I passed my PhD viva voce, Alhamdulillah. It took me more than a week to pluck up courage to immortalize the whole experience in this blog. I have to say that the mental exhaustion of being interrogated non-stop for 3 hours straight was a unique experience! Haha!
Like so many other PhD candidates before me, I too will never forget the day of my viva on the fateful 20th June 2023. The Chairman (Prof. Dr. Nizam); The Internal Examiners (Prof. Jusang & Prof. Dr. Akmar) as well as The External Examiner (Prof. Dedy Mulyana) and my Supervisors – Main Supervisor (Dato’ Prof. Dr. Abdul Muati) & Co-Supervisors (Prof. Dr. Moniza Waheed & Prof. Dr. Hamisah Hasan). And the Secretary of the session – Dr. Sharifah Sofea. All of them are top notches in the field!
On 15th June 2023, the plan was to have mock viva with my supervisors at Pusat Strategi & Perhubungan Korporat UPM at the Canselori building itself as my Main Supervisor, Dato’ Prof. Dr. Abdul Muati is the director. A week prior, I managed to book the slot – thanks to the helpful secretary, Puan Jun. At 2.30 p.m., my other two Co-Supervisors Prof. Madya Dr. Moniza and Prof. Madya Dr. Hamisah came. We waited for Prof Muati who came around 3.00 p.m. as he was from Shah Alam after attending meeting with some State Secretariats (if I am not mistaken) in regards of the upcoming Selangor State Election. Apparently my 88 slides were too many – I was so overwhelmed by the all the information I extracted from my thesis – so in the end, Prof asked me to “trim down” the slides. AND I didn’t get to present or to be in that ‘rapid-fire’ hot spot Question-and-Answer simulation as our discussion was more of layback conversation. Initially, I felt bummed and anxious but later I’ve noticed that during the “conversation”, we did discuss on the possible questions to be asked, etc. So, I guess Supervisors knew better – that differentiate a PhD candidate and supervisors!
The casual “mock viva.”! I was scared because I didn’t get to emulate the simulation as per real viva (being grilled on the spot!). But yeah, the possible questions to be asked were actually casually discussed while we were having the conversation. It was layback but in a way, uniquely fruitful. I guess SVs know best!
No recording or footage is allowed during viva voce. So I took this prior to the session. Nervous!
Circa a month ago, UPM already sent me the zoom link through my email – that my viva vice was going to be conducted on 20th June 2023 at 2.30 p.m. So, I took work leave for two days to prep myself (on the 19th and 20th June). Truthfully, I was feeling a bit lethargic due to the hot weather and tonsilitis. So my thesiscation at Mardhiyyah Hotel in Shah Alam on the weekend, 17th and 18th June (Saturday & Sunday) was all about sleeping, sleeping and sleeping. I didn’t know why I felt so drowsy and sleepy the whole time! Nevertheless once I am back to Batang Kali, I forced myself for the big day:-
- I did several “talk-to-the-camera” videos just to train myself on how to speak spontaneously on my thesis;
- I perused and revised some of the communication textbooks suggested by lecturers such as Katherine Miller’s “Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts” and Creswell-Poth’s “Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches”
I was definitely feeling nervous especially on the day prior. I was also intimidated when I read experiences and “tips” shared in the Facebook’s Doctorate Support Group. That feeling of thinking that “I am still not good enough” was immense. But after messaging someone who I deeply admire and unabashedly having strong sense of adulation (Haha!), my inner storm was calmed. I was told to have a good rest and sleep well – as this was also once advised by this person’s supervisor – a long time ago. With that, I decided to succumb to my drowsy mind and body – “Tawakallah” – and off to bed early.
I first started to work my Abstract at Kota Bharu’s Perdana Hotel. I have strong affinity to that hotel. I love the Malay Muslim hospitality there.
On the morning of 20th June, I was still “trimming” my slide presentation. The initially 88 slides were then reduced into 69 slides – and then 59 slides. At this point, I thought I was going to be half-berserk! Reducing the slides was definitely going to cost “lost of information”! But around 12.30 p.m.; I finally had the gut to reduce them significantly into 42 slides. I just told myself – “this needs to be done. Just rumble with it!”. So, at 2.30 p.m.; I entered the Zoom link for my viva voce and found out that:-
- The Chairman was Prof. Madya Dr. Nizam
- The two Internal Examiners were Prof. Jusang Bolong & Prof. Madya Dr. Akmar
- The External Examiner was Prof. Dedy Mulyana from Fakultas Ilmu Komunikasi Universitas Padjadjaran.
Apart from them, Dr. Sharifah Sofia served as the Secretary of the viva voce. And all of my supervisors joined the session – which The Chairman quipped as a “rare scene as usually only one out of the three supervisors attend viva voce and Co-Supervisors don’t really do this!” So, I have to say this meant a lot to me – thank you Prof Muati, Dr. Moniza and Dr. Hamisah for squeezing time amidst hectic schedules! The Chairman, Prof Madya Dr. Nizam who is known for his meticulous and systematic nature began the session by stating that altogether there would be 9 sessions with twice intervals where the candidate (me) and supervisors were to be excluded from the main Zoom platform for the examiners to have private discussions:-
- The Casual Conversation : Warming-up session where everyone in the panel was to be introduced;
- Oral Presentation (Slides Presentation) with 15-20 minutes max;
- Abstract & Chapter 1 (Thesis Introduction, Background, Research Questions, Research Objectives, Significance of Research);
- Chapter 2 (Literature Reviews)
- Chapter 3 (Methodology)
- Chapter 4 (Findings & Discussion)
- Chapter 5 (Conclusion)
- Private Discussion of Chairman, Internal and External Examiners
- The Verdict
Phew, so the bloodbath began! For the whole 3 hours, I couldn’t move my ass as the examiners took turn to ask for clarifications and answers. As I was the focus of the session, it would be unprofessional to “excuse myself to the toilet” or even moved my face away from the screen! So for 3 hours, I weathered the questions back-to-back while glancing over my watch! As gist, these were the comments by all the two Internal Examiners (Prof Jusang Bolong & Prof. Madya Dr. Akmar) and External Examiner (Prof. Dedy Mulyana) :-
For my Abstract & Chapter 1 (Introduction):-
- Abstract should be written only in a single paragraph as per UPM’s template.
- Problem Statement : Integrate the disadvantage of using other theories other than Neo-Aristotelian; And why did I chose only to concentrate on Logos and not Ethos & Pathos?; Why did I this time frame from 2004-2018?
- The wording of Research Objectives by using “To Identify” is very quantitative-based. Avoid using that as rhetorical analysis is interpretive. Therefore, the Research Objectives can be moulded into – “To understand the nature of Mahathir’s inventio” instead of “To identify Mahathir’s application of inventio”;
- Why did Pronuntiatio is decided not to be discussed?
- Since I used Purposive Sampling as my method of data collection, I have to mention it briefly in Chapter 1;
- Include Definition of Keywords in Chapter 1
- Avoid using “will be.” This research has already been conducted and therefore the wording must be in Past Tense.
- Used No.1 and No.2 in the numbering of Research Questions – not the alphabets
- Where are the Introduction subpoints in the Contents list?
- Limitation – should be in Chapter 5 : Add the arguments on why Pronuntiatio is excluded
- Scope and Significance of Research : As a teacher, what is the POV as a teacher? How students are to benefit from this research?
For my Chapter 2 (Literature Reviews):-
- In Page 33 on the section of Published Studies Relevant to the Research : more in-depth of the research – what methods, theories they applied?
- Dispositio and Elocutio : what were the findings of past studies related to these unit of analyses?
- Definition of terminologies should be included in Chapter 1
- Literature review is the comparison and synthesis of the concept – how did you relate that with your research?
For my Chapter 3 (Methodology):-
- Citations are outdated. We need current citations to reflect the relevance of the methodology
- Where is the title “Research Design”?
- Be specific in the preamble that this research is applying Purposive Sampling with System Searching Strategy as refinement (Identification-Screening-Eligibility)
- Audit Trail : elaborate why decided to implement this qualitative approach to increase reliability of data
- Claim the stance vividly. The thesis mentioned that selection of speaker is based on affinity or antipathy. So why Mahathir was chosen? Based on affinity or antipathy? Explain the background reading conducted on materials that are both Pro & Anti Mahathir to neutralize the lens
- Why the criteria of artifacts (subjects) contained “wholly / partially” issues on Malay Hegemony?
- Add another column in the table of Speech Contents – duration of videos, url of videos
- Process of transcribing the videos and way coders validated the contents of videos (highlight the The 5 Phase Coder Training)
For my Chapter 4 (Findings and Discussions):-
- Bold the different elements of unit of analyses (logos Vs dispositio Vs elocutio) if the same speech excerpt containing all these
- Highlight personal stance on the findings prior to Chapter 5
- McCroskey died in 2012. How can the citation was typed as 2015?
For my Chapter 5 (Conclusion, Limitation & Implication):-
- Chapter 5 is your chapter. It is a disappointment that the chapter only consist 20 pages whereas THIS IS YOUR OWN CHAPTER where everything you have garnered as a philosophical doctor should be outpoured in this chapter. The existing content is satisfactory but expected more from you
- Limitation : Extensive and should encompass the significance
- Contribution in Theoretical perspective: make comparison between this classic theory Vs the contemporary theories so that the argument on why this classic theory was chosen is strengthened
- Contribution in Methodological perspective: highlight that you have adopted Audit Trail and Holsti’s Intercoder Reliability to empower the Foss’ Criteria for Adequacy in Rhetorical Criticism in the section of “Reliability and Validity in Rhetorical Criticism.”
- Recommendation : Perhaps any other theories or methods to study the abstracts?
- The thesis margin needs to be PAID ATTENTION!
- References are OK but make sure the citation dates are correct
As you can tell, the session was saturated with a lot of corrections. I have to confess that I was overwhelmed. But the examiners ensured me that they would be sending Dr. Sharifah Sofea’s report on the lists of the correction. So, after the gruesome 3 hours; they isolated me and my supervisors to the Breakout Room. I was so touched that the three of them (Prof Muati, Dr. Moniza and Dr. Hamisah) were still there. So we chit-chatted while waiting for the verdict – Dr. Hamisah was actually about to cook for her Iftar while Prof Muati was attending this important State Secretariat meeting! Jazakallahu khayr!
Working on the presentation slides although I was feeling feverish that moment – at Shah Alam’s Mardhiyyah Hotel and Concorde Hotel. I love these two hotels as they exude the Malay Muslim Hospitality. And the Blue Mosque view – that was a spiritual placebo for me.
Once we were back in common Zoom platform, the Chairman explained that they had achieved consensus and that the title of my research would be slightly modified into: “Mahathir’s Rhetorics During Political Hiatus” – omitting the “A Rhetorical Analysis” since UPM discouraged that practice. And then :-
“Based on the three hours viva vocea and the private discussions we had during intervals – CONGRATULATIONS, DR. SHAHRILL. You’ve passed this viva voce with minor correction.”
The moment I heard the word “Dr. Shahrill”, I wept and cried spontaneously!! It wasn’t the tears of “Yes, I’ve made it!” – it’s more of “Is this real? All the sleepless nights; all the crying alone sessions; all the feeling of being suffocated but no where to turn to”; As if a big rock was finally lifted – the rock I’ve make peace with throughout this journey, patiently shouldering it and no one could see it but me. I was shaking and my tears unabashedly went down. I guess because they know me since my Master’s Degree days – Dr. Akmar, Dr. Moniza and Dr. Hamisah also had that tears watering their eyes. The supervisors were asked to give speeches. But what really touched me was what Dr. Moniza said:-
We have seen Shahrill’s journey. Initially when he started this PhD journey, clearly he didn’t know anything and had no clue about what he was trying to do. He aimed to study Angelina Jolie’s humanitarian speeches but after that changed to Mahathir’s. But we see his progress. Out of a sudden, his writings becomes better. He won the Third Prize in The National 3 Minutes Thesis and he writes in newspapers. We are all so proud of him.”
Alhamdulillah. It was an unforgettable experience. To be grilled 3 hours and then to receive good news and comments from Supervisors; I was in Cloud 9. But honestly, I know that my journey in this session was eased by my mother’s Doa (she performed Yassin and Taubah Prayer and recited 170 times of Ayatul Kursi) as well as the presence of my supervisors. And I was also lucky to have sets of compassionate Examiners (Internal and External) that are known for their nurturing personas – unlike others who may want to adopt provocative nature. Alhamdulillah, I am thankful for that.
The preparation for the 2.30 slot – 20th June 2023. My viva voce!
So now, I am still waiting for the full report from FBMK as well as to fill up the three forms GS 16A, GS 25A and GS 17. All I can say is – Alhamdulillah; ALLAH SWT is the Greatest! Alhamdulillah!