FREE DAILY EMAIL

Date : 15/09/2004
Source: Ministry of Education
Title: M Surty: Qualification Africa 2004 Conference


KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF EDUCATION, MR ME SURTY, MP, AT THE QUALIFICATION AFRICA 2004: THINKING AND DOING EDUCATION AND TRAINING ANEW, Gallagher Estate, Midrand, 15 September 2004

The SAQA Chairperson, Dr Nkomo,
The German Ambassador, His Excellency Mr Adt,
The German Qualifications Federation, represented by Mr Reuter,
The SAQA Executive Officer, Mr Isaacs,
Various other dignitaries,
Honourable guests and participants in the Qualification Africa 2004 conference.

It is my privilege to address you at this important juncture in South African history. Since 1994 government has been committed to correcting many of the imbalances that have originated from the pre-1994 dispensation - education and training have not remained untouched. Under the guidance of Minister Bhengu the first brave steps were taken. These steps included a major overhaul of the schooling curriculum and the promulgation of numerous acts and regulations. One such act that is most relevant to this conference is the South African Qualifications Authority Act that was promulgated in 1995.

The SAQA Act set the stage for the development and implementation of a National Qualifications Framework in South Africa. It gave hope to our people, who were denied access to formal learning - that their life experiences and informal learning achievements would be recognised - that their knowledge would have potency in the qualifications framework and would be assigned its rightful value; alongside other forms of knowledge.

It is therefore no surprise that our National Qualifications Framework, the NQF, its architecture and purpose are the subject of intense and ongoing debate and review. The structure of the NQF was much deliberated prior to the SAQA Act, mainly from within the labour movements that so vehemently opposed the actions of the apartheid regime, but also by the much wider education and training community. The NQF was indeed one of the first signs that the ANC government was taking education and training seriously, moreover "thinking and doing education and training anew".

From 1999 Minister Asmal continued this assault on the legacies of the previous dispensation - most notably with the streamlining of the higher education landscape. It was also under the guidance of Minister Asmal that significant attention was given to NQF implementation. Two interventions stand out: (1) in 2002 a Study Team was appointed to recommend ways in which the South African NQF could be streamlined and accelerated; (2) in 2003 an Inter-departmental Task Team was appointed to prepare a joint statement on behalf of the Departments of Education and Labour.

In May of this year, Minister Pandor took over the reigns of this important Ministry from Professor Asmal. Despite being inundated by numerous pressing concerns, it was possible to release another relevant discussion document as early as June of this year, The Draft Higher Education Qualifications Framework. NQF stakeholders and partners, including each of you as participants in the Qualification Africa 2004 conference, are urged to once again take the opportunity to participate in NQF development and implementation by submitting comments on this document.

Our ten years of democracy have included seven years of NQF development and implementation. At times we have been impatient with the slow progress, yet when we look at similar initiatives across the globe, we can stand unashamed, we have indeed made significant progress. As we speak, many other countries, even those that have undertaken similar initiatives for much longer periods, are studying NQF development and implementation in South Africa. The attendance of representatives from numerous SADC countries, Germany, Ireland and Scotland at this Qualification Africa 2004 conference is but one example of the interest shown by the international community. In my opinion, South Africa has set an international benchmark to think and do education and training in a new way, a way that is most suitable to modern societies the world over, and a way that is paved by NQF development and implementation.

On behalf of the government of South Africa, and in particular the Department of Education I reaffirm our commitment to NQF development and implementation, including the speedy resolution to various areas of contestation that have negatively impacted on NQF implementation in recent months and even years. With the Department of Labour, SAQA and the numerous other bodies and role-players the time is opportune to once again show the international community that we, as South Africans, are able to take hands and even against the greatest of odds, successfully complete that which we set out to do.

Having said this, I wish to use the remainder of the time allocated to me to raise ten focus areas that, in my opinion, will be key to thinking and doing education and training anew over the next five years, and maybe even into the next ten years of our democracy. Looking at the list of topics that will be covered in the next two days I do note, that many, if not all, of these focus areas are indeed being debated by participants - I hope that some of the thoughts that I raise today will contribute to your discussions.

Focus area 1: Embracing constructive change

Together with the majority of NQF stakeholders and partners, the Department acknowledges that changes to the current NQF architecture are imminent. An important factor in thinking anew about education and training will revolve around the nature and extent of these changes to the NQF. As noted by our Irish colleague, Professor Gary Granville, at the opening ceremony to this conference held last night, to say that we have had five or even seven years to implement the NQF is not an indictment of the rate of progress of NQF implementation:

On the contrary, five years is hardly enough time to understand a simple and restricted framework, let alone to bring to fruition the comprehensive and all embracing South African model.

Today we as South Africans can look back, and confidently say that without any doubt the NQF has been instrumental in redressing the imbalances created by the pre-apartheid education and training system - we have achieved much in a very short period of time. However, numerous challenges still lie ahead, which require a strong leadership role amongst all the constituencies that are collectively responsible for the implementation of the NQF. In this regard, the Department of Education, together with the Department of Labour, lead the way for future NQF implementation - and will continue doing so in future. The success of a major framework such as our NQF requires collaboration at all levels of implementation, and I trust that all of us will diligently attend to our respective mandates in a manner that benefits the people of this country.

The current state of flux caused mainly by the delays in resolution to the Study Team Report and the Consultative Document will soon be something of the past. The complexities of our NQF, and the promotion of democratic principles of consultation and discussion, have collectively resulted in these delays. The delays could not have been avoided - simply because of the continued commitment by government to have an integrated qualifications framework that brings together different forms of learning under one roof, which is a mammoth task as most of you would know.

Today I would like to reiterate government's commitment to putting an end to the NQF review process. The Ministers of Education and Labour will announce the outcomes of the extensive consultation processes that began with the Study Team Report, followed by the Consultative Document - both of which attracted numerous responses from the education and training constituencies and the general public.

Together with the Department of Labour, SAQA and other role-players we will have to embrace the changes to the NQF, not because they suit our own agendas, but because they are to the benefit of the South African education and training system. The overwhelming commentary that the two Departments normally receive on matters of the NQF is humbling - and is an indication of the commitment that the people of South Africa have demonstrated in the transformation of the education and training system of this country.

Focus area 2: Purposes and expectations of the NQF

It is fair to say that unrealistic expectations of the NQF have abounded. Both government and stakeholders have from time to time laid the responsibility for the slow pace of transformation at the door of the NQF, as noted in the Study Team Report on page 66:

Given its origins and scope, many South Africans have justifiably high expectations of the NQF in the transformation of education and training. However, the NQF was never intended to achieve transformation on its own and could not do so. Some South Africans may have looked to the development of the Framework itself... to bring major progress towards access, redress and progression. If so, this may explain their disappointment at the rate of implementation since 1995.

Another important point, also raised in SAQA's Cycle 1 Report of the NQF Impact Study, needs to be noted: the NQF, in its current or revised form, cannot be seen in isolation from other national policies and initiatives - this overemphasis on what NQFs can achieve in isolation from other initiatives form part of an international trend to use qualifications as drivers of educational reform, as stated in the Cycle 1 Report on page 27:

The government must make explicit what the NQF is expected to achieve and the purposes for which it will be used. A democratically elected government is entitled to use qualifications for the purpose of accountability if it so chooses. However, it should make transparent what these purposes are and open up the possibility of debate on potential conflict between particular purposes.

Focus area 3: Leadership and resourcing by government

A major recommendation of the Study Team Report was that the Departments of Education and Labour should assert their leadership of the NQF. The release of the Consultative Document was a step in the right direction but, as many stakeholders have noted in their responses to the Consultative Document, much still needs to be done. Thinking and doing education and training anew is going to require the Departments to firstly come to agreement on various contested issues, and secondly to use these agreements to develop a common strategy for NQF implementation that will give the guidance that has, until recent, been lacking.

The resourcing of the NQF is another important focus area that is vital to education and training. Donor funding has featured prominently in various aspects of NQF implementation and this trend needs to be reversed for the sake of sustainability. The Department has taken note of both these concerns and continually seeks to find alternative funding mechanisms that enable NQF implementation structures to remain viable and sustainable.

Focus area 4: Stakeholder participation

NQF development and implementation has been characterised by extensive stakeholder participation. As noted by the SAQA Chairperson and Executive Officer in 2003, the extensive consultation and negotiation have brought perceived benefits as well as perceived disadvantages:

This adherence to the principle of transparency of development and operation has ensured that SAQA is perceived as a trustworthy organisation. However, it has also been cited as the major cause of what has been termed by some as "implementation at a snail's pace".

Despite being aware of the delaying effect brought about by extensive stakeholder participation, the Department has encouraged stakeholders to comment on both the Study Team Report and the Consultative Document and most recently the Draft Higher Education Qualifications Framework document. The delays have indeed been much too long; even so, but the end of the review process is quite close

Focus area 5: Conceptualisation of integration

Another key focus area to thinking and doing education anew is not new at all. Since initial discussions around NQF implementation in the early 1990s, debates about the integration of education and training have consistently surfaced. Initial attempts to create a single Ministry of Education and Training never materialised and were eventually replaced with an integrated approach to education and training overseen by the current two Departments of Education and Labour.

The Ministers of Education and Labour are agreed on the conceptualisation of integration and will further explore and debate the detail in much more depth. If integration refers to closer links between workplace-based or institutional learning, theory and practice, knowledge and skills, we need to take notice and remain in touch with similar international trends. It is agreed that the unnecessary creation of a divide between the two modes of learning must be avoided at all cost. Education and training must complement each other and the institutions of learning must be available and accessible to achieve this integration

Focus area 6: Primacy of the NQF objectives

The objectives of the NQF have consistently formed a fixed anchorage during NQF development and implementation. As recent as June of this year, Minister Pandor made the statement that the Higher Education Qualifications Framework Policy should 'advance the objectives of the NQF'. Various other examples can also be mentioned.

The Department reasserts its commitment to the NQF objectives and suggests that these objectives form, and will form, a vital part of thinking and doing education and training anew in South Africa. The five NQF objectives are to:

1. create an integrated national framework for learning achievements;
2. facilitate access to and mobility and progression within education, training and career paths;
3. enhance the quality of education and training;
4. accelerate the redress of past unfair discrimination in education, training and employment opportunities;
5. contribute to the full personal development of each learner and the social and economic development of the nation at large.

Focus areas 7: Harmonisation of qualifications in SADC, Africa and beyond

Through the leadership of our president, Mr. Mbeki, South Africa has become an important role-player on the African continent, and indeed, in the world. Alignment between NEPAD, various SADC policies and initiatives, and education and training within South Africa has become increasingly important. A few years ago such alignment may have been regarded as a 'nice to have', today it has become a necessity.

The harmonisation of qualifications between SADC countries through the proposed Regional Qualifications Framework is a worthwhile initiative that should be supported by all of us. From our own experience in South Africa we have learnt that affecting such large-scale changes is fraught with difficulties, but is not insurmountable. Through research, conferences such as Qualification Africa 2004, and continual engagement between role-players in the SADC countries and beyond, a Regional Qualifications Framework may very well be within our reach in the years to come.

Focus area 8: Credit transfer and RPL

The NQF has improved the transfer of credits between institutions across the wide spectrum of education and training in South Africa. Yet, much still needs to be done in ensuring that the recognition of prior learning principle actually works for the people for whom it was designed. The Department is of the opinion that credit transfer should remain an important factor when considering changes to education and training, to the point that similar Credit Accumulation Transfer or CAT systems that have been successfully implemented over much of the European Union, particularly the United Kingdom, should be scrutinised to see what we can learn from them.

Similarly, it is important that the awarding of credits, through the Recognition of Prior Learning remains an important feature of NQF implementation. RPL has, in various sectors, most notably the construction sector, proven to be a cost effective method to empower previously disadvantaged individuals. The time has come to encourage education and training providers to offer RPL and remove the barriers that are limiting RPL implementation.

Focus area 9: Minimising negative power manifestations

If we are serious about thinking "anew" about education and training, we also need to acknowledge that NQF implementation has not been an easy journey to traverse due to diverse interests of the NQF community. Heated debates have occurred that are a result of the firm belief in upholding the principles of the NQF by all parties concerned. Unfortunately, such debates have been misconstrued to mean a whole of a lot of things that they do not mean. I would argue strongly that, in fact, the debates are an indication of a healthy democracy. The debates have assisted in fine-tuning duplications and overlaps in roles and responsibilities of various role players. They have also assisted each constituency to see the world from the eyes of the other.

The debates will continue to even after the NQF review has been completed - the nature of our state simply does not allow otherwise. We would all do well in delivering on our mandates if we use such debates optimally.

Focus area 10: Systemic change through NQFs

The final focus area that is key to thinking and doing education and training anew is linked to my earlier discussion on the purposes and expectations of the NQF. The South African NQF differs from most other NQFs implemented across the world in that it was, and I will argue still is, designed to affect major systemic change. Michael Young refers to such an NQF as "strong", and characterises it as often being regulatory, legislative and used to affect social transformation. On the other hand, Young refers to "weak" frameworks, such as those in Scotland and the United Kingdom, that often describe systems that are already in place, purposing mainly to bring coherence to such existing systems.

The South African NQF is a strong framework that has been developed to bring about significant systemic change, mainly to correct the multitude of imbalances that were left by the apartheid system. Although we may agree that the NQF cannot achieve this in isolation from various other government initiatives, the NQF has been chosen by government as the key vehicle through which systemic change will be achieved.

In conclusion, I would like to call upon all of us to take our mandates seriously - rethink the way that we collaborate "anew" and I can almost guarantee that the answers to critical concerns will be soon discovered. What appeared as major obstacles in the implementation of the NQF may actually be challenges that require us to "think anew". It is not just the education and training system that needs to be thought anew, but also the way we live, work and respond to the demands of the changing society.

I trust that you will challenge yourselves into thinking "anew" as you journey through your conference - and I wish you the best in your deliberations.

Thank you.

Issued by: Ministry of Education
15 September 2004

SPONSORED BY

Advanced