Purpose -An important aspect of an academic curriculum in higher learning institutions for technical disciplines is the industrial internship programme for students. The purpose of this paper is to investigate students' perception of the effectiveness of an industrial internship programme offered by a private technological university in Malaysia. Design/methodology/approach -Utilising a case study approach, the data for this study were collected though a survey questionnaire. The questionnaire gauged students' perception of their eight-month internship programme. Findings -The students rated the industrial internship programme favorably. Generally, students viewed the learning through practical experience during the internship positively. In addition, factors related to the organisers' operational and administrative efforts and the role played by the host company were also identified as important in determining the success of the industrial internship programme. Originality/value -Industrial internship programmes in respective universities vary according to various needs. By sharing the findings in this case study, other institutions with similar or different industrial internship programmes can benefit from the information discussed in this paper.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this paper I explore the notion of reflexivity in two main domains. In the first, I explore my struggles as a trained objective, positivist researcher trying to embrace and appreciate subjective qualitative research practices. In the second section, I explore the dynamic relationship between myself, the researcher and my participants, focusing on issues related to ethnicity and power. Generally, research that explores ethnicity and power relationships commonly depicts the researcher as the privileged self compared with the participants as the marginalised other. However, in this paper I illustrate how this relationship in a multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual research context is much more complex and multifaceted than usually acknowledged. Moreover, this was further complicated by the researcher’s own experience in relation to the issue under investigation, which was different from that of the participants.