MyRA, short for the Malaysia Research Assessment Instrument (also written Malaysian Research Evaluation or Malaysian Research Assessment), is the national framework Malaysia’s Ministry of Higher Education uses to evaluate the research performance of the country’s higher education institutions (HEIs). Where the country’s separate SETARA instrument rates teaching and learning quality, MyRA is specifically a research-performance rating, expressed as a 1-to-6-star score, and it is one of the criteria used to determine and maintain Research University status. For research offices, CRIS/RIM administrators, and international collaborators trying to understand how a Malaysian partner institution’s research standing is officially measured, this guide walks through what MyRA covers, how the rating is produced, and how it compares to similar national research-assessment instruments elsewhere.
What MyRA Is and Who Administers It
MyRA was first developed in 2006, originally to support Malaysia’s Research University (RU) agenda: the Ministry of Higher Education needed a standardized instrument to identify which universities were strong enough in research to be designated Research Universities, distinct from the country’s teaching-focused public universities. Since 2014, participation in the annual MyRA assessment exercise has been mandatory for all Malaysian higher education institutions, not only the research universities, though the stakes of the rating differ by institution type.
The rating itself is awarded by the Higher Education Department (Jabatan Pendidikan Tinggi) within Malaysia’s Ministry of Higher Education (Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi, KPT). Individual universities typically run their own internal MyRA coordination and preparation through a research management centre or a KPI/performance-monitoring unit, which collects and submits the data that the ministry’s panel ultimately audits and rates.
What MyRA Actually Measures
MyRA measures research excellence using an Input-Process-Output (IPO) model, extended with Outcome and Impact indicators, applied to what the instrument groups together as RDC&I: Research, Development, Commercialisation and Innovation. In practice this breaks down into the kinds of categories familiar to anyone who has worked with a national research-assessment or CRIS reporting exercise elsewhere:
- Input research funding secured (both government and external/industry grants), research infrastructure and facilities, and the composition and qualifications of research personnel (e.g., the proportion of PhD-qualified academic staff).
- Process how research is governed and managed institutionally: research policy, ethics and integrity oversight, postgraduate supervision structures, and research management systems.
- Output the tangible products of research activity: indexed journal publications and their citation impact, patents filed and granted, postgraduate (particularly PhD) completions, and research-derived products or prototypes.
- Outcome and Impact downstream effects such as commercialisation of research (licensing, spin-offs, industry uptake), societal and economic impact, and international research collaboration and recognition.
Universities submit supporting documentation for each of these components, and the exercise is not purely a desk review of self-reported numbers; it includes a verification stage described below.
The 6-Star Rating Scale and the Audit Process
MyRA results are expressed on a six-level star scale, with 6-Star representing the highest tier of research excellence and standing among Malaysian HEIs, down to 1-Star at the lower end. Under the current MyRA framework, participating institutions go through both a document audit (verification of the data and evidence submitted against each IPO/outcome indicator) and a site audit conducted by a panel of trained auditors, rather than a rating produced from self-reported figures alone. Achieving and retaining a high MyRA star rating, 5- or 6-Star in particular, is treated by Malaysian universities as a significant institutional milestone, and universities that achieve it typically publicize it prominently, since the rating factors into research funding allocation decisions, national and institutional reputation, and, for the designated Research Universities, continued eligibility for RU-tier funding and status.
MyRA and Research University (RU) Status
Malaysia designates a small group of public universities as Research Universities (RU), a tier distinct from the country’s other public universities, with correspondingly different funding expectations and research-output benchmarks. Five universities hold this designation: Universiti Malaya (UM), Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM). MyRA was created specifically to give the Ministry of Higher Education a defensible, standardized basis for identifying and monitoring institutions at this level, and the instrument’s IPO/outcome framework still mirrors the kind of research-intensity indicators (postgraduate completions, grant income, publication and citation output, PhD-qualified staff ratios) that distinguish a research university from a primarily teaching-focused one.
MyRA vs. SETARA: Two Different Ratings
MyRA is frequently mentioned alongside SETARA (the Rating System for Malaysian Higher Education Institutions), and the two are sometimes confused, but they measure different things. SETARA rates teaching and learning quality, curriculum, graduate employability, and student experience, while MyRA rates research performance specifically. A Malaysian university’s public reputation typically rests on both ratings together, but a strong SETARA rating does not imply a strong MyRA rating, or vice versa; a teaching-focused institution can score well on SETARA while carrying a modest MyRA star rating, and a research-intensive university’s MyRA rating says nothing directly about its SETARA standing.
How MyRA Compares to Other National Research-Assessment Instruments
MyRA sits in the same general category as several other countries’ national research-evaluation frameworks, though the mechanics differ. The UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) assesses research outputs, impact case studies, and research environment through expert peer-review panels on a multi-year cycle rather than an annual star rating. France’s HCERES performs a comparable national evaluation role for French research and higher education institutions; see CASRAI’s HCERES guide for a direct point of comparison. Australia’s research-assessment landscape runs through the Australian Tertiary Education Commission’s relationship with the Australian Research Council, covered in CASRAI’s ATEC guide. What distinguishes MyRA from REF and HCERES specifically is its explicit input-process-output-outcome structure and its direct institutional-tier consequence (Research University status), rather than a primarily peer-review-driven, output-centric model. Research offices working across multiple countries’ assessment regimes may also find it useful to compare MyRA’s approach against the reform commitments described in CASRAI’s DORA and CoARA comparison, since responsible-metrics debates over-reliance on publication counts and journal-level metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor apply to MyRA’s output indicators in the same way they apply to any output-heavy national assessment instrument.
Data and Systems Behind MyRA Reporting
Because MyRA output indicators depend heavily on publication and citation data, Malaysian universities preparing MyRA submissions typically draw on the same bibliometric infrastructure used for international rankings and tenure review: Scopus, Web of Science, and increasingly OpenAlex-derived data, cross-referenced against institutional research-information systems. Researcher-level identifiers such as an ORCID iD and a properly maintained Scopus Author ID reduce the disambiguation work involved in compiling accurate output counts for a MyRA submission, the same way they do for any institution-level research-assessment or reporting exercise built on a CRIS/research information system.
Common Questions About MyRA
Is MyRA the same as a university ranking like QS or THE?
No. MyRA is a national government assessment of research performance used for domestic policy purposes: funding, Research University status, and institutional accountability to the Ministry of Higher Education. QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education (THE) are separate, privately run global ranking systems using their own methodologies, and a university’s MyRA star rating and its global ranking position are not directly comparable, even though both are influenced by overlapping research-output data.
How often is MyRA conducted?
MyRA has run as a recurring assessment exercise since 2014, when participation became mandatory for all Malaysian HEIs, with universities submitting data cycle by cycle and periodic document and site audits verifying it.
Do private universities in Malaysia participate in MyRA?
Malaysian private higher education institutions can participate in MyRA, and a number of them have obtained and publicized MyRA star ratings, though the instrument’s original purpose and its tightest institutional consequence, Research University status, is specific to the public university system.
What happens if a university’s MyRA rating drops?
A lower MyRA rating affects an institution’s standing in research-funding allocation decisions and its public research reputation; for the designated Research Universities specifically, sustaining research performance consistent with RU-tier expectations is part of what the rating is designed to monitor over time.
Why This Matters Beyond Malaysia
For international funders, co-investigators, and research-information-system administrators working with Malaysian partner institutions, MyRA is the reference point a Malaysian university itself uses to describe its research standing; it is worth understanding on its own terms rather than assuming it maps directly onto REF, ERA, or a global league table. As with any national research-assessment instrument that leans on output and citation counts, the same responsible-metrics caveats that apply to journal-level indicators generally apply to how MyRA output data should and should not be used in isolation.
