-Malaysian

graduates were self-sponsored while the

remaining 10 per cent received scholarships from

either IIUM, foreign governments (Saudi Arabia,

Libya, etc.), or Islamic Development Bank (see

Figure 1.5 below).

Figure 1.5 Graduates by sponsorship

1.1.4 Mode of study

Most of the graduates (98.1 per cent) pursued

their studies full-time (see Figure 1.6 below).

Sixty graduates completed the only two

undergraduate programmes offered on a part-

time basis at IIUM: the Bachelor in Business

Management (BBM) by KENMS (54 graduates)

and the Bachelor of Islamic Revealed Knowledge

(BIRK) by KIRKHS (6 graduates).

Figure 1.6 Graduates by mode of study

1.1.5 Entry qualification

Most Malaysian graduates who pursued their

degrees full-time came from CFS, while 85.9 per

cent of non-Malaysian graduates joined IIUM

with A-Level qualifications. Seventy graduates

were former IIUM law graduates who returned to

complete a second degree, the Bachelor of Laws

(Shariah), at AIKOL (see Figure 1.7 below).

13%

48%

10%

10%

29%

90%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Malaysian Non-Malaysian

JPA/MARA PTPTN

Other scholarships Self-sponsored

98.1%

Full-time Part-time

3,964graduates


5

Figure 1.7 Graduates by entry qualification

1.1.6 Academic performance

Academic performance is measured in terms of

the Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA).

The mean CGPA of male and female Malaysian

graduates were 2.95 and 3.12, respectively.

Among non-Malaysian graduates, the mean

CGPA for male and female were 3.01 and 3.12,

respectively (see Figure 1.8 below).2

Figure 1.8 Graduates by CGPA

IIUM awards three classes of degrees: first class

(CGPA > 3.60), upper second class (CGPA 2.80–

3.59), and lower second class (2.00–2.79). Of the

3,709 Malaysian graduates, five per cent obtained

first class degrees compared to fifteen per cent of

2 The difference in the average performance of male and female graduates is significant (p-value = 0.000).

the 255 non-Malaysian graduates. More than half

of both Malaysian and non-Malaysian graduates

obtained upper second-class degrees (see Figure

1.9 below).

Figure 1.9 Graduates by class of degree

Graduates from KOED registered the highest

mean CGPA (3.39), followed by KLM (3.38) and

27.8% 5.6%

8.8%

33.3%

85.9%

66.7%

87.4%

33.3%

33.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Malaysian full-time

Non-Malaysian full-time

Malaysian part-time

Non-Malaysian part-time

SPM O-LevelSTPM STAMDiploma A-LevelCFS First/bachelor's degreePKPG Work experience/professional certificate

3.12

2.95

3.01

3.12

2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2

Malaysian female

Malaysian male

Non-Malaysian female

Non-Malaysian male

5%15%

72% 54%

23%31%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


First class Upper second class Lower second class


6

KAHS (3.31). The lowest mean CGPA was

registered by graduates from KOE (2.85), AIKOL

(2.97), and KOP (3.03). There is no CGPA for

KOM and KOD (see Figure 1.10 below).

Figure 1.10 Mean CGPA by kulliyyah

Graduates with scholarships performed better

than graduates who were either self-sponsored or

PTPTN borrowers. The mean CGPA of

JPA/MARA scholarship recipients was 3.31

compared to 2.99 among PTPTN borrowers (see

Figure 1.11 below).3 Similarly, the mean CGPA of

non-Malaysian graduates with scholarships was

3.25 compared to 3.06 among self-sponsored

graduates (see Figure 1.12 below).4

Figure 1.11 Mean CGPA of Malaysian graduates by

sponsorship

Figure 1.12 Mean CGPA of non-Malaysian graduates

by sponsorship

3 The difference in the average performance of Malaysian graduates who were JPA/MARA scholars, recipient of other scholarships, self-sponsored, and PTPTN borrowers is significant (p-value < 0.05).

4 The difference in the average performance of non-Malaysian graduates who were scholarship recipients and self-sponsored is significant (p-value < 0.05).

3.39

3.38

3.31

3.27

3.26

3.11

3.07

3.06

3.04

3.03

2.97

2.85

2 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8

KOED

KLM

KAHS

KON

KOS

KICT

KENMS

KAED

KIRKHS

KOP

AIKOL

KOE

3.31

3.15

3.09

2.99

2.8

2.9

3

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

JPA/MARA Other scholarships

Self-sponsored PTPTN

3.25

3.06

2.95

3

3.05

3.1

3.15

3.2

3.25

3.3

Scholarships Self-sponsored


7

1.1.7 Co-curricular activities

Co-curricular involvement is divided into

involvement in societies, clubs, and sports

activities. Half of all graduates were actively

involved in co-curricular activities and only a

small percentage were not active in any co-

curricular programme (see Table 1.2 below).

Table 1.2 Co-Curricular involvement by activity

Co-curricular involvement (%)

Societies Clubs Sport

Not active 4.2 4.2 10.9

9.2 10.3 19.0

30.9 31.5 32.6

32.3 31.5 22.4

Active 23.4 22.6 15.1

Both male and female graduates were equally

active in societies and clubs, but male graduates

were more actively involved than female

graduates in sports activities.5,6 (see Figure 1.13

below).

Figure 1.13 Co-curricular involvement by gender

1.1.8 Internship

Internship refers to industrial attachment or

training undergone by undergraduate students

during their studies. Seventy-nine per cent of all

graduates went for an internship. Of those, 30 per

cent did their internship with government

agencies while 39 per cent went to local and

multinational companies, including six per cent

who went to government-linked corporations

(see Figure 1.14 below).

5 There was no significant difference between male and female graduates’ involvement in societies and clubs (p-value > 0.05). However, male graduates were

Most internships lasted between one and three

months, although 4.3 per cent of the graduates

went for internships lasting for more than six

months (see Figure 1.15 below).

Sixty-nine per cent of the graduates received an

allowance during their internship (see Figure 1.16

below).

significantly more actively involved in sport than female graduates (p-value < 0.05). 6 The ratings were tested against the value of 3 indicating active participation.

3.70

3.69

3.50

3.57

3.52

2.91

Male Female

Societies

Sport Clubs


8

Figure 1.14 Graduates by internship placement

Figure 1.15 Graduates by internship duration

Figure 1.16 Graduates by internship allowance

1.1.9 Determinants of academic performance

Several factors were considered as potential

determinants of academic performance (CGPA).

The first factor was gender, as female graduates

appeared to perform better than male graduates.

The analysis also differentiated graduates who

came from the IIUM matriculation programme

(CPS) from direct-intake graduates.

As English is the medium of instruction at IIUM,

the level of English language proficiency at entry

was also considered. This variable was measured

by the result for English at the SPM level. Hence,

only those who took SPM before entering IIUM

were included in this analysis. Those who

obtained an F grade were assigned a value of 1, a

value of 2 for an E, 3 for a D, 4 for a C, 5 for a B,

and 6 for an A grade.

Family income was included as graduates who

came from households that were financially better

off may be at an advantage in facilitating their

studies. The academic performance of graduates

who worked while studying may be adversely

affected as they spent less time studying. Lastly,

No20.9%

37.4%

30.9%

10.1%

7.3%

5.6%

5.5%3.0%

Yes79.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Internship Placement

Government Private (Local)

Private (Multinational) GLC

Own business Statutory body

NGO

72.7%

23.0%

2.3% 2.0%0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Internship Duration

1–3 months 4–6 months

7–12 months > 12 months

Yes69%

No31%

3,135graduates


9

the analysis also considered whether the level of

involvement in co-curricular activities had any

significant impact on CGPA.

The regression results are summarised in Table

1.3 below. Overall, male graduates performed

worse than female graduates across all kulliyyahs

except KOED and KOP, where there was no

significant difference in performance between the

genders.

Graduates who came from CFS did not perform

as well as others in KIRKHS and KAHS but had

similar performance, on average, as direct-intake

graduates in other kulliyyahs. Higher English

proficiency at entry contributed to higher CGPA

particularly among graduates from KENMS,

KICT, KIRKHS, KON, and KOS.

Higher family income led to better academic

performance only among KENMS and KOE

graduates, but it was not a significant factor

among graduates from other kulliyyahs.

As expected, the academic performance of

graduates who worked, either full-time or part-

time, while studying was lower than those who

did not work. The former might not have been

able to manage or devote more time to their

studies when they had to work. Active

involvement in co-curricular activities did not

have any detrimental effect on academic

performance. In fact, among KOE graduates,

active involvement in such activities contributed

positively towards their CGPA.

Table 1.3 Determinants of academic achievement (CGPA) by kulliyyah

Constant Male CFS

English at entry

Family income Worked

Co-curriculum R2 N

AIKOL 2.82 (0.00)

-0.09

(0.04) -0.05 (0.31)

0.03 (0.48)

0.01 (0.15)

-0.05 (0.19)

0.01 (0.75) 0.03 329

KAED 2.60 (0.00)

-0.14 (0.00)

0.04 (0.69)

0.03 (0.32)

0.01 (0.01)

-0.13 (0.00)

0.04 (0.02) 0.10 505

KENMS 2.4 (0.00)

-0.08 (0.02)

0.02 (0.59)

0.11 (0.00)

0.01 (0.10)

-0.09 (0.00)

0.02 (0.32) 0.10 446

KICT 2.72 (0.00)

-0.24 (0.00)

0.05 (0.62)

0.09 (0.08)

0.01 (0.12)

-0.07 (0.33)

-0.02 (0.55) 0.22 101

KIRKHS 2.55 (0.00)

-0.11 (0.00)

-0.07 (0.02)

0.12 (0.00)

0.00 (0.14)

-0.08 (0.00)

-0.02 (0.25) 0.13 738

KOE 2.60 (0.00)

-0.14 (0.00)

0.04 (0.69)

0.03 (0.32)

0.01 (0.01)

-0.13 (0.00)

0.04 (0.02) 0.10 505

KOED 3.57 (0.00)

-0.10 (0.19)

0.11 (0.26)

-0.02 (0.45)

0.00 (0.49)

0.02 (0.68)

-0.03 (0.33) 0.11 68

KAHS 3.54 (0.00)

-0.14 (0.00)

-0.29 (0.05)

0.04 (0.27)

0.00 (0.39)

-0.04 (0.20)

-0.03 (0.16) 0.13 211

KON 2.90 (0.00)

-0.15 (0.05) - 0.09

(0.05) 0.00

(0.57) -0.07 (0.27)

-0.02 (0.42) 0.37 37

KOP 3.01 (0.00)

0.10 (0.11) - 0.03

(0.69) 0.01

(0.35) 0.10

(0.12) -0.06 (0.10) 0.07 98

KOS 2.80 (0.00)

-0.13 (0.00)

-0.18 (0.12)

0.11 (0.00)

0.01 (0.23)

-0.11 (0.00)

0.02 (0.36) 0.18 205

KLM 2.06 (0.00)

-0.16 (0.02)

0.03 (0.63)

0.06 (0.24)

0.01 (0.14)

-0.01 (0.78)

-0.02 (0.58) 0.19 78

Total 2.66 (0.00)

-0.18 (0.00)

-.0.01 (0.62)

0.08 (0.00)

0.0 (0.01)

-0.07 (0.00)

0.02 (0.02) 0.10 3043

Note: (.) p-value


10

1.2 Evaluation of academic programmes, facilities, and services

1.2.1 Relevance and helpfulness of study programme

Graduates were asked to evaluate the relevance

and helpfulness of their respective study

programmes to their current jobs by rating them

on a scale of 1 (extremely low or not helpful at all)

to 5 (extremely high or extremely helpful).

The results are summarised in Figure 1.17 below.

Overall, IIUM academic programmes were rated

3.8 and 3.9 for relevance and helpfulness,

respectively. The ratings significantly greater than

3.5 suggest that the graduates found that the

programmes were both relevant and helpful. The

similar ratings given by Malaysian and non-

Malaysian graduates also suggest that IIUM

programmes have successfully catered to the

needs of both Malaysian and non-Malaysian

graduates alike.

The highest ratings, both in terms of relevance

and helpfulness, were given by graduates from

KON and KOD. While medical graduates

considered their programme helpful, they rated

lower in relevance at 3.4. Cross-kulliyyah

comparison for non-Malaysians, however, is not

very meaningful given the small number of

observations, especially of the smaller

programmes.

Figure 1.17 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes by kulliyyah

1

2

3

4

5

KON KICT KOD AIKOL KLM KOP KAED KOED KENMS KAHS KIRKHS KOE KOS KOM Total

Relevance Malaysian Relevance Non-Malaysian Helpfulness Malaysian

Helpfulness Non-Malaysian Relevance Total Helpfulness Total


11

1.2.2 Curriculum

Table 1.4 Evaluation of curriculum by kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

Tot

al

Suitability of programme 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.3

Theoretical & practical balance

4.1 3.9 4.1 3.9 4.0 3.6 4.4 4.0 4.7 4.7 4.4 4.1 4.0 4.5 4.0

Internship 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.9 4.6 4.3 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.3 3.9 4.5 4.1

Compulsory co-curriculum 4.1 3.9 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.0 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.1

Compulsory subjects 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.1 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.1 4.5 4.2

Variety of co-curriculum 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.1 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3 4.0 4.4 4.2

Prepare for working life 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.9 4.0 3.7 4.4 3.9 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.2 3.8 4.3 4.0

Internship helps employment 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.0 3.9 4.6 4.1 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.4 3.7 4.4 4.1

Malaysian 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.0 4.5 4.1 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.3 4.0 4.4 4.2

Non-Malaysian 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.4 4.2 N/A N/A 4.0 N/A 4.0 3.1 3.8 3.8

Total 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.2 3.9 4.4 4.1 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.3 4.0 4.4 4.1

Note: Total value was computed by taking the mean value of all items

Graduates were asked to evaluate the overall

curriculum in terms of (i) suitability of the study

programme, (ii) balance between theoretical and

practical components, (iii) internship

programme, (iv) compulsory co-curriculum, (v)

compulsory subjects, (vi) variety of co-curriculum

offered, (vii) preparing students for working life,

and (viii) whether the internship programme has

helped graduates obtain suitable employment.7

Each item was rated on a scale of 1 (not satisfied

at all) to 5 (extremely satisfied) and the results are

summarised in Table 1.4 above.

Overall, the graduates were satisfied with the

curriculum, as shown by the ratings which were

significantly greater than 3. Except for “preparing

students for working life”, the ratings were

7 While not all programmes require internship, 91 per cent of graduates undertook the attachment.

significantly above 4, suggesting high levels of

satisfaction. The ratings given by Malaysian and

non-Malaysian graduates from AIKOL, KAED,

and KICT were not significantly different.

However, Malaysian graduates from other

kulliyyahs gave significantly higher ratings,

suggesting higher levels of satisfaction, than their

non-Malaysian counterparts.

While the graduates rated the programmes as

relevant and helpful and were satisfied with the

curriculum, they also gave several suggestions to

improve the quality of the programmes. A

common suggestion was to revise the courses

offered to meet the needs of industry and the job

market. This suggestion was mostly raised by

KICT graduates (25.2 per cent). Particularly,


12

courses which are irrelevant should be removed,

outdated ones brought up-to-date, and new

courses introduced to cover new developments in

the area.

Additionally, 36.4 per cent of the engineering

graduates suggested that the teaching approach

should emphasize knowledge and skills that are

relevant to the needs of industry. The graduates,

particularly from KOP, also suggested that the

management of the programmes concerning

teaching and learning, scheduling of courses,

assessment, and class activities should be

improved.

1.2.3 Acquired skills

Graduates were asked to evaluate the skills they

acquired during their studies in terms of

information and communication technology

(ICT) skills, soft skills, and life skills, as well as

proficiency in the English and Malay languages.

They were asked to list the top three ICT skills

they have acquired and rate their skill levels from

1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Similarly, with soft skills

and language proficiency. The graduates were

also asked to rate the extent their education at

IIUM affected their lives with regard to a list of life

skills from 1 (no influence at all) to 5 (a lot of

influence).

ICT skills

Graduates across all kulliyyahs rated their ICT

skills to be good (3.6 and above). Most IIUM

graduates were familiar with Microsoft Word (96

per cent), PowerPoint (95 per cent) and Excel (75

per cent), although graduates from KAED and

KICT reported different sets of ICT skills

compared to others (see Table 1.5 below).8 More

than a third of engineering graduates listed

familiarity with AutoCAD while graduates from

KON (51 per cent), KOM (37 per cent), KOP (20

8 AutoCAD is a computer-aided design and drafting software used by architects, graphic designers, and engineers. Adobe Photoshop is extensively used for

per cent), as well as KIRKHS (25 per cent) listed

SPSS, a statistical software.

Soft skills

Soft skills include interpersonal communication,

creative and critical thinking, problem-solving,

analytical, teamwork, inculcating and practising

positive values, and awareness of general

knowledge and current issues. In general, the

graduates rated their soft skill to be good with

mean ratings significantly greater than 3 (see

Table 1.6 below). Malaysian AIKOL and KENMS

graduates rated themselves significantly higher

than their respective non-Malaysian counterparts

for problem-solving. Malaysian KENMS

graduates also rated themselves significantly

higher than others for teamwork, and higher than

non-Malaysian KENMS graduates for inculcating

and practising positive values. Similarly, among

KOS graduates.

photo-editing, and graphic design. PHP is used to create dynamic web pages. Java/J2EE extends the functionality of web services.


13

Life skills

Graduates were asked to rate the extent education

at IIUM influenced their lives and the results are

summarised in Table 1.7 below. Generally, the

graduates indicated that IIUM education has

considerably influenced their lives.

Language proficiency

Graduates reported good levels of proficiency in

the English and Malay languages, with ratings

significantly greater than 3 (see Figure 1.18

below). Unsurprisingly, Malaysian graduates

rated themselves significantly higher than non-

Malaysian graduates for the Malay language.

There was no significant difference between the

ratings of Malaysian and non-Malaysian

graduates for their English language proficiency,

except for KOE graduates. Non-Malaysian KOE

graduates rated themselves higher than

Malaysian graduates for the English language.

Table 1.5 Top ICT skills by kulliyyah

AIKOL KIRKHS KOM

Microsoft Word Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Excel

96.2% 95.4% 75.1%


91.5% 87.2% 59.6%

Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Word Microsoft Excel

95.2% 87.1% 54.4%

KAED KLM KON

Adobe Photoshop AutoCAD Microsoft Word

74.5% 73.7% 45.7%


94.2% 87.3% 51.7%

Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Word SPSS

95.1% 92.7% 51.2%

KAHS Overall KOP


92.8% 87.8% 60.8%


96.2% 95.4% 75.1%


87.4% 84.7% 64.0%

KENMS KOE KOS

Microsoft Excel Microsoft Word Microsoft PowerPoint

88.3% 95.4% 77.9%

Microsoft Word Microsoft Excel Microsoft PowerPoint

70.2% 61.3% 53.9%


87.8% 81.4% 77.2%

KICT KOED KOD

PHP Adobe Photoshop Java/J2EE

55.5% 38.5% 36.3%


90.0% 87.5% 48.7%


97.8% 93.3% 64.4%


14

Table 1.6 Soft skills by kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

Tot

al

Interpersonal communication 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.0 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.1

Creative & critical thinking 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.1

Problem-solving 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.2 Analytical 4.1 4.2 4.4 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.2 Teamwork 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 Inculcating & practising positive values 4.4 4.4 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4

General knowledge & current issues 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.1 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.1

Malaysian 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 Non-Malaysian 4.3 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.7 N/A N/A 4.0 N/A 3.4 4.2 4.9 4.3

Table 1.7 Life skills by kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

Tot

al

Develop self-confidence 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 Enhance self-maturity 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 Develop self-resilience 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.4 Become more knowledgeable 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.4

Enhance interest in learning 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.1 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3

More sensitive towards current affairs 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.1 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.2

Ability to be independent 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.5

Creative & critical thinking 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3

Ready to face the working life & its challenges

4.2 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.3

Problem-solving & decision-making 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.4

Teamwork 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 Effective communication 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 Malaysian 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.4 Non-Malaysian 3.9 4.1 4.0 4.3 4.2 3.7 4.1 N/A N/A 4.9 N/A 3.2 4.3 3.6 4.1


15

Figure 1.18 Language proficiency by kulliyyah

1.2.4 Facilities and services

Graduates were asked to rate their satisfaction of

the various services provided by the University

including career and guidance, library, and other

facilities on a scale of 1 (not satisfied at all) to 5

(extremely satisfied).

Career guidance services

The graduates were satisfied with the career and

guidance services, as the mean ratings were

greater than 3 (see Table 1.8 below). Nursing and

medical graduates were the most satisfied of all

giving the highest ratings.

Table 1.8 Evaluation of career guidance services by kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

Tot

al

Information on job & career opportunities 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.8 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.7 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.0 3.6 4.2 3.9

Assistance in interviewing skills 3.8 3.6 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.6 3.9 3.8 4.2 4.3 4.5 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.9

Assistance in job application 3.8 3.7 4.0 3.9 4.1 3.6 3.9 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.6 3.9 3.9 4.2 3.9

Assistance in obtaining jobs 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.9 3.5 4.1 4.3 4.5 3.8 3.4 3.9 3.7

Information on further studies 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.7 4.1 3.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.0 3.6 4.1 3.9

Job opportunities on campus 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.8 3.4 4.0 4.1 4.2 3.8 3.4 3.9 3.7

Arranging on-campus job recruitments 3.7 3.5 3.9 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.2 3.4 3.7 4.4 3.5 3.0 3.9 3.6

1

2

3

4

5

AIKOL KAED KENMS KICT KIRKHS KOE KOED KAHS KOD KOM KON KOP KOS KLM Overall

Malaysian English Malaysian Malay Non-Malaysian English Non-Malaysian Malay


16

Library services

The graduates were very satisfied with library

facilities and services. All aspects of library

facilities and services including online services,

online resources, operating time, and services

provided by the library staff were given mean

ratings greater than 4, including a mean overall

rating of 4.27 (see Figure 1.19 below).

Figure 1.19 Evaluation of library facilities and services

Figure 1.20 Evaluation of other facilities and services

Other facilities and services

The levels of satisfaction for other facilities such as

laboratories, health centre, lecture halls and

classrooms, sports facilities, transportation, and

accommodation were also high (see Figure 1.20

above). The graduates also indicated high levels of

satisfaction for the study area, online integrated

learning system, ICT facilities and services, and

campus security. However, parking facilities were

rated slightly lower at 3.4.

However, the supplementary IIUM Tracer Study

finds that law graduates did not agree that there

was adequate and functional safety equipment

and that theft and disciplinary cases were handled

effectively. They also disagreed that building

defects were rectified immediately. However,

since the AIKOL building is one of the oldest

buildings at the Gombak campus, the views were

not surprising.

Graduates from the Kuantan campus were not

satisfied with the food services available there.

They disagreed that the number of food outlets

was adequate and that the variety and quality of

food offered at the cafeteria were good. They also

did not agree that the prices of the food offered at

the cafeteria were reasonable.

The views, however, were not shared by nursing

graduates, who agreed that there were enough

food outlets with reasonable food variety, quality,

1.002.003.004.005.00

Onlineservices

Onlineresources

Staff

OperatingtimeResources

Study area

Overall

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00Laboratories

Health centre

Transportation

Accommodation

Lecture halls &classrooms

Sport facilities

CafeteriaICT facilities &services

Study area

Campusbookshop

Online integratedlearning system

Campus security

Parking


17

and price at the Kuantan campus. KON graduates

seem to be the most satisfied of all graduates of

the various University facilities and services (see

Table 1.9 below)

Suggestions

KULLIYYAH

The IIUM Tracer Study asked graduates for

suggestions to improve the facilities and services.

Among the main suggestions, particularly from

AIKOL, KENMS, and KIRKHS graduates,

concerned improvements and upgrades to the air-

conditioning, lighting, and furniture in classes,

laboratories, and other teaching venues and

buildings.

Other suggestions concerned better services.

KOM and KOP graduates particularly, suggested

that staff give better support and response to

student requests. While 13 per cent of graduates

from KLM suggested improvements to the

kulliyyah administration and management in

maintaining facilities, addressing student

complaints, and overall efficiency.

MAHALLAH

Three main areas of improvement suggested by

the graduates for improvement at the mahallahs

concerned internet access, parking, and laundry

facilities. Particularly, there should be wider Wi-

Fi coverage, higher internet speed, and better

network availability. The graduates also proposed

better registration and management of parking

spaces as well as more covered parking. Laundry

facilities at the Mahallah should also be improved

by providing more washing and drying areas,

upgrading laundry machines, and opening more

launderettes at the respective mahallahs.


Tab

le 1

.9 E

valu

atio

n of

faci

litie

s an

d se

rvic

es b

y ku

lliyy

ah, I

IUM

Tra

cer

Stud

y

Faci

litie

s an

d m

anag

emen

t A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

Tot

al

The

ove

rall

faci

litie

s ar

e co

nduc

ive

for

teac

hing

and

lear

ning

act

iviti

es

3.07

3.

11

3.19

3.

32

3.13

3.

18

3.41

3.

18

3.31

3.

50

3.29

3.

22

3.24

3.

37

3.18

The

cla

ssro

oms

are

clea

n an

d w

ell-

mai

ntai

ned

3.01

2.

94

3.10

3.

30

3.08

3.

14

3.32

2.

99

3.14

3.

45

3.24

3.

16

3.15

3.

34

3.08

The

cla

ssro

oms

are

com

fort

able

2.

97

2.89

3.

03

3.28

3.

01

3.10

3.

31

3.01

3.

10

3.33

3.

36

3.11

3.

16

3.36

3.

04

The

land

scap

e is

ple

asan

t and

wel

l-ke

pt

3.23

3.

29

3.32

3.

43

3.32

3.

30

3.50

3.

28

3.46

3.

53

3.40

3.

33

3.33

3.

48

3.32

The

res

pons

e tim

e up

on r

epor

ting

of

any

com

plai

nt is

ade

quat

e 2.

77

2.86

2.

94

2.95

2.

85

2.94

3.

22

2.91

2.

95

3.43

3.

20

2.99

3.

03

3.13

2.

92

The

mai

nten

ance

wor

ks a

re

satis

fact

ory

2.90

2.

96

3.05

3.

12

2.96

3.

01

3.30

3.

04

3.03

3.

50

3.24

3.

06

3.10

3.

22

3.02

Kul

liyya

h A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

Tot

al

Faci

litie

s in

cla

ssro

oms

are

in g

ood

cond

ition

2.

71

2.64

2.

88

3.38

2.

78

2.95

3.

24

2.78

2.

69

3.13

2.

96

2.90

3.

00

3.36

2.

84

Toi

lets

at k

ulliy

yah

are

in g

ood

cond

ition

2.

80

2.68

2.

97

3.44

3.

07

3.08

3.

19

3.09

3.

25

3.03

3.

13

3.18

3.

30

3.44

2.

99

The

num

ber

of d

iscu

ssio

n ar

eas

is

adeq

uate

2.

73

2.78

2.

90

3.23

2.

94

3.04

3.

20

3.04

2.

64

3.25

3.

09

2.89

3.

00

3.14

2.

91

The

con

ditio

n of

dis

cuss

ion

area

s is

go

od

2.77

2.

84

2.98

3.

33

2.97

3.

03

3.24

3.

03

2.90

3.

20

3.18

2.

94

3.05

3.

30

2.96

Mah

alla

h A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

Tot

al

Faci

litie

s in

Mah

alla

h ro

oms

are

in

good

con

ditio

n 3.

01

3.20

3.

11

3.14

3.

10

3.08

3.

38

3.36

3.

41

3.68

3.

49

3.40

3.

32

3.20

3.

19

Toi

lets

are

alw

ays

in g

ood

cond

ition

2.

73

2.90

2.

82

2.74

2.

70

2.73

3.

19

3.05

2.

92

3.53

3.

24

3.14

3.

04

2.76

2.

87

Mah

alla

h co

mpo

und

and

land

scap

e ar

e cl

ean/

wel

l-m

aint

aine

d 3.

16

3.27

3.

18

3.25

3.

19

3.18

3.

38

3.27

3.

30

3.63

3.

44

3.35

3.

28

3.36

3.

24


Aux

iliar

y, v

enue

, and

food

out

let

serv

ices

A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

Tot

al

The

num

ber

of a

uxili

ary

serv

ices

pr

ovid

ed is

ade

quat

e 2.

91

3.06

3.

07

3.13

3.

09

2.96

3.

18

2.50

2.

59

3.18

2.

69

2.69

2.

60

3.06

2.

97

The

con

ditio

n of

aux

iliar

y se

rvic

es

prov

ided

is g

ood

2.92

3.

06

3.10

3.

10

3.08

3.

01

3.22

2.

74

2.71

3.

35

2.89

2.

71

2.68

3.

06

3.00

The

num

ber

of v

enue

faci

litie

s is

ad

equa

te

3.02

3.

16

3.15

3.

28

3.18

3.

16

3.29

3.

01

2.94

3.

28

3.20

3.

01

2.90

3.

23

3.13

The

con

ditio

n of

ven

ue fa

cilit

ies

is g

ood

2.97

3.

08

3.13

3.

19

3.15

3.

14

3.27

2.

88

2.83

3.

20

3.18

2.

98

2.90

3.

24

3.08

The

num

ber

of fo

od o

utle

ts o

n ca

mpu

s is

ade

quat

e 2.

99

3.15

3.

15

3.21

3.

18

3.19

3.

28

2.24

2.

36

2.93

2.

29

2.31

2.

36

3.15

2.

99

The

var

iety

of f

ood

offe

red

at c

ampu

s ca

fete

ria

is g

ood

2.88

3.

10

3.04

3.

18

3.16

3.

13

3.23

2.

23

2.27

2.

98

2.31

2.

25

2.30

3.

11

2.93

The

pri

ce o

f foo

d of

fere

d at

cam

pus

cafe

teri

a is

rea

sona

ble

2.82

2.

93

2.98

3.

09

3.02

2.

91

3.11

2.

56

2.66

3.

00

2.64

2.

52

2.57

2.

86

2.88

The

qua

lity

of fo

od o

ffere

d at

cam

pus

cafe

teri

a is

goo

d 2.

80

2.98

2.

95

3.04

3.

06

3.01

3.

18

2.55

2.

68

3.10

2.

53

2.40

2.

52

2.97

2.

89

Secu

rity

and

saf

ety

AIK

OL

KIR

KH

S K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KO

E

KA

ED

K

OE

D

KO

M

KO

P K

ON

K

OD

K

OS

KA

HS

KLM

T

otal

The

re a

re a

dequ

ate

and

func

tiona

l sa

fety

equ

ipm

ent

2.44

2.

61

2.73

2.

97

2.80

2.

75

2.94

2.

96

3.05

3.

38

3.20

3.

03

3.08

2.

95

2.77

Def

ects

of b

uild

ing

are

atte

nded

to

imm

edia

tely

2.

41

2.65

2.

71

2.87

2.

74

2.73

3.

00

2.79

2.

74

3.33

2.

82

2.94

3.

01

2.91

2.

74

I fee

l saf

e at

the

prem

ises

with

str

inge

nt

secu

rity

pol

icie

s 2.

65

2.85

2.

91

3.11

3.

02

2.93

3.

18

3.03

3.

19

3.40

3.

27

3.22

3.

21

2.94

2.

96

The

sec

urity

forc

e pa

trol

s co

nsta

ntly

2.

73

2.93

2.

95

3.07

3.

05

2.98

3.

16

3.12

3.

19

3.50

3.

40

3.24

3.

22

3.03

3.

01

The

sec

urity

cas

es s

uch

as th

efts

, di

scip

linar

y ca

ses

are

hand

led

effe

ctiv

ely

2.55

2.

79

2.77

2.

90

2.89

2.

75

3.13

2.

93

2.95

3.

35

3.27

3.

08

3.08

2.

87

2.85

Scal

e: 1

(Str

ongl

y di

sagr

ee),

2 (D

isag

ree)

, 3 (A

gree

), 4

(Str

ongl

y ag

ree)

H

ighe

st s

core

R

atin

g no

t sig

nific

antly

(5%

) di

ffere

nt fr

om 2

.5

Rat

ing

sign

ifica

ntly

(5%

) low

er

than

2.5


20

1.2.5 Degree and University

Most graduates believed that the degrees obtained

were worth the money and time spent (see Figure

1.21 below).

Figure 1.21 Worthwhileness of degree

Malaysian graduates were more likely than non-

Malaysian graduates to recommend IIUM to

others (see Figure 1.22 below).

Figure 1.22 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others

While 84.4 per cent of non-Malaysian graduates

found their degrees worthwhile, only 73 per cent

would recommend IIUM to others. Only half of

non-Malaysian engineering graduates would

recommend IIUM to their friends and family

members as a place of study although two thirds

of them found their degrees worthwhile (see

Table 1.10 and Table 1.11 below).

Table 1.10 Worthwhileness of degree by kulliyyah

92.3%84.4%

7.7%15.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


No

Yes

93.1%

73.0%

6.9%

27.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


No

Yes

Malaysian (%) Non-Malaysian (%)

Yes No Yes No AIKOL 95 5.0 100 0 KAED 86.9 13.1 92.9 7.1 KENMS 93.6 6.4 88.5 11.5 KICT 87.4 12.6 82.6 17.4 KIRKHS 93.2 6.8 84.2 15.8 KOE 87.9 12.1 66.7 33.3 KOED 98.7 1.3 100 0 KAHS 91.9 8.1 N/A N/A KOD 100 0 N/A N/A KOM 100 0 100 0 KON 97.6 2.4 N/A N/A KOP 99.1 0.9 0 100 KOS 88.9 11.1 100 0 KLM 94.2 5.8 100 0 Total 92.3 7.7 84.4 15.6


21

Table 1.11 Willingness to recommend IIUM to others by kulliyyah

Malaysian (%) Non-Malaysian (%) Yes No Yes No

AIKOL 94.4 5.6 75 25.0 KAED 90.3 9.7 71.4 28.6 KENMS 95.7 4.3 77 22.9 KICT 92.8 7.2 78.3 21.7 KIRKHS 96.3 3.7 75.8 24.2 KOE 87.9 12.1 46.7 53.3 KOED 96.1 3.9 100 0 KAHS 88.3 11.7 N/A N/A KOD 95.6 4.4 N/A N/A KOM 96.6 3.4 100 0 KON 100 0 N/A N/A KOP 96.4 3.6 0 100 KOS 87.2 12.8 100 0 KLM 96.5 3.5 100 0 Total 93.1 6.9 73 27.0

1.2.6 Islamisation, integration, and internationalisation

Figure 1.23 Evaluation of aspects of Islamisation by kulliyyah

Islamisation is one of the missions of IIUM. In

this regard, graduates were asked whether they

agree that the University’s courses incorporate

Islamic values, IIUM provides a conducive

environment to practice Islam better, and IIUM

helps students to be better Muslims. The results

are summarised in Figure 1.23 above.

In general, the graduates agreed to the three

aspects of Islamisation as the mean ratings are

above 3.5 out of 5 across all kulliyyahs. This

suggests that the University has successfully

fulfilled its mission with respect to the above three

aspects of Islamisation.

0

1

2

3

4

5

AIKO

L

KAED

KEN

MS

KICT

KIRK

HS

KOE

KOED

KAH

S

KOD

KOM

KON

KOP

KOS

KLM

Courses incorporate Islamic values Conducive environment for better practice of Islam

Helps me to be a better Muslim


22

Additionally, the graduates were asked an open-

ended question about the advantages of studying

at IIUM, to which they were free to provide more

than one answer.

The most common responses were: (i) the Islamic

environment; (ii) the international environment;

(ii) opportunities for self-improvement as a

Muslim; and (iv) integration of knowledge. These

four responses are consistent with the vision and

missions of IIUM (see Figure 1.24 below).

While encouraging, the results emphasise a need

for IIUM to strive further to fulfil its objectives, as

though a third of the graduates mentioned the

Islamic environment, only slightly above 15 per

cent cited integration of knowledge.

KOP graduates were the most who cited the

Islamic environment, with almost half of them

giving it as the advantage of studying at IIUM.

Surprisingly, more science graduates than non-

science graduates mentioned integration of

knowledge. Particularly, more than half of KOM

graduates, and a quarter of KAHS and KOP

graduates, respectively, wrote the integration of

knowledge as an advantage of studying at IIUM.

More than graduates from other kulliyyahs, 37

per cent of KON graduates reported to have

benefited from self-improvement as a Muslim.

Figure 1.24 Advantages of studying at IIUM

1.2.7 Career enhancement training

Over three quarters of IIUM graduates indicated

that they would like to attend additional training

programmes to enhance their career

opportunities and more than half would be willing

to pay for the training (see Figure 1.25 below).

The highest demand for additional training came

from KAHS graduates (82 per cent) while the

lowest were from KON graduates (56.1 per cent).

Only 39 per cent of KON graduates were willing

to pay for additional training (see Figure 1.26

below).

Overall, the most preferred training programmes

were those related to enhancing English

proficiency and ICT skills. English language

programmes were highly demanded particularly

by AIKOL, KOED, KOM, KOD, and KOS

graduates. KICT and KOE graduates, however,

preferred programmes that would expand their

ICT skills (see Figure 1.27 below).

Figure 1.25 Demand for additional training

15.8%

18.6%

18.9%

35.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Integration ofknowledge

Self-improvement as aMuslim

Internationalenvironment

Islamic environment

24%

25%

51%

Would not liketo attend

Would like toattend but notpay

Would like toattend and pay

3,964graduates


23

Figure 1.26 Demand for additional training by kulliyyah

Figure 1.27 Preferred training programme by kulliyyah

1.2.8 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM

Graduates were also asked an open-ended

question about the disadvantages of studying at

IIUM. Over a third of the graduates indicated that

there were no disadvantages of studying at IIUM.

Of the rest, 7.2 per cent respectively mentioned

shortcomings in the study programmes and long

duration of study. Complaints about

shortcomings in the study programmes came

mostly from graduates from KOE (12 per cent)

and KICT (15 per cent), while the long duration

of study was raised by KOD and KOS graduates.

Lastly, 6.7 per cent of the graduates mentioned

poor facilities at the kulliyyahs and mahallahs (see

Figure 1.28 below).

Figure 1.28 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AIKOL KAED KENMS KICT KIRKHS KOE KOED KAHS KOD KOM KON KOP KOS KLM

Yes and willing to pay Yes but not willing to pay No

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AIKOL KIRKHS KENMS KICT KOE KAED KOED KOM KOP KON KOD KOS KAHS KLM

English proficiency ICT skills

6.7%

7.2%

7.2%

33.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Poor kulliyyah/mahallahfacilities

Long duration of study

Weaknesses inprogramme

None


24

1.3 Employment profile

1.3.1 General overview of employment characteristics

Figure 1.29 Overview of employment characteristics

The labour force includes those who are either

employed or unemployed. The unemployed are

those who do not have a job but are looking for

one (see Box 1 below). In this tracer study, the

labour force consisted of graduates who were full-

time or part-time employed or were unemployed

and searching for a job. Otherwise, they were

outside the labour force. Only fresh graduates

were considered for analysis. Those who were

probably already holding full-time jobs when they

enrolled as undergraduate students at IIUM, such

as those who underwent undergraduate degree

programmes offered by ICCE, were excluded.9

Overall, the graduates’ labour force participation

rate was 76.9 per cent (see Figure 1.29 above) and

it was higher for male (79.2 per cent) than female

graduates (76.1 per cent) (see Figure 1.30 and

Table 1.12 below). The rate of employment was

60.5 per cent, which was also higher for male

(65.2 per cent) than female (57.7 per cent)

9 Graduates who joined IIUM through the Program Khas Pensiswazahan Guru (PKPG), studied on part-time basis”, or were more than 28 years old were excluded from the analysis. 10 Department of Statistics Malaysia (2017, November 9). Principal Statistics of Labour Force, Malaysia,

graduates. In comparison, Malaysia’s overall

labour force participation rate in the same period

was 67.9 per cent (80.1 per cent male and 54.6

per cent female) and employment rate was 96.6

per cent.10

The labour force participation rates were higher

among male than female graduates of all

kulliyyahs except KOED and KOS. All KON

graduates and 93.9 per cent and 95.6 per cent of

KOM and KOD graduates, respectively, were in

the labour force. Apart from these kulliyyahs,

KICT graduates also recorded among the highest

labour participation rate at 90.4 per cent. On the

other hand, AIKOL graduates had the lowest

labour participation rate at 33.9 per cent as many

were undergoing chambering without pay at the

time of the survey. The second lowest labour

participation rate was among KOS graduates at

69.9 per cent (see Table 1.12 and Figure 1.31

below).

Third Quarter (Q3) 2017. Retrieved from https://dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=149&bul_id=alYvK1J5OTk2NnA2MEJUbG1HcXdTZz09&menu_id=U3VPMldoYUxzVzFaYmNkWXZteGduZz09

Full-time employed, 37.4%

Part-time employed, 9.1%Unemployed, 30.4%

Attending/planning to attend further study/training, 16.9%

Not looking for a job, 6.2%

3,782graduates 76.9% IN LABOUR FORCE

23.1% OUTSIDE LABOUR FORCE


25

Figure 1.30 Employment category by gender

BOX 1: TECHNICAL NOTES

Labour force refers to those who, during the reference week are between 15 to 64 years (in completed years at last birthday) and who are either employed or unemployed.

Employed refers to all persons who, at any time during the reference week worked for at least one hour for pay, profit or family gain (as an employer, employee, own-account worker or unpaid family worker). Also considered as employed are persons who did not work during the reference week because of illness, injury, bad weather, leave, labour dispute, and social or religious reasons but had a job, farm, enterprise or other family enterprises to return to. Also included are those on temporary lay-off with pay who would be called back to work.

Unemployed refers to those who do not have a job but are interested to work. There are two groups of unemployed, i.e., the actively unemployed and inactively unemployed.

Outside labour force: All persons not classified as employed or unemployed as stated above are classified as outside labour force. Includes housewives, students (including those going for further studies), retired, disabled persons, and those not interested in looking for a job.

Labour force participation rate: The economic activity of a population depends on the demographic characteristics of that population. The proportion of the economically active population, therefore, differs between sub-groups of that population. These variations are measured by specific activity rates termed as the labour force participation rate. Labour force participation rate is defined as the ratio of the labour force to the working-age population (15 to 64 years), expressed as a percentage.

Unemployment rate: The proportion of the unemployed population to the total population in labour. This rate measures the percentage of the unemployed population in the labour force.

Adapted from the Department of Statistics Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=124&bul_id=aUVrUWh2ZnZubkl2RUxEQU15N3ZWdz09&menu_id=U3VPMldoYUxzVzFaYmNkWXZteGduZz09

In this study:

Graduates in the labour force refer to graduates who were: i. Employed:

a. full-time employed; b. part-time employed; or c. chambering law graduates who

received work allowance. ii. Unemployed:

a. waiting for teaching or other work placement; or

b. still searching for a job.

Graduates outside of labour force refer to graduates who were: i. furthering studies or waiting for

placement for further study; ii. chambering law graduates who did

not receive work allowance; iii. attending short courses or training

programmes; iv. having family responsibility or health

problems; v. lacking self-confidence, feeling job

offered was not suitable, or not willing to relocate to other places;

vi. choosing not to work, not interested to work, or taking a break.

Labour force participation rate

=Labour force

Total graduates× 100

Employment rate

=Total employed

Labour force× 100

14.4%

3.2% 2.5%6.9%

2.9% 2.4% 1.9%

22.9%

5.9% 6.9%

14.3%

6.4% 5.3% 4.1%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Full-time Part-time Awaitingplacement

Searching Further studies Training Not interested

Employed Unemployed Not in labour force

Male Female


Tab

le 1

.12

Em

ploy

men

t cha

ract

eris

tics

by k

ulliy

yah

and

gend

er

Tot

al

Ove

rall

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P K

OS

KLM

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

48.7

75

.2

48.3

56

.9

73.0

45

.0

55.7

27

.4

52.4

4.

7 11

.6

90.2

28

.0

37.0

45

.9

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 60

.5

91.2

63

.4

66.9

77

.9

61.5

61

.8

49.3

63

.1

11.6

18

.1

95.1

42

.0

49.1

55

.7

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/to

tal u

nem

ploy

ed

12.1

0.

0 10

.5

5.6

5.7

3.8

5.4

30.1

7.

0 88

.4

78.3

2.

4 51

.0

6.1

4.9

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

76.9

33

.9

84.4

79

.0

90.4

79

.1

80.8

91

.3

84.6

95

.6

93.9

10

0 90

.1

69.9

70

.1

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/no

t in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

73.2

95

.1

38.6

63

.5

69.2

67

.2

75.4

42

.9

52.9

0.

0 11

.1

- 72

.7

78.9

53

.8

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 6.

2 3.

3 9.

6 7.

7 3.

0 6.

9 4.

7 5.

0 7.

2 4.

4 5.

4 0.

0 2.

7 6.

4 13

.8

N

3782

35

9 28

0 54

0 13

5 91

9 58

8 80

21

8 45

14

7 41

11

0 23

3 87

Mal

e (3

4.2%

) O

vera

ll A

IKO

L K

AE

D

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

IRK

HS

KO

E

KO

ED

K

AH

S K

OD

K

OM

K

ON

K

OP

KO

S K

LM

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

53.5

70

.5

60.2

66

.1

78.3

43

.8

57.0

11

.1

60.5

0.

0 18

.2

87.5

25

.0

18.5

55

.6

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 65

.2

93.2

71

.8

75.6

84

.1

62.9

63

.3

22.2

71

.1

0.0

34.1

10

0.0

45.0

37

.0

66.7

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/to

tal u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 9.

1 0.

0 8.

7 3.

9 5.

8 3.

4 5.

1 55

.6

7.9

100.

0 59

.1

0.0

50.0

5.

6 11

.1

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

79.2

41

.5

88.8

77

.9

89.6

80

.9

83.4

69

.2

90.5

10

0.0

91.7

10

0.0

71.4

71

.1

75.0

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/no

t in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

73.2

93

.5

46.2

55

.6

62.5

76

.2

69.8

50

.0

100.

0 -

0.0

- 87

.5

77.3

66

.7

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 5.

6 3.

8 6.

0 9.

8 3.

9 4.

5 5.

0 15

.4

0.0

- 8.

3 -

3.6

6.6

8.3

N

1293

10

6 11

6 16

3 77

22

0 37

9 13

42

5

48

8 28

76

12

Fem

ale

(65.

8%)

Ove

rall

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

D

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P K

OS

KLM

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

45.9

76

.0

39.3

53

.0

66.0

45

.4

53.1

29

.7

50.3

5.

3 8.

5 90

.9

27.8

45

.9

44.2

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 57

.7

89.3

57

.0

63.0

69

.8

60.9

58

.8

53.1

61

.1

13.2

10

.6

93.9

40

.5

55.0

53

.8

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/to

tal u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 13

.8

0.0

11.9

6.

3 5.

7 4.

0 5.

6 26

.6

6.7

86.8

87

.2

3.0

51.9

6.

4 3.

8

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

76.1

29

.6

82.3

79

.6

91.4

79

.1

76.6

95

.5

84.7

95

.0

94.9

10

0.0

96.3

69

.4

69.3

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/no

t in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

73.8

95

.5

34.5

66

.2

80.0

65

.8

81.6

33

.3

51.9

0.

0 20

.0

- 33

.3

81.3

52

.2

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 6.

3 3.

2 11

.6

6.9

1.7

7.2

4.3

3.0

7.4

5.0

4.0

- 2.

4 5.

7 14

.7

N

2489

25

3 16

4 37

7 58

69

9 20

9 67

17

6 40

99

33

82

15

7 75


Fi

gure

1.3

1 E

mpl

oym

ent c

ateg

ory

by k

ulliy

yah

0%10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training

Not looking for a job

Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


AIKO

LKA

EDKE

NM

SKI

CTKI

RKH

SKO

EKO

ED

Fem

ale

Mal

e

0%10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


Working full-time

Working part-time

Awating placement

Searching for a job

Studying

Training


KAH

SKO

DKO

MKO

NKO

PKO

SKL

M

Fem

ale

Mal

e


28

Though AIKOL graduates had the lowest labour

force participation rate, they recorded the highest

employment rate at 91.2 per cent, which means

most of the few law graduates who were in the

labour force managed to secure employment. On

the contrary, KOD graduates, who have the

second highest labour force participation rate had

the lowest employment rate, although 88.4 per

cent of those unemployed were awaiting job

placements. The circumstances of KOS graduates,

however, is of concern since over half of the

graduates were unemployed and most were still

searching for a job.

While the employment levels of graduates of most

kulliyyahs were not low, a significant number of

the graduates were in part-time, rather than full-

time, employment. Excluding part-time

employment, the overall full-time employment

rate was only 48.7 per cent. For instance, almost

half of employed KOED graduates were in part-

time employment. Disproportionately fewer

female graduates were employed full-time

compared to male graduates (see Figure 1.30 and

Table 1.12 above).

Among the graduates who were unemployed at

the time of the study, 12.1 per cent were waiting

for job placements. These consist of 13.8 per cent

of female graduates and 9.1 per cent of male

graduates. The proportion of unemployed female

graduates awaiting job placements was higher

than that of male graduates across all kulliyyahs

except KOED, KAHS, and KLM.

Of those who were outside of labour force, 40 per

cent were waiting to further or were furthering

their studies, 17.2 per cent were AIKOL graduates

undergoing chambering (without allowance), and

14.7 per cent were attending courses or training

programmes. The proportion of male and female

graduates in these pursuits were almost equal.

Other graduates staying outside the labour force

included those who wanted to take a break (11.9

per cent), those with family responsibilities or

health issues (8.7 per cent), and those who were

not interested or lack the confidence to work (see

Figure 1.32 below)

The survey reveals a higher proportion of female

graduates (6.3 per cent) compared to male

graduates (5.6 per cent) not looking for a job.

Among them, graduates from KLM recorded the

highest proportion with 13.8 per cent not

interested or looking for a job.

Figure 1.32 Reasons for not participating in the labour force

39.5%

17.2%

14.7%

11.9%

8.7%

8.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Waiting/further studies

Chambering (without allowance)

Attending courses/training

Taking a break/travelling

Family responsibility/health problem

Not interested/not willing to relocate/lack self-confidence/other


29

1.3.2 Employment profile of employed graduates

Of the employed graduates, 80 per cent were in

full-time employment while the remaining 20 per

cent were in part-time employment. The majority

of those in full-time employment was in a

permanent job position (45 per cent) or employed

on a contract basis (36 per cent). The rest were

either employed on a temporary basis (15 per

cent), working with family (2 per cent), or

chambering with work allowance (0.4 per cent)


On the other hand, those who work part-time

were mostly employed on a temporary basis (57

per cent). About 23 per cent were employed on

contract, 12 per cent were self-employed, and the

remaining 6 per cent worked with their family.

Most of the graduates (66 per cent of full-time and

44 per cent of part-time) filled managerial or

professional roles while 6.3 and 3.3 per cent, in

full-time and part-time employment, respectively,

worked as technicians or associate professionals

(see Figure 1.34 and Figure 1.35 below).

Figure 1.33 Graduates by type of employment status

Figure 1.34 Employment status by type of occupation

Figure 1.35 Type of occupation by employment type

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Perm

anen

t

Cont

ract

Tem

pora

ry

Self-

empl

oyed

Wor

king

with

fam

ily

Cham

berin

g

Perm

anen

t

Cont

ract

Tem

pora

ry

Self-

empl

oyed

Wor

king

with

fam

ily

Cham

berin

g

Full-time Part-time

46.0%

43.9%

27.0%

20.4%

18.5%

34.9%

42.9%

44.0%

25.6%

23.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Managerial/professional

Technician/associate professional

Clerical support

Service/sales

Others

Permanent Contract Temporary Working with family

66.3%

43.9%

6.3%

3.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Full-time

Part-time

Manageria/professional Technician/associate professional Clerical support Service/sales Others


30

The remaining 27.4 and 52.8 per cent, in full-time

and part-time employment respectively, can be

considered underemployed as they were in jobs

for which they were overqualified such as in

clerical support, service and sales, etc. As such, 32

per cent of all IIUM graduates who were working

at the time of the survey were underemployed.

However, it is suspected that the actual level of

underemployment rate is lower as a significant

number of medical and nursing graduates

claimed to be service and sales workers.11 They

may have misidentified themselves as sales or

service workers when working at private clinics or

retail pharmacies.

Nevertheless, the observed level of

underemployment is comparable to the 34 per

cent rate of underemployment of college

graduates in the United States in 2017.12

Female graduates were found to be at a

disadvantage in the workforce. They were found

disproportionately more in part-time, rather than

full-time, employment and more likely to be

underemployed. Over 31 per cent of female

graduates worked in clerical, or service and sales

roles, compared to about 20 per cent of male

graduates. Only 61 per cent of female graduates

were in managerial and professional roles

compared to 65 per cent of male graduates (see

Figure 1.36 below).

Figure 1.36 Type of occupation, employment status, and gender

Overall, the top three sectors 2017 IIUM

graduates worked in were education (15.1 per

cent), professional, scientific, and technical (15

11 Nine of 24 medical and 21 of 38 pharmacy graduates indicated that they were in the service and sales category. 12 Federal Reserve Bank of New York (2018, July 25). The Labour Market for Recent College Graduates.

per cent), and other services (14.4 per cent).

However, the sectoral concentrations differ across

different kulliyyahs. For instance, 28.1 per cent of

Retrieved from https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labour-market/college-labour-market_underemployment_rates.html.

70.4%63.7%

36.8%47.7%

9.9%

4.1%

5.7%

2.1%

7.3%17.7%

19.8%18.5%

8.4% 12.0%

23.5%19.5%

3.9% 2.5%14.2% 12.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Male Female Male Female

Full-time Part-time

Managerial/professional Technician/associate professional Clerical support Service/sales Others


31

KENMS graduates worked in the financial and

insurance or takaful sector while most KICT

graduates, expectedly, were in the information

and communication technology sector; 30 per

cent of engineering graduates were employed in

the manufacturing sector, and 40 per cent of

KAED graduates were in the construction sector.

Most KOP, KAHS, and KOD graduates

predictably worked in the health and social

services sector. A diverse group were found

among KOS graduates, who worked in the

financial and insurance or takaful, education, or

other services sectors (see Table 1.13 below).

Table 1.13 Top economic sectors by kulliyyah

AIKOL KAED KENMS

Professional/scientific/ technical Other services Education

57.4%

21.3% 3.7%

Construction Professional/scientific/ technical Other services

39.7% 20.5%

7.3%

Financial/insurance/takaful Other services Professional/scientific/ technical

28.1% 17.9% 13.0%

KICT KIRKHS KOE

Information/communication Professional/scientific/ technical Other services

54.7% 13.7%

12.6%

Education Other services Administrative/support

32.7% 16.5%

8.5%

Manufacturing Information/communication Professional/scientific/ technical

29.6% 15.3% 15.3%

KOED Overall KAHS

Education Wholesale/retail Other services Water/sewerage management

72.2% 8.3% 5.6% 5.6%

Others Education Professional/scientific/ technical Other services

55.5% 15.1% 15.0%

14.4%

Health/social Professional/scientific/ technical Other services

38.1% 25.4%

13.6%

KOD KOM KON

Health/social Professional/scientific/ technical Agriculture/Forestry/Fishery

40.0% 40.0%

20.0%

Professional/scientific/ technical Other services Health/social Wholesale/retail

24.0%

20.0% 16.0% 16.0%

Health/social Professional/scientific/ technical Others

76.9% 7.7%

7.7%

KOP KOS KLM

Health/social Professional/scientific/ technical Other services

39.0% 26.8%

14.6%

Other services Financial/insurance/ takaful Education

20.0% 17.5%

15.0%

Education Other services Financial/insurance/takaful

35.3% 23.5% 11.8%

Among those who worked full-time, KICT

graduates earned the highest with a mean

monthly income of RM2,547.75, followed by

13 Differences in the mean monthly income between graduates of the different kulliyyahs are significant at the 5 per cent level.

KOE graduates with RM2,312.26.13 KOED

graduates earned the lowest with only RM1,250

monthly (see Figure 1.37 below).14

14 Significantly lower than graduates from all other kulliyyahs except KOM, KOD, and KOP, against which there is no significant difference partly due to small sample sizes.


32

Figure 1.37 Mean monthly income by kulliyyah. (.) number of observations

1.3.3 Comparative profile of graduates with different employment statuses

This section presents a comparative profile of five

categories of graduates in terms of:

Academic performance;

Duration of internship;

Involvement in co-curricular activities;

Job search behaviour;

Income received, or expected income if

not working; and

Number of job interviews attended and

preferred employment sector if not

working.

The five categories are those who were:

i. employed full-time;

ii. employed part-time;

iii. unemployed;

iv. furthering or planning to further studies;

and

v. not interested or not looking for a job.

The results are summarised in Table 1.14 below.

Graduates who were furthering or planning to

further their studies had the highest mean CGPA

of 3.11. This is expected as only students who are

good academically get accepted into graduate

programmes. It could also be that students with

higher CGPA are those who like to study and

would more likely want to continue studying at

the postgraduate level. On the other hand, those

who were unemployed at the time of the survey

reported the lowest mean CGPA of 3.02.

Of the graduates who were still searching for a job

at the time of the convocation, 44 per cent had not

attended any job interviews and a third was called

for only one or two interviews. The remaining

24.4 per cent had attended at least three

interviews.

Graduates who secured full-time employment

started searching for a job actively, on average,

two weeks upon completion of their studies while

those who obtained only part-time employment

started their search slightly later at about 2.5

weeks. In contrast, those who were still

unemployed at the time of the survey only started

searching for work actively, on average, one

month after completion of their studies.

Graduates in full-time employment also

underwent a longer mean internship duration of

3.37 months during their studies compared to

those in part-time employment (2.7 months) or

RM1,250.00RM1,250.00

RM1,379.63RM1,750.00RM1,761.36

RM1,919.45RM1,962.50RM1,969.57RM2,000.00

RM2,074.32RM2,132.72

RM2,198.98RM2,312.26

RM2,547.75

KOED (20)KOD (2)

KOP (27)KOM (16)

AIKOL (88)KIRKHS (329)

KOS (60)KAED (115)

KLM (28)KON (37)

KENMS (243)KAHS (98)KOE (265)KICT (89)


33

the unemployed (2.91 months). Meanwhile,

involvement in co-curricular activities was

slightly higher among graduates with full-time

jobs compared to others.15 Those who were not

interested or not looking for a job were less active

in co-curricular activities as students.

The mean total monthly income, including

allowances, of graduates working full-time, was

RM2,067.40, which was more than twice that of

graduates working part-time.16 The difference is

not unexpected given part-time employees work

fewer hours than full-time workers.

However, there were divergences in income even

within each employment status.17 For instance,

the mean total monthly income of those employed

full-time on a permanent basis was RM2,366.28,

which was significantly higher than those of other

categories.18 Graduates who were employed full-

time on a contract basis earned an average of

RM2,081.55 and the lowest income from full-

time employment were earned by those who

worked on a temporary basis, self-employed, or

with family. Similar patterns apply among

graduates who were in part-time employment.

On average, those employed on permanent basis

received the highest monthly income, followed by

those appointed on contract, and the lowest were

those whose employment was temporary, were

self-employed, or working with family (see Figure

1.38 below).

Table 1.14 Characteristics of different employment statuses

Employed full-time

Employed part-time Unemployed

Further study


CGPA 3.07 3.09 3.02 3.11 3.05 Internship duration (months) 3.37 2.70 2.91 2.80 2.69 Co-curricular involvement 3.53 3.49 3.33 3.42 3.23 Monthly income (RM) 2067.40 957.73 2572.32* 2809.56* 2641.41* When searching for a job (months) 0.53 0.61 1.00 1.06 2.61

Preferred job sector

N/A N/A

Government (71.2&) Private multinational (11.7%) Private local (8.6%)

N/A N/A

Note: * expected

15 The co-curriculum overall rating is the mean value of the graduates’ self-ratings of their level of involvement in (i) societies, (ii) clubs, and (iii) sport, on a scale of 1 (not active) to 5 (very active). 16 The income computed is an approximation of the actual income using the mid-point of the range of income given for each response. For example, the incomes within the range RM1,501-RM2,000 are approximated as RM1,750. Incomes of more than RM10,000 are approximated as RM12,000. 17 Employment status is categorized into: (i) full-time employed; (ii) part-time employed; (iii) not working; (iv) others. Those employed are further divided into categories of employment: (i) permanent; (ii) contract;

(iii) temporary; (iv) self-employed; (v) working for family. 18 T-tests indicate that for full-time employment, the income is highest for permanent employees, followed by those on contract, and then temporary, self-employed, and working with family; i.e., permanent > contract > temporary = self-employed = working with family. For part-time employment, the highest income is received by permanent and contract employees, followed by workers categorized as temporary, self-employed, and working for family; i.e., permanent = contract > temporary = self-employed = working for family.


34

Figure 1.38 Total monthly income (including allowance) by employment status

Interestingly, graduates who were still

unemployed at the time of the survey expected a

higher monthly income of RM2,572.3219. Those

who were planning or already pursuing higher

studies expected an even higher mean income of

RM2,809.56, while those not looking for a job

expected an income of over RM2641.41 if they

were to work. Most of the unemployed graduates

would prefer to work with the government.

Despite the figures, a high salary was not the

topmost criterion for choosing a job among those

unemployed and outside the labour force. Among

those unemployed, the top two criteria were

opportunities for job enhancement and valuable

work experience. On the other hand, job security

and employee benefits were most important

among graduates who were pursuing further

studies. While those who were not looking or

confident to be in the labour market claimed to

give priority to job security and gaining valuable

work experience over others (see Figure 1.39

below).

Figure 1.39 Top criteria in searching for a job among those not working

19 The expected income is also computed based on the mid-point of the range given.

RM2,366.28

RM2,081.55

RM1,303.74

RM1,307.69

RM1,073.53

RM1,531.25

RM1,201.30

RM861.68

RM898.81

RM855.26

Permanent

Contract

Temporary

Self-employed

Working with family

Part-time Full-time

0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

High salary Job security Flexible hours Benefits Opportunitiesfor job

enrichment

Job satisfaction Valuable workexperience

Unemployed Further studies Not looking/confident


35

1.3.4 Determinants of employment

A more robust examination using regression

analyses were undertaken to identify the

significant factors that affect two employment

variables: duration until getting full-time

employment and monthly income obtained from

employment. Analysis of the duration until

getting full-time employment included only

graduates who were in the labour force while

analysis for income obtained from employment

was restricted to only employed graduates, both

full-time and part-time.

Duration until getting full-time employment

The measurement of the duration until getting

full-time employment was based on responses to

two questions in the survey questionnaire. All

graduates were asked about their current job

status: (i) employed full-time, (ii) employed part-

time, (iii) not working, or (iv) others. Those who

were employed were asked further how long they

had to wait for their first job.

For graduates who were employed full-time, the

following values were assigned for the duration

indicator:

Table 1.15 Duration of waiting for the first job

Response to how long have to wait for the first job

Duration indicator

Before completion of studies 0 1 month 1 2 months 2 3 months 3 4 months 4 5 months 5 6 months 6 7 months 7 8 months 8 9 months 9 10 months 10 11 months 11 12 months 12 More than a year 13

For graduates who were in part-time employment

or unemployed, they were assigned the value 13

for the duration indicator.

Several determinants that may affect the duration

until getting full-time employment were

considered. The first was gender as descriptive

statistics suggest that male graduates may have

an advantage over female graduates in the labour

market. The second and third variables were

CGPA and duration of study. Employers may

place importance on these two variables as they

can be construed to signal their level of ability.

The analysis also considered the graduates’ level

of involvement in co-curricular activities and soft

skills. However, it should be noted that these two

variables were based on the graduates’ own

subjective assessment. The co-curriculum score is

the mean value of the graduates’ self-ratings of

their level of involvement in societies, clubs, and

sport, on a scale of 1 (not active) to 5 (very active).

Similarly, the soft skills score is the mean value of

their self-ratings of seven soft-skill items from 1

(poor) to 5 (excellent).

Duration of industrial training or internship and

whether the graduates worked while they were

studying were also included as explanatory

variables as experience in the working

environment may contribute positively to gaining

full-time employment. The analysis also

considered the time elapsed between the

completion of studies and the date of the

convocation since those who completed earlier

would more likely to obtain a full-time job.

The results as shown in Table 1.16 find that in

general, male graduates took a shorter time to

gain full-time employment compared to female


36

graduates. Further analysis of each kulliyyah

indicates that this finding applies to graduates

from KENMS, KICT, KAED, and KOS. In

addition, those with higher CGPA were able to

gain full-employment earlier than others,

particularly among AIKOL, KENMS, and KOS

graduates. Interestingly, the result is the opposite

for KOP graduates; controlling for other factors,

those with higher CGPA took longer to secure full-

time employment.

Involvement in co-curricular activities matters in

the duration taken to gain full-time employment

only for KOE, KOS, KOED, and KAHS graduates

but not others. The duration KICT and KOED

graduates took to complete their programme has

a negative effect on the time taken to secure full-

time employment. The longer the time they took

to complete their studies, the longer it took them

to gain full-time employment upon completion of

their studies. This variable is not significant for

other graduates.

Internship is a significant determinant only for

KOS and KENMS graduates. Surprisingly, the

level of soft skills of the graduates, as assessed by

themselves, is not a significant determinant

except for AIKOL graduates. For the latter, it

contributed positively to gaining full-time

employment earlier. The lack of impact of soft

skills on employability is contrary to what is

expected as it is often mentioned that employers

are looking for graduates with the necessary soft

skills. Perhaps, other factors take precedence over

the level of soft skills a graduate has in the time

taken to secure full-time employment. Possibly as

well, the graduates’ self-assessed level of soft skills

may not reflect the actual level.

Working while studying affected the duration

until attaining full-time employment for some

graduates. AIKOL graduates who worked while

studying took longer time to secure full-time

employment. However, it significantly facilitated

KOP graduates gain full-time employment

sooner.

Graduates should not delay searching for jobs as

it will also delay gaining full-time employment. As

expected, graduates who completed their studies

earlier took a shorter time to secure full-time jobs.

However, KOED graduates are the exception.

KOED graduates who completed their studies

closer to the date of the convocation took a shorter

time to gain full-time employment compared to

those who completed much earlier.


Tab

le 1

.16

Det

erm

inan

ts o

f dur

atio

n un

til g

ettin

g fu

ll-tim

e jo

b by

kul

liyya

h

O

vera

ll A

IKO

L K

AE

D

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

IRK

HS

KO

E

KO

ED

K

AH

S K

ON

K

OP

KO

S K

LM

(Con

stan

t)

15.2

8 (0

.00)

14

.97

(0.0

5)

11.7

4 (0

.15)

22

.34

(0.0

0)

9.31

(0

.34)

12

.73

0.00

12

.32

(0.0

2)

29.3

9 (0

.11)

3.

96

(0.8

0)

-5.2

3 (0

.70)

40

.93

(0.1

4)

31.7

8 (0

.00)

7.

06

(0.7

7)

Mal

e -0

.63

(0.0

1)

0.68

(0

.51)

-2

.69

(0.0

0)

-1.2

2 (0

.04)

-2

.32

(0.0

3)

0.57

0.

30

-0.7

4 (0

.16)

1.

54

(0.4

8)

-0.3

0 (0

.80)

0.

27

(0.8

7)

0.35

(0

.82)

2.

40

(0.0

1)

-0.6

6 (0

.84)

CG

PA

-0.9

1 (0

.01)

-2

.23

(0.0

9)

-2.2

5 (0

.20)

-2

.20

(0.0

2)

-0.6

0 (0

.72)

0.

34

0.64

-0

.81

(0.3

7)

-7.1

9 (0

.10)

-1

.50

(0.5

0)

1.36

(0

.70)

4.

25

(0.0

7)

-2.9

5 (0

.08)

1.

26

(0.8

0)

Co-

curr

icul

um

-0.3

9 (0

.00)

-0

.92

(0.1

0)

-0.5

3 (0

.30)

-0

.02

(0.9

5)

-0.1

1 (0

.85)

-0

.38

0.14

-0

.65

(0.0

3)

-1.6

8 (0

.05)

-1

.20

(0.0

4)

0.58

(0

.34)

0.

80

(0.3

8)

-1.1

7 (0

.03)

0.

22

(0.8

5)

Stud

y du

ratio

n (y

ears

) 0.

01

(0.9

4)

0.57

(0

.61)

0.

81

(0.2

5)

-0.7

8 (0

.14)

1.

58

(0.0

5)

-0.0

2 0.

95

0.82

(0

.09)

2.

07

(0.1

7)

2.57

(0

.38)

-

-7.5

1 (0

.16)

-0

.59

(0.7

1)

0.17

(0

.96)

Inte

rnsh

ip d

urat

ion

(mon

ths)

-0

.33

(0.0

0)

-0.4

0 (0

.37)

-0

.33

(0.2

5)

-0.3

3 (0

.02)

-0

.34

(0.4

6)

0.12

0.

40

-0.3

4 (0

.46)

0.

05

(0.9

3)

0.03

(0

.81)

-0

.15

(0.2

1)

-0.5

6 (0

.19)

-0

.92

(0.0

2)

0.30

(0

.73)

Soft

ski

lls

-0.2

6 (0

.19)

-1

.07

(0.0

9)

0.86

(0

.37)

-0

.24

(0.6

2)

-1.3

3 (0

.15)

-0

.61

0.13

-0

.20

(0.6

5)

0.37

(0

.79)

0.

43

(0.6

0)

0.34

(0

.77)

-0

.12

(0.9

2)

-0.3

2 (0

.69)

-1

.23

(0.3

7)

Whe

n st

art j

ob s

earc

hing

0.

76

(0.0

0)

0.83

(0

.01)

0.

62

(0.0

2)

0.86

(0

.00)

1.

16

(0.0

0)

0.54

0.

00

0.83

(0

.00)

0.

34

(0.3

3)

1.04

(0

.01)

3.

76

(0.0

0)

0.66

(0

.14)

0.

75

(0.0

2)

0.94

(0

.29)

Wor

ked

whi

le s

tudy

ing

-0.4

0 (0

.08)

1.

96

(0.0

4)

-0.5

8 (0

.51)

-0

.76

(0.1

8)

-0.9

2 (0

.35)

-0

.60

0.20

-0

.57

(0.2

7)

0.50

(0

.98)

-0

.52

(0.5

7)

0.17

(0

.91)

-3

.21

(0.0

2)

-0.7

4 (0

.39)

-0

.05

(0.6

4)

Mon

ths

sinc

e gr

adua

tion

-0.4

8 (0

.00)

0.

00

(0.9

9)

-0.4

7 (0

.08)

-0

.73

(0.0

0)

-0.2

8 (0

.11)

-0

.43

0.00

-0

.51

(0.0

0)

0.06

(0

.40)

-0

.88

(0.1

7)

- -4

.76

(0.2

2)

-0.8

9 (0

.00)

-0

.49

(0.1

4)

N

2361

10

2 18

9 36

9 10

4 62

2 42

3 62

17

6 37

85

13

8 54

R

2 0.

109

0.18

9 0.

133

0.24

7 0.

328

0.07

0 0.

136

0.18

4 0.

087

0.34

9 0.

183

0.23

8 0.

078

Not

e: (.

) p-v

alue

.


38

Total monthly income

Total monthly income was obtained from the

question asking the graduates their total monthly

income including allowances. The possible

responses were “RM500 and below”, “RM501 to

RM100”, and so on until “RM5001 to RM10,000”

and “more than RM10,000”. Midpoint values

were used to approximate the total monthly

income for analysis.

Again, gender was considered as a factor as male

graduates appear to have an advantage in the job

market. CGPA was also considered as those with

higher CGPA are expected to perform better in the

workplace. Active involvement in co-curricular

activities and soft-skills presumably also

contribute positively to job performance and

therefore income. The analysis also considered

the duration of industrial training or internship as

an explanatory variable as the experience gained

is expected to contribute positively to actual work

performance.

Apart from these variables, the graduates’

assessment of their own ability and capability in

performing their jobs was also considered. This

variable was measured as the mean value of their

ratings of five items, namely, (i) workplace

adaptability, (ii) problem-solving and decision-

making skills, (iii) confidence to perform the task

required, (iv) working in a team, and (v)

communication skills; on a scale of 1 (extremely

low) to 5 (extremely high). A dummy variable to

differentiate between full-time and part-time

employment was included to control for the

differences in income between these two groups

of workers.

The findings as given in Table 1.17 show that,

even after controlling for the other factors, there

was a significant difference in the mean incomes

between male and female graduates. On average,

employed male graduates earned higher incomes

than their female counterparts, particularly for

those from AIKOL, KIRKHS, KENMS, KAED,

KOP, and KOED. Higher CGPA also implied

higher incomes for KIRKHS, KENMS, and KAED

graduates.

Surprisingly, the result for involvement in co-

curricular activities indicates that it had an

adverse effect on income for AIKOL, KIRKHS,

KOED graduates. Involvement in co-curricular

activities only benefited KON graduates.

Industrial training or internship was not a

significant factor in obtaining higher incomes for

most except KAHS graduates, and unexpectedly,

those who went through longer internships while

studying received lower monthly incomes from

work.

The level of soft skills a graduate had did not have

any significant impact on total monthly income

once other factors are controlled for. This finding

is consistent with the earlier results for duration

taken to obtain full-time employment. Work

performance matters in determining the income

received from work. The better the graduates

were in terms of workplace adaptability, problem-

solving and decision-making skills, confidence to

perform task, teamwork, and communication

skills, the higher reward they received in terms of

financial remuneration.

Even after considering the other factors, there

exists a significant difference in income between

full-time and part-time employment. On average,

a graduate with full-time employment received

over RM1,200 more than one with only part-time

employment. The biggest difference is for KOED

graduates, where on average, the income received

from a full-time job was RM1,663.17 higher than

that from a part-time job. Earlier, descriptive


39

statistics indicate that graduates who were in

part-time employment were mostly on a

temporary basis. It may be a choice taken by the

graduates while searching for a permanent full-

time position. However, a full-time job would

ensure a more stable and favourable financial

situation for the graduates.


Tab

le 1

.17

Det

erm

inan

ts o

f mon

thly

inco

me

from

em

ploy

men

t by

kulli

yyah

O

vera

ll A

IKO

L K

AE

D

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

IRH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

N

KO

P K

OS

KLM

(Con

stan

t)

-577

.99

(0.1

0)

-91.

28

(0.9

6)

-223

.53

(0.6

7)

-140

5.70

(0

.04)

-1

905.

07

(0.0

0)

-416

.36

(0.5

9)

206.

87

(0.8

2)

3171

.48

(0.5

1)

1310

.05

(0.3

7)

2835

.08

(0.1

9)

-756

.99

(0.7

1)

333.

62

(0.8

2)

5994

.00

(0.0

7)

Mal

e 41

2.87

(0

.00)

11

89.1

7 (0

.00)

19

4.97

(0

.08)

32

9.64

(0

.01)

-1

20.9

5 (0

.14)

33

6.82

(0

.01)

19

9.03

(0

.15)

14

78.4

1 (0

.06)

-7

4.73

(0

.68)

-2

11.7

8 (0

.40)

10

62.8

7 (0

.01)

15

8.03

(0

.51)

14

8.91

(0

.71)

CG

PA

443.

16

(0.0

0)

629.

29

(0.2

5)

426.

65

(0.0

4)

601.

01

(0.0

0)

361.

25

(0.4

5)

489.

78

(0.0

0)

159.

78

(0.4

0)

-917

.94

(0.3

9)

-180

.52

(0.6

1)

-268

.96

(0.6

3)

62.5

2 (0

.89)

42

8.48

(0

.24)

-4

42.5

7 (0

.56)

Co-

curr

icul

um

-127

.43

(0.0

0)

-603

.60

(0.0

1)

-1.0

9 (0

.95)

-8

4.34

(0

.20)

-1

7.47

(0

.11)

-1

80.8

7 (0

.01)

28

.65

(0.7

0)

-646

.63

(0.0

1)

-6.3

7 (0

.95)

17

9.23

(0

.08)

16

4.69

(0

.40)

-1

93.9

4 (0

.14)

-2

35.2

4 (0

.24)

Inte

rnsh

ip d

urat

ion

-6.6

0 (0

.57)

-1

20.5

3 (0

.45)

29

.87

(0.3

0)

-40.

19

(0.1

1)

64.6

4 (0

.84)

39

.89

(0.3

0)

74.8

2 (0

.49)

-2

11.3

1 (0

.25)

-5

2.79

(0

.00)

-1

6.07

(0

.37)

-5

4.87

(0

.52)

-6

.65

(0.9

3)

-73.

35

(0.6

0)

Soft

ski

lls

-70.

75

(0.2

2)

-403

.09

(0.1

6)

58.4

6 (0

.84)

-7

.25

(0.9

5)

-395

.36

(0.5

3)

-93.

21

(0.4

6)

235.

06

(0.1

0)

467.

89

(0.4

4)

-23.

27

(0.8

8)

104.

91

(0.6

4)

42.9

8 (0

.87)

-5

5.61

(0

.74)

-2

42.5

7 (0

.23)

Wor

k pe

rfor

man

ce

181.

86

(0.0

0)

589.

42

(0.0

7)

-43.

43

(0.5

8)

266.

65

(0.0

3)

805.

34

(0.0

1)

144.

14

(0.2

6)

-195

.30

(0.1

5)

434.

34

(0.4

7)

151.

50

(0.3

2)

-191

.37

(0.3

3)

75.3

8 (0

.79)

18

.12

(0.9

2)

-293

.87

(0.3

1)

Wor

king

full-

time

1229

.31

(0.0

0)

1537

.44

(0.0

0)

1013

.29

(0.0

0)

1015

.50

(0.0

0)

1217

.06

(0.0

0)

1167

.55

(0.0

0)

1057

.16

(0.0

0)

1663

.17

(0.0

1)

1218

.74

(0.0

0)

53.7

2 (0

.92)

85

3.24

(0

.00)

10

87.0

4 (0

.00)

99

2.03

(0

.02)

N

16

12

110

124

276

88

403

271

51

115

35

37

71

31

R2

0.19

0.

20

0.41

0.

22

0.39

0.

19

0.11

0.

41

0.35

0.

16

0.43

0.

33

0.34

N

ote:

(.) p

-val

ue

MASTER’S DEGREE GRADUATES

2PART

44IIUM TRACER STUDY 2017

42



A total of 583 master’s degree graduates took part

in the Graduate Tracer Study 2017 upon the 33rd

IIUM Convocation.

More than two thirds (69.3 per cent) of the

graduates were Malaysian while the remaining

30.7 per cent were non-Malaysian. In terms of

gender, 46.7 per cent of all graduates were female

and Malaysian, though they were more male than

female non-Malaysian graduates (see Figure 2.1

below).

Figure 2.1 Graduates by gender and origin

2.1.2 Distribution according to kulliyyah


There are 16 kulliyyahs and institutes offering

master’s degree programmes at IIUM. The

number of graduates from each kulliyyah

correlates with the number of programmes

offered by the respective kulliyyahs. The highest

number of graduates were from KIRKHS, which

offers 13 programmes, followed by KENMS with

six programmes, and KOE with nine

programmes.


graduates except from KICT and KOE. While

there were more male than female non-Malaysian

graduates from all kulliyyahs except KICT and

KOED.

KOD does not offer any postgraduate programme

and no non-Malaysian graduated from INHART

and KON (see Figure 2.2 above).

23%

47%

18%

12%Malaysian male

Malaysianfemale

Non-Malaysianmale

Non-Malaysianfemale

583graduates

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

AIKOL IIiBF INHART ISTAC KAED KENMS KICT KIRKHS KOE KOED KAHS KOM KON KOP KOS KLM

Malaysian female Malaysian male Non-Malaysian female Non-Malaysian male

MASTER’S DEGREE GRADUATES45

43

2.1.3 Sponsorship

Half of Malaysian graduates funded their studies

with scholarships from various government

agencies and PTPTN loans while the remaining

48 per cent were self-sponsored. On the other

hand, 87 per cent of non-Malaysian graduates

were self-sponsored (see Figure 2.3 below).


2.1.4 Employment while studying

Sixty-three per cent of all graduates; consisting of

56.5 per cent of full-time students and 93 per cent

of part-time students worked through their

studies (see Figure 2.4 below).

Figure 2.4 Employment while studying

50%

13%

48%

87%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


JPA/MARA/PTPTN Other scholarships

Self-sponsored

272

95

209

7

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full-time Part-time

Worked Did not work


44

2.1.5 Mode and duration of study

Most of the master’s graduates were full-time

students; only 18 per cent pursued their degrees

part-time (see Figure 2.5 below).


Duration of study refers to the length of time

graduates take to complete their studies.

According to IIUM Centre for Postgraduate

Studies (CPS), the normal duration for

completing a master’s degree is two years in full-

time mode and four years in part-time mode,

except for executive programmes offered by IIUM

academic centres, which are one to two-year

programmes.

There are three modes of study for non-executive

programmes: (i) coursework, (ii) research, and

(iii) coursework and research. The most common

mode of study was the mixed coursework and

research mode chosen by 42 per cent of the

graduates. A quarter of the graduates opted for

coursework only, and 18.9 per cent chose to do

their master’s by research only. The remaining

14.1 per cent underwent executive master’s

programmes (see Figure 2.6 below).

Generally, graduates took longer than the normal

period to complete their study. Of the graduates

who studied full-time, only 56.3 per cent of those

who pursued their degree by coursework

graduated on time. Full-time graduates who did

their degree by research or coursework and

research modes took even longer, on average.

Their graduate-on-time (GOT) rates were 7.5 and

12.1 per cent, respectively, and half of these

graduates took more than 3.4 and three years,

respectively, to complete their studies.

Figure 2.6 Graduates by programme mode of study

The survey also revealed that a KIRKHS graduate

graduated in less than a year by coursework and

research full-time, while on the other end, another

graduate from KOM took 6.33 years to complete

a programme by research full-time.

GOT rates for graduates in part-time mode, while

not satisfactory, were higher than that of those in

full-time mode. The highest rate was recorded by

graduates who studied by coursework; over 85

per cent of whom were able to complete their

programmes within four years. The rates were

significantly lower among those who pursued

their degree by research (50 per cent) or mixed

coursework and research (16.7 per cent) (see

Table 2.1 below).

82%

Full-time Part-time

583graduates

119 27

1064

215

30

41

41

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full-time Part-time

Coursework Research

Coursework & research Executive


45

GOT rates of graduates who pursued their studies

full time on coursework and research mode, the

most common mode of study, were dismal.20 The

highest rate was only 12.5 per cent for KOE,

which means only 12.5 per cent of its graduates

were able to complete their programme within

two years. Worse still for KIRKHS, KENMS, and

KOED. Only 10.8 and 6.5 per cent of KIRKHS

and KENMS graduates, respectively, completed

their studies on time. None of the 23 KOED

graduates managed to graduate on time (see

Table 2.2 below).

Table 2.1 Duration of study by mode of study

20 Kulliyyahs with small number of graduates were excluded as comparisons will not be meaningful.

Coursework Research

Coursework & research Executive Overall

Full-time GOT (%) 56.3 7.5 12.1 - -

Median 2.00 3.42 3.00 1.58 2.75

Min 1.17 1.08 0.75 0.58 0.58

Max 5.42 6.33 6.25 2.67 6.33

N 119 106 215 41 481

Part-time GOT (%) 85.2 50.0 16.7 - -

Median 3.42 4.75 5.38 2.42 3.42

Min 1.42 2.25 3.50 1.58 1.42

Max 5.67 6.25 7.00 4.00 7.00

N 27 4 30 41 102


46

Table 2.2 Duration of study by mode of study and kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

IIiB

F

INH

AR

T

IST

AC

Executive Full-time

GOT (%) - - Median 1.42 1.58 Min 1.00 0.58 Max 2.42 2.67 N 10 31

Part-time GOT (%) - - Median 2.42 2.67 Min 1.58 1.58 Max 4 3.58 N 13 28

Coursework Full-time

GOT (%) 75.0 52.6 82.4 52.1 83.3 7.7 50.0 Median 1.83 2.00 1.58 2.00 1.50 3.17 2.13 Min 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.17 2.00 1.67 Max 3.00 3.42 2.83 5.42 2.50 4.58 2.58 N 8 19 17 48 12 13 2

Part-time GOT (%) 100 0.0 100 81.8 83.3 Median 1.42 5.67 2.00 3.42 4.00 Min 1.42 5.67 2.00 2.42 3.00 Max 2.42 5.67 2.00 5.42 4.25 N 6 1 1 11 6

Research Full-time

GOT (%) 0.0 12.5 0.0 66.7 0.0 0.0 20.0 4.2 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 Median 5.33 2.96 3.17 1.58 3.25 3.42 2.58 3.83 2.67 2.42 3.79 2.71 Min 5.33 1.92 2.33 1.08 2.33 3.42 1.75 1.83 2.33 2.00 2.33 2.33 Max 5.33 4.42 3.83 2.50 4.67 3.42 4.00 6.33 3.00 4.83 4.42 3.42 N 1 16 3 3 17 1 10 24 2 5 16 0 8

Part-time GOT (%) 0.0 100 0.0 Median 6.25 3.13 5.50 Min 6.25 2.25 5.50 Max 6.25 4 5.50 N 1 2 1

Coursework & research Full-time

GOT (%) 33.3 40.0 6.5 14.3 10.8 12.5 0.0 50.0 0.0 33.3 33.3 Median 2.33 2.08 3.42 2.67 3.25 2.71 4.00 1.79 2.92 2.58 3.25 Min 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.75 1.50 2.08 1.50 2.83 1.75 1.83 Max 4.08 2.33 5.58 5.83 6.25 5.25 6.00 2.08 4.00 5.08 3.33 N 3 5 31 7 83 40 23 2 6 12 3

Part-time GOT (%) 100 50.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0 Median 3.92 4.46 5.25 5.92 5.58 5.17 Min 3.92 3.5 3.58 4.42 4.33 5.00 Max 3.92 6.0 6.00 7.00 6.58 6.00 N 1 6 7 4 9 3


47








Overall, IIUM master’s degree programmes were

evaluated by the graduates as both relevant and

helpful to their current jobs with respective mean

ratings significantly above 4.

While most of both Malaysian and non-

Malaysian graduates gave their programmes

ratings higher than 4 for both relevance and

helpfulness, Malaysian graduates gave higher

ratings than non-Malaysian graduates for

relevance. Compared to others, KOS graduates

rated their programmes only moderately relevant

and helpful with mean ratings not significantly

different from 3 (see Figure 2.7 below).

Figure 2.7 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes

2.2.2 Curriculum

The graduates were also asked to rate the contents

of the study programmes in terms of several

aspects, as in Table 2.3 below, from 1 (not

satisfied at all) to 5 (extremely satisfied). In

general, graduates across all kulliyyahs were

satisfied with the curriculum offered by IIUM,

with mean ratings significantly above 3 overall.

The graduates gave several suggestions to

improve the quality of the programmes.

Graduates, particularly from ISTAC, proposed

improvements to the management of the

programmes regarding teaching and learning,

scheduling of courses, assessment, and class

activities.

Another suggestion was to restructure the

programmes and courses to meet the needs of

industry and the job market, by removing

irrelevant courses and offering new courses to

cover new knowledge.

The graduates also proposed more opportunities

and funding for attending conferences, assistance

in publication, and training to improve analytical

skills to enhance research activities.

1

2

3

4

5

AIKO

L

KAED

KEN

MS

KICT

KIRK

HS

KOE

KOED

KAH

S

KOM

KON

KOP

KOS

KLM

IIiBF

INH

ART

ISTA

C

Tota

l

Relevance Malaysian Relevance Non-Malaysian Helpfulness Malaysian

Helpfulness Non-Malaysian Relevance Total Helpfulness Total


48


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

S

KLM

IIiB

F

INH

AR

T

IST

AC

Tot

al

Suitability of programme 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.4 4.8 4.0 4.5 4.7 4.3 4.3 4.4

Theoretical & practical balance 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.0 4.1 4.4 4.6 4.1 4.3 4.4 4.1 4.0 4.1

Compulsory co-curriculum 4.3 4.3 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 3.6 4.0 4.5 3.7 4.7 4.1

Compulsory subjects 4.4 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.6 3.9 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.7 4.3 Variety of co-curriculum 4.2 4.5 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.5 4.6 3.9 4.3 4.5 3.3 5.0 4.1

Prepare for working life 4.1 4.5 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.6 3.9 4.7 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.0

Malaysian 4.6 4.5 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.7 3.9 4.0 4.6 3.8 4.2 4.3

Non-Malaysian 3.6 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.0 4.3 3.0 4.5 4.6 N/A 4.5 3.9

Total 4.3 4.4 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.6 3.8 4.3 4.5 3.8 4.4 4.1

Note: Total value was computed by taking the mean value of all items


ICT skills

Overall, the graduates were most familiar with

Microsoft Word (83.7 per cent) and PowerPoint

(76.3 per cent) and rated their skills on the two

applications as good with ratings ranging from

4.0 to 4.4. KOE graduates, however, were more

familiar with Microsoft Excel than Word (see

Table 2.4 below).

Table 2.4 Top ICT skills by kulliyyah

Overall AIKOL Microsoft Word Microsoft PowerPoint

83.7% 76.3%

Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Word

95.1%

92.7%

KENMS KIRKHS Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Word

84.7%

82.9%

Microsoft PowerPoint Microsoft Word

98.7% 89.5%

KOE KOED Microsoft Excel Microsoft Word

64.4% 60.3%

Microsoft Word Microsoft PowerPoint

94.4% 87.0%

Soft skills

Aspects of soft skills, as in Table 2.5 below, were

rated from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Overall, the

graduates rated themselves positively with mean

ratings greater than 4 across all kulliyyahs except

for two graduates from KON. KOM graduates

rated their soft skills slightly higher than the

others in all aspects.

Life skills

Mean ratings greater than 4 across all kulliyyahs

suggest that education at IIUM has influenced the

lives of the graduates a lot. Again, slightly higher

ratings were given by KOM graduates than others

(see Table 2.6 below).


Overall, the graduates rated their English and

Malay language proficiency as good with mean

ratings greater than 3.5. Most graduates rated

themselves to be significantly better in the

English than the Malay language (see Figure 2.8

below).


49


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

IIiB

F

INH

AR

T

IST

AC

Tot

al

Interpersonal communication 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.7 3.5 4.2 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3

Creative & critical thinking 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.6 3.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.3

Problem-solving 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.2 4.4 4.3 4.3 Analytical 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.3 Teamwork 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.5 4.7 3.5 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.4 Inculcating & practising positive values

4.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.7 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.4

General knowledge & current issues 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.7 4.3

Total 4.5 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.6 3.8 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.3 Note: Total value was computed by taking the mean value of all items


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P

KO

S

KLM

IIiB

F

INH

AR

T

IST

AC

Tot

al

Develop self-confidence 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.7 4.4 Enhance self-maturity 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 5.0 4.6 4.8 4.7 4.4 Develop self-resilience 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.7 4.4 Become more knowledgeable 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.0 4.4 4.3 5.0 4.6 4.8 4.7 4.5

Enhance interest in learning 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.4 4.0 5.0 4.5

More sensitive towards current affairs 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.5 4.0 4.4 4.1 4.7 4.4 4.3 5.0 4.4

Ability to be independent 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.4 4.6 5.0 4.5

Creative & critical thinking 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.4

Ready to face the working life & its challenges

4.4 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.7 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.6 3.9 4.7 4.4

Problem-solving & decision-making 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.6 4.3 4.7 4.4

Teamwork 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.4 4.3 4.7 4.4 Effective communication 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.8 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.5

Total 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.0 4.4 4.3 4.8 4.5 4.4 4.8 4.4 Note: 1 (has no influence at all), 5 (has a lot of influence)


50







(extremely satisfied).

Career guidance services

While the graduates were satisfied with career

guidance services provided by the University,

with mean ratings greater than 3, Malaysian

graduates gave higher ratings than non-

Malaysian graduates (see Figure 2.9 below).

Figure 2.9 Evaluation of career guidance services

Figure 2.10 Evaluation of library facilities and services

Library facilities and services

Library facilities and services continue to receive

high ratings from graduates. Again, Malaysian

graduates gave higher ratings than non-

Malaysian graduates. Mean ratings of overall

library facilities and services by Malaysian and

non-Malaysian graduates were 4.49 and 4.27 out

of 5, respectively (see Figure 2.10 above).

Other facilities and services

The graduates were also generally satisfied with

other facilities and services with mean ratings

0

1

2

3

4

5

AIKOL KAED KENMS KICT KIRKHS KOE KOED KAHS KOM KON KOP KOS KLM IIiBF INHART ISTAC

English Malay

1.02.03.04.05.0

Information onjob & career

opportunities

Assistance ininterviewing

skills

Assistance injob application

Assistance inobtaining jobs

Information onfurther studies

Jobopportunitieson campus

Arranging on-campus jobrecruitments


1.02.03.04.05.0

Onlineservices

Onlineresources

Staff


Study area

Overall



51

greater than 3.5. Malaysian graduates reported

higher levels of satisfaction with mean ratings

greater than 4 (see Figure 2.11 below).

Similar responses were received in the

supplementary IIUM Tracer Study, summarised

in Table 2.7 below. Graduates were mostly

satisfied with the facilities and services provided

by the University, with Malaysian graduates

giving higher ratings than non-Malaysian

graduates.

A few facilities received less satisfactory ratings of

less than 3. Non-Malaysian graduates disagreed

that the condition of toilets at the mahallahs was

good. Graduates were also generally concerned

about the handling of building defects and

availability of safety equipment. Non-Malaysian

graduates also disagreed that thefts and

disciplinary cases are handled effectively.


Suggestions

KULLIYYAH

The main suggestion given by the graduates

concerned air-conditioners, lightings, and

furniture in classes, laboratories, and in other

teaching venues. The fixtures need to be replaced,

fixed, or upgraded, as many were in poor

condition. The graduates also felt that kulliyyah

administrative staff should be more responsive to

the needs and requests of students. In addition,

kulliyyahs should provide discussion rooms or

lounges for the postgraduate students.

Apart from the general suggestions above, 33 per

cent of ISTAC graduates suggested improvements

to the buildings and lecture rooms at the institute.

On the other hand, 40 per cent of the KOP

graduates felt that improvements were needed

regarding the overall management and

administration of the kulliyyah in maintaining the

facilities, addressing student complaints, and

improving efficiency.

MAHALLAH

With respect to the mahallahs, the graduates

suggested better internet access, particularly

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

Laboratories,studios, workshops

Health centre

Transportation

Accommodation


Sport facilities

CafeteriaICT facilities &services

Study area

Campus bookshop

Online integratedlearning system

Campus security

Parking



52

better Wi-Fi coverage, higher connection speed,

and better network availability. In addition,

parking facilities needed to be upgraded,

particularly in terms of management of parking

registration and parking areas, including the

availability of covered parking spaces. Lastly, it

was suggested that the room registration process

should be made smoother and more efficient.

Table 2.7 Evaluation of facilities and services, IIUM Tracer Study


Mahallah room facilities are in good condition 3.20 2.94

Mahallah toilets are always in good condition 3.01 2.61

Mahallah compound and landscape are clean and well maintained 3.31 2.98

Number of auxiliary services provided is adequate 3.21 3.09

Condition of auxiliary services is good 3.23 3.07

Number of venue facilities is adequate 3.33 3.22

Condition of venue facilities is good 3.29 3.18

Number of food outlets is adequate 3.23 3.15

Variety of cafeteria food is good 3.18 3.12

Price of cafeteria food is reasonable 3.16 3.13

Quality of cafeteria food is good 3.13 3.14

Classroom facilities are in good condition 3.07 3.05

Toilets at Kulliyyah are in good condition 3.07 3.03

Number of discussion areas are adequate 3.06 3.09

Discussion areas are in good condition 3.12 3.11

There is adequate and functional safety equipment 2.96 2.89

Building defects are attended to immediately 2.83 2.82

I feel safe at the premises due to stringent security policies 3.09 3.06

Security force patrols constantly 3.08 3.00

Security cases such as thefts and disciplinary cases are handled effectively 3.06 2.83

Overall facilities are conducive to teaching and learning 3.33 3.22

Classrooms are clean and well maintained 3.22 3.20

Classrooms are comfortable 3.20 3.18

University landscape is pleasant and well kept 3.39 3.34

Complaint report response time is adequate 3.07 3.03

Maintenance works are satisfactory 3.11 3.06


Overall, 87.3 per cent of graduates believed that

the degrees obtained were worth their time and

money spent and 87 per cent would recommend

IUM to others. In both instances, the results were

less so among non-Malaysian graduates. For

example, 41.9 and 34.9 per cent of KOED and

KENMS graduates, respectively, would not

recommend IIUM as a place of study to their

family members or friends (see Figure 2.12,

Figure 2.13, Table 2.8, and Table 2.9 below).


53





Yes No Yes No

AIKOL 83.9 16.1 90 10.0

KAED 94.7 5.3 100 0

KENMS 95.6 4.4 81.4 18.6

KICT 94.7 5.3 82.4 17.6

KIRKHS 85.8 14.2 71.8 28.2

KOE 92.9 7.1 58.1 41.9

KOED 93.9 6.1 81 19.0

KAHS 100 0 100 0

KOM 95.8 4.2 100 0

KON 100 0 N/A N/A

KOP 100 0 100 0

KOS 93.3 6.7 100 0

KLM 100 0 100 0

IIiBF 100 0 83.3 16.7

INHART 100 0 N/A N/A

ISTAC 100 0 100 0

Total 91.8 8.2 77.1 22.9

8.2%22.9%

91.8%77.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Yes

No

8.7%24.0%

91.3%76.0%

Malaysian Non-Malaysian0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Yes

No


54



n Yes No n Yes No

AIKOL 31 80.6 19.4 10 100 0

KAED 19 89.5 10.5 3 100 0

KENMS 68 88.2 11.8 43 65.1 34.9

KICT 19 100 0 17 88.2 11.8

KIRKHS 113 93.8 6.2 39 76.9 23.1

KOE 42 88.1 11.9 31 58.1 41.9

KOED 33 97 3.0 21 95.2 4.8

KAHS 9 88.9 11.1 1 0 100

KOM 24 95.8 4.2 2 100 0

KON 2 100 0 0 - -

KOP 4 100 0 1 100 0

KOS 15 93.3 6.7 1 100 0

KLM 4 100 0 2 100 0

IIIBF 12 100 0 6 66.7 33.3

INHART 8 62.5 37.5 0 - -

ISTAC 1 100 0 2 100 0

TOTAL 404 91.3 8.7 179 76 24.0

2.2.6 Islamisation, integration, and internationalisation

Overall, the graduates agreed that courses

integrate Islamic values, the IIUM environment

promotes the better practice of Islam, and that the

University helps them become better Muslims.

The mean ratings were greater than 3.5 out of 5

across all kulliyyahs except KAHS and KOE with

ratings 3.2 and 3.4, respectively, for incorporation

of Islamic values in courses; and KOS with rating

3.4 for IIUM helping the graduates to be better

Muslims (see Figure 2.14 below).

Figure 2.14 Evaluation of aspects of Islamisation by kulliyyah

0

1

2

3

4

5

AIKO

L

KAED

KEN

MS

KICT

KIRK

HS

KOE

KOED

KAH

S

KOM

KON

KOP

KOS

KLM

IIiBF

INH

ART

ISTA

C

Tota

l

Courses incorporate Islamic values Conducive environment for better practice of Islam

Helps me to be a better Muslim


55

2.2.7 Advantages and disadvantages of studying at IIUM

The most common responses for the advantages

of studying at IIUM were: (i) the Islamic

environment, (ii) the international environment,

(ii) self-improvement as a Muslim, and (iv)

integration of knowledge, which are consistent

with the vision and missions of IIUM (see Figure

2.15 below).

While the university has provided an Islamic

environment, as indicated by 31.7 per cent of the

graduates, less than ten per cent explicitly stated

integration of knowledge as an advantage for

studying at IIUM. In this respect, more effort

needs to be put in to achieve this mission.


On the other hand, 34 per cent of the graduates

stated that there was no disadvantage in studying

at IIUM. However, 11.1 per cent, including a third

of ISTAC graduates and 17 per cent from AIKOL,

complained of poor service of the administrative

staff.

Graduates, including 40 per cent from KOP, also

mentioned poor facilities at the classrooms and

mahallahs as a disadvantage of studying at IIUM


Figure 2.16 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM 9.4%

13.4%

19.0%

31.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%




Islamic environment

6.5%

11.1%

34.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Poorclassroom/mahallah

facilities

Poor service ofadministrative staff

None


56


2.3.1 General overview of employment characteristics

The overall employment characteristics of IIUM

master’s degree graduates are summarised in

Table 2.10 below. Not all graduates joined the

labour force; a quarter chose to stay outside the

labour market including ten per cent who stated

that they were neither interested to work nor

planning to further their studies. The overall

employment rate, at 73.5 per cent, was not high

and included those in part-time employment.

Excluding the latter, only 59 per cent of the

graduates in the labour force managed to find a

full-time job.

Table 2.10 Key employment statistics

Labour force participation rate 77.0% Employment rate 73.5% Full-time employment out of total labour force 59.0%

Not interested out of total 9.8%

As summarised in Table 2.11 below, the labour

force participation rate was 89.4 per cent among

Malaysian male graduates and 86.4 per cent for

Malaysian female graduates. However, not all the

graduates secured employment. The employment

rate for Malaysian male graduates was 85.6 per

cent, which was higher than 74.9 per cent for

female graduates. In addition, not all those who

were employed were in full-time jobs, and female

graduates were more likely than male graduates

to be in part-time employment.

On the other hand, of the non-Malaysian

graduates who attended the Convocation and

completed the survey, only slightly more than half

(53.6 per cent) were in the labour force. Of those

outside the labour force, half were attending

courses or furthering their studies. Surprisingly,

more than a fifth of the non-Malaysian graduates

were not interested in joining the labour market.

The low employment rate of 55.2 per cent for

these graduates might have discouraged some of

them from joining the workforce. Another

possible reason is that they may be taking a break

while waiting to return to their home country

before deciding whether to join the labour force.

Given the small number of graduates from each

kulliyyah, cross-kulliyyah comparison to a large

extent are not so meaningful. Only two kulliyyahs

had over 100 master’s graduates for 2017, which

were KIRKHS and KENMS. Between these two

kulliyyahs, Malaysian graduates from KENMS

fared significantly better employment-wise. They

recorded a higher employment rate of 87.5 per

cent for male graduates and 83 per cent for female

graduates compared to KIRKHS graduates at

77.1 and 69.7 per cent, respectively.

In contrast, non-Malaysian KENMS graduates

registered a lower employment rate of 47.6 per

cent as opposed to 68 per cent for non-Malaysian

KIRKHS graduates. Nonetheless, all non-

Malaysian KENMS graduates who were working

were in full-time employment but among the

employed KIRKHS graduates, less than 30 per

cent worked full time.


Tab

le 2

.11

Em

ploy

men

t cha

ract

eris

tics

by k

ulliy

yah

and

gend

er

Mal

aysi

an m

ale

Ove

rall

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

N

KO

P K

OS

KLM

II

iBF

INH

AR

T

IST

AC

Fu

ll-tim

e/la

bour

forc

e (%

) 76

.3

86.7

10

0 87

.5

100

57.1

85

.7

50.0

10

0 10

0

0 40

.0

100

66.7

50

.0

E

mpl

oym

ent r

ate

(%)

85.6

86

.7

100

87.5

10

0 77

.1

100

75.0

10

0 10

0

100

60.0

10

0 66

.7

50.0

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/T

otal

une

mpl

oyed

(%)

5.9

0.0

- 0.

0 -

0.0

- 0.

0 -

-

- 0.

0 -

100

0.0

La

bour

forc

e pa

rtic

ipat

ion

rate

(%

) 89

.4

100

100

94.1

90

.9

100

50.0

10

0 10

0 93

.8

10

0 71

.4

100

60.0

10

0

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

85.7

-

- 10

0 10

0 -

71.4

-

- 10

0

- 10

0 -

100

-

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 1.

5 -

- 0.

0 0.

0 -

14.3

-

- 0.

0

- 0.

0 -

0.0

-

N

132

15

3 17

11

35

14

4

1 16

1 7

1 5

2

Mal

aysi

an fe

mal

e T

otal

A

IKO

L K

AE

D

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

IRK

HS

KO

E

KO

ED

K

AH

S K

OM

K

ON

K

OP

KO

S K

LM

IIiB

F IN

HA

RT

IS

TA

C

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

62.6

71

.4

60.0

70

.2

62.5

51

.5

52.6

70

.4

40.0

10

0 10

0 66

.7

75.0

50

.0

71.4

50

.0

- E

mpl

oym

ent r

ate

(%)

74.9

78

.6

73.3

83

.0

62.5

69

.7

68.4

77

.8

60.0

10

0 10

0 10

0 75

.0

100

71.4

50

.0

- W

aitin

g pl

acem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 5.

1 0.

0 25

.0

0.0

33.3

5.

0 0.

0 0.

0 0.

0 -

- -

0.0

- 0.

0 0.

0 -

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

86.4

87

.5

93.8

92

.2

100

84.6

67

.9

93.1

62

.5

87.5

50

.0

100

100

66.7

10

0 10

0 0.

0 (S

tudy

& tr

aini

ng)/

Not

in la

bour

forc

e (%

) 51

.4

50.0

10

0 25

.0

- 33

.3

55.6

10

0 10

0 0.

0 10

0 -

- 10

0 -

- 0.

0 N

ot lo

okin

g/to

tal (

%)

6.3

6.3

0.0

5.9

- 9.

0 14

.3

0.0

0.0

12.5

0.

0 -

- 0.

0 -

- 10

0 N

27

2 16

16

51

8

78

28

29

8 8

2 3

8 3

7 6

1 N

on-M

alay

sian

T

otal

A

IKO

L K

AE

D

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

IRK

HS

KO

E

KO

ED

K

AH

S K

OM

K

ON

K

OP

KO

S K

LM

IIiB

F IN

HA

RT

IS

TA

C

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

29.2

10

0 0.

0 47

.6

30.0

20

.0

31.3

16

.7

0.0

-

0.0

0.0

0.0

20.0

100

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 55

.2

100

100

47.6

40

.0

68.0

56

.3

58.3

0.

0 -

0.

0 0.

0 0.

0 60

.0

10

0 W

aitin

g pl

acem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 14

.0

- -

18.2

33

.3

12.5

14

.3

0.0

0.0

-

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

53.6

10

.0

33.3

48

.8

58.8

64

.1

51.6

57

.1

100

0.0

10

0 10

0 50

.0

83.3

50.0

(S

tudy

& tr

aini

ng)/

Not

in la

bour

forc

e (%

) 50

.6

66.7

0.

0 27

.3

28.6

57

.1

73.3

66

.7

- 50

.0

-

- 10

0 10

0

0.0

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 21

.2

20.0

66

.7

34.9

29

.4

15.4

9.

7 14

.3

- 50

.0

-

- 0.

0 0.

0

50.0

N

17

9 10

3

43

17

39

31

21

1 2

1

1 2

6

2


58

Most of the graduates who were working at the

time of the survey were employed fittingly in the

top occupational levels as managers or

professionals. However, for some of them,

particularly non-Malaysian graduates, it was only

on a part-time basis.

At the same time, there were graduates who were

underemployed, such as those who worked as

technicians or associate professionals, or those in

much lower levels of occupation such as clerical

support, or service and sales workers. In fact, two

Malaysian graduates stated that they were in

elementary occupations. The underemployment

rate was highest among both male and female

non-Malaysian graduates, at 21.4 and 25 per

cent, respectively (see Figure 2.17 below).

Figure 2.17 Graduates by type of occupation

A high percentage (43 per cent) of the graduates

were employed in the education sector. The other

top sectors were financial and insurance or

takaful; and professional, scientific, and technical

sectors (see Figure 2.18 below).

Figure 2.18 Employed graduates by economic sector

87.4%

46.7%

79.5%

50.0%

7.3%

31.9%

10.5%

25.0%

2.1%

10.0%14.3%

0.6%5.0%

7.1% 9.3% 10.0%3.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Malaysian male Non-Malaysian male Malaysian female Non-Malaysianfemale

Lower levels part-time Lower levels full-time

Technician/associate professional part-time Technician/associate professional full-time

Managerial/professional part-time Managerial/professional full-time

Professional/scientific/technical

11%

Education43%

Financial/insurance/takaful12%

Others34%


59

The income received from employment by those

in part-time employment differed from that of

those in full-time employment, even within the

same job category. For instance, the mean

monthly income for part-time managers was

RM2,650, compared to RM4,931 of full-time

managers. The same situation applies to all the

other job categories. For those in the professional

category, the mean monthly income from part-

time employment was RM1,536, which was

much lower than the RM4,688 mean total income

received by those employed full-time. However,

the differences are expected as those who worked

part-time contributed fewer hours to their jobs

and therefore earned lower incomes (see Figure

2.19 below).

Figure 2.19 Total monthly income by type of occupation

Graduates who were in full-time employment

were mostly employed on either permanent or

contract basis. Three quarters of Malaysian

graduates who worked full-time were employed

on a permanent basis while only a fifth were on a

contract basis (see Figure 2.20 below). The

percentage of non-Malaysian graduates

employed full-time on a permanent basis was

lower at 57.1 per cent while 39.3 per cent were

employed on contract (see Figure 2.21 below).

On the other hand, a significant number of both

Malaysian and non-Malaysian graduates in part-

time employment were on a temporary basis. Half

of the Malaysian graduates who worked part-time

were employed temporarily while a third were on

contract employment. Forty-four per cent of non-

Malaysian graduates who worked part-time were

employed on a temporary basis while a fifth were

on contract and another fifth were self-employed.

RM1,250.00

RM1,000.00

RM1,083.33

RM1,250.00

RM1,535.71

RM2,650.00

RM1,750.00

RM3,400.00

RM2,281.25

RM2,812.50

RM4,688.39

RM4,931.03

Elementary

Service/sales

Clerical support

Technician/associate professional

Professional

Managerial

Full-time Part-time


60

Figure 2.20 Employed Malaysian graduates by type of

employment status

Figure 2.21 Employed non-Malaysian graduates by

type of employment status

Figure 2.22 Total monthly income by employment status

Employment status matters in determining the

amount of monthly income received from work.

Graduates in permanent full-time employment

earned a mean income of RM5,277.49, which was

the highest. There were no significant differences

in mean income among those employed full time

on contract, temporary basis, self-employed, or

working with family.21 However, among those in

21 Based on t-tests on difference of means.

part-time employment, the highest mean

incomes were earned by graduates who were

either in permanent positions (RM2,687.50) or

working with family (RM2,666.67). Those

employed part-time on contract, temporary basis,

or self-employed received much lower monthly

incomes, on average (see Figure 2.22 above).

73.8%

5.1%

20.7%

33.3%

48.7%

10.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full-time Part-time

Permanent Contract

Temporary Self-employed

Working with family

57.1%

8.0%

39.3%

20.0%

44.0%

20.0%

8.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full-time Part-time

Permanent Contract

Temporary Self-employed

Working with family

5277.49

2775

1850

2000

2666.67

2687.5

1666.67

1183.33

1111.11

1416.67

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Permanent

Contract

Temporary

Self-employed

Working with family

Part-time Full-time


61

2.3.2 Determinants of monthly income

Regression analyses were conducted to identify

the factors that have significant effects on the

monthly income of the recent master’s degree

graduates (see Table 2.12 below). The estimation

was done for all graduates in the sample and

separately for three kulliyyahs which had the

largest number of graduates: KIRKHS, KENMS,

and KOE.22

The findings show that, in general, there was a

significant difference in income between male and

female graduates. Male graduates earned more

than RM1,000 higher than female graduates,

controlling for other factors. While the gender

income disparity applied to KOE graduates, it was

not significant among KENMS and KIRKHS

graduates.

There was no significant difference in monthly

income between Malaysian and non-Malaysian

graduates. Surprisingly, co-curriculum

involvement was negatively related to income for

KENMS graduates; those who were more actively

involved in co-curricular activities while studying

obtained lower incomes when they worked.

As expected, the findings show that incomes were

higher for those who worked full-time compared

to part-time. Incomes from full-time employment

were estimated to be about RM2,400 higher than

incomes from part-time employment, given other

factors constant.

In general, work performance, as assessed by the

graduates themselves, contributed positively to

monthly income. However, it was not a

significant determinant for KIRKHS, KENMS, or

KOE graduates. The level of (self-assessed) soft

skills acquired by the graduates had no impact on

the level of income a graduate received from their

job. On the other hand, academic achievement

mattered for KENMS graduates; those who

earned higher incomes were those who obtained

higher CGPA during their studies.

Table 2.12 Determinants of monthly income from employment All KENMS KIRKHS KOE

(Constant) 325.52 (0.83)

-11962.08 (0.13)

-827.82 (0.72)

6077.86 (0.07)

Male 1136.88 (0.00)

844.38 (0.28)

503.52 (0.32)

1854.73 (0.01)

Malaysian 50.27 (0.90)

992.45 (0.27)

-927.60 (0.14)

568.30 (0.45)

Co-curriculum -415.84 (0.00)

-956.10 (0.00)

-181.55 (0.44)

-390.50 (0.20)

Working full-time 2411.85 (0.00)

1897.67 (0.11)

1981.06 (0.00)

1483.49 (0.10)

Work performance (1-5) 608.53 (0.09)

332.77 (0.68)

424.97 (0.48)

-362.46 (0.62)

Soft skills from university (1-5) -89.15 (0.77)

417.61 (0.60)

-97.72 (0.84)

-590.96 (0.40)

CGPA -53.48 (0.61)

3758.41 (0.03)

545.66 (0.15)

-181.93 (0.43)

N 244 40 73 25 R2 0.24 0.45 0.25 0.52

Note: (.) p-value

22 The sample sizes for graduates of other Kulliyyah are too small to obtain meaningful results.

PhD GRADUATES

3PART


64



There were 138 PhD graduates taking part in the

Graduate Tracer Study 2017 upon the 33rd IIUM

Convocation. More than half of the graduates

(54.3 per cent) were non-Malaysian. Overall,

there was about equal proportion of female and

male graduates at 48 and 52 per cent,

respectively. However, the number of female

Malaysian graduates were more than double that

of male Malaysian graduates with the situation

reversed among non-Malaysian graduates (see

Figure 3.1 below).

Figure 3.1 Graduates by gender

3.1.2 Distribution according to kulliyyah

Thirteen kulliyyahs offer PhD programmes at

IIUM. Of the 138 graduates, 17 each graduated

from AIKOL, KICT, KIRKHS, and KOED,

respectively.


graduates for all kulliyyahs except from KOS. No

Malaysian male graduated from KICT and KOM

while no Malaysian female graduated from KOS.

Among non-Malaysian graduates, there were

more male than female graduates for all

kulliyyahs. No non-Malaysian graduated from

KAHS, KOS, and KOM (see Figure 3.2 below).


31.2%

14.5%16.7%

37.7%

Malaysianfemale

Malaysian male

Non-Malaysianfemale

Non-Malaysianmale

138graduates

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

AIKOL KAED KENMS KICT KIRKHS KOE KOED KAHS KOM KOP KOS IIiBF ISTAC

Malaysian female Malaysian male Non-Malaysian female Non-Malaysian male

PhD GRADUATES67

65

3.1.3 Sponsorship

About two thirds of the 63 Malaysian graduates

received loans and scholarships from the Ministry of

Higher Education, JPA, MARA, PTPTN, banks, etc.,

while the other third were self-sponsored. In

contrast, 68 per cent of non-Malaysian graduates

were self-sponsored while the remaining 32 per cent

received scholarships from foreign governments,

IIUM, and others (see Figure 3.3 below).


3.1.4 Employment while studying

Of the 138 graduates, 54.4 per cent worked either

full-time or part-time while they were studying.

There was about equal proportions of graduates who

studied full-time who worked and did not work while

they were studying. Whereas, all but one graduate

who studied part-time worked while they studied


Figure 3.4 Employment while studying

5%

62%

32%

33%

68%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


JPA/MARA/PTPTN Other scholarships

Self-sponsored

59

62

16

1

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Worked Did not work

Full-time Part-time


66

3.1.5 Mode and duration of study

Most of the 138 PhD graduates were full-time

students and only 12 per cent were part-time

students (see Figure 3.5 below).


There are only two methods of study for the PhD

degree: (i) research, and (ii) coursework and

research. More than half (65.2 per cent) of the

graduates pursued their study by research while

the rest by coursework and research (see Figure

3.6 below).

Figure 3.6 Graduates by programme mode of study

The normal duration for completing a PhD degree

is three years full-time and six years part-time.

However, IIUM graduates, whether those who

pursued their degree full-time or part-time,

regardless of the mode of study, generally were

not able to complete their studies within the

normal study period.

The situation was worse among those who

studied full-time compared to part-time. Less

than 3 per cent of the graduates who studied full-

time managed to obtain their degree within the

given three years. More than half of those who

opted for the research-only mode took more than

five years to complete their studies; while half of

those who studied by coursework and research

took longer periods of more than six and a half

years to finish.

A quarter of those who did their PhD part-time

managed to graduate within the given six years.

The median duration was eight years, meaning

half of them took more than eight years to

complete their PhD.

Surprisingly, two graduates—one full-time and

one part-time from KIRKHS and KOED,

respectively—managed to complete their PhD in

just two years. On the other end, a full-time KICT

graduate took 9.42 years while a part-time IIiBF

graduate took 10.33 years to graduate (see Table

3.1and Table 3.2 below).

88%

Full-time Part-time

138graduates

82

8

39

9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full-time Part-time

Research Coursework & research

PhD GRADUATES69

67

Table 3.1 Duration of study by mode of study

Research

Coursework & research Overall

Full-time GOT (%) 2.4 2.6 2.5

Median 5.00 6.58 5.42

Min 2.00 3.00 2.00

8.33 9.42 9.42 6.33

N 82 39 121

Part-time GOT (%) 25.0 22.2 23.5

Median 7.46 8.00 8.00

Min 2.00 5.42 2.00

Max 10.33 9.17 10.33

N 8 9 17

Table 3.2 Duration of study by mode of study and kulliyyah

AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P

KO

S

IIiB

F

IST

AC

Research Full-time

GOT (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 Median 5.25 5.25 5.00 4.58 4.75 5.42 5.42 4.33 4.63 4.71 4.96 5.54 Min 3.25 4.50 4.08 2.00 3.08 3.58 3.67 4.33 3.42 4.00 2.83 4.17 Max 8.33 5.25 8.25 8.00 6.25 8.25 6.00 4.33 5.08 5.42 7.83 6.92 N 16 3 13 5 11 5 6 1 8 2 10 2

Part-time GOT (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 100 0.0 Median 6.83 7.83 10.25 9.00 2.00 3.83 8.71 Min 6.83 7.83 10.25 9.00 2.00 3.83 7.08 Max 6.83 7.83 10.25 9.00 2.00 3.83 10.33 N 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

Coursework & research Full-time

GOT (%) 9.10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Median 4.58 5.00 7.33 6.67 4.67 6.79 Min 3.00 4.92 3.25 5.58 4.67 6.08 Max 7.08 9.42 8.42 8.58 4.67 8.33 N 11 3 11 7 1 6

Part-time GOT (%) 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 Median 8.25 8.00 7.00 8.42 Min 7.67 8.00 5.42 8.42 Max 9.17 8.00 8.00 8.42 N 3 1 4 1


68








Malaysian graduates generally gave higher

ratings than non-Malaysian graduates. The mean

ratings given by Malaysian graduates were mostly

close to 5, indicating their high satisfaction with

the study programmes in terms of both the

relevance and helpfulness to their current jobs.

On the other hand, non-Malaysian AIKOL

graduates gave their programme a mean rating of

2.3 for relevance, indicating that they found the

programme not relevant to their current jobs (see

Figure 3.7 below).

Figure 3.7 Relevance and helpfulness of study programmes

3.2.2 Curriculum

The graduates were also asked to rate the contents

of the study programmes in terms of several

aspects, as in Table 3.3 below, from 1 (not

satisfied at all) to 5 (extremely satisfied). Overall,

PhD graduates across all kulliyyahs were satisfied

with the curriculum offered by IIUM as indicated

by the mean total ratings above 3.5.

The overall value was computed by taking the

mean value of all items. Total mean ratings of

each item in the curriculum assessment were also

above 3.5, indicating that the programmes

fulfilled their objectives in giving various benefits

to the graduates.

1

2

3

4

5


Relevance Malaysian Relevance Non-Malaysian Helpfulness Malaysian Helpfulness Non-Malaysian

PhD GRADUATES71

69


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P

KO

S

IIiB

F

IST

AC

Tot

al

Suitability of programme 4.5 4.8 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.5 4.7 5.0 4.1 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.5

Theoretical & practical balance 4.4 4.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.7 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 3.8 4.3

Compulsory co-curriculum 4.2 5.0 4.3 3.4 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.7 - 3.0 4.0 3.1 4.5 3.9

Compulsory subjects 4.3 4.7 4.6 4.0 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.0 3.0 3.1 4.0 3.4 4.6 4.2

Variety of co-curriculum 4.6 5.0 3.9 3.5 3.9 4.3 4.2 4.8 - 2.8 4.0 2.9 4.0 3.9

Prepare for working life 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.6 5.0 3.2 4.5 4.0 4.4 4.2

Malaysian 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.5 4.5

Non-Malaysian 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.7 4.1 4.3 4.2 - - 3.3 - 3.6 4.2 3.9

Total 4.4 4.4 4.2 3.8 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.5 3.5 4.1 3.8 4.3 4.2

The graduates offered several suggestions to

improve the quality of the programmes. The main

suggestions included improving the management

of the programmes in terms of teaching and

learning, scheduling of courses, assessment, and

class activities. Programmes and courses should

also be reviewed to meet the needs of the industry

and the job market. Courses which are irrelevant

should be removed, and new courses which cover

new knowledge should be offered. In addition,

more emphasis and opportunities for research

activities should be given to PhD graduates such

as financial support for attending conferences,

assistance in publication, and training to improve

analytical skills.


PhD graduates were also asked to rate the skills

they acquired from the study programmes in

three categories: ICT skills, soft skills and life

skills.

ICT skills

Graduates were asked to list three ICT skills that

they have and rate them from 1 (poor) to 5

(excellent). Since the number of PhD graduates

across the thirteen kulliyyahs was small, cross-

kulliyyah comparisons were not practical.

However, most graduates knew Microsoft

PowerPoint (77.5 per cent), Word (76.8 per cent),

and Excel (68.1 per cent); and rated their ICT

skills as good, ranging from 4.1 to 4.3.

Soft skills

Aspects of soft skills, as in Table 3.4 below, were

rated from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Graduates,

except those from KOS, gave positive evaluations

to all components of soft skills with most total

mean ratings greater than four out of five. The

total value was computed by taking the mean

value of all items. Malaysian graduates generally

rated themselves higher than non-Malaysian

graduates.


70

Life skills

Graduates were specifically asked to what extent

the University influenced specific aspects of their

lives during their study periods. In general,

graduates felt that the IIUM education system

had a lot of influence on their lives as the total

mean ratings were above four (see Table 3.5

below). The total value was computed by taking

the mean value of all items. Again, Malaysian

graduates generally gave higher ratings than non-

Malaysian graduates.


Graduates were asked to rate their proficiency in

both the English and Malay languages on a scale

of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent). Overall, there was a

large gap between Malaysian and non-Malaysian

graduates’ Malay language proficiency. Malaysian

and non-Malaysian graduates rated their Malay

at 4.0–5.0 and below 3.0, respectively.

However, the gap was hardly observed in their

proficiency in the English language, except

among KAED graduates. Generally, the graduates

felt that their English was better than their Malay

(see Figure 3.8 below).23


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P

KO

S

IIiB

F

IST

AC

Interpersonal communication 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.6 4.0 4.4 5.0 3.9 4.0 4.5 4.3 4.3

Creative & critical thinking 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.5 4.4 5.0 4.1 4.0 4.4 4.6 4.3

Problem-solving 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.6 4.3 5.0 4.3 4 4.5 4.6 4.4 Analytical 4.4 4.5 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.5 4.3 5.0 4.1 3.5 4.2 4.6 4.4 Teamwork 4.4 4.8 4.1 4.5 4.1 4.6 4.6 4.4 5.0 4.0 3.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 Inculcating & practising positive values

4.4 4.8 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 5.0 4.1 4.0 4.3 4.7 4.4

General knowledge & current issues 4.5 4.5 4.1 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.7 4.4 5.0 4.3 3.5 4.4 4.7 4.4

Malaysian 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.4 4.2 4.6 5.0 4.4 5.0 4.8 3.8 4.5 4.9 4.6 Non-Malaysian 3.8 4.0 3.9 4.5 4.2 4.3 4.3 - - 3.9 - 4.4 4.4 4.2 Total 4.3 4.5 4.2 4.4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.4 5.0 4.1 3.8 4.4 4.6 4.4

23 Paired sample test found a one per cent significance difference.

PhD GRADUATES73

71


AIK

OL

KA

ED

KE

NM

S

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S

KO

E

KO

ED

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P

KO

S

IIiB

F

IST

AC

Tot

al

Develop self-confidence 4.5 4.8 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.3 5.0 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.8 4.5 Enhance self-maturity 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.5 4.4 5.0 4.4 4.0 4.6 4.4 4.6 Develop self-resilience 4.6 5.0 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.4 5.0 4.3 4.0 4.6 4.4 4.6 Become more knowledgeable

4.6 4.8 4.4 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.8 4.6 5.0 4.4 4.0 4.6 4.8 4.6

Enhance interest in learning

4.6 4.8 4.4 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.8 4.4 5.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.6

More sensitive towards current affairs

4.4 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.4 5.0 4.4 4.0 4.5 4.4 4.4

Ability to be independent 4.6 4.8 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.6 5.0 4.4 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.5 Creative & critical thinking 4.5 5.0 4.4 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.5 4.4 5.0 4.3 4.0 4.6 4.7 4.6 Ready to face the working life & its challenges

4.6 4.8 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.3 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.8 4.6

Problem-solving & decision-making

4.6 4.8 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.7 4.5

Teamwork 4.6 4.5 4.0 4.4 4.4 4.7 4.6 4.6 5.0 4.3 4.0 4.4 4.7 4.4 Effective communication 4.6 5.0 4.4 4.7 4.5 4.8 4.7 4.6 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.5 4.8 4.6 Malaysian 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.6 4.7 5.0 4.5 5.0 4.7 4.2 4.7 5.0 4.8 Non-Malaysian 4.1 4.2 4.0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 - - 4.2 - 4.4 4.4 4.4 Total 4.6 4.8 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.3 4.2 4.5 4.6 4.5

Note: 1(has no influence at all), 5 (has a lot of influence)


1

2

3

4

5


English Malaysian English Non-Malaysian Malay Malaysian Malay Non-Malaysian


72






(extremely satisfied). Graduates were also asked

to rate their level of agreement to a list of

statements on aspects of mahallah, auxiliary,

venue, food outlet, kulliyyah, and security and

safety services; and management of facilities on a

scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree).

The graduates evaluated all the listed services and

facilities positively with most ratings greater than

4. However, a lower but still satisfactory mean

rating of 3.53 was recorded for parking facilities

(see Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10 below).

Similar, the graduates generally agreed that the

facilities and services provided by the University

were good, adequate, and satisfactory. However,

lower ratings indicated lower levels of satisfaction

for the condition of toilets at the mahallahs and

promptness of building repairs (see Table 3.6

below).

Figure 3.9 Evaluation of library facilities

and services


12345

Onlineservices

Onlineresources

Staff


Study area

Overall

1

2

3

4

5Sport facilities


Laboratories/studios/workshops

ICT facilities &services

Study area

Campusbookshop

Onlineintegrated…Campus security

Parking

Health centre

Transportation

Accommodation

Cafeteria

PhD GRADUATES75

73

Table 3.6 Evaluation of facilities and services, IIUM Tracer Study

Mahallah room facilities are in good condition 3.13

Mahallah toilets are always in good condition 2.91

Mahallah compound and landscape are clean and well maintained 3.26

Number of auxiliary services provided is adequate 3.17

Condition of auxiliary services is good 3.20

Number of venue facilities is adequate 3.37

Condition of venue facilities is good 3.36

Number of food outlets is adequate 3.19

Variety of cafeteria food is good 3.17

Price of cafeteria food is reasonable 3.19

Quality of cafeteria food is good 3.13

Classroom facilities are in good condition 3.22

Toilets at Kulliyyah are in good condition 3.19

Number of discussion areas are adequate 3.17

Discussion areas are in good condition 3.28

There is adequate and functional safety equipment 3.06

Building defects are attended to immediately 2.95

I feel safe at the premises due to stringent security policies 3.24

Security force patrols constantly 3.18

Security cases such as thefts and disciplinary cases are handled effectively 3.07

Overall facilities are conducive to teaching and learning 3.50

Classrooms are clean and well maintained 3.45

Classrooms are comfortable 3.31

University landscape is pleasant and well kept 3.54

Complaint report response time is adequate 3.21

Maintenance works are satisfactory 3.26

Suggestions

KULLIYYAH

Twelve per cent of the graduates suggested

improving the overall management and

administration of the kulliyyahs, particularly with

regard to the maintenance of classrooms and

laboratories, addressing student needs and

complaints, and improving the overall efficiency

of the running of the kulliyyahs. Additionally,

13.8 per cent of the graduates suggested that

kulliyyahs provide rooms or lounges for students

to hold discussions.

MAHALLAH

A main suggestion was to improve internet

services through wider Wi-Fi coverage, higher

connection speed, and better network availability.

It is also proposed that the room registration

process improved by making it smoother and

more efficient. The graduates suggested that the

mahallah management conduct regular

inspections including spot checks and be more

responsive to complaints and reports. Mahallah

management should also be proactive in

maintaining the facilities and attend to repairs

promptly.


74


Overall, more than 90 per cent of graduates felt

that the degrees they obtained were worthwhile.

The small number of graduates who felt otherwise

were non-Malaysian, including four out of six

AIKOL graduates (see Figure 3.11and Table 3.7

below).


Similarly, more than 90 per cent of the graduates

would recommend their family members and

friends to study at IIUM, including three of the

four AIKOL graduates who thought their degrees

were not worthwhile. However, some KOP

graduates would not recommend IIUM to others

even as they felt their degrees were worthwhile

(see Figure 3.12 and Table 3.8 below).




Yes No Yes No

AIKOL 100 0 33.3 66.7

KAED 100 0 100 0

KENMS 100 0 71.4 28.6

KICT 100 0 100 0

KIRKHS 100 0 100 0

KOE 100 0 100 0

KOED 100 0 81.8 18.2

KAHS 100 0 - -

KOM 100 0 - -

KOP 100 0 83.3 16.7

KOS 100 0 - -

IIiBF 100 0 75.0 25.0

ISTAC 100 0 80.0 20.0

Total 100 0 84.0 16.0

6363

12

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Yes No

6166

29

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Yes No

PhD GRADUATES77

75



Yes No Yes No

AIKOL 90.9 9.1 83.3 16.7

KAED 100 0 100 0

KENMS 100 0 85.7 14.3

KICT 100 0 100 0

KIRKHS 100 0 100 0

KOE 75.0 25.0 100 0

KOED 100 0 81.8 18.2

KAHS 100 0 - -

KOM 100 0 - -

KOP 100 0 33.3 66.7

KOS 100 0 - -

IIiBF 100 0 87.5 12.5

ISTAC 100 0 100 0

Total 96.8 3.2 88.0 12.0

3.2.6 Advantages and disadvantages of studying at IIUM

The main advantages of studying at IIUM, as

given by 29 and 22 per cent of PhD graduates

respectively, were the Islamic and international

environment of the university. Additionally, 17

per cent of the graduates cited the integration of

knowledge. Another benefit, according to 9 per

cent of graduates, was personal improvement as a

Muslim (see Figure 3.13 below).


Most graduates stated that there was no

disadvantage in studying at IIUM. Nevertheless,

others cited poor computer and internet facilities,

lack of parking spaces, and poor service of

administrative staff (see Figure 3.14 below).

Figure 3.14 Disadvantages of studying at IIUM

29.0%

21.7%

9.4%

17.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Islamic environment




5.1%

5.1%

5.1%

38.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Computer & internetfacilities

Parking

Poor service ofadministrative staff

None


76


The overall labour force participation rate for

IIUM PhD graduates was 89.9 per cent and the

employment rate was 81.5 per cent. Hence, a fifth

of PhD graduates were unemployed at the time of

the survey. Several were waiting for job

placements, but the majority of the unemployed

were still looking for a job. This was particularly

the case for non-Malaysian graduates, whose

employment rate was considerably lower than

that of their Malaysian counterparts.

The situation was expected. Most Malaysians

pursuing PhD programmes typically were already

employed and attached to an educational

institution. On the other hand, many non-

Malaysians undergoing PhD programmes were

not attached to any institution and were not in the

labour market. They typically will only enter the

labour market upon completion of their studies,

and many will take time to secure employment as

they preferred to work in their countries of origin.

Accordingly, more Malaysian graduates were in

the labour force, at 95.2 per cent compared to a

lower figure of 89.9 per cent for non-Malaysian

graduates. However, of the non-Malaysians who

were not in the labour force, 45.5 per cent were

either furthering their studies (postdoctoral) or

attending training programmes. Non-Malaysian

graduates from ISTAC and KOED had the lowest

labour force participation rates at 60 and 63.6 per

cent, respectively.

Malaysian graduates from all kulliyyahs except

AIKOL, KICT, and KAED recorded full

employment. While the one ICT graduate who

was unemployed was waiting for a work

placement at the time of the survey, the

unemployed AIKOL and KAED graduates were

still searching for jobs. There were two Malaysian

graduates, one from KICT and another from

ISTAC who were not interested to work.

Among non-Malaysian graduates, only two out of

six (33.3 per cent) KOP graduates were employed

at the time of the survey; the rest were searching

for a job. Six of the 12 KICT graduates who were

in the labour force were unemployed. However,

two were waiting for job placements, while the

other four were still searching for jobs. There were

also several non-Malaysian graduates, most of

them female, who stated that they were not

interested to work, particularly from AIKOL,

KOE, KOED, and ISTAC (see Table 3.9 below).

Most of the employed Malaysian graduates were

employed on a permanent basis. Half worked

with the government and another 30 per cent

worked with statutory bodies. Most of the non-

Malaysian graduates were employed as either

permanent or contract staff and worked in the

government sector (56 per cent) or with local

private companies (18.6 per cent) (see Figure

3.15 and Figure 3.16 below).

A large proportion of the graduates, as expected,

worked in the education sector. All those who

were employed worked, appropriately, as

professionals or managers. Hence, there was no

instance of underemployment among the

graduates (see Figure 3.17 below).

PhD GRADUATES79

Tab

le 3

.9 E

mpl

oym

ent c

hara

cter

istic

s by

kul

liyya

h an

d na

tiona

lity

Mal

aysi

an

Tot

al

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P K

OS

IST

AC

II

iBF

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

93.3

90

.9

66.7

10

0 66

.7

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

80.0

E

mpl

oym

ent r

ate

(%)

95.0

90

.9

66.7

10

0 66

.7

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/to

tal u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 33

.3

0.0

0.0

10

0

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

95.2

10

0 10

0 85

.7

75.0

10

0 10

0 10

0 10

0 10

0 10

0 10

0 75

.0

100

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/no

t in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

10

0

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 3.

2

0.

0 25

.0

25

.0

N

63

11

3

7 4

7 4

6 7

1 2

2 4

5

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

Tot

al

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

KO

M

KO

P K

OS

IST

AC

II

iBF

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

57.8

40

.0

100

66.7

41

.7

88.9

57

.1

42.9

33

.3

33

.3

87.5

E

mpl

oym

ent r

ate

(%)

68.8

60

.0

100

66.7

50

.0

88.9

71

.4

71.4

33

.3

66

.7

100

Wai

ting

plac

emen

t/to

tal u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 20

.0

0.0

50

.0

33.3

0.

0 50

.0

0.0

0.0

0.

0

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

85.3

83

.3

100

85.7

92

.3

90.0

87

.5

63.6

10

0.0

60

.0

100

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/no

t in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

45.5

0.

0

0.0

100

0.0

0.0

75.0

50

.0

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 6.

7 16

.7

0.0

0.0*

0.

0 10

.0

12.5

9.

1

20

.0

N

75

6

1 7

13

10

8 11

6

5

8

Tot

al

Tot

al

AIK

OL

KA

ED

K

EN

MS

KIC

T

KIR

KH

S K

OE

K

OE

D

KA

HS

K

OP

KO

S IS

TA

C

IIiB

F Fu

ll-tim

e/la

bour

forc

e (%

) 75

.0

75.0

75

.0

83.3

46

.7

93.8

72

.7

69.2

50

.0

66

.7

84.6

E

mpl

oym

ent r

ate

(%)

81.5

81

.3

75.0

83

.3

53.3

93

.8

81.8

84

.6

50.0

83.3

10

0 W

aitin

g pl

acem

ent/

tota

l une

mpl

oyed

(%)

21.7

0.

0 0.

0 50

.0

42.9

0.

0 50

.0

0.0

0.0

0.

0

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

89.9

94

.1

100

85.7

88

.2

94.1

91

.7

76.5

10

0

66.7

10

0 (S

tudy

& tr

aini

ng)/

not i

n la

bour

forc

e (%

) 42

.9

0.0

50

.0

50.0

0.

0 0.

0 75

.0

33.3

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 3.

6 5.

9

0.0

0.0

5.9

8.3

5.9

11.1

N

138

17

4 14

17

17

12

17

7

1 8

2 9

13

*One

gra

duat

e cl

aim

ed to

be

not w

orki

ng o

r un

empl

oyed

bec

ause

fore

igne

rs a

re n

ot a

llow

ed to

wor

k in

Mal

aysi

a.


78

Figure 3.15 Employed graduates by type of employment status

Figure 3.16 Employed graduates by employment sector

Figure 3.17 Employed graduates by economic sector

53

20

2

21

1

2 1

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Malaysian

Non-Malaysian

Permanent Contract Temporary Self-employed Working with family

33

24

17

2 5

4

8

1

2 1

1

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Malaysian

Non-Malaysian

Government Statutory body Private (multinational) Private (local) GLC NGO Others

1

2

4

4

48

31

4

7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Malaysian

Non-Malaysian

Financial/insurance/takaful Professional/scientific/technical Education Others

SUMMARY, SUGGESTIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4PART


80

4.1 Summary

4.1.1 Bachelor’s degree graduates

Academic performance

1. Academic performance of the graduates in

terms of CGPA was relatively high with

means greater than 3 for all kulliyyahs

except AIKOL and KOE. Five and 15 per

cent, respectively, of Malaysian and non-

Malaysian graduates, received first class

honours.

2. Analysis on academic performance shows

that (i) female graduates outperformed

male graduates, (ii) English proficiency at

entry contributed positively to academic

performance, (iii) working while studying

had an adverse effect on academic

performance, and (iv) active co-curricular

involvement did not significantly affect

academic performance.

Co-curricular activities

3. Involvement of the graduates in co-

curricular activities was satisfactory with

over 70 per cent stating that they were

actively involved in societies, clubs, and

sports programmes.

Internship

4. Almost 80 per cent of the graduates

underwent internships that mostly lasted

1–3 months.

Programme evaluation

5. Overall, the graduates felt that their study

programmes were relevant and helpful to

their current jobs. KON and KOD

graduates gave the highest mean ratings.

6. The graduates were generally satisfied with

the curriculum particularly with regard to

its suitability, balance between theory and

practice, and preparation for working life.

7. More than 90 per cent of the graduates

indicated that the degrees they obtained

were worthwhile and would recommend

their family members and friends to study

at IIUM.

Skills

8. The three most common ICT skills most

graduates possessed were Microsoft Word,

PowerPoint and Excel. Other top ICT skills

include AutoCAD, Adobe Photoshop, PHP,

Java/J2EE, and SPSS.

9. In general, the graduates rated their

English language proficiency as high.

Malaysian graduates also rated their Malay

language proficiency as high while non-

Malaysian graduates, expectedly, rated it to

be good, but not as high.


would like to attend additional training

programmes to enhance their English

proficiency and ICT skills for career

enhancement.

Islamisation

11. IIUM was successful in its Islamisation

mission with respect to the incorporation

of Islamic values in courses and creating an

environment that promotes the better

practice of Islam. However, the University

SUMMARY, SUGGESTIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS83

81

needs to strive further in the aspect of the

integration of knowledge.

Facilities and services


the facilities and services provided by the

University. The only exceptions were

issues related to (i) the safety of buildings

and handling of theft and disciplinary

cases, as highlighted by AIKOL graduates;

and (ii) the quality of food services at the

Kuantan campus.

13. Suggestions by the graduates to improve

facilities and services at the kulliyyahs were

generally related to (i) classroom fixtures,

and (ii) buildings and lecture venues.

Disadvantages of studying at IIUM

14. Three main disadvantages of studying at

IIUM were:

i. Weaknesses in some programmes,

particularly in engineering and ICT.

ii. The long duration of study at KOD

and KOS.

iii. Poor facilities in the classrooms and

mahallahs.

Employment


were in the labour force but only 37.4 per

cent were employed full-time and 30.4 per

cent were unemployed. Three quarters of

those who were not in the labour force

were either furthering or planning to

further their studies or were attending

training courses.

24 Although KOM, KOP, and KOD graduates had lower employment rates, most of these graduates were

16. KON graduates had the highest

employment rate, while Kulliyyah of KOS

graduates had the lowest.24

17. A fifth of employed graduates was in part-

time rather than full-time employment and

disproportionately more female graduates

were part-time workers. Most of those who

worked full-time were in a permanent

position or employed on a contract basis,

while those who worked part-time were

mostly on a temporary basis.

18. Almost 14 per cent of graduates from KLM

were not interested or looking for a job.

19. Among the graduates who were working,

32 per cent were underemployed as they

were employed in clerical support, service

and sales, and other lower levels jobs for

which they were overqualified—and more

so for female graduates.

20. On average, graduates who were

unemployed started searching for a job

later (1 month after completion of studies)

than those who were employed (2 to 2½

weeks after completion of studies).

21. Male graduates took shorter times to gain

full-time employment than female

graduates. AIKOL, KENMS, and KOS

graduates with higher CGPA were more

likely to gain full-time employment earlier

than others. However, the reverse was true

for KOP graduates. Involvement in co-

curricular activities and duration of

internship were significant factors in the

duration until gaining full-time

waiting for job placements while KOS graduates were mostly still searching for jobs.


82

employment for some, but not all

graduates. Self-assessed levels of soft-skills

were not a significant determinant in the

length of time taken to obtain a full-time

job.

22. Among the employed graduates, the mean

income for females was significantly lower

than that for males. Expectedly, work

performance contributed positively to

income. Controlling for other factors, on

average, a graduate with full-time

employment received RM1,200 more than

one with part-time employment.


83

4.1.2 Master’s degree graduates

Academic performance

1. Over 80 per cent of the graduates studied

full-time.

2. 42 per cent of the graduates pursued their

programmes by coursework and research.

Only about 19 per cent pursued their

master’s degrees by research, while 14 per

cent completed the executive master’s

programmes.

3. Most of the graduates were self-sponsored

and were working while studying for their

master’s degree.

Duration of study

4. Less than 60 per cent of the graduates who

underwent the master’s programmes by

coursework on a full-time basis managed

to graduate on time within two years.

5. It was worse for those who underwent

their master’s programmes by research, or

coursework and research, where only 7.5

and 12 per cent, respectively, were able to

graduate on time.

6. A similar situation, although slightly

better, applied to those who studied part-

time. The median duration for completing

the full-time and part-time master’s

programmes were 2.75 and 3.42 years,

respectively.


7. In general, most of the graduates felt that

their study programmes were relevant and

helpful to their current jobs, with the

exception of KOS graduates, who rated

their programme as just average.


the curriculum particularly with regard to

suitability, balance between theory and

practice, and preparation for working life.

9. The majority (87.3 per cent) of the

graduates stated that the degrees they

obtained were worthwhile and would

recommend IIUM as a place of study to

their family members and friends.

However, a significant number of non-

Malaysian graduates from KOED (41.9 per

cent) and KENMS (34.9 per cent) would

not recommend IIUM as a place of study.


10. In general, the graduates rated their

English language proficiency as high.

11. The graduates also rated their Malay

language proficiency as good, but not as

high as their proficiency in the English

language.

Islamisation

12. While IIUM has created an Islamic

environment, less than 10 per cent of the

graduates explicitly stated the integration

of knowledge as a main advantage to

studying at IIUM.




University.

14. The only exceptions, especially among

non-Malaysian graduates, were in the

condition of the toilets at the mahallahs,

timely repair of building defects and


84

having adequate safety equipment, and the

handling of theft and disciplinary cases.

15. Suggestions to improve kulliyyah facilities

and services include: (i) fixing classroom

fixtures such as air-conditioners, lightings,

and furniture; (ii) having administrative

staff becoming more responsive towards

student needs and requests; and (iii)

providing discussion rooms or lounges.

Employment

16. The labour force participation rate was 77

per cent and only 59 per cent of those in the

labour force were employed full-time. Ten

per cent of the graduates indicated that

they were not interested to work nor plan

to further their study.

17. Underemployment was highest among

non-Malaysian graduates for both male

and female, at 21.4 and 25 per cent,

respectively.

18. The top three sectors in which the

graduates were employed were education

(43 per cent), financial and insurance or

takaful (12 per cent) and professional,

scientific, and technical (11 per cent).

19. Analyses indicate that the mean income of

employed male graduates is estimated to

be over RM1,000 higher than that of

female graduates, controlling for the other

factors. Additionally, the income from full-

time employment was about RM2,400

higher than that from part-time

employment. Academic performance

contributed positively to income for

KENMS graduates.


85

4.1.3 PhD degree graduates

Profile

1. Slightly more than half of the PhD

graduates were non-Malaysian. Among

Malaysian graduates, more than two thirds

were female, while among non-Malaysian

graduates more than two thirds were male.

Mode and duration of study

2. Over 80 per cent of the graduates studied

full-time. Sixty-five per cent pursued their

PhD by research and 35 per cent by

coursework and research.

3. Regardless of the mode of study, less than

3 per cent of those who studied full-time

graduated on time. Half of them took more

than 5.42 years to complete their studies.

4. Among the graduates who did their PhD

part-time basis, the graduate-on-time rate

was 23.5 per cent and half of them took at

least 8 years to obtain a PhD degree.


5. Overall, the graduates felt that their study

programmes were relevant and helpful to

their current jobs.

Disadvantages of studying at IIUM

6. The three main disadvantages of studying

at IIUM were:

i. Lack of good computer laboratories

and internet facilities;

ii. Lack of parking spaces; and

iii. Poor service of administrative staff.




University.

8. Among the suggestions to improve the

facilities and services at the kulliyyahs were

to improve the overall management and

administration in the maintenance of

classrooms and laboratories and

addressing student complaints, as well as

to provide discussion rooms or lounges for

students.


9. The graduates rated their English language

proficiency as high, with the exception of

non-Malaysian KAED graduates who

indicated that their level of proficiency was

just average.

10. Malaysian graduates rated their Malay

language proficiency as high, whereas non-

Malaysian graduates, rated it as not good,

expectedly.

Employment

11. The overall labour force participation rate

was 89.8 per cent with an employment rate

of 81.5 per cent.

12. The employment rate for non-Malaysian

graduates was considerably lower (68.8

per cent) than Malaysian graduates (95 per

cent).

13. Several non-Malaysian graduates, mostly

female, were not interested to work.

14. Most of the graduates worked in the public

education sector and were employed on a

permanent basis. None of the working

PhD graduates was underemployed.


86

4.2 Suggestions and recommendations


1. Maintain the good facilities and services provided by the Library.

2. Improve the University’s facilities and services particularly with regard to:

i. Having adequate and functional safety equipment, timeliness of building repair, and

effectiveness in the handling of theft and disciplinary cases particularly at AIKOL.

ii. Lecture rooms fixtures such as air-conditioners, lightings, and furniture particularly at AIKOL,

KIRKHS, and KENMS

iii. Toilets particularly at postgraduate student accommodation.

iv. Food services at Kuantan campus.

v. Administrative staff responses to undergraduate student needs and complaints particularly at

KOM, KOP, and KLM.

vi. Services provided by the administrative staff to postgraduate students particularly at ISTAC

and AIKOL.

vii. Overall kulliyyah management and administration in relation to maintenance of classrooms

and laboratories, addressing student needs and complaints, and the overall running of the

kulliyyah especially catering to postgraduate students.

viii. The absence of lounges or discussion rooms for postgraduate students.

ix. Internet access and services including Wi-Fi coverage, particularly at the mahallahs.

x. Management of parking areas and registration at the mahallahs.

xi. Laundry facilities including washing and clothes-drying areas and launderettes at the

mahallahs.

xii. Overall maintenance and management of mahallah facilities and services.

Islamisation

3. Maintain and improve the Islamic and international environment of IIUM.

4. Increase efforts in realizing the university’s mission of integration of knowledge especially in:

i. Undergraduate programmes offered by non-science kulliyyahs.

ii. All masters’ programmes offered by IIUM.

IIUM as a place of study

5. Investigate the reasons a significant number of non-Malaysian graduates would not recommend

IIUM to others as a place to study, especially among:

i. Bachelor’s degree graduates from KOE.

ii. Master’s degree graduates from KENMS and KOED.


87

Undergraduate programmes

6. Consider offering training courses to all final year students to improve and enhance their English

language proficiency and ICT skills to complement those offered within their respective academic

programmes.

7. Undertake efforts to improve the English language proficiency of first-year students to improve their

academic performance.

8. Monitor and assist students who need to work while studying to ensure that their studies will not be

affected.

9. Encourage participation in co-curricular activities as these pursuits do not have a detrimental effect

on academic performance.

10. Examine the duration of study of programmes offered by KOS and KOD to determine if they are too

long.

11. Undertake efforts to improve the full-time employment rate of all graduates, particularly from KOS.

12. Put more emphasis on incorporating practical knowledge and the latest developments and

technologies in the respective fields of study in undergraduate programmes. Additionally, the

programmes should include more hands-on applications and building of prototypes, real case studies

and projects, collaborations with industry, field trips and visits, etc.

13. Impress on students the importance of academic performance and not delaying their job search in

securing a full-time job faster.

Postgraduate programmes

14. Investigate the factors, such as quality of student intake, academic programmes, process and

monitoring of supervision, selection and appointment of examiners, duration of thesis examination,

etc., to explain the low proportion of students graduating on time.

15. Review the relevance and helpfulness, particularly of KOS master’s degree and AIKOL PhD degree

(for non-Malaysians) programmes in preparing graduates for the labour market.

16. Impress on students, particularly KENMS master’s degree graduates, the importance of academic

performance as a significant determinant of income from employment after graduation.


APPE

NDI

CES

Appe

ndix

1: N

umbe

r of p

artic

ipan

ts a

nd to

tal n

umbe

r of 2

017

IIUM

gra

duat

es

Num

ber

of p

artic

ipan

ts, G

radu

ate

Tra

cer

Stud

y 20

17

N

atio

nalit

y A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

IST

AC

II

iBF

InH

AR

T

Tot

al

Bac

helo

r M

alay

sian

36

8 83

8 54

5 11

2 56

4 26

8 12

9 14

6 11

0 41

45

23

4 22

3 86

-

- -

3709

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

12

102

63

23

30

15

4 1

1 0

0 3

0 1

- -

- 25

5

Mas

ter

Mal

aysi

an

31

113

68

19

42

19

33

24

4 2

- 15

9

4 1

12

8 40

4

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

10

39

43

17

31

3 21

2

1 0

0 1

1 2

2 6

0 17

9

PhD

M

alay

sian

11

7

7 4

4 3

6 1

2 -

- 2

7 -

4 5

- 63

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

6 10

7

13

8 1

11

0 6

- -

0 0

- 5

8 -

75

Num

ber

of 2

017

IIU

M g

radu

ates

N

atio

nalit

y A

IKO

L K

IRK

HS

KE

NM

S K

ICT

K

OE

K

AE

D

KO

ED

K

OM

K

OP

KO

N

KO

D

KO

S K

AH

S K

LM

IST

AC

II

iBF

InH

AR

T

Tot

al

Bac

helo

r M

alay

sian

37

2 85

4 55

5 11

7 57

2 27

0 13

4 14

7 11

0 41

45

23

8 22

5 88

-

- -

3768

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

14

123

100

35

62

22

5 3

2 0

1 5

0 1

- -

- 37

3

Mas

ter

Mal

aysi

an

33

118

73

21

44

20

33

26

4 2

- 16

9

4 1

13

8 42

5

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

23

74

76

25

67

6 31

5

4 0

- 1

3 3

7 15

2

342

PhD

M

alay

sian

13

8

8 4

4 3

6 1

2 -

- 2

7 -

5 6

- 69

Non

-Mal

aysi

an

18

40

23

24

19

1 28

1

7 -

- 3

- -

10

15

- 18

9


Appe

ndix

2: E

mpl

oym

ent c

hara

cter

istic

s by

und

ergr

adua

te p

rogr

amm

e

Em

ploy

men

t cha

ract

eris

tics

by u

nder

grad

uate

pro

gram

me

A

IKO

L K

EN

MS

KIC

T

LLB

LL

B_

S O

vera

ll B

AC

C

BB

A

BE

CS

ISFI

N

Ove

rall

BC

S B

IT

Ove

rall

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

74.4

77

.1

75.2

82

.8

42.4

56

.8

42.3

56

.9

81.8

71

.0

73.0

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 91

.1

91.4

91

.2

85.2

62

.0

66.3

52

.8

66.9

81

.8

77.0

77

.9

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 0.

0 0.

0 0.

0 22

.2

8.6

15.6

20

.7

16.8

0.

0 30

.4

25.9

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

30.2

49

.3

33.9

75

.3

77.3

80

.5

82.0

78

.7

84.6

91

.7

90.4

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

95.7

91

.7

95.1

77

.5

55.6

47

.8

59.3

62

.4

75.0

66

.7

69.2

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 3.

0 4.

2 3.

3 5.

6 10

.1

10.2

6.

0 7.

7 3.

8 2.

8 3.

0

N

298

71

369

162

119

118

150

549

26

109

135

K

IRK

HS

BA

RB

B

EN

L C

OM

M

HIS

T

PSC

I PS

YC

RK

FQ

RK

QS

RK

UD

SO

CA

O

vera

ll

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

28.8

53

.8

42.6

40

.4

55.7

48

.7

31.1

41

.0

46.3

39

.2

45.0

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 47

.9

66.3

55

.7

55.8

66

.4

66.4

66

.7

62.3

64

.8

52.9

61

.5

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 18

.4

5.7

11.1

4.

3 12

.2

7.9

20.0

8.

7 5.

3 4.

2 9.

9

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

75.3

73

.2

81.3

77

.6

80.8

85

.0

67.2

81

.3

83.1

86

.4

79.1

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

70.8

81

.6

28.6

60

.0

72.4

70

.0

68.2

50

.0

81.8

50

.0

67.2

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 7.

2 4.

9 13

.3

9.0

5.3

4.5

10.4

9.

3 3.

1 6.

8 6.

9

N

97

142

75

67

151

133

67

75

65

59

931

K

AE

D

KO

ED

AA

D

ALA

A

QS

AR

CH

U

RP

Ove

rall

GU

IDE

IS

ED

T

AA

SL

TE

ASL

O

vera

ll

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

51.2

61

.5

44.6

41

.4

47.6

48

.3

20.0

30

.0

36.4

25

.9

27.4

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 79

.1

66.7

51

.8

60.3

64

.3

63.4

33

.3

45.0

45

.5

63.0

49

.3

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 22

.2

23.1

14

.8

26.1

66

.7

28.7

60

.0

54.5

66

.7

60.0

59

.5

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

87.8

83

.0

82.4

82

.9

87.5

84

.4

93.8

87

.0

91.7

93

.1

91.3

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

16.7

62

.5

25.0

33

.3

66.7

38

.6

0.0

33.3

0.

0 10

0.0

42.9

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 10

.2

6.4

13.2

11

.4

4.2

9.6

6.3

8.7

8.3

0.0

5.0

N

49

47

68

70

48

282

16

23

12

29

80


K

AH

S K

LM

AU

D

BIO

MD

D

IET

O

PT

PHYT

R

DI

Ove

rall

AR

CO

M

EN

CO

M

TPH

M

Ove

rall

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

93.8

22

.6

47.8

88

.5

58.3

54

.5

52.4

35

.7

51.4

40

.0

45.9

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 93

.8

43.4

60

.9

92.3

62

.5

59.1

63

.1

57.1

56

.8

50.0

55

.7

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 0.

0 16

.7

5.6

50.0

33

.3

33.3

18

.8

0.0

12.5

20

.0

11.1

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

80.0

75

.7

93.9

89

.7

82.8

88

.0

84.2

73

.7

64.9

90

.9

70.1

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

25.0

76

.5

33.3

0.

0 20

.0

66.7

51

.4

80.0

50

.0

0.0

53.8

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 15

.0

5.7

4.1

10.3

10

.3

4.0

7.2

5.3

17.5

9.

1 13

.8

N

20

70

49

29

29

25

222

19

57

11

87

K

OE

AE

RO

A

UT

OM

B

IO

CIE

C

OM

EG

M

AT

ER

M

CT

M

FG

Ove

rall

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

56.5

46

.7

41.7

48

.1

71.4

57

.4

56.4

62

.1

55.7

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 58

.7

52.0

47

.2

51.9

76

.2

70.2

66

.0

65.2

61

.8

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 21

.1

16.7

15

.8

8.0

13.3

7.

1 15

.6

13.0

14

.2

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

78.0

81

.5

80.0

80

.0

79.7

79

.7

78.3

88

.0

80.6

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

69.2

76

.5

88.9

53

.8

81.3

75

.0

76.9

77

.8

74.8

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 6.

8 4.

3 2.

2 9.

2 3.

8 3.

4 5.

0 2.

7 4.

7

N

59

92

45

65

79

59

120

75

594

K

OS

KO

M

KO

P K

ON

K

OD

BSB

T

BSM

S C

HE

M

PHYS

O

vera

ll M

BB

S PM

AC

Y N

UR

S D

EN

T

Full-

time/

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

21.6

54

.4

26.9

30

.0

37.0

11

.6

28.0

90

.2

4.7

Em

ploy

men

t rat

e (%

) 27

.5

67.6

38

.5

55.0

49

.1

18.1

42

.0

95.1

11

.6

Wai

t pla

cem

ent/

Tot

al u

nem

ploy

ed (%

) 10

.8

18.2

12

.5

0.0

11.9

95

.6

87.9

50

.0

100.

0

Labo

ur fo

rce

part

icip

atio

n ra

te (

%)

69.9

73

.1

68.4

60

.6

69.6

93

.9

90.1

10

0.0

95.6

(Stu

dy &

trai

ning

)/N

ot in

labo

ur fo

rce

(%)

72.7

80

.0

83.3

76

.9

77.8

11

.1

72.7

-

0.0

Not

look

ing/

tota

l (%

) 8.

2 5.

4 5.

3 6.

1 6.

3 5.

4 2.

7 0.

0 4.

4

N

73

93

38

33

237

147

111

41

45

D I V I S I O NALUMNI RELATIONS

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA

9 789671 396971

ISBN 978-967-13969-7-1

alumni relations - iium

Documents