Date: 30/09/2004
Source: Ministry of Education
Title: N Pandor: Africa Dialogue Lecture
AFRICA DIALOGUE LECTURE BY THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION, N PANDOR, MP, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL STUDIES, University of Pretoria, 30 September 2004
THE STATE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN SOUTH AFRICA
Professor Hussein Solomon
Staff and students
It is a pleasure to present a lecture in this series at the Centre. Before I set out the challenges we face, allow me to confirm a sense of confidence in the sector in that the difficulties are not insurmountable. It is also important to state that there are several institutions doing excellent work in teaching, research and innovation. However, even in the face of these acknowledged positive attributes there are matters we must attend to.
It is helpful to begin by putting the problems we face in higher education into perspective. First, over the past 10 years we have created 1.6 million jobs. That is a phenomenal achievement for a country of our size and population at this particular time. Yet while we have created jobs, we have not created enough jobs to cope with the number of persons coming on to the labour market. Second, in common with a number of other middle-income developing countries our economy has shown a growth in demand for intermediate and high skills at the expense of the unskilled. Third, we are also beginning to see the phenomenon of graduate unemployment. This growth has expanded since 1995 (from 6% to 15%) and most of it is unemployment of African graduates.
This poses a very difficult set of problems for education and for South Africa. There is a mismatch between the education our graduates are receiving and the jobs that are available to them in the economy. At the same time there is also a mismatch between the training that is available to those school leavers who do not move on into higher education and the demand for skills in the economy.
Each year about 15% of our school leavers go on into higher education, another 10% or so find learnerships, and the remaining 80% swell the ranks of the unemployed and/or remain at home.
It is a national imperative to build a skills staircase from schools through further education and into higher education.
What can we do to improve the system? We must consolidate on the gains that we have made in equity, redress and responsiveness within the system over the past ten years.
Mergers
In higher education, we have begun to do this by developing policies aimed at cracking the mould of the apartheid higher education institutional system through our merger processes and the national plan for higher education. A considerable amount of time and energy has been devoted to this process. The process is on track and problems are being worked through.
Overall expenditure on higher education has increased from R4.8 billion in 1994 to just under R10 billion in the 2004/2005 financial year. In the context of our objectives for human resource development, the policies and plans for higher education are beginning to have the desired results. Access to higher education for women in general and for Africans in particular has improved significantly.
However, financial exclusion still remains the biggest challenge for poor students. NSFAS resources are limited and students can only access funds once they are registered at an institution, and the poor usually do not even have the minimum of funds required to register.
We must determine solutions to the ongoing financial exclusions, because continuing exclusion on these grounds is contrary to our aspiration of increased success, a larger pool of skilled persons in South Africa, and genuine equality of opportunity. Over the next five years we will continue to give attention to the need to ensure accessibility to higher education for the poor.
We have invested significantly in the reconfiguration of higher education institutions to suit the needs of a democratic society and these efforts must be continued. Institutions will have to reshape schools and faculties in order to ensure that we are organised to offer differentiated programmes that allow for diversity of skills and for improved innovation and creativity.
In order to ensure that the merger process achieves the desired ends, the Department has established a Merger Unit. Its role is to oversee, support and monitor the process, including the provision of technical and financial support to the affected institutions. The Unit consists of a core group of staff with expertise in a range of key functional areas that would need to be addressed during the implementation process (e.g., financial, legal, human resources and labour matters, academic and student issues and governance, ICT etc).
A comprehensive set of guidelines was produced by the Merger Unit in April 2003 to assist the institutions in identifying the key elements, steps and processes that they would have to deal with on the way to creating new institutions, including the criteria and processes to access financial sustainability.
The higher education plan provides for mergers, incorporations, and the establishment of comprehensive institutions. We have also developed a concept document on comprehensive institutions to enable institutions that offer a combination of technikon and university programmes to think through the key issues and challenges that arise in developing an appropriate academic and organisational model. Both documents have been received with considerable interest by the institutions.
At the institutional level, interactions and meetings between institutional managers and task teams and the Merger Unit have been ongoing. A series of on-site institutional visits have been conducted and workshops hosted to address particular merger-related issues, for example, on academic planning, student governance and participation, human resources planning. The Merger Unit has also been instrumental in monitoring the merger process, particularly, to ensure that the process is inclusive and participatory.
Another key mechanism to support and monitor the merger process has been the establishment of the Ministerial Reference Group. Its role is to monitor institutions as they progress through the merger process, and, in particular, to ensure that due regard is given to the central principles underpinning the restructuring and transformation agenda, and that all stakeholder groups remain informed and consulted.
In terms of merger progress, most institutions during the pre-merger phase focused on technical, administrative and management/ governance aspects of integration, which is a necessary first step towards full and substantive integration. Issues of equity have been addressed, for the most part, in the appointment of the interim management. Nevertheless, while the mergers have in numerical terms enhanced equity, clearly much more work needs to be done to ensure adequate representivity in all areas of institutional structures and functions.
With regard to enhanced access, where institutions have had existing academic development programmes these have been retained with the focus now on how best to strengthen these given the consolidation of resources. Where such programmes were previously not available, these have in some cases been introduced. For example, the University of the Free State extended its Career Preparation Programme to the Qwa Qwa campus, which it incorporated in 2003.
New funding formula
A new funding framework that promotes greater effectiveness and efficiency in meeting policy goals is now in place.
There are three key things to note about the new funding formula.
First, in the past the universities and the technikons were funded differentially, and the differentiation mainly took place in relation to staff salaries on the argument that university staff were trained to undertake research while technikon staff were not. In addition, on the same argument technikons did not have access to research funds. Under the new funding formula this is no longer the case. So the first thing the new funding formula has done is to redistribute resources from the universities to the technikons.
Second, the new funding formula provides that future research funding is based on research outcomes, but for a transitional period (3 years) we are not going to apply this part of the formula. So there is a gap between where we are at the moment and where we should be in three years. I should add that the new formula still benefits the larger institutions because at the moment they conduct most, if not all, the research.
Third, we are not seeing a growth in available resources, so we have to do more with less and do it well. This means a very rigorous examination of funds and budgeting by institutions.
As I said in my budget speech,
Source: Ministry of Education
Title: N Pandor: Africa Dialogue Lecture
AFRICA DIALOGUE LECTURE BY THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION, N PANDOR, MP, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL STUDIES, University of Pretoria, 30 September 2004
THE STATE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN SOUTH AFRICA
Professor Hussein Solomon
Staff and students
It is a pleasure to present a lecture in this series at the Centre. Before I set out the challenges we face, allow me to confirm a sense of confidence in the sector in that the difficulties are not insurmountable. It is also important to state that there are several institutions doing excellent work in teaching, research and innovation. However, even in the face of these acknowledged positive attributes there are matters we must attend to.
It is helpful to begin by putting the problems we face in higher education into perspective. First, over the past 10 years we have created 1.6 million jobs. That is a phenomenal achievement for a country of our size and population at this particular time. Yet while we have created jobs, we have not created enough jobs to cope with the number of persons coming on to the labour market. Second, in common with a number of other middle-income developing countries our economy has shown a growth in demand for intermediate and high skills at the expense of the unskilled. Third, we are also beginning to see the phenomenon of graduate unemployment. This growth has expanded since 1995 (from 6% to 15%) and most of it is unemployment of African graduates.
This poses a very difficult set of problems for education and for South Africa. There is a mismatch between the education our graduates are receiving and the jobs that are available to them in the economy. At the same time there is also a mismatch between the training that is available to those school leavers who do not move on into higher education and the demand for skills in the economy.
Each year about 15% of our school leavers go on into higher education, another 10% or so find learnerships, and the remaining 80% swell the ranks of the unemployed and/or remain at home.
It is a national imperative to build a skills staircase from schools through further education and into higher education.
What can we do to improve the system? We must consolidate on the gains that we have made in equity, redress and responsiveness within the system over the past ten years.
Mergers
In higher education, we have begun to do this by developing policies aimed at cracking the mould of the apartheid higher education institutional system through our merger processes and the national plan for higher education. A considerable amount of time and energy has been devoted to this process. The process is on track and problems are being worked through.
Overall expenditure on higher education has increased from R4.8 billion in 1994 to just under R10 billion in the 2004/2005 financial year. In the context of our objectives for human resource development, the policies and plans for higher education are beginning to have the desired results. Access to higher education for women in general and for Africans in particular has improved significantly.
However, financial exclusion still remains the biggest challenge for poor students. NSFAS resources are limited and students can only access funds once they are registered at an institution, and the poor usually do not even have the minimum of funds required to register.
We must determine solutions to the ongoing financial exclusions, because continuing exclusion on these grounds is contrary to our aspiration of increased success, a larger pool of skilled persons in South Africa, and genuine equality of opportunity. Over the next five years we will continue to give attention to the need to ensure accessibility to higher education for the poor.
We have invested significantly in the reconfiguration of higher education institutions to suit the needs of a democratic society and these efforts must be continued. Institutions will have to reshape schools and faculties in order to ensure that we are organised to offer differentiated programmes that allow for diversity of skills and for improved innovation and creativity.
In order to ensure that the merger process achieves the desired ends, the Department has established a Merger Unit. Its role is to oversee, support and monitor the process, including the provision of technical and financial support to the affected institutions. The Unit consists of a core group of staff with expertise in a range of key functional areas that would need to be addressed during the implementation process (e.g., financial, legal, human resources and labour matters, academic and student issues and governance, ICT etc).
A comprehensive set of guidelines was produced by the Merger Unit in April 2003 to assist the institutions in identifying the key elements, steps and processes that they would have to deal with on the way to creating new institutions, including the criteria and processes to access financial sustainability.
The higher education plan provides for mergers, incorporations, and the establishment of comprehensive institutions. We have also developed a concept document on comprehensive institutions to enable institutions that offer a combination of technikon and university programmes to think through the key issues and challenges that arise in developing an appropriate academic and organisational model. Both documents have been received with considerable interest by the institutions.
At the institutional level, interactions and meetings between institutional managers and task teams and the Merger Unit have been ongoing. A series of on-site institutional visits have been conducted and workshops hosted to address particular merger-related issues, for example, on academic planning, student governance and participation, human resources planning. The Merger Unit has also been instrumental in monitoring the merger process, particularly, to ensure that the process is inclusive and participatory.
Another key mechanism to support and monitor the merger process has been the establishment of the Ministerial Reference Group. Its role is to monitor institutions as they progress through the merger process, and, in particular, to ensure that due regard is given to the central principles underpinning the restructuring and transformation agenda, and that all stakeholder groups remain informed and consulted.
In terms of merger progress, most institutions during the pre-merger phase focused on technical, administrative and management/ governance aspects of integration, which is a necessary first step towards full and substantive integration. Issues of equity have been addressed, for the most part, in the appointment of the interim management. Nevertheless, while the mergers have in numerical terms enhanced equity, clearly much more work needs to be done to ensure adequate representivity in all areas of institutional structures and functions.
With regard to enhanced access, where institutions have had existing academic development programmes these have been retained with the focus now on how best to strengthen these given the consolidation of resources. Where such programmes were previously not available, these have in some cases been introduced. For example, the University of the Free State extended its Career Preparation Programme to the Qwa Qwa campus, which it incorporated in 2003.
New funding formula
A new funding framework that promotes greater effectiveness and efficiency in meeting policy goals is now in place.
There are three key things to note about the new funding formula.
First, in the past the universities and the technikons were funded differentially, and the differentiation mainly took place in relation to staff salaries on the argument that university staff were trained to undertake research while technikon staff were not. In addition, on the same argument technikons did not have access to research funds. Under the new funding formula this is no longer the case. So the first thing the new funding formula has done is to redistribute resources from the universities to the technikons.
Second, the new funding formula provides that future research funding is based on research outcomes, but for a transitional period (3 years) we are not going to apply this part of the formula. So there is a gap between where we are at the moment and where we should be in three years. I should add that the new formula still benefits the larger institutions because at the moment they conduct most, if not all, the research.
Third, we are not seeing a growth in available resources, so we have to do more with less and do it well. This means a very rigorous examination of funds and budgeting by institutions.
As I said in my budget speech,
Advertisement
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE FEEDBACK
To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here
