Proceedings of the Colloquium on Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)

for the upgrading and up-skillingof teachers in South Africa

educationDepartment:EducationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

DISCLAIMER

Views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) or the South African Department of Education (DoE) .

COPYRIGHT

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, in photocopy or recording form or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA).

Edited by Dr Heidi Bolton, Professor Ian Moll, and Dr Jeffy Mukora

Compiled by SAQA's Research Directorate, and the Directorate: Strategic Support, SAQA. Distributed by the Directorate: Strategic Support, SAQA .

Publication Date: September 2010ISBN: 978-0-9802748-8-2

Postnet Suite 248Private Bag X06Waterkloof0145

Helpdesk: 086 010 3188Facsimile: 012 431-5039Website: www.saqa.org.zaE-mail: saqainfo@saqa.org.za

Foreword by the Director-General of Education

Message from the Chief Executive Officer of SAQA

Recognition of Prior Learning in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers: introductory notesProfessor Ian Moll, University of the Witwatersrand

A history of RPL in South Africa Dr Jeffy Mukora, South African Qualifications Authority

Specialised pedagogy: a comparative review of RPL practices in formal, non-formal and occupational learning contexts in South AfricaAlan Ralphs, University of the Western Cape

Epistemological and pedagogical issues in RPL in teacher upgrading Dr Mignonne Breier, Human Sciences Research Council

Work-integrated learning and RPL in programmes for serving teachersProfessor Terry Volbrecht, Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Managing RPL in institutions Dr Elizabeth Smith, University of South Africa

Proposals for the up-skilling of different categories of un(der)qualified educatorsTask Team 5 of the Occupation-Specific Dispensation

ConclusionsProfessor Ian Moll, University of the Witwatersrand

Acronyms and abbreviations

(ii)

(iii)

1

11

27

37

58

76

95

118

124

(i)

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is an issue that has been highlighted

in the recent negotiations around the Occupation-Specific

Dispensation (OSD) agreements. It is particularly important when we

consider the number of teachers in the system with historical

qualifications that do not meet the desired level of Relative Education

Qualification Value (REQV) 14. How do we develop processes to

recognise learning that these teachers have acquired through their experiences over many years of teaching?

This problem was highlighted in the work of the OSD Task Team 5 in 2008. The RPL Colloquium, the proceedings

of which are recorded in this publication, was a response to the need to consider how these issues could be

dealt with at a systemic level.

The Department of Education (DoE) in collaboration with the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA)

hosted the Colloquium, which involved participants from a range of stakeholders including departmental

officials, Higher Education institutions and teachers' unions. The different RPL perspectives presented clearly

illuminate the fact that successful implementation of RPL is complex and difficult, and that 'upgrading' of

educators should be understood as both access and redress issues. The urgency to provide redress for long-

serving teachers in the system should not interfere with the need for high-quality access to new knowledge and

skills for those teachers who still have a number of years to serve in the system. In principle, RPL is desirable, but

if implemented without careful consideration of appropriate approaches for different groups of teachers, it will

not be beneficial either for the teachers involved or for the system as a whole.

I believe the Colloquium and this publication are important contributions and valuable resources for the

development of an RPL strategy for teacher education. I would like to thank the research team for their

provocative presentations, and all the participants for their valuable contributions.

Duncan Hindle

Director-General: Department of Education

2008

Forewordby the Director-General of Education

(ii)

The Colloquium on the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) for the

upgrading and up-skilling of teachers in South Africa was held at the th thKopanong Conference Centre in Benoni on the 10 and 11 December

2008. It was facilitated bythe Research Directorate of the South African

Qualifications Authority (SAQA) in partnership with the Department of

Education (DoE).

Why is upgrading and up-skilling of school-based teachers through RPL important?

RPL is one of the key principles of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) in South Africa. It has potential

to address some of the more subtle aspects of certain work-related injustices inherited from apartheid. Firstly,

it is meant to recognise skills that have traditionally been ignored or undervalued. A related feature is that the

competency-based approach aligned to the NQF offers opportunities for prior learning not developed within

formal provisions, but rather through life or work experience, to be recognised and acknowledged.

In terms of school-based teachers, there is a need to upgrade or up-skill teachers to satisfy the minimum

requirements of 'Matric plus four years' (M+4) or Relative Education Qualification Value (REQV) 14, according

to the Collective Agreements Nos. 1 and 2 of 2008 in the Framework for the Establishment of an Occupation-

Specific Dispensation for educators in public education. Currently the minimum qualification requirement for

qualified teachers is set at REQV 13. However in terms of the Agreement, this norm is set to move to REQV 14.

This shift has led to the need for up-skilling or upgrading.

The two-day Colloquium brought together experts in RPL with the aim of examining alternative up-skilling

routes. The discussions that took place will go a long way towards identifying suitable up-grading routes for

school-based teachers below the required REQV 14 level.

We trust that the papers in this book will stimulate further debate and increase understanding of the role of RPL

in teacher education: our warm appreciation to the participants.

Samuel BA Isaacs

Chief Executive Officer, SAQA

2008

(iii)

Messagefrom the Chief Executive Officer of SAQA

(iv)

1. Introduction

Four kinds of stories are often told about teachers who acquire experience on the job - in the classroom - that takes them beyond the qualifications they have obtained in the past. An example of the first kind of story is that of the wise, older teacher in a primary school - perhaps in a rural village or local township neighbourhood - who has become a trusted educator of young children, and is looked up to by parents for her wisdom. She has stature in the community. She taught many of the parents herself. An example of the second kind of story is about a younger teacher trained in learning areas less in demand these days than was previously the case - areas such as Afrikaans and Biblical Studies - but who for the past six or so years has been teaching learning areas now more in demand such as Mathematics in Intermediate and Senior Phase (Grades 4-7) classrooms. She has 'taught herself' the skills of Mathematics, gone out of her way to find the people, books and classroom resources that have made her relatively successful at her task, and is now a recognised Maths teacher.

An example of the third kind of story is that of a person trained in some field other than teaching - say as an accountant or bookkeeper - who one day agreed to help out at a school because his skills were so desperately needed. He has been there ever since, gradually acquiring pedagogic knowledge in which he did not formally train, but which he learned over time by talking to colleagues and from informal study. Lastly, there is the story of the crèche caregiver, who has looked after young children in a community centre for many years. Along the way she has picked up some qualifications from early childhood NGOs, and has become skilled in preparing children for reading and numeracy at school. Now she wants to become a Grade R teacher.

There are certainly teachers out there who have developed in these and other similar ways. Well-known realities mirroring these descriptions highlight the need to find Recognition of Prior

Recognition of Prior Learning in the upgrading andup-skilling of serving teachers: introductory notesProfessor Ian Moll, University of the Witwatersrand

Learning (RPL) processes for teachers in South Africa. At the same time, we must acknowledge that there are other teachers who would today be considered 'under-qualified' or 'unqualified', teachers who did not learn as much on the job as some of their colleagues did. This reality is another big task facing any RPL project for teachers: how to distinguish those who have gone beyond their qualifications, from those who have not.

It was in this context that the Department of Education (DoE) and the South African Qualifi-cations Authority (SAQA) hosted a Colloquium on RPL in the upgrading and up-skilling of teachers in South Africa from 10 - 11 December 2008. The Colloquium consisted in the main of papers delivered by various experts in the field of RPL, ranging from a provocative paper on the history of RPL in South Africa, through theoretical discussion of what focal points would be most appropriate in considering an RPL process related to teaching and learning in the classroom, to a paper on the administrative and bureaucratic measures necessary to implement RPL successfully on a large scale. The contributions were rounded off by a paper delivered by a DoE task team, reflecting on which teachers should be considered for RPL, through what routes, and via which mechanisms.

In addition to these formal contributions, the Colloquium developed valuable discussions regarding different perspectives, interests and social actors in the terrain of RPL. Participants in the Colloquium included academics involved in research and teacher education, who brought critical insights on knowledge - including knowledge of disciplines that underlie learning areas in school and pedagogic knowledge - into the debate. They also included practitioners from teacher training institutions concerned with optimum throughput and delivery in teacher education; policy makers from government, parastatals and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs); and teacher unionists, representing the on-the-ground aspirations and interests of their fellow-members,

1

the teachers themselves. The tensions and different orientations that this audience brought with them contributed significantly to the outcomes of the Colloquium, which were perhaps not as straightforward as it was originally hoped they would be. There was also a remarkable degree of consensus among all participants, particularly in relation to the importance of the school and within it the classroom as the proper locus of any envisaged RPL activities for teachers. We try to represent in this collection points of consensus as well as tensions arising as they played themselves out across the various presentations and informal discussions.

In this introduction, a brief overview and commentary on each of the papers presented in the Colloquium are provided. The main messages for an RPL initiative that focused on teachers are drawn out, and the narrative that emerged across the various sessions is summarised. The introduction then goes on to describe the patterns that emerged in discussions among participants in response to the various inputs. The discussions and emerging patterns were captured in a concept-mapping exercise that took place at the end of the first day and was subsequently developed on the second. The conclusion at the end of this book takes up the various points of consensus and dispute that emerged from the Colloquium, and focuses them on a set of possible future directions for the implementation of RPL in the upgrading and up-skilling of teachers in South Africa.

Dr Jeffy Mukora of SAQA presented a paper in which the comfortable post-apartheid account of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) - that it has been conceived, implemented and developed by the democratic government in South Africa - comes into question. The NQF, and within it the policies and practices of RPL, has been understood to have originated in a progressive initiative on the

2. Comment on the history of RPL presented

part of trade unions and the broad democratic movement, and to recognise and value the subjugated knowledges and expertise of workers and ordinary people under apartheid. However, Mukora suggests that this view is not correct. Instead, he argues that there was much more continuity than rupture between the restructuring initiatives of the apartheid state of the 1980s and moves to integrate education and training by the new African National Congress (ANC) government after 1994.

The textual evidence provided by Mukora is compelling at the level of discourse analysis: where the NQF envisages vertical pathways of development from primary school or Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET), through multiple Further Education and Training (FET) sites, to diplomas, degrees and higher degrees for all learners, the De Lange commission of 1981 had already envisaged much the same reform moves in suggesting a:

... framework within which different types of teaching and learning situations are arranged ... [to make provision for] various educational possibilities as well as for the possibility of both vertical and horizontal flow of pupils through the system (Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) 1981:95, quoted in Mukora 2008).

Where the White Paper on Education (Republic of South Africa 1995:15) envisages the integration of education and development pathways with continuity “between the head and hand”, De Lange had already advocated “an integrated, flexible relationship between formal and non formal education, between school and the world of work, in the context of lifelong continuing education” (HSRC 1981:195, quoted in Mukora 2008).

Perhaps the nub of Mukora's argument is that the socio-economic imperatives faced by the reforming apartheid state at the end of the 1980s, and those faced by the post-apartheid state in the 1990s were

2

so similar as to both requiring something like an NQF - that is, a policy mechanism to integrate education and training. Mukora shows us clearly why, for the sake of rupture with the past, the two sets of envisaged changes had to appear to be very different; but he also shows us that they were indeed very similar in conception.

There was much debate at the Colloquium about Mukora's suggestions. Those who had been in some way or another part of the establishment of the NQF after 1994 insisted that the drivers of change had sought rupture with the past, including reforms of policies associated with the sinking apartheid ship. It was suggested that Mukora had not taken sufficient account of the social and political alliances coming together in the formulation of the NQF, and had therefore misunderstood the radical nature of the socio-economic transformation represented by the new education and training dispensation. Importantly, there was a realisation that the NQF and related interventions like RPL have had instances of success rather than universal success, possibly due to over-specification in assessment regimes and assessment technologies, and challenges linked to implementation.

But what does this mean for consideration of RPL for teachers in the current context? Mukora unfortunately gave us little food for thought on this question. On the progressive construal, it appears that RPL for teachers might be conceived of as a mechanism to overcome injustices of the past, in which teachers trained in the segregated institutions of apartheid were not given full opportunities to develop the range of skills required by critical educators in modern knowledge and information contexts. It would provide a route for teachers hamstrung by limited training programmes awarding two- and three-year diplomas, to upgrade on the basis of their experience, to degree-equivalent status. In Mukora's account however, the suggestion is that RPL might be one of the ways in which teachers previously operating at different levels of an unequal system could be integrated into

a new, more uniform system straddling all education and training institutions. Mukora's is a vision of continuity and the maintenance of traditional education patterns, albeit for all, rather than one of diverse learning pathways in a multiplicity of formal, non-formal and informal learning contexts.

The tension between these views was not resolved; it was carried through the rest of the Colloquium. Should RPL be developed and implemented in such a way so as to legitimise and provide certification of the multiple learning pathways of teachers in all kinds of contexts, pathways not necessarily formal? Or should it seek to recognise and provide a warrant for past developmental practices 'on the job' that have, de facto, allowed teachers to realise substantive formal disciplinary and pedagogic knowledge in them? It was to debates on the nature of knowledge in teacher education, integrating RPL into the work of teachers, and implementing RPL on a large scale that the Colloquium then turned.

Alan Ralphs of the University of the Western Cape (UWC) presented a paper in which he examined the body of experience in RPL, and research into RPL, that has accumulated in South Africa to date. One central lesson learned is that RPL always seems to have built into it a concern with recognising the bases for formal, analytical and conceptual knowledge in the more hybridised practices of everyday life (including the workplace). There is usually a transition and a developmental one at that, in the aims of any RPL intervention: different approaches and 'internal grammars' of practice must be articulated by learners when they are asked to make their past experiences explicit for purposes of RPL assessment. While this articulation may indeed value past, informally-acquired learning, it also requires that this learning be transformed in ways that are consistent with formal learning contexts. In this context, Ralphs noted an important recognition emerging from experience in South Africa:

3. On RPL in practice

3

RPL was clearly not as optimally inclusive a device as had been suggested from the outset. In fact, the indications were that as an evidence-led assessment device, its potential to exacerbate the unequal distribution of knowledge and skills in society was greater than its capacity to redress these imbalances (Ralphs 2008).

The point is that success in RPL tasks requires in the first place, that learners are able to recognise in the task the rules to which they must adhere in order to engage with it successfully: “only those with prior learning and habitus [are] endowed with the necessary cultural capital [to] succeed” at the task (op.cit.). Ralphs cites evidence to suggest that success in RPL tasks requires that learners recognise these rules, and that without the necessary background in formal knowledge practices, they may not be expected to do so spontaneously. However he also suggests that if RPL is conceived as a developmental intervention, it may be possible to teach learners how to recognise such rules. So his argument seems to be that, although it is now widely accepted that many original conceptions of RPL have failed to realize their objectives - both in theory and in implementation - it is also apparent that “there is a strong case for re-examining the reasons for this [failure, and] for re-theorising the policy and the practice” (op.cit.).

The general response of Colloquium participants to Ralphs' presentation was to recognise the importance of his arguments for teacher upgrading and up-skilling. Perhaps it is because the importance of formal knowledge criteria in schools seems so incontestable, that there is less ambivalence on this issue than one might find in relation to other education and training contexts in which learning relating to areas such as cabinet-making or hairdressing takes place. In discussion, Ralphs summed up the consensus in this way: “in RPL … evaluation rules come in at the end, but what is much more important is what comes before, the formative dimension of RPL” (Ralphs 2008). The

important dimension recognised in this discussion is the notion of RPL as a developmental practice in relation to the accumulated past experiences of learners, and not only as a summative assessment process. This conceptualisation of RPL requires that the potential of learners to engage with deep and specialised knowledge criteria in any area is identified and deliberately developed as part of the RPL intervention.

Ralphs' paper put the question of knowledge criteria on the table. But the Colloquium was still concerned with exactly what kinds of knowledge are particular to the practice of school teaching, and how RPL might set out to valorise these.

Dr Mignonne Breier of the HSRC presented a paper on the different forms of knowledge for which recognition would be appropriate in any RPL process for teachers. She commenced her argument by showing how the NQF (and hence, 'official' conceptions of RPL) sought to create common mechanisms for valorising formal, non-formal and informal knowledge across the system. This search effectively flattens distinctions between different kinds of education and training practices in the interests of “overcoming discrepancies in the social and economic currencies for non-formal and informal knowledge” (Breier 2008). However, she went on to show how, even in the trade union context where it is expected that political interests in equating formal and workplace learning would be strongest, it was found that “knowledge acquired in work and life experience could not easily be equated with that [imported] in formal education contexts” (ibid.). In developing her position, she echoed Ralphs' earlier point about RPL candidates needing to navigate differing types of knowledge. RPL seeks to recognise informal learning in workplaces and everyday contexts, but seemingly contradicts this recognition by requiring that candidates reformulate this knowledge in the abstracted terms of formal knowledge domains.

4. On practical wisdom, academic knowledge and everyday know-how

4

Breier then introduced her particular analytic contribution. She suggested that the formal-informal knowledge duality contains an intuition that is correct. In other words, there is something about practical knowledge that is not reducible to formalised abstractions, and although this needs to be recognised, practical knowledge is not best understood as informal, everyday knowledge. To the two already under consideration, she added a third form of knowledge, namely practical wisdom or phronesis (a concept drawn from Aristotle). Wisdom is conceived here, as something developed over time in relation to real-life practical contexts. While it might draw upon the formal ('vertical') knowledge systems one learns in school, and also incorporate the practical ('horizontal') strategies one acquires in everyday life and workplace contexts, it entails above all the kinds of judgement that bring moral and ethical considerations to bear in practices. This suggests Breier, is a much better view of the 'other than formal' knowledge that RPL has sought to recognise, than the notion of 'everyday knowledge' offers. It is about practical wisdom acquired over time, and has particular pertinence to a consideration of what teachers might acquire in engaged classroom practices over many years, whether or not they have formal

1qualifications in the field.

The next part of Breier's argument explores the manner in which reflection on practice by teachers can constitute the assessment modality in which this search for practical wisdom could be realised. Reflection itself is still something teachers need to learn to do for purposes of assessment, and this ability is made easier by various kinds of language ability, disciplinary and pedagogic knowledge, attitudinal dispositions and collegial support. Reflection is nonetheless a form of engagement

with past experience that teachers can employ to understand and convey to others, the wisdom they have developed in their classrooms over time.

Breier presents us with cameos of two different teachers to paint a picture of what this kind of knowing could entail. The challenge that she poses is in relation to how this knowledge might be built into RPL strategies for upgrading and up-skilling teachers categorised as under-qualified. As she puts it:

... to recognise such wisdom, the [RPL processes] would have to provide opportunities to show their pastoral strengths in a school setting and to tell their life stories in individual interviews or written narratives, ideally in their mother tongue (Breier 2008).

Participants at the Colloquium responded enthusiastically to this paper. It seems that the idea of practical wisdom introduced a dimension to understanding the knowledge of teachers that had been missing in previous debates about RPL for teachers. Indeed, one might say that it allowed the teacher educators present to express the practical wisdom they had built up in their own practices over time, in regard to what needs to be recognised as a core orientation of a good teacher. This led to a number of resonances being identified in the ensuing discussion about possible RPL procedures focused on teachers in future. The discussion brought the wisdom of the teaching community to the fore; it recognised the wisdom inherent in the professional community of teachers, in specialist communities of practice formed amongst teachers across schools, and in practices associated with indigenous knowledge systems. One participant put the matter as follows when commenting on Breier's paper:

... teachers can now be recognised in ways consistent with the practice of registering professionals in other areas. This is done in alliance with, but is not dominated by, the education community. Assessment is thus about

1 This is a polemical statement. Its intention is to emphasise that teaching leads to wisdom, and that in principle, even a teacher without a formal qualification acquires such practical wisdom over time. However, it should not lead us to underestimate the importance of how formal knowledge in a discipline contributes to the phronesis of a teacher over time.

5

gaining the confidence of one's community, and it introduces a different profile to the benchmarking profile - the community of professionals itself does the determining (Conference participant, 2008).

Something emerging at this point in the Colloquium - in a sense directly from Breier's paper and the trajectory of the argument preceding it - was the strong recognition that RPL for teachers needs to be located in the professional practice of teachers themselves, in the classroom context of the school. Towards the end of this Introduction I come to describing how this strong consensus was formed among the different constituencies present at the Colloquium. Here however it leads directly to the concerns of the next paper, which is about integrating RPL into the work of teachers.

Professor Terry Volbrecht of the Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) presented a paper in which he examines the possibilities of integrating both the summative and the developmental processes of RPL into the work that teachers do in classrooms on a daily basis, that is - through a work-integrated learning approach. The efficiency and cost benefits of such an approach should be immediately apparent, but it is Volbrecht's insights into the assessment and developmental benefits of such an approach that are most interesting for our purposes.

In relation to summative assessment, the main approach he advocates is that of the professional development portfolio. The idea here is that teachers will put together such a portfolio over a period of time. Portfolios will reflect actual classroom and other school-based activities; this task should be done in accordance with the DoE objectives requiring teachers to integrate conceptual content knowledge and pedagogic knowledge in classroom activities, and to learn to apply such expertise confidently in practice (DoE

5. On work-integrated learning and RPL

2006:17, quoted in Volbrecht 2008). At this point we need to add to the DoE frame a question, about how the practical wisdom of teachers could be built into the requirements of such portfolio development.

The approach suggested by Volbrecht would potentially have direct developmental benefits for teachers involved in RPL processes. Key activities in which teachers would engage when constructing these portfolios are styled as the collection of-, selection of-, and reflection on, information descriptive of and/or derived from classroom practice. In each key activity active decisions are required which if appropriately supported and mentored, could potentially develop teachers towards required levels of knowledge and practical wisdom implied by the sought minimum qualification levels. The main challenge for the teacher:

... is how to work with the features so that they serve the performative or representational purposes of the portfolio (for forms of summative assessment, evaluation or appraisal), as well as other personal and professional purposes related to private reflection and to the building of a database that could be drawn on selectively for a variety of audiences (Volbrecht 2008).

Discussion of this paper at the Colloquium was largely appreciative of the insights it put forward in relation to the principled implementation of an RPL programme for teachers. One comment was that it made possible multiple pathways along which teachers could move towards required outcomes, in that the professional development portfolio started in individuals' own work, yet required movement and deliberate reflection towards outcomes phrased in terms of the knowledge criteria of known successful teaching practices. What was striking about the developing debate at this stage was how naturally the earlier recognition of the importance of recognising practical wisdom in RPL for teachers fitted into the possibilities that Volbrecht had

6

outlined. While the professional development portfolio approach certainly does not ignore the importance of formal conceptual and pedagogic knowledge, it roots its processes in teachers' reflections on their everyday work context and classroom strategies. Its very emphasis on considered reflection brings individuals' practice to the fore, and creates obvious possibilities for practical wisdom to become a deliberate focus of the assessment process. The earlier theoretical discussion that had developed at the Colloquium started to acquire a clear pragmatic orientation during Volbrecht's session.

Volbrecht's argument concluded with careful examination of the various requirements for successful implementation of the portfolio development approach. He cautioned that in-qualification RPL is complex and difficult to implement. However, his case was compelling. It is also the most likely approach to realise the well-rounded development of under-qualified teachers required by the DoE. By the end of the paper, the question of the 'nitty-gritty' of implementation was firmly on the table.

Dr Elizabeth Smith of the University of South Africa (UNISA) presented a paper on the detailed processes involved in implementation of a large-scale RPL strategy in a large institution, with her own university as example. She started by recognising some of the tensions implicit in Colloquium debates thus far. She spoke of the difficulty of converting the “intrinsic value” of informal learning into the “extrinsic value” required of evidence in RPL exercises. She noted the “delicate balance between academic assessment and learner support” (Smith 2008), drawing attention to the tension between the formal knowledge criteria required for recognition of the content and pedagogic knowledge known to characterise good teaching, and the multiple origins of teacher development pathways in workplace and everyday-life contexts.

6. On managing RPL

Her paper details the formal features, and institutional locations of the functions and attendant responsibilities relating to the various levels of the RPL programme at UNISA.

The importance of this paper is the realisation it evokes of just how complex and widespread (in institutional terms) the successful delivery of an RPL programme is likely to be. If the task within an institution is clearly massive; imagine how much more this will be the case for a large-scale implementation of RPL across multiple institutions!

Early in the paper, Smith outlined the core elements necessary for the success of such a programme. These elements range from initial and ongoing assessment procedures; through structured communication between students, academic and administration personnel; to advisory and support services, all backed by administrative and financial systems. Smith then outlined the different kinds of RPL offered by UNISA, strategic imperatives in this regard, and the planning of RPL interventions on a step-by-step basis with regard to all the institutional interstices within which it must be engaged and implemented. There is detail here which will no doubt be considered carefully by whoever is responsible for implementation of the DoE's envisaged RPL programme for teachers.

In the ensuing Colloquium discussion however, it became clear that Smith did not provide much insight into how exactly the practical implemen-tation of RPL takes account of the knowledge tension that she herself identified at the outset. At various points in the presentation she had noted that the implementation strategy “requires academic rigour”. She noted that RPL processes need to recruit the expertise of specialist academics versed in both the explicit and tacit criteria of a discipline or knowledge practice of whatever kind. She also recognised that RPL processes should be “participatory and stakeholder driven”, “uphold equality,” and serve the economic needs of individuals, communities and the nation. Yet there

7

was no account offered as to how this tension is to be managed. A comment from the audience suggested that this absence could perhaps be related to the “managerial feel” of this paper, and that it saw the real tensions inherent in RPL - the competing construals of knowledge brought to bear within its assessment regimes - as being something that could be dealt with adequately through bureaucratic efficiency.

Up to that point the Colloquium had recognised that the question of access to disciplinary content knowledge and pedagogic knowledge was a crucial issue in the failure of teaching in many South African classrooms. Those at the Colloquium had developed conceptions of RPL as a set of strategies for overcoming these failings by taking individual teacher development seriously. The Smith session ended with strong recognition that, in taking forward the lessons to be learned from UNISA about the implementation of RPL, knowledge tensions inherent in its practices needed to be more carefully understood and integrated into planning processes. The question as to what kinds of expertise should be paramount in judgements about teacher knowledge had come to the fore; it was a tension at the Colloquium, and will clearly be a tension in the ongoing implementation of RPL for teachers. This tension needs to be recognised however as something productive, and needs to be managed accordingly.

The final paper at the Colloquium was presented by the Occupation-Specific Dispensation (OSD) Task Team 5. It aimed to set out the framework within which an up-skilling strategy for teachers in South Africa is to be developed. The technical and labour-relations aspects of the task were spelled out clearly: by 2013, the aim is to have retrained and

qualified some 25 000 under- and unqualified teachers in the country. The more difficult aspect of this goal relates to the substance of what up-skilling should entail, given understanding of the

7. On the context of implementation

knowledge, pedagogic expertise and practical wisdom required of successful teachers in South

stAfrica in the 21 century.

The Task Team paper set out accounts of the categories of teachers being targeted by the RPL initiatives - categories echoed in the stories at the start of this Introduction. The paper goes on to summarise the various routes available for RPL, each of which is dealt with in various ways in the other papers in this collection. The substance of the Task Team's recommendations is that two main routes be considered for RPL for under- and unqualified teachers in South Africa: occupational re-designation or a qualifications route based on learning integrated with work or practical training. The proposals are complex, and are concentrated mainly on RPL challenges for teachers in primary schools, and particularly for those working in the Foundation Phase, since these areas are where the majority of teachers targeted by the RPL proposals are located. The paper concluded with detailed proposals for up-skilling un- or under-qualified teachers in five categories.

Emerging plans for the RPL exercise for teachers in South Africa would do well if they were to be qualified by theoretical and practical concerns emerging from debates at the Colloquium. If it is the case that the primary imperatives in teacher development should be developmental, and if this recognition entails an understanding that many teachers (perhaps, particularly, under-qualified teachers) have not acquired the grasp of complex content knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge enabling them to be competent teachers in their classrooms, then it would seem that certain of the envisaged routes for teacher upgrading and up-skilling using RPL mechanisms must take precedence over others.

Something strongly recognised in this Colloquium was that teacher education had been a ground-

8. RPL for teachers

8

breaking space for engagement with RPL in South Africa. Through the work done by a range of institutions on the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE) in policy formulation, delivery, monitoring and research, a body of research findings and expertise has been built up in relation to these practices that has become something of a national asset. Researchers working more generally on RPL matters, both nationally and internationally, are increasingly looking to these experiences in South African teacher education and development for case studies of what might be possible (and also not possible) in implementing RPL on a large scale. The papers presented by Breier, Ralphs and Volbrecht at this Colloquium are testimony to this fact.

South Africa also has some extended accounts to offer on the challenges and difficulties associated with 'going to scale' regarding RPL. Mukora gave us dramatic insights into how the whole concept of RPL can stem from a notion that such an approach to assessment and certification will be able to solve education and training problems at a national level, so much so that its compelling logic can appeal in similar ways to two different governments on opposing sides of one of the most dramatic social and political transformations in history. The UNISA experience, described in all its complexity by Smith, helped us understand just how labour- and resource-intensive an RPL option on a large scale will be, as indeed do the experiences of various other Higher Education Institutions in implementing RPL processes in the country. If there were any illusions about these aspects before the Colloquium, then discussions there made it quite clear that RPL initiatives envisaged for teachers in this country would require of government great amounts of ingenuity, strategic acumen, energy, and material resources.

In South Africa, the lessons learned about RPL thus far are hard ones. Just as the NQF in its original form, in many of its over-technical and overly specified formulations of knowledge and skills, failed to

realise some of its most treasured core objectives - the breaking down, or at least softening, of boundaries between education and training - so the somewhat mechanistic conceptions of RPL that have been implemented in many South African RPL experiments seem to have met with mixed success. The treasured core objective of such processes is to provide a dual set of routes for under- and unqualified teachers who, objectively, have been disadvantaged as teachers (in their educational roles) and as educators (in their careers) by the legacies of apartheid.

This dual route may be conceived as follows:

(1) RPL needs to recognise the specialised knowledge and skills that practising teachers acquire 'on the job' within the classroom. Such expertise has a bearing on a person's ability to perform as a teacher at a much higher level of sophistication and respon-sibility within that same subject or phase domain than his or her existing qualifications would imply (in other words, such expertise enables 'up-skilling').

(2) RPL needs to recognise the generic knowledge and skills that persons acquire in non-formal 'on-the-job training', both in the classroom and more broadly in the day-to-day institutional context of the school. Such expertise - and in the terms made popular in the RPL Colloquium, practical wisdom - has a bearing on a person's ability to transfer knowledge and skills across school subject or phase specialisation, to learn new skills quickly in a new area of practice (in other words, such expertise enables 're-skilling') (adapted from Moll and Welch 2004:10).

We have not yet achieved these objectives. However, the Colloquium ended with a sense of optimism that they may still be achievable. This collection of papers will, I believe, provide the reader with a similar sense of optimism.

9

References

Breier, M. 2008. Epistemological and pedagogical issues in RPL in teacher upgrading. Paper presented at the Colloquium on RPL in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers, 10 - 11 December 2008.

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). 1981. Report of the main committee of the HSRC investigation into education (De Lange Report). Pretoria: HSRC.

Moll, I. and Welch, T. 2004. RPL in teacher education: lessons being learned from the National Professional Diploma in Education. Journal of Education 32:159 - 181.

Mukora, J. 2008. A history of RPL in South Africa. Paper presented at the Colloquium on Recognititon of Prior Learning in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers, 10 - 11 December 2008.

Ralphs, A. 2008. Specialised Pedagogy: a comparative study of RPL practices and their effects on learners lives in formal, non-formal and occupational learning contexts in South Africa. Paper presented at the Colloquium on Recognition of Prior Learning in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers, 10 - 11 December 2008.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1995. White Paper on Education and Training. Notice 196 of 1995. Pretoria: Department of Education.

Smith, E. 2008. Managing RPL at institutions. Paper presented at the Colloquium on Recognition of Prior Learning in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers, 10 - 11 December 2008.

Volbrecht, T. 2008. Work-integrated learning and RPL in programmes for serving teachers. Paper presented at the Colloquium on Recognition of Prior Learning in the upgrading and up-skilling of serving teachers, 10 - 11 December 2008.

10

A History of RPL in South AfricaDr Jeffy Mukora, South African Qualifications Authority

Summary

1. Introduction

This paper explores the background and origins of Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) in South Africa. It contextualises development of RPL policies through analysis of the historical, social, economic and political backgrounds within which such policy has been developed. It argues that the resulting policy directions expressed in the post-1994 policy agenda, where RPL was seen as a mechanism of redress of past inequalities in education, training and recognition within the National Qualifications Framework (NQF), were not new in South Africa. In fact, policy reforms and initiatives introduced in the 1980s provided the building blocks with which RPL was constructed. These findings raise a number of issues. Most important is the tension between the incrementalism thesis established in this paper and the policy discontinuities associated with RPL and the NQF in South Africa. The implications of the findings for reform strategies will be discussed, together with considerations relating to educational change.

RPL in South Africa is a purposeful and deliberate attempt to redress the injustices inherited from apartheid and to improve the country's economic competitiveness in the global market. Through an analysis of past intentions and present policies, this paper attempts to offer some insights into the questions: What is RPL? How has it evolved in South Africa?

The paper begins by defining RPL as a broad concept. Consideration is given to both economic and social derivatives and imperatives under which RPL has evolved. It then describes the NQF as the mechanism through which RPL is to be implemented. This section is followed by brief discussion of the underlying economic and manpower trends in the period 1976 - 1980 and the reform proposals that followed. This discussion is then linked to key debates of the 1990s.

2. What is RPL?

Delving into the historical foundations of RPL revealed that it originally started in the United States in the 1970s. Then key assumptions were that what a learner knows and can do, no matter how or where it was learned, should be recognised appropriately and that hands-on experience of things being learned about and worked with can enhance that learning.

These early assumptions are consistent with those expressed in many countries, including in South Africa, in response to the needs of adult learners in education and training. In South Africa, RPL is one of the most challenging and contested cornerstones of the NQF. The potential to recognise, offered by RPL, the knowledge, skills and competencies of people denied access to learning opportunities through apartheid education and training policies, and who were often viewed, due to their lack of formal qualifications, as being incompetent in the workplace, makes it a most exciting policy initiative. RPL is highly contested partly because key role-players such as the education and training sectors, organised labour, business and industry reflect a range of differing and sometimes conflicting perceptions and approaches to education and training. This lack of common ground for RPL practices makes its implementation a very challenging process.

The National Standards Bodies Regulations No. 18787 of 28 March 1998, in defining RPL, state:

... recognition of prior learning means the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner however obtained, against the learning outcomes required for a specified qualification, and the acceptance for purposes of qualification of that which meets the requirements (South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) 1998:88) .

11

In addition, in terms of the requirements for the registration of qualifications, Section 8(1)(a) of these regulations states that a qualification shall:

... indicate in the rules governing that award of the qualification that the qualification may be achieved in whole or in part through the recognition of prior learning, which concept includes but is not limited to learning outcomes achieved through formal, informal and non-formal learning and work experience (op.cit.).

Taking the above definitions and other formulations generally used both nationally and internationally into account, this paper proposes the following definition of RPL:

RPL refers to the formal identification, assessment and acknowledgement of the full range of an individual's skills, knowledge, competencies, capabilities, values and attitudes irrespective of how and where they have been acquired - be it formally, informally or in non-formal training, on-the-job experience or life experience.

In a formal setting, learners are able to proceed to the next level of school education after recognition of their prior learning at the completion of the previous school year. Recognising what has been previously learned is the basis of all school tests and examinations. There is an assumption that learning has taken place. What tests and examinations seek to discover is the extent of that learning and whether enough has been gained to proceed with new learning. This process involves tacit acknowledgement that learning is hierarchical and that learners are able to add to their knowledge by building on previous learning.

Similar processes apply to tertiary studies. For admission to tertiary-level courses, students must have succeeded in specifically chosen prior studies. These processes are further acknowledgement that prior learning is necessary for formal study.

These basic assumptions about prior learning do not extend beyond formal school and tertiary-level learning to other kinds of learning, such as post-school non-formal learning, non-formal training and on-the-job learning. Such learning is generally regarded as incidental, inconsequential and unrelated to formal tertiary study. 'Formal study' in these contexts means all study that takes place in recognised tertiary institutions such as universities and Further Education and Training (FET) Colleges. RPL, at tertiary level, seeks to clarify the value of informal and experiential learning obtained outside formal education and training contexts. This learning is harder to pin down than its formal counterpart, and therein lies a significant challenge - a challenge faced by implementers of the NQF.

In 1994 South Africa witnessed its first democratic elections after more than 40 years of apartheid in which the majority of its citizens suffered serious deprivations. One of the legacies of apartheid was that education and training systems were differentiated along racial and ethnic lines. The new democratic government faced many challenges in this regard. One immediate challenge involved removing divisions inherited from the effects of apartheid, and the creation of equal opportunities for all individuals in South Africa. Another challenge involved preparing South Africa for economic competitiveness in the face of globalisation. One of the policy initiatives adopted by the first democratic government was the passage of the SAQA Act in 1995 and the establishment of the SAQA Board in 1996. These provided a framework for the development and implementation of the NQF, with SAQA as its overseeing authority.

The main objective of the NQF was to drive fundamental restructuring of education and training, from the fragmented and inequitable system inherited from the apartheid system, to one that would facilitate development of individuals in the country, elimination of skills deficits, and

3. RPL within the NQF

12

develop high standards and qualifications reflective of international best practice.

It was intended that the NQF initiative address the needs of those whom the apartheid system had neglected, as well as power differentials in the workplace, by challenging hierarchical divisions in education and training; academic and vocational knowledge; working and learning; and workers and bosses (Bird 2003). The NQF also offered potential to address some of the more subtle aspects of certain work-related injustices inherited from apartheid. Firstly, it was meant to recognise skills that had traditionally been ignored or undervalued. Related to this, the competency-based approach aligned to the NQF offered opportunities for recognition of prior learning not developed within formal provisions, but rather through life or work experience.

According to one view (McGrath 1996; Cooper 1998; the Departments of Education and Labour (DoE and DoL) 2002; Allais 2003; Bird 2003), the idea of RPL within the context of the NQF in South Africa emerged in the early 1990s in negotiations between the trade union movement and its alliance partners about the differentiated education system and industrial training. Borrowing ideas from England, Scotland, Australia and New Zealand, labour and business representatives negotiating the National Training Strategy Initiative (NTSI) (see National Training Board (NTB) 1994), concluded the establishment of an NQF framework for learning achievements. This development was fed into the policy processes of the Government of National Unity, which was formed after the 1994 elections.

The present paper presents an alternative view, locating the origins of the early ideas of the NQF and RPL practices in policy proposals about education and industrial training reforms developed under the apartheid state (Mukora 2006). It is argued that the ideas were first developed (although not implemented) in the apartheid state, and were later modified and amplified by the trade union

movement as a result of international visits. This position is based on the analysis of two major documents published in the early 1980s.

The first document is the Report of the main committee of the HSRC investigation into education (the De Lange Report) (Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) 1981). This report was published long before the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) was formed. Adrienne Bird, considered by many to be the chief architect of the NQF, was not in South Africa at the time - only returning to the country in 1983.

The second document is the Artisan training and recognition collective agreement for the metal industries (ATRAMI 1982), made and entered into by employers' organisations and trade unions - parties to the National Industrial Council for the Iron, Steel, Engineering and Metallurgical Industry (which later became the Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council). This Artisan Training and Recognition Agreement was gazetted on 13 August 1982. It highlighted for the first time that persons in the metal industry would be recognised as artisans by means other than the completion of apprenticeships in terms of the Manpower Training Act No. 56 of 1981. The current paper focuses on how that was going to happen.

Apart from the two above-mentioned key documents, two other reports will also be referred

1to, namely the HSRC/NTB investigation into the training of artisans in the RSA (HSRC/NTB 1984) and the HSRC/NTB investigation into skills training in the RSA (HSRC/NTB 1989). These reports appeared before the National Union of Metal Workers' (NUMSA's) Vocational Project - a project widely considered to be one of the key building blocks of the NQF, and on which documents were published in 1991.

1 These abbreviations denote the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) and the National Training Board (NTB).

13

The De Lange Report in its discussion of new educational structures emphasised the need for linkages between formal and non-formal education, and convergence of academic and vocational education. The report also stressed the need for mobility of learners within the delivery system. It paid attention to the need for a national certification body responsible for standards of evaluation and certification in both formal and non-formal education (which, it is argued, later became SAQA). A flexible modular educational structure with integration of formal and non-formal education was put forward.

The HSRC/NTB reports (HSRC/NTB 1984 and 1989) criticised apartheid training, recommending significant changes to the apprenticeship system. A modular competency-based institutional model coupled with controlled on-the-job training was recommended for a new system of artisan training. We shall see that representatives of the trade union movement borrowed ideas about competency-based education from Australia, when the same ideas were available locally.

The next section gives a brief overview of the apartheid education and training system and the imbalances it left in its wake. This overview is followed by a short discussion of underlying economic and manpower trends in the period 1976 - 1980 and the reform proposals that followed.

The ideology of separate development, or apartheid, was signalled by the coming to power of a Nationalist government in 1948. Several Acts were passed to bring education closer to this policy of separate development. The main theme running through the history of apartheid education in South Africa was the differential pattern of educational provision for different race groups. While individuals classified as 'White' received high quality education comparable with that in first world

4. Brief history of education and training under apartheid

countries, those categorised as 'Coloured' or 'Black' received education characterised by insufficient and poorly qualified teachers, overcrowded classrooms, high drop-out rates and limited allocation of resources such as furniture, books and other equipment (see for example Christie and Collins 1984; Pillay 1990).

Education under apartheid was characterised by a multiplicity of departments. At the time of the De Lange Report (HSRC 1981), the provision of education in South Africa was the responsibility of 19 racially and ethnically divided education departments under 14 different cabinets implementing their own regulations in terms of at least 12 Education Acts (Hofmeyer and Buckland 1992). Some 11 departments oversaw 'African education', for which nine examining bodies administered about 90 examinations each year (Hofmeyr and Buckland 1992; Kraak 1992).

At the helm of this system was the Ministry of National Education, established in 1984. Four other racially exclusive ministries - one responsible for each of four designated 'population groups' - operated alongside this national ministry. General education policy was an outcome of negotiations between the Ministry of National Education and the other four ministries. Each of the ministries was accorded control over the implementation of policy, teacher training, educational programmes and instructional methods within its ethnic group.

The control of education in South Africa was further divided into 'own affairs' and 'general affairs'. General education affairs was the responsibility of a cabinet minister designated 'White'; 'African education' was deemed a general affair. 'Own affairs' education referred to the education of 'Coloureds', 'Whites' and 'Indians', and was the responsibility of racially segregated Coloured, White and Indian education departments.

Such a multiplicity of departments produced administrative chaos: no single ministry had

14

oversight responsibility for the whole education system; there was considerable lack of co-ordination. Norms were not uniform; there were no standards for achieving comparability in the quality of educational provision; there were high levels of inequality in educational opportunities in the different structures. In addition the number of departments also resulted in extensive bureaucracy, poor communication, inflexibility, inefficiency, and wastage of funds (see Hofmeyer and Buckland 1992).

The apartheid training system was similarly segregated, training policies being shaped by, inter alia:

• few training opportunities for workers classified as 'Black', and an emphasis on training and skilling for 'Whites'; the apprenticeship model was defined along racial lines, and the system lacked recognition of informally-acquired skills. It is argued that large numbers of Black workers, while categorised as 'unskilled', had acquired high-level skills and knowledge through years of on-the-job experience. There was no recognition or pay for these informally acquired skills;

• lack of coordination between education and training structures;

• lack of clear national standards. The majority of workers who participated in company training programmes at lower levels were not able to receive recognition for their knowledge outside the companies con-cerned. Where companies provided certificates, these documents were not nationally recognised as the associated courses were not designed in accordance with national standards;

• a multitude of certification councils, including the South African Certification

Council for formal school qualifications; and the Certification Council for Technical Education. There was no mechanism to accredit education and training received across industrial sectors and between education and training institutions (Kraak 1992).

One of the consequences of this fragmented system was limited transferability of vocational skills in the external labour market.

Other apartheid policies of separate development added to the general neglect, so that the structural position inhabited by most people classified as Black, was one in which people formed a vast resource of unskilled labour, a pattern reinforced by the rural location of Black people, often in underdeveloped 'homeland' areas. This historical legacy left the largest part of the population in the country with the biggest backlogs, not only in the extent of their educational provision, but also in the quality of education and training received based as they were, on inequalities in the levels of funding, facilities and the supply of trained teachers.

Wide exclusion from a reasonable quality of life was the main cause of discontent in the country; the struggles of Black workers, learners, and communities were against apartheid in general. In 1973 massive spontaneous strikes were pre-cipitated by the fall of real wages in the face of falling gold prices, economic stagnation and inflation. These strikes saw the development of powerful industrial trade unionism among Black workers and of NUMSA in particular - to address the low quality of jobs and limited career opportunities for Black workers (Allais 2003; Bird 2003).

The school boycotts and general unrest associated with the massacre of many schoolchildren demon-strating in Soweto on 16 June 1976 stand out amongst the most serious crises in the educational history of South Africa. Tens of thousands of Black school learners and others took to the streets in the

15

township of Soweto near Johannesburg to protest against 'Bantu Education' - the inferior education offered to Black children, which included compulsory learning of Afrikaans, mother tongue of the oppressors - in what are now referred to as the 'Soweto Uprisings'. Police responded with teargas and live bullets, killing many people. The event is currently commemorated by a South African national holiday, Youth Day, which honours all the young people who lost their lives in the struggle against apartheid.

These and similar social disturbances and the underlying economic crisis rendered the apartheid state weak and insecure. Action was needed and, as a result, a number of Commissions of Inquiry were set up to find solutions to these problems. The underlying dilemma for the then government however remained the initiation of evolutionary change without forfeiting the then-entrenched White power.

Two broad policy trends relevant to the later RPL and the NQF policy agenda emerged. On one hand, there was the then-government's economic reform strategy which attempted to devolve economic power to the private sector, to establish a 'free market'; on the other hand, there was an education and training reform strategy which attempted to upgrade the skills of the workforce.

To signal the departure from the main historical trend of increasing state involvement in the economy, two Commissions were appointed by the government in 1977 - the Wiehahn Commission and the Riekert Commission - “in order to satisfy demands from monopoly capital for an enlarged, stable source of African semi-skilled and skilled labour” (Marais 1998:42).

At the time, it was commented that “the findings of these Commissions, together with the reactions to them, suggest that a major ideological shift with

5. Policy antecedents

respect to state economic policy may be taking place (Natrass 1981:27). The Commissions also criticised the multiplicity of departments and institutions, and lack of coordination in the apartheid education and training system. That the apprenticeship system was outdated both pedagogically and techno-logically, and that there was a serious lack of mobility between formal education and non-formal training, were noted (Republic of South Africa (RSA) 1979; Wiehahn 1982).

Both Commissions made recommendations introducing significant changes to labour and training legislation, which resulted in the passage of the Manpower Training Act No. 56 of 1981. This Act replaced a large number of laws upon which racially segregated institutions for the training of employees were founded. It was the first consolidated set of laws for the promotion and regulation of training in all sectors of the economy under a single, non-racially defined Act of parliament. For the first time in the history of the country, African people could be indentured as apprentices. Few Black people were given artisan and technician status however; White workers were for the most part the recipients of company and state training programmes. In 1982, 92.9% of the artisans and 87.6% of the technicians employed in the South African industrial sector were White; and 3.1% of the artisans and 6.9% of the technicians were Black (Kraak and Von Holdt 1990:17).

Such initiatives, concerned mainly with labour legislation, later shifted to education. At the beginning of the 1980s, as the state continued to realise that economic growth was being subverted by chronic skill shortages and that these shortfalls necessitated educational reform, the De Lange Report (HSRC 1981) was commissioned.

It is argued that building on the Riekert and Wiehahn Commissions, the De Lange Commission is the initial point of reference for current policies in the integration of education and training (Mukora 2006). The De Lange Report is concerned with the

16

bringing together of general and vocational education; and the making of general education more relevant to work, and vocational education broader than specific work-based skills. It also considers the creation of flexible pathways between formal education and non-formal training. The following section outlines the salient features of the De Lange Report, revealing the origins of the ideas that later became policy under the democratic government.

The report defined the educational structure in South Africa as follows:

The educational structure is the framework within which different types of teaching and learning situations are arranged, including also their mutual relationships. The structure makes provision for various educational possibilities as well as for the possibility of both vertical and horizontal flow of pupils through the system (HSRC 1981:95).

Use of the terms 'vertical' and 'horizontal' in relation to movement of learners through the system indicate concern with achieving flexibility or mobility of learners within the system. The Report notes that the (then) education system had limited potential for horizontal flow, and that formal

2education had restricted ties with its non-formal counterpart. In other words learners could not “move readily from one type of education to another” (HSRC 1981:96). It is worth noting that in the report, non-formal education includes vocational training.

Concerned about the lack of articulation between delivery systems, De Lange recommended an

6. The De Lange Report

investigation into the establishment of a national certification body that would be responsible for standards of evaluation and certification in both formal and non-formal contexts. Due to the absence of a single certification council, there had been no mechanism to accredit education and training received across the associated contexts. An appropriate certification system would potentially enable learners to progress optimally in their schooling and/or working careers.

The report used the concept of 'levels' to make finer distinctions with respect to vertical progression through the system. This approach was seen as making standardisation necessary for the coordination of certification and 'outlet' points (HSRC 1981:104).

The report also proposed a flexible modular 3educational system within which formal and non-

formal education could be integrated. The idea was that such integration would allow for horizontal movement between the two forms of education; mutual recognition of certification; rights of admission to courses rather than to institutions; and

4bridging courses to facilitate vertical mobility. The suggested system would provide for differences in ability, interests, choices, and the differing ages and stages in the development of learners.

It is worth noting in passing, that when Scotland implemented its 16-plus Action Plan in 1984 (when modular courses replaced all non-advanced courses in further education and all non-academic courses for 16 to 18 year-olds in schools), the proposals of a modular structure were already in the De Lange report of 1981. This comparison is important because the 16-plus Action Plan is often considered to be the first building block of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (Raffe 2003).

2 The report distinguished between formal and non-formal as follows: formal education was defined as planned education taking place within schools, colleges or universities, whereas non-formal education was education occurring in planned but highly adaptable ways in institutions or organisations outside the spheres of formal education (HSRC 1981:91, 104).

3 It is a framework within which various levels and grades of courses can be arranged to form rounded-off units or phases.4 This is a course designed to round off a particular level and grade, which is also a point of withdrawal from formal education, and by this means creates links with viable occupational possibilities and/or training in non-formal education.

17

To increase the horizontal movement of learners, the De Lange report recommended the “recognition of modules (credits) in courses” (HSRC 1981:123). It noted that:

... if modules in courses are not mutually recognised then horizontal flow between institutions on one hand and between courses within a particular institution on the other, remains limited (ibid.124).

In view of the line of reasoning in this paper, the most important aspect of the De Lange report was its emphasis on the integration of formal and non-formal education, calling for the interspersing of education with work throughout life. Stoikov (1975:5) used the term 'recurrent education and training' for this principle, describing it as:

... a global system containing a variety of programmes which distribute education and training of different levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), by formal and non-formal means, over the life span of the individual in a recurring way, that is, alternated with work or other activities (Stiokov 1975:5).

The key issue here is the timing of these activities over individuals' lifetimes, avoiding the concept of 'terminal education'. In short, the De Lange report presents education as a continuing process linked to the concept of lifelong learning - ideas also featuring prominently in current debates on education and training. One of the objectives of the then proposed new education system was summed up by De Lange as follows:

... the purpose of the then new system was] to create an integrated, flexible relationship between formal and non-formal education, between school and the world of work, in the context of lifelong continuing education (HSRC 1981:194).

Last but not least, the recommendations made by

the De Lange Committee would be meaningless in a fragmented education system. In Chapter 4, Section 4.17 of the Report, the suggestion was made that a single ministry (with one minister and one department) be created, to:

... meet the needs for a national education policy aimed at equal opportunity and equal quality and standards and relevance to the changing educational needs of the Republic of South Africa (HSRC 1981:195).

Some of the respondents participating on the De Lange Committee were convinced that the Report was a watershed in the history of education and training in South Africa. They acknowledged that while they did not have the concept of a national qualifications framework in mind at the time, they were working with ideas expressed in current debates on the integration of education and training. Schalk Engelbrecht, coordinator of the De Lange investigation in 1980, expressed such sentiments in his article on the De Lange report in 1992, concluding that “Against this background I would like to postulate that, in many ways, the De Lange report will come back again and again in future educational discussions and planning” (Engelbrecht 1992:512).

It can thus be argued that the De Lange report laid the foundations for a new education and training dispensation. However, it was not clear from the interviews and from the report itself what the origins were, of the proposals put forward. One of my respondents who served on one of the Working Committees, pointed to an influential Education Sector Policy Paper (World Bank 1980), giving an indication of what might have influenced De Lange.

Some of my respondents from the trade union movement were asked in interviews to make comparisons between what they were proposing in the 1990's, and what was proposed in the De Lange Report. They denied borrowing from De Lange and maintained that what they were proposing was totally different.

18

Other initiatives from the 1980s with principles mirrored in the current system are touched upon in the following sections of this paper.

The ATRAMI Scheme is an innovative metal industry initiative aimed at providing recognition of prior learning for semi-skilled workers in the industry. It was first developed in 1982 by the National Industrial Council for the Iron, Steel, Engineering and Metallurgical Industry (now known as the Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council) (RSA 1982). It is important to note that this agreement was sector-specific and limited only to employers and employees who were members of the employers' organisations and trade unions respectively. The objectives of the scheme as highlighted in the agreement were that:

Whereas it is agreed that it is in the interest of the Industry that persons shall be recognised as artisans by other means than the completion of an apprenticeship in terms of the Manpower Training Act, 1981, it is agreed that:

(a) Persons trained and/or recognised by certification in terms of this Agreement shall be deemed to be artisans in the Industry for all purposes and shall be recognised by the parties as such; and

(b) The Metal Industries' Artisan Training Agreement shal l be discontinued and all contracts entered into in terms of that Agreement shall be deemed to be contracts entered into in terms of and subject to the provisions of this Agreement (RSA 1982:3).

This scheme was designed for persons “over the age

7. Artisan Training and Recognition Collective Agreement for the Metal Industries (ATRAMI)

of 25 years with educational levels satisfactory to the Council”, and who were “not artisans or apprentices for the purposes of the Main Agreement” (op.cit.4). Further, these persons would need to have “satisfied the Council” that they had “been employed and trained in classes of Rate A work” falling “within the scope of trades designated under the Manpower Training Act, 1981, for periods amounting in the aggregate to five years or more” (ibid.). They would, subject to the Council's approval, “be deemed to be artisans for all purposes within the industry in such trade as the Council may determine”, and would be “entitled to continue doing Rate A work in that trade” (ibid.). This status would be granted:

... provided that such persons shall, on application to the Council, supported by evidence of educational level and such previous employment and training on Rate A work, and having successfully completed such test as the Council may, in its discretion, require from the Council a certificate of recognition as an artisan in that trade in the form specified by the Council (ibid.).

The parties also agreed to the following:

(a) RPL is a process to give recognition to workers for the skill and knowledge that they already have. The RPL process involves assessment against agreed standards to obtain credits leading to certification.

(b) In companies implementing the Five Grade system, all workers wishing to be assessed for the purpose of RPL in terms of unit standards required by the company for the employees' current occupations shall be allowed this opportunity. The time-frame for this assessment shall be agreed upon between worker representatives and management at company level.

19

(c) Workers shall be assessed in a language of their own choice, insofar as this is practicable at the company concerned.

(d) The number of unit standards per grade shall be decided on by the unions and employers jointly at national level.

The HSRC/NTB report (1984) repeated the De Lange criticisms of the then current training system, and made recommendations introducing significant changes to artisan training in South Africa. The preface of the Report notes skills shortages as a major challenge for the country:

As we approach the end of the twentieth century, one of the most pressing needs in the Republic of South Africa, plagued by many large economic, monetary and political problems, is a reasonable supply of trained manpower for all population groups in order to improve productivity (HSRC/NTB 1984:xi).

The report, drawing from De Lange, attributes skills shortages to the then education system. It reiterates that, because of the emphasis in education, on academically orientated general formative education, people entered the vocational world without suitable value systems and sufficient appropriate skills. It notes the tendency to look down on manual work and practical skills, which has a detrimental effect on the development of technical manpower.

The report also refers to international trends with respect to apprenticeship training. The English modular approach developed by the Engineering Industrial Training Board, and Australia's 'competency approach', are cited as examples. The

8. The HSRC/NTB investigation into the training of artisans in South Africa (HSRC/NTB 1984)

HSRC/NTB Report (1984:177) advocates a modular performance-based institutional training system for artisans, the flexibility of which allows progression for all levels of workers. This recommendation was an important development since apprenticeships only catered for artisans. These issues were picked up by trade unions from the early 1990s.

The apartheid state's reform strategies did not solve many of the problems faced by South Africa. Social upheavals, compounded by sanctions from the international community and economic decline, continued to weaken the apartheid state. In response, it declared states of emergency in 1985 and 1986. The democratic forces started to become optimistic about political change, and substantial policy developments occurred in South Africa in the early 1990s.

On 2 February 1990, then State President De Klerk announced the unbanning of the African National Congress (ANC) and other banned organisations, and committed his government to a negotiated resolution of the South African conflict. This meant that democratic forces were to come up with informed policies to guide negotiations. At the same time the outgoing apartheid government was putting its proposals in place. It should be remembered that the National Party government did not surrender power to the ANC, but rather shared governing responsibilities based on these negotiations, setting up an Interim Constitution that redefined, but also preserved, many of the existing arrangements (Mukora 2006).

This section of the paper considers some of the policy options proposed by the democratic forces, especially those put forward by the trade union movement. A key player in this respect is Adrienne Bird, who, returning from the United Kingdom in 1983, worked as an education officer in the Metalworkers' Union of the then Transvaal province. When NUMSA was formed in 1987, Bird

9. Key developments of the 1990s

20

became the Regional Education Officer for the Witwatersrand Region, with Alec Erwin as the National Education Secretary.

In 1988, when negotiations and political change were clearly inevitable to all political formations, Erwin called for his officials to start preparing for new training policies (Bird 1990). Although NUMSA believed it was the government's responsibility to carry out this reconstruction, it also argued that this role should involve the full participation of progressive trade unions. Erwin commented that the role of the state in regard to training would be to:

• provide an effective educational base on which training could be built;

• stimulate investment in training, as the private sector generally invests very little in this area because of low returns; and

• coordinate certification so that workers could transfer from formal to non-formal education, from industry to industry and from company to company (Bird 1990:11).

As has been shown, the 'coordination of certification' and 'mobility between formal to non-formal education' were phrases featuring in the De Lange Report (HSRC 1981).

NUMSA's reform agenda was driven by severe shortages of skills and knowledge, and led to the development of programmes that would address its workers' needs. A major concern here was the legacy of “Bantu education, which has created a poor educational base on which to build vocational training” (HSRC 1981:14). We have seen that some of these concerns had been raised before in the De Lange and HSRC/NTB Reports (HSRC 1981, and HSRC/NTB 1984, respectively).

NUMSA began its preparations by establishing a number of Research and Development Groups (RDGs) to consider new training policy recommen-

dations. In 1989, a group of 27 shop stewards were appointed as Training RDGs. In 1990, the group travelled (in small clusters of four) to different international destinations. They visited West Germany, Sweden, Italy, the United Kingdom, Australia and Zimbabwe (Bird 1990). Bird and her group went to Australia and filed a report which became the NUMSA Vocational Training Project (NUMSA 1991). This report is important for laying out key elements of the policy debate that has shaped South Africa's education and training reform. However, some of the elements proposed had been on the South African agenda for over a decade. We have also seen that Australia's 'competency model' and the English modular approach were cited in previous reports. The report of the NUMSA Vocational Training Project stressed the need for RPL as a key to lifelong education and training. Again, the concept of lifelong continuing education was used in the De Lange report and RPL had been in operation in the South African metal industry under the ATRAMI Scheme since the early 1980s. What is significant about the NUMSA project is that while De Lange made some recommendations for the new education and training system, the NUMSA project went further and started to develop a framework that would stress both career paths and closer articulation between formal education, adult education, and training. This development forms part of the incrementalism thesis developed in this paper, where ideas already present before the onset of democracy were further developed by the democratic movement, into what later became the NQF.

It is important to note that the need to integrate literacy programmes with training was also expressed in the earlier HSRC/NTB reports because of the effects of Bantu Education, which had created a poor educational base on which to build vocational training. The NUMSA report acknow-ledges that what was being proposed in the Vocational Project in this regard was not new: “This

21

reality is acknowledged in the recent HSRC/NTB report on 'Skills Training in the RSA' and underlies a number of the recommendations made in the report” (Bird 1990:14).

The Training RDGs' recommendations were tabled at the Union's national congress in May 1991 and after their acceptance, were tabled and approved at COSATU's National Congress in July 1991. The recommendations stressed the need for a job grading system and for career paths allowing workers to move from one job or industry to another and from one grade to the next (such as from sweeper to engineer); to earn equal wages for equivalent work; and to be given paid time off for training (Lugg et al 1998). This would be achieved through the development of competency standards and training modules within a coordinated accreditation system. The approach was consistent with Australia's competency-based reform in school education and the new vocationalism of the late 1980s. The influence of Australia on the NUMSA project was bolstered by two invited Australian trade unionists: Chris Lloyd, who joined NUMSA in 1992, and whose focus area was industrial restructuring; and Alistair Machin, who became part of COSATU's Participatory Research Project, focusing on the National Training Strategy and the NQF.

COSATU's National Congress emphasised the need for linkages between education (both formal and Adult Basic Education) and industrial training through “a national certification system which ensures national recognition and portability for knowledge and skills acquired” (Bird 1992:185). For this to happen, a framework was proposed within which all industry and allied education and training boards must function. At this point in time, COSATU had not come up with a detailed proposal of what that framework would look like, but the Australian Industry Occupational (career path) Classification was used as an example of such a model. In this model, industrial career paths are articulated to the NTB competency levels. Mobility across industries is possible through the existence of common core

modules of education, which are applicable across industries.

At the same time the NTB was outlining its vision for a new National Training Strategy for South Africa (HSRC/NTB 1991). However, the early NTB was not accepted by the union movement, given its failure to consult. With a view to the political changes that were under way, it was inevitable that the processes of the NTB would be democratised. The later NTB secured the full participation of all interested parties and produced the National Training Strategy Initiative (NTSI) document (NTB 1994). With reference to RPL, the NTSI stated that:

Education and training should through assessment, give credit to prior learning through formal, non-formal and informal learning and/ or experience. Of particular importance in South Africa where for reasons of history, learners have been denied access to one or other of the formal, non-formal and informal learning systems, and have had to learn in some other way, for example by experience or by correspondence in another country. This principle accepts that no person entering the learning situation is without learning and aims to measure and give credit for that prior learning (op.cit.11).

As indicated, these deliberations were consistent with previous debates and reinforced by the principles which were to underpin the future national learning systems. The deliberations from different stakeholders led to the development of an NQF which stressed the link between education and training qualifications in an integrated system.

These policy ideas were turned into legislation after the first democratic elections in 1994 with the passage of the SAQA Act of 1995 (RSA 1995) and the series of associated legislation that followed.

Some initial experiences of piloting RPL and workforce development have been traced by Lugg et al (1998) and Ballim et al (2000). In 1995, the

22

Building Industries Training Board and FAS International Consulting Ltd, under the auspices of the NTB, ran a pilot project on RPL. Like the ATRAMI Scheme, this was a scheme organised by the building industry in South Africa as a way of recognising those with claimed prior learning experience in the occupations of carpenter and bricklayer. The project revealed that of the 315 workers originally screened, 259 completed the advisory stage; only 182 were assessed and only 38 managed to secure full trade qualifications (Ballim et al 2000:188). Much of this failure was attributed to the inability of candidates to achieve set standards within the specified time frames, and the absence of advisors and assessor representatives in particular language groups.

Also in 1995, a pilot RPL process was implemented on a mass scale within one mining house in South Africa (Lugg et al 1998). This research highlighted some of the problems associated with early implementation of RPL. The first was that in this case, the RPL process did not have any direct impact on the outcomes of beneficiaries. Very few workers received any wage increases or were re-graded. The second was that management and the unions did not share the same visions or agendas when they entered RPL agreements. It was reported that while the union saw the process as part of improved job grading and wage increases, management saw it mainly as a skills audit process. Some writers (Buchler & Ralphs 1998; Michelson 1997) reflected on epistemological, political and ethical issues as well as power relations in society that cannot be separated from RPL practices.

The same year also witnessed some developments in RPL practices in the field of teacher education. The Workers' Higher Education Project was started by the Joint Education Trust in 1995 to promote RPL projects in workplaces and in Higher Education. Most important was the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE), which attempts to upgrade the qualifications of many under-qualified teachers in South Africa. The most recent work on

this project is reflected in Mignonne Breier's monograph, The RPL Conundrum: Recognition of Prior Learning in a Teacher Upgrading Programme (Breier 2008). The biggest challenge presented in this study is how prior learning can be recognised.

I have made a number of claims about the origins of RPL and South Africa's NQF. First, I have argued and located the origins of the early ideas of the NQF and RPL in policy proposals about education and industrial training developed under the apartheid state. Although these ideas were not implemented at the time, they provided the building blocks upon which the NQF and RPL practices were constructed. The trade union movement picked up these ideas, amplified them and developed a framework through which both career paths and closer linkages between education and training would be facilitated. In other words, the trade union movement took the ideas beyond mere recommendations.

Second, I have tried to demonstrate the disjuncture between claimed policy discontinuities associated with the development of the NQF and RPL in South Africa, and the incrementalism thesis established here. I have pointed out that the development of RPL and the NQF can be understood as an evolutionary process rather than the product of a sharp break with the past. In this respect, the development of RPL and the NQF in South Africa is considered to be incremental.

These findings are in sharp contrast to the politically motivated rhetoric that views the NQF as 'a means of transforming education and training in South Africa'. In other words the NQF was introduced in 1995 with the aim “to redress the effects of a hated order” (French 2005:54). This goal emphasises the very different circumstances in which the NQF in South Africa was being established, compared to contexts in which NQFs have been developed in many other countries. It also placed an enormous

10. Conclusion

23

burden of expectation on the South African NQF.

Third, it is understood that the legacies of apartheid made immediate change a political imperative. For the democratic movement to shape its policy agenda ahead of the first democratic elections in 1994, and acknowledge its borrowing from the apartheid past, would have been problematic. The early ideas were therefore modified and legitimised through international policy referents. In other words, the new NQF policy had to demonstrate to the voters that South Africa was moving away from apartheid. These are the politics of educational change.

Allais, A. 2003. The national qualifications framework in South Africa: a democratic project trapped in a neo-liberal paradigm? Journal of Education and Work 16(3):305 - 324.

Ballim, Y., Omar, R. and Ralphs, A. 2000. Learning Assessment in South Africa. In: N. Evans (Ed.). Experiential learning around the world: employability and the global economy. London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Bird, A. 1990. Numsa's vocational training project. South African Labour Bulletin 15(1):10 - 16.

Bird, A. 1992. Redefining human resources development within the context of economic and labour market policies: a Cosatu perspective. Education With Production 10(1):161 - 194.

Bird, A. 2003. National monograph on technical and vocational training in South Africa. Geneva: International Labour Office.

Breier, M. 2008. The RPL Conundrum: Recognition of Prior Learning in a Teacher Upgrading Programme. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council Press.

References

Buchler, M. and Ralphs, A. 1998. The National Qualifications Framework and recognition of prior learning. Joint Education Trust Bulletin 8.

Christie, P. and Collins, C. 1984. Apartheid ideology and labour reproduction. In: P. Collins, C.B. and Gillespie, R. (1984) Moving education forward to keep society back: the South African De Lange Report re-evaluated. Comparative Education Review 28(4):625 - 638.

Collins, C.B. And Gillespie, R. 1984. Moving education forward to keep society back: the South Africa De Lange Report re-evaluated. Comparative Education Review 28(4):625 - 638.

Cooper, L. 1998. The implications of the National Qualifications Framework for emancipatory education in South Africa. In: Centre for Education Policy Development (Ed.). Reconstruction, development, and the National Qualifications Framework. Johannesburg: Centre for Education Policy Development:77 - 84.

Department of Education and Department of Labour (DoE and DoL). 2002. Report of the study team on the implementation of the National Qualifications Framework. Pretoria: DoE and DoL.

Engelbrecht, S.W.H. 1992. The De Lange report revisited ten years down the road. In: R. McGregor and A. McGregor (Eds.), McGregors' educational alternatives. Johannesburg: Juta:495 - 513.

French, E. 2005. Only connect? Towards a national qualifications framework research agenda for a new stage of atonement. South African Qualifications Authority Bulletin 8(1):61 - 67.

Hofmeyer, J. and Buckland, P. 1992. Education system change in South Africa. In: R. McGregor and A. McGregor (Eds.). McGregors' education alternatives. Johannesburg: Juta:15 - 59.

24

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). 1981. Report of the main committee of the HSRC investigation into education (De Lange Report). Pretoria: HSRC.

Human Sciences Research Council and National Training Board (HSRC/NTB). 1984. The HSRC/NTB investigation into the training of artisans in the Republic of South Africa. Pretoria: HSRC.

Human Sciences Research Council and National Training Board (HSRC/NTB). 1989. Investigation into skills training in South Africa. Pretoria: HSRC.

Kallaway, P. 1984. Apartheid and education: the education of Black South Africans. Johannesburg: Ravan Press.

Kraak, A. and Von Holdt, K. 1990. The training strategy of business and government: new opportunities for unions? South African Labour Bulletin 15(1):16 - 21.

Kraak, A. 1992. The national training strategy: the triumph of market ideology. Education with Production 10(1):129 - 160.

Lugg, R., Mabitla, A., Louw, G. and Angelis, D. 1998. Workers' experiences of the Recognition of Prior Learning in South Africa: some implications for redress, equity and transformation. Studies in Continuing Education 20(2):201 - 215.

Marais, H. 1998. South Africa limits to change: the political economy of transformation. London & New York: University of Cape Town Press.

McGrath, S. 1996. Learning to work? Changing discourses on education and training in South Africa, 1976 - 96. Doctoral thesis, Edinburgh University.

Michelson, E. 1997. Multicultural approaches to portfolio development. In: A.D. Rose and M.A. Leaky (Eds.). New directions for Adult and Continuing Education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Mukora, J. 2006. Social justice or economic rationality? The South African qualifications framework considered in the light of local and global experiences. Doctoral thesis, Edinburgh University.

Nattrass, J. 1981. The South African economy: its growth and change. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

National Training Board (NTB). 1994. A discussion on a national training strategy initiative. Pretoria: NTB.

National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa (NUMSA). 1991. NUMSA Vocational Training Project document. Johannesburg: NUMSA.

Pil lay, P.N. 1990. The development and underdevelopment of education in South Africa. In: B. Nasson and J. Samuels (Eds.). Education: from poverty to liberty. Cape Town: David Philip:30 - 47.

Raffe, D. 2003. Simplicity itself: the creation of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework. Journal of Education and Work 16(3):239 - 257.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1979. Commission of inquiry into legislation affecting the utilisation of manpower (Riekert Report). Pretoria: Government Printer.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1981. Manpower Training Act, No. 56 of 1981. Pretoria: Government Printer.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1982. Iron, Steel, Engineering and Metallurgical Industries Artisan Training and Recognition Agreement. Government Gazette, 13 August 1992. Pretoria: Government Printer.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1995. The South African Qualifications (SAQA) Act No. 58 of 1995. Pretoria: Government Printer.

25

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 1998. NSB Regulations. Available at: http://www.saqa.org.za/list.asp?key=Regulations&kw=NSB (accessed 25 August 2009).

Stoikov, V. 1975. The economics of recurrent education and training. Geneva: International Labour Office.

Wiehahn, N. 1982. The complete Wiehahn Report. Johannesburg: Lex Patria.

Buckland, P. 1984. Technicism and De Lange: reflections on the process of the Human Sciences Research Council investigation. In: P. Kallaway. 1984. Apartheid and education: the education of Black South Africans. Johannesburg: Ravan Press.

Granville, G. 2004. Impact of the National Qualifications Framework after ten years of democracy. South African Qualifications Authority Bulletin 6:1.

Nasson, B. and Samuels, J. (Eds.). 1990. Education from poverty to liberty. Cape Town: David Philip.

Bibliography

26

Specialised pedagogy: a comparative review of RPLpractices in formal, non-formal and occupationallearning contexts in South AfricaAlan Ralphs, University of the Western Cape

1. Background and rationale

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) was first introduced into the South African education and training system as a principle closely aligned to three key elements of the national policy discourse driving systems-level reforms after 1994. It was intended firstly, as part of the political discourse of transformation, to redress past injustices and ensure effective access for those who were excluded by the policies and practices of apartheid. Secondly, it was part of a discourse of lifelong learning, to render explicit and certifiable the knowledge and skills acquired experientially at work or in contexts other than formal schooling or Higher Education. Third, it was part of the discourse of an integrated National Qualifications Framework (NQF) enhancing the flexibility and articulation capabilities of the system with reference to all forms of learning and the workings of a national credit accumulation and transfer scheme.

The original thinking about RPL drew for its inspiration and design on the experiences of specialists and practitioners within South Africa and from around the world (National Training Board (NTB) 1994), mostly in Higher Education but with some applications in vocational education, trade testing and workforce development. Its inclusion as a founding principle of the NQF raised many expectations that with the necessary standards and assessment expertise it would be widely applied and recognised, thus helping to build an inclusive system of lifelong learning within and across the conventional boundaries of formal, non-formal and informal learning. However its implementation has proved a lot more costly and complex to implement than expected, and many of the embedded assumptions about knowledge, pedagogy and assessment have come under critical review.

This thought is reflected in a growing body of experience and research which, although relatively small-scale, suggests that RPL has not yet fulfilled its promise and that there is a strong case for re-

examining the reasons for this state of affairs, and for re-theorising the policy and practice. This paper is inextricably rooted in this history and in this sense reflects an important continuity in the search for what Judy Harris (2000) refers to as an “optimally inclusive” model of RPL in South Africa. This search begins with the first association of RPL with experiential learning theory and the espoused efficiencies of outcomes-based assessment, through to the current proposal for its re-articulation as a specialised set of practices serving different constituencies of learners and purposes (access, credit exchange, certification, curriculum development, social transformation) in and across different contexts such as universities, trade unions, community organisations, Further Education and Training (FET) colleges and workplaces in the formal and informal sectors.

In this paper I provide a summary of the literature reviewed in putting together a proposal for the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) Research Directorate early in 2009. The review provides some insight into the history of RPL as policy and practice in the evolving transformation of education and training systems in South Africa. Hopefully it will help to position current debates around its track record and potential within the complex field of teacher education and professional development in South Africa.

The history of RPL-related practice and research in South Africa followed an interesting trajectory after the first investigations conducted as part of the National Training Strategy Initiative (NTSI) from 1992 - 1994 (NTB 2004). That investigation positioned RPL as part of a commitment to building a fully integrated and inclusive education and training system which “should through assessment give credit to prior learning obtained through

2. Developments in RPL policy, discourse and research in South Africa

2.1 RPL in policy development

27

formal, non-formal and informal learning and/or experience” (ibid.5). The report was based on a review of emerging RPL-related practices in South Africa and in other countries, most of which were located in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) with a focus on standardised examinations, challenge exams, portfolio assessment and the validation of prior certified learning.

Not surprisingly, the various iterations of the definition of RPL in policy and legislation in the years following the NTSI process remained strongly focused on the assessment and accreditation of experiential learning, with specific reference to the outcomes and assessment criteria of registered qualifications and unit standards (Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) 1995; SAQA 2002).

The NTSI process took note of the fact that little was known about RPL practices beyond the confines of formal education and a limited range of artisan training contexts. It recommended the establish-ment of a number of pilot projects across a variety of levels, subjects, contexts and constituencies, through which to explore the concept and develop guidelines for good practice (NTB 2004:100). This suggestion gave impetus to the funding and development of a number of new RPL projects in the late 1990s (Ballim et al 2000), with a focus in the fields of adult education, nursing, teaching, business management, labour law, rural development and construction. Most of these initiatives were based in the public HEIs, not surprisingly given the time delays in setting up the infrastructure, regulations and standards-setting

1bodies of the NQF after 1995 . This development put the focus on attempts to implement and theorise RPL, on matters of central concern to the academic staff and institutions involved, namely, on academic standards, epistemological access and institutional readiness.

2.2 An evolving RPL discourse in South Africa

Notwithstanding its more 'academic' start, there has been a lot of work done over the last 10 years to build the necessary policy and regulatory framework for RPL in South Africa, and to test its viability at different sites of practice (Heyns 2004). The initial momentum was enhanced by field trips to

2RPL-related organisations in the United Kingdom, United States, and New Zealand, by an influential group of South Africans from government, public universities, organised business, and organised labour. These interactions provided the necessary insight and resources for further policy develop-

3 4ments and small-scale pilot projects at HEIs and in industry. It was only after 2001 that the first large-scale projects were started in the occupational

5sectors, for example for school teachers , financial

6 7advisors and construction workers .

The development of an RPL discourse in South Africa reflects an interesting but often contested representation of these practices in different locations and levels in the system. Much of the early work was done by academics, researchers and policy makers working on or with the first pilot projects at public HEIs and subsequently at SAQA (Heyns 2004) and related Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) (Dyson and Keating 2005). Some professions were more affected by changing policy and labour markets than others, and this gave rise to a number of innovative RPL projects associated with the upgrading of qualifications for personnel employed in the fields of nursing and teacher education. Development of the discourse outside of these environments is still not well

1 SAQA Act No. 58 of 1995.

2 The Council for Adult and Experiential Learning in the United States, and the Learning from Experience Trust in the United Kingdom.3 SAQA 2002.4 Initial funding for projects at the Universities of the Witwatersrand, Free State, Western Cape, and KwaZulu-Natal was provided by the Ford- and Kellogg Foundations and administered through the Joint Education Trust from 1998 - 2001.5 Over 11 000 under-qualified teachers started the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE) in the years 2001 - 2002.6 Over 11 000 financial advisors were assessed for credit in respect of new standards for professional registration.7 Some 6 000 construction workers took part in RPL initiatives through 24 centres nationwide.

28

researched or documented, although recent studies by Deller (2007) and Cooper (2006) focus on lessons emerging from the financial services sector and trade union education respectively.

The studies mentioned in the preceding section have helped to provide a framework for describing the range of RPL-related practices current in South Africa. They also provide the basis for the central argument of this paper: that the policy-based assumptions about RPL as a key principle in the construction of an inclusive qualifications framework in South Africa (HSRC 1995; SAQA 2002) cannot be realised without acknowledging its limitations as an assessment device and its potential as a specialised pedagogical practice. This argument is briefly elaborated in the literature review (Section 2.4 below), with reference to three distinctly different RPL practices, each of which is associated with its own set of purposes, agencies and preferred locations. Each has its own limitations, and importantly, each has been critiqued.

2.3.1 Assessment-driven RPL practices

Assessment-driven RPL practices are located mainly in the trade and occupational sectors where changing standards, labour market requirements and quality assurance systems have threatened employees without the requisite qualifications despite their years of experience in the field. Here the focus is on the design and implementation of cost-effective assessment procedures and instruments based on unit standards and qualifications which closely resemble the technical and professional competences expected in a specialised labour market. In this form of the practice, RPL is represented as a form of credit exchange (Harris 2000) whereby informally acquired knowledge and skills are assessed and certified as being equivalent in content and value to those specified in the selected unit standard or qualification. Summative assessment activities are

2.3 Describing RPL practices

foregrounded in this practice, but the process usually requires a range of other activities to contextualise the assessment criteria and to assist in preparing the evidence needed.

2.3.2 Portfolio development practices

Portfolio development practices are located in Higher Education, where non-traditional students are helped to prepare learning portfolios to support their applications for access to, or advanced standing in existing university-level programmes. Here the focus is on orientation to the discourse of formal education, and specifically into the meta-cognitive competences required to succeed in these contexts. Applicants are expected to re-articulate their experiential learning in relation to the conventions and portfolio specifications of the academy. This form of RPL practice understands RPL as an individualised developmental process which is consistent with liberal humanist traditions in Higher Education, and which draws extensively on the experiential learning principles and methodology commonly associated with the field of adult education.

2.3.3 Hybrid portfolio and curriculum development practices.

These practices are embryonic in South Africa but are well established at some colleges and universities in the United States and Canada

8(Michelson and Mandel 2004) . This form of RPL practice understands RPL as a set of boundary engagements whereby the knowledge and learning conventions of the academy are brought into dialogue with the specialisations of other communities of practice such as trade unions,

8 Examples of this practice at some institutions are reflected in the literature on RPL from Canada and the United States, Empire State College at the State University of New York and De Paul University in Chicago being the best-known examples; in South Africa at Workers' College, the University of KwaZulu-Natal and the Business Management Leadership Programme at the University of the Free State.

29

private companies or professional bodies. These in turn shift the social relations of portfolio development and educational planning from one regulated solely by the assessors or academic staff to one in which epistemological and pedagogical differences are recognised, valued and often contested in the pursuit of a shared set of objectives. In their ideal form these engagements require a set of institutional, programme and staff dispositions that can relate to and value discursive practices beyond the academy in an inclusive if not uncontested fashion (Harris 2000, 2006). The outcomes of these engagements are manifested in hybridised forms of portfolio development and negotiated curricula that reflect complex mediation of different sources of epistemological authority and pedagogy outside of the academy.

Harris (2000) and Luckett (1999) were the first to suggest some caution in the elevated advocacy that accompanied the first iterations of RPL policy in South Africa. These were not unwise words, as the brief literature review below indicates.

Harris prefaced her analysis with a review of international case studies located within Higher and Further Education and Training Institutions in the United Kingdom, United States and Australia. She was particularly interested in changes in the global knowledge economy and the impact of these developments on the re-articulation of post-secondary qualifications and curricula, especially but not only in the Further Education and Training (FET) sector. Her argument, which drew on Bordieu and Passeron's (1977) notions of cultural capital and habitus, and Bernstein's (1971) notions of encoded curricula, was that these institutions are structurally implicated in the stratified distribution of higher-order knowledge and skills in society and that RPL (as an up-front, assessment-driven practice) could not expect to alter that structure in any fundamental sense.

2.4 Researching the practice in South Africa

Only those whose prior learning and habitus were endowed with the necessary cultural capital would succeed in these practices. Harris's own reflection on the case study of learners from working-class backgrounds, based at the University of Cape Town, suggested that it was only those who had acquired a familiarity with reading, writing and critical thinking as part of their jobs that were able to counter this trend and meet the portfolio requirements for access to the diploma programme studied.

RPL was clearly not as optimally inclusive a device as had been suggested from the outset. In fact, the indications were that as an evidence-led assessment device, its potential to exacerbate the unequal distribution of knowledge and skills in society was greater than its capacity to redress these imbalances.

Other researchers have agreed with Harris's conclusions but for different reasons. Shalem and Steinberg (2006) use Bernstein's (1996, 2000) analytical framework to engage with the complex pedagogies at work in portfolio-based assessments for practising teachers seeking entry into postgraduate teaching qualifications. Their case study and analysis brings into question the assumption that Kolb's (1984) experiential learning methods are the most effective tool for helping practitioners make explicit their current competence (retrospective action) and potential to succeed (prospective action) within a specialised field of study. Their concern is not with the reflective and therapeutic value of the process per se, but rather with the nature and consequences of the “invisible pedagogies” (Shalem and Steinberg 2006) implicated in these forms of the practice. The different logic and internal grammars of vocational and scholastic discourse are left invisible to learners in these processes, and this makes the processes of recognition and assessment particularly difficult and time-consuming for the candidates and academics involved.

30

Breier (2006) and Breier and Burness (2003) take this perspective a little further in their study of how prior experiential learning is recruited into the curriculum through the conversations and pedagogic strategies used by students and lecturers in labour law courses at two universities. Different pedagogic strategies are identified and described in these analyses, and Breier contrasts the formalist approach to labour law education on one hand, where “both pedagogy and curriculum were often not appropriate for students with extensive practical experience of the Labour Law”, with what she refers to as a “disciplinary specific approach” where curriculum and pedagogical practices are “concerned with the authenticity of the programme in relation to the discipline and the field of practice” on the other (Breier 2006:92). This latter approach requires that learners are made aware of the logic and rules of the programme and how these regulate engagements with informal learning in the context of the course.

Breier's argument is crucial to this study because it provides a basis from which to recognise the specialised nature of the discourse and pedagogies involved in different sites of practice and how these shape and constrain the ways in which experiential learning is recognised and engaged in the formal curriculum.

In other case studies, Castle (2003) and Osman and Castle (2006) analyse the opportunities and constraints provided by the articulation of RPL both as a construct of Outcomes-Based Education and as a practice closely associated with the andragogical model of adult education. Their research confirms the significance of the philosophical and epistemological underpinnings of different models of the practice, and specifically the benefits of adult-centred pedagogies in the design and implemen-tation of portfolio development courses with practising teachers and adult educators. Osman (2006), who works from the perspective of critical theory, makes the further point that adult-centred portfolio representations are not necessarily good

for all learners, that they are expensive and time-consuming and must in certain contexts be weighed against the merits of more efficient models of assessment and credit exchange. She agrees with Michelson (1996) that they have a tendency to privilege rationalist formulations of knowledge, and hence to reinforce rather than engage the boundaries between different centres of epistemological authority within and outside the academy.

This research resonates with a small but growing body of work that has explored forms of the practice in the workplace, occupational sectors and trade unions. Cooper's (2006) study takes us into an exploration of the specialist nature of union pedagogy and its relation to formal university-based pedagogies. Her study, located within the framework of post-Vygotskian activity theory, explores the history, nature and predominance of different linguistic, performance, narrative and written tools in mediating the production and distribution of knowledge and skills at all levels and sites of activity in the organisation. These tools are all contextualised within the 'local and particular' activities of the union, but they are distinguished conceptually from the hybridised nature and form of union knowledge and pedagogy:

workers draw on different forms of knowledge ranging from local, practical forms to more analytical and conceptual forms, including elements of highly codified forms of knowledge such as economics and law (ibid.234).

The significance of this study and of another by Deller (2007) in the context of a private-sector-based RPL practice, is that they both speak to the historical and culturally embedded nature of the tools, languages and texts that mediate the construction and acquisition of knowledge in activity systems outside the academy. Cooper (2006) unpacks the significance of this embedded-ness for the design of university-based programmes for trade union educators, where scaffolding

31

strategies are required to mediate engagements between the different genres and uses of language and written text in the union and in the academy. Deller's (2007) study in the financial services sector explores the need for a 'corporate model of RPL' that recognises the significance of work-based tools and artefacts and the collective nature of the processes through which learning takes place in these contexts. These features have quite specific implications for the design of assessment instruments and processes with which collectively acquired work-based knowledge and skills can be assessed against national industry standards.

Recent research in the field of teacher education (Moll and Welch 2004; Volbrecht et al 2006; Breier 2008) has also had to grapple with these issues in a hybridised form of the practice that accompanied the introduction of the National Professional Diploma in education (NPDE) in 2002. Here the focus is on practising teachers who are required to upgrade their qualifications in order to meet the new norms and standards for registration in the profession. Explicit provision for RPL credits was specified in the design of the qualification, but implementing this as an up-front, evidence-based assessment practice has proved particularly problematic for various reasons.

Moll and Welch (2004) point to a number of logistical, funding and conceptual problems associated with the large-scale launch of this project in 2002. Their paper challenges the claim that RPL can serve as a mass access mechanism based on unquestioned assumptions about the value and transferability of knowledge and skills across different learning contexts. They argue for a distinction between 'domain specific' prior learning and 'domain general' prior learning, where both are worthy of recognition (credit) but where the latter is particularly significant for mobilising new learning in a changing programme or environment.

Volbrecht et al (2006) also discuss the significance of logistical, funding and institutional factors on the

design and implementation of RPL within the NPDE at different institutions. They point to the substantial diversity in practices at 17 HEIs , despite attempts by the sponsors to generate a common conceptual framework and set of minimum standards. In most cases, funding and other constraints had regulated the provision for RPL to a set of add-on portfolio activities quite late in the delivery of programmes, with consequent confusion as to whether they had engaged with knowledge and skills acquired prior to or during the course.

In other cases, the integration of RPL into the curriculum reflected what Harris (2000) refers to as the 'developmental' or 'spine' model of RPL which, in this case, the authors felt should be theorised as an instance of work-integrated learning. The essence of this formulation of the practice lies in its provision for a gradual immersion into the discourse of the new curriculum while at the same time setting up a critical, iterative engagement with the prior knowledge and related capabilities of the practising teacher.

Breier (2008) takes this theme forward in her 'fine-grained' case studies of the practice at three different institutions offering the NPDE. Her analysis centres around exploration of the 'practical wisdom' (phronesis) which some of the teachers evidenced in the interviews but seldom within the formal representations of their RPL portfolios. Breier argues that “the concept of practical wisdom should form part of any curriculum that seeks to recognise prior learning” (ibid.iii) although there are no specific indications as to how this could be done.

This brings me to the central proposition of this paper and the research proposal that we have put to SAQA. RPL policies have been tried and tested in different fields and institutional contexts with different purposes and results. As suggested above, its significance as an up-front assessment device for establishing knowledge and credit equivalence across different contexts has been increasingly challenged. It seems very clear from the above that

32

RPL practices are positioned at the interface of different, even multiple, communities of practice

9(Wenger 1998), usually academic on one side and 10

work-based on the other, and that its specialist role is to mediate an exchange of pedagogic dialogue and meaning-making across these different discursive practices. There is however, not much by way of a common language or theoretical framework to describe and analyse its nature and purpose as a specialised pedagogical practice with its own internal rules of description and with

11different applications in different contexts.

Much of rhetoric around RPL would suggest that its primary task is the assessment of experiential learning against the specified norms and standards of new teacher qualifications, and that this is a relatively straightforward exercise related to the design of appropriate assessment procedures and instruments. But the literature covered in this review suggests otherwise, and in doing so draws attention to the complex processes and translations involved as the teachers and their lecturers attempt to re-contextualise their situated knowledge of school-based practices within a professional programme certified by the university. RPL in these situations is as much an exercise in navigating the differences between the discourses of teaching at school and in university-based professional programmes as it is about the assessment rules and procedures for establishing equivalence in and across these two contexts. In both cases specialised pedagogy is at work.

This set of circumstances raises the central proposition of this paper: that not enough is known

3. Proposal for further research

about the specialised nature of the pedagogy involved in RPL-related practices for teacher education. Evidence from the Volbrecht et al study (2007) suggests that current RPL practices are highly diversified across the HEIs involved in provision for the NPDE, and that this diversity reflects the different epistemological and pedagogical assumptions about the value of teachers' experiential learning in South Africa, among other things. It also reflects the disparities of location, constituency and resources available to the HEIs across the South African Higher Education landscape. A comparative study of RPL practices across these institutions would provide a more detailed and nuanced understanding of the specialised nature and impact of this practice in different institutions and contexts.

In addition, none of the teacher education studies draws on the kind of in-depth analysis of the situated learning activities and discourse of teachers at school as Cooper (2006) does in her study of union pedagogy. Breier's study (2006) goes some way down this road, and her suggestion of phronesis provides an interesting way of classifying those components of teachers' knowledge which is both an asset to their practice but not easily recognised in the outcomes of the NPDE qualification. This gap suggests that further RPL research would need to include a comparative study of teachers-in-practice, potentially drawing on the conceptual frameworks offered by activity theory and the sociology of knowledge to analyse and compare the knowledge and skills teachers acquire through their teaching, with that taught in the professional programmes at universities.

This suggested research would potentially provide valuable data for developing a more refined language of description for RPL as a specialised pedagogical practice requiring dedicated resources and staff to implement. The overall question driving such a research project would be:

9 Alternately, a unit standards-based assessment practice. 10 I use this term broadly to include any forms of work, paid and unpaid.11 This is not just a South African phenomenon (Young 2006), but it is a problem that South Africans could work at given the prevailing momentum to build an education and training system that is both more inclusive and more responsive to changing socio-economic needs and priorities.

33

Under what terms and conditions, in the South African context, could RPL serve as a more effective strategy for widening epistemological access and authority in the system of education in South Africa, and for taking these practices to scale in different contexts?

A number of more focused questions fall under this umbrella, namely:

1. How effective are different RPL practices for engaging with complexities of knowledge recognition and equivalence in and across different learning pathways and communi-ties of practice?

2. What needs to change for RPL to become a more optimally inclusive and effective practice in the workplace, and in Further and Higher Education provision, in mediating access and credit transfer across different contexts and learning pathways in a differentiated but interdependent National Qualifications Framework (NQF)?

The value of such a study for policies pertaining to the role RPL can play in the further implementation and development of the reformed education and training system in South Africa is particularly significant in light of proposed changes to the structures and systems of the NQF. The move to an inter-dependent, three-sub-framework system, with responsibilities for qualifications, quality assurance and articulation resting with three National Quality Councils will require a more specialised and regulated environment for the articulation of qualifications and credits across different qualification pathways than was previously the case. A re-articulated policy for RPL as a specialised pedagogical practice may serve the new system a lot better than its current formulation as an assessment device for the certification of informal learning.

References

Andersson, P. and Harris, J. (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education.

Ballim, Y., Omar, R. and Ralphs, A. 2000. Learning assessment in South Africa. In: N. Evans, Experiential learning around the world: employability and the global economy. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Bernstein, B. 1971. Class, Codes and Control: theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.

Bernstein, B. 1996. Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Bernstein, B. 2000. Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc.

Billett, S. 2004. Co-participation at work: learning through work and throughout working lives. Studies in the Education of Adults 36(2):190 - 205.

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, I. 1977. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.

B re ier, M . a n d B u rn es s , A . 2003 . T h e implementation of Recognition of Prior Learning at universities and technikons in South Africa 2003: Draft Report on research commissioned by the Joint Education Trust. Bellville: Centre for Adult Continuing Education, University of the Western Cape.

Breier, M. 2006. A disciplinary-specific approach to the recognition of prior informal experience in adult pedagogy: 'rpl' as opposed to 'RPL'. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the

34

Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:77 - 96.

Breier, M. 2008. The Recognition of Prior Learning conundrum: Recognition of Prior Learning in a teacher upgrading programme. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council Press.

Castle, J. 2003. The prior learning paths of mature students entering a postgraduate qualification in adult education. Journal of Education 29.

Cooper, L. 2006. 'Tools of mediation': an historical-cultural approach to the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL). In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:221 - 240.

Deller, 2007. Towards the development of an RPL model for South Africa in the Insurance Sector. Doctoral thesis, University of Johannesburg.

Dyson, C. and Keating, J. 2005. Skills knowledge and employability. Skills Working Paper No. 21. Geneva: International Labour Office.

Evans, N. (Ed.). 2000. Experiential learning around the world: employability and the global economy. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Fenwick, T. 2006. Reconfiguring Recognition of Prior Learning and its assumptions: a complexified view. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:284 - 300.

Harris, J. 2000. RPL: Power, pedagogy and possibility: conceptual and implementation guidelines. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.

Harris, J. 2006. Questions of knowledge and curriculum in the Recognition of Prior Learning. In: P.

Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:51 - 76.

Heyns, J.P. 2004. Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL): in search of a valid and sustainable mechanism for South Africa. Doctoral thesis, University of Pretoria.

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). 1995. Ways of seeing the National Qualifications Framework. Pretoria: HSRC.

Kolb, D. 1984. Experiential Learning. Engelwood Cliffs New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Luckett, K. 1999. Ways of recognising the prior learning of rural development workers. South African Journal of Higher Education, 13:2.

Michelson, E. 1996. The politics of memory: the recognition of experiential learning. In: S. Walters (Ed.). Globalization, Adult Education and Training. London: Zed Books:142 - 153.

Michelson, E. and Mandell, A. 2004. Portfolio development and the assessment of prior learning: perspectives, models and practices. Sterling: Stylus Publishing.

Moll, I. and Welch, T. 2004. Recognition of Prior Learning in teacher education: lessons learned from the National Professional Diploma in Education. Journal of Education 32(1):59 - 181.

National Training Board (NTB). 1994. The Recognition of Prior Learning: current thinking and status in South Africa. Document of Working Committee 9, National Training Board.

Osman, R. and Castle, J. 2006. Making space for adult learners in Higher Education. South African Journal of Higher Education 4:515 - 527.

35

Osman, R. 2006. Recognition of Prior Learning: an emerging and contested practice in South Africa. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: Nat ional Inst i tute for Adult Cont inuing Education:205 - 220.

Parker, B. and Walters, S. 2008. Competency based training and national qualifications frameworks: insights from South Africa. Asian Pacific Education Review 9(1):70 - 79.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). 1995. South African Qualifications Act (SAQA) Act No. 58 of 1995. Pretoria: Government Printer.

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 2002. The Recognition of Prior Learning in the context of the South African National Qualifications Framework. Policy Document. Pretoria: SAQA.

Shalem, Y. and Steinberg, C. 2006. Portfolio-based assessment of prior learning: a cat and mouse chase after invisible criteria. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:97 - 116.

Volbrecht, T., Tisani, N., Hendricks, N. and Ralphs, A. 2006. Recognition of Prior Learning in the National Professional Diploma in Education: Research Report. Cape Town: Cape Peninsula University of Technology and University of the Western Cape.

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Young, M. 2006. Endword. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education:321 - 326.

36

Epistemological and pedagogical issues in RPL inteacher upgradingDr Mignonne Breier, Human Sciences Research Council

Summary

1. Introduction

Many thousands of teachers in South Africa need to improve their qualifications to meet new requirements for registration. Some have many years of teaching experience and there are powerful motivations to accredit that experience through the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL). Attempts to do this in the teacher upgrading programme, the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE), have encountered a number of difficulties arising out of the underlying conundrum: how does one recognise learning that one also regards as inappropriate and wishes to upgrade? This paper argues that teacher upgrading programmes, as well as official definitions of RPL, would benefit from a tripartite view of knowledge which incorporates the notion of practical wisdom as well as academic and everyday knowledge. The paper cautions against RPL for credit in programmes like the NPDE but suggests that students should nonetheless be given opportunities to construct portfolios and reflect on prior practices in the light of new learning. Because of the predominance of English as the medium of instruction, many will be inhibited by the academic l iteracies required and should be given opportunities to express themselves in their mother tongues.

This paper raises epistemological and pedagogical issues (defined as issues related to theories of knowledge and teaching) associated with RPL in teacher education upgrading programmes.

The knowledge issues are addressed in the first part of the paper in the following way. Firstly, I consider how RPL has been conceptualised in policy and law in South Africa and how it has been implemented in education, Higher Education and teacher education. I then argue that RPL in this country has been officially conceptualised on the basis of a dual notion of knowledge that distinguishes between academic and everyday knowledge whereas a

three-part conceptualisation, which incorporates the notion of practical wisdom, would be more appropriate.

In the second part of the paper I address the pedagogical issues associated with the implemen-tation of RPL in the teacher upgrading programme, the NPDE, where most of the RPL initiatives in teacher education in South Africa are concentrated. I discuss what I consider to be the main issues: the conundrum that underlies RPL in all teacher upgrading programmes, the emphasis on and difficulties relating to the practice of 'reflection', and the difficulties relating to the recruitment and recognition of practical wisdom.

The final part of the paper draws conclusions and offers some suggestions for the future concep-tualisation and implementation of RPL in teacher education.

RPL is one of the key principles of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) in South Africa. Put onto the policy agenda in the early 1990s by the trade union movement, it was originally designed as a form of educational redress for those who were prevented from obtaining a decent formal education under apartheid. It is recognised that many adults have advanced their knowledge and performed important and responsible jobs despite a lack of formal education. Many have played leading roles in their communities, in trade unions and in politics. This achievement needs to be recognised in the workplace (through promotion or appropriate remuneration, for example) or in formal education contexts (for the purposes of access or credit or advanced standing). There have been powerful arguments for the introduction of RPL that draw attention to vast discrepancies in the social and economic currency of formal and informal knowledge, associated with the dominant and marginalised respectively (see for example Michelson 1996). However, official definitions of

2. Part 1: Epistemological issues

37

RPL have not necessarily allowed for this redress vision.

The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) Act, No. 58 of 1995, set the following objectives for the NQF:

a) create an integrated national framework for learning achievements;

b) facilitate access to, and mobility and progression within education, training and career paths;

c) enhance the quality of education and training;

d) accelerate the redress of past unfair discrimination in education, training and employment opportunities; and thereby

e) contribute to the full personal development of each learner and the social and economic development of the nation at large (Republic of South Africa (RSA) 1995).

RPL could be seen to underlie every one of the NQF objectives, although it is arguable whether it leads to increased quality. It certainly aims to achieve access, mobility, progression, redress and personal development.

The Human Sciences Research Council's (HSRC's) Ways of seeing the National Qualifications Framework (1995) presented one of the first official definitions of RPL. Here it was conceptualised in terms of unit standards and defined as:

[G]ranting credit for a unit on the basis of an assessment of formal and non-formal learning/experience to establish whether the learner possesses the capabilities specified in the outcomes statement. Similarly a person

2.1 RPL in policy and law

could gain recognition for prior learning in respect of an entire qualification, provided that such a person is able to demonstrate the full competence associated with that qualification (HSRC 1995:3).

The next major definition of RPL was contained in the regulations on National Standards Bodies, which were passed in 1998 (SAQA 1998). These regulations stated that all qualifications may be achieved in whole or in part through RPL, which they defined as:

... the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner howsoever obtained against the learning outcomes required for a specified qualification, and the acceptance for purposes of qualification of that which meets the requirements (op.cit.).

Furthermore, prior learning “includes but is not limited to learning achieved through formal, informal and non-formal learning and work experience” (SAQA 1998; no page numbering given).

The SAQA policy document which fleshed out the concept of RPL repeats this definition and says it makes clear a number of principles in the development and execution of RPL:

• learning occurs in all kinds of situations - formally, informally and non-formally;

• measurement of the learning takes place against specific learning outcomes required for a specific qualification; and

• credits are awarded for such learning if it meets the requirements of the qualification (SAQA 2002:7).

RPL is about identifying, matching, assessing and crediting, the document concludes. However, it also hints at the difficulties associated with this

38

approach and motivates for a holistic vision of RPL that “prevents assessment from becoming a purely technical application” (op.cit.12) and “looks for the intrinsic rather than extrinsic value of someone's learning within a particular context and the ways in which some forms of knowledge are privileged” (op.cit.11). Among many other requirements, a holistic approach would:

(a) allocate “high priority to learner-centred support systems that will assist in preparation for assessment”;

(b) recognise “the rich diversity of knowledge and learning styles which candidates bring into an assessment situation”;

(c) take “as its starting point the standpoint of critical theory, which challenges the social and structural conditioning of the curriculum, institutions and related opportunities for adult learners in formal education”;

(d) challenge “the construction and content of qualifications to be more inclusive of knowledge, skills, values and attitudes that are acquired outside formal institutions of learning in society” (op.cit.12).

The movement from an emphasis on specific outcomes to a holistic approach to RPL signals the difficulties that emerged in the process of implementing RPL subsequent to the introduction of the policy.

In the unions, which had motivated for RPL in the first place, it was found to be a potential source of division promoting personal “competitive upward mobility” rather than “collective interest” (Cooper 1998:152). A Congress of South African Trade Unions participatory research project involving RPL processes at two unions showed that:

2.2 Difficulties associated with implementing RPL

... the vast majority of workers who went through the RPL process did not receive any direct benefit. Very few workers were re-graded, received any pay increases or had an opportunity for training as a result of being RPL-ed (Lugg et al 1998:205).

Lugg et al warned that RPL could “further entrench the oppression of workers” (op.cit.202).

On the educational front it was found that knowledge acquired in work and life experience could not be easily equated with that imparted in formal education contexts. Unions had promoted the NQF as a means to progress from 'sweeper to engineer', but there was an underlying flaw to this argument. Muller described the union vision of the NQF as “a kind of cognitive jungle gym” based on an “epistemological argument” propelled by “a social vision of integration and social justice” (Muller 2000 and 1997:97). This argument took issue with “the academic-vocational tracks of traditional education which are premised on a strong divide between mental and manual labour” and assumed that “all skills are essentially and in principle on the same epistemological footing” (ibid.), which had to be the case if they were to be exchangeable for credit.

Not surprisingly, RPL was to play a very limited role in Higher Education. Where it has been implemented, it has mainly been for the purposes of

1access to postgraduate programmes although in some professional courses, discrete practical elements are sometimes 'recognised' for credit (Breier and Burness 2003). Teacher education was no exception, until the introduction of the NPDE with its attempt to introduce RPL on an unprecedented scale, for reasons that have as much to do with finances and logistics as with a commitment to RPL (see Breier 2008).

1 Existing mature age exemption procedures permitted access to undergraduate courses.

39

2.3 Forms of knowledge

While RPL policy draws a distinction between formal, informal and non-formal learning, these forms of learning have not been defined. They merely came to be associated with sites of acquisition: formal learning with credentialled courses at universities, schools and so on; and non-formal learning with short, non-credentialled courses such as those offered by trade unions; while informal learning is considered to be acquired through work or life experience.

From the outset there has been an underlying contradiction in the official conception of RPL. It was intended to assist those who had missed out on formal education yet it required candidates to compare their learning with formal outcomes which are usually attained only through formal education. Furthermore, only formal learning has been accorded any serious analysis (through specific outcomes). The nature of the other-than-formal knowledge is barely considered. Academic literature on RPL has tended to concentrate on the social and economic currency of dominant and marginalised forms of knowledge (for example Michelson 1996). The author's early analyses of RPL were dualist, based on the work of Basil Bernstein (Breier 2003, 2006, and 2008). Harris (2006) has also utilised Bernsteinian concepts. This paper presents a progression from such analyses, arguing that there are limitations to dualist categorisations of knowledge and that a three-part distinction should be made. 2.3.1 Three forms of knowledge

I argue that there are essentially three forms of knowledge, but they cannot be aligned with the formal/informal/non-formal distinction commonly drawn. As stated above, this three-part distinction refers mainly to the site of acquisition and not to the form of knowledge. Usually two forms are implied: formal and that which is not formal. Sometimes these are equated with academic/everyday

knowledge and associated with the concepts of abstract/concrete, universal/particular, general/ particular and so forth, respectively.

I argue that there are three types of knowledge: academic/formal, everyday, and practical wisdom. In making this assertion I am drawing on the work of the educational sociologist Basil Bernstein (2000), and relating it to the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle (Crisp 2000). Bernstein has developed the concepts of 'horizontal' and 'vertical' discourse, which relate to academic/formal and everyday knowledge. Aristotle's concepts of episteme and techne together equal formal knowledge, while his concept of phronesis or practical wisdom provides the vital third dimension. Table 1 is a representation of the overlap.

40

Table 1: Three dimensions of knowledge

2.3.2 Academic/formal/vertical knowledge

Bernstein’s (2000) concept of 'vertical discourse' can be related to the 'formal learning' of RPL policy. It includes the knowledge we usually associate with the disciplines we teach, as well as craft knowledge. For this reason I have situated Aristotle's techne along with his episteme in Table 1 above. Techne is sometimes mistakenly assigned to the category of everyday knowledge. The verticality of craft-related skill and knowledge is often not recognised, usually because the means of transfer and acquisition is tacit rather than explicit (see Gamble 2004).

Vertical discourse consists of two different types, both distributed through principles of re-contextualisation: hierarchically organised, prin-cipled structures of knowledge, as in the sciences, or

TheoristAcademic/

FormalEveryday Practical wisdom

Basil BernsteinVertical

discourseHorizontaldiscourse

n/a

AristotleEpistemeTechne

n/a Phronesis

Form of Knowledge

a series of specialised languages with specialised modes of interrogation and criteria for the production and circulation of texts, as in the humanities (education included). Bernstein (2000) calls these 'vertical' and 'horizontal' knowledge structures respectively.

Horizontal knowledge structures can be divided further into those with strong grammars ('languages' that have explicit conceptual syntax capable of relatively precise empirical descriptions such as Economics, Linguistics, Mathematics, Logic) and those with 'weak grammars' such as Sociology, Social anthropology and Cultural studies. 'Education' as a discipline could be considered to be a form of horizontal knowledge structure with weak grammar. One means of distinction between knowledge forms with strong and weak grammars is that one knows when one is 'doing' the former such as Mathematics or Logic because of their specific rules and principles. In the latter such as Social Sciences, it is far less clear how one is to acquire the appropriate 'gaze' (Bernstein 2000:165). Another distinction can be drawn according to transmission. While vertical knowledge structures and horizontal knowledge structures with strong grammars are explicitly transmitted (i.e. the pedagogy makes clear the principles, procedures and texts to be acquired), horizontal knowledge structures with weak grammars may be tacitly transmitted, as in the crafts or teaching practices.

2.3.3 Everyday knowledge

Horizontal discourse is defined by Bernstein (2000) as 'commonsense knowledge' that all can access, that applies to all and that 'has a common history in the sense of arising out of the common problems of living and dying': horizontal discourse “entails a set of strategies which are local, segmentally organised, context specific and dependent, for maximising encounters with persons and habitat” (Bernstein 2000:157).

Examples include “learning how to dress, running

errands, counting change, addressing different individuals, using a telephone, selecting a video” (op.cit.159). Such strategies are not related to each other by any integrating principle and are therefore segmental.

If one considers that practical, demonstrable knowledge and skills are most easily recognised in RPL and that such knowledge is a form of vertical discourse, then one can see that RPL is really only concerned with vertical knowledge. There is no argument for recognition of everyday competences such as one's capacity to rent a video or use a telephone, although examples from everyday life are sometimes recruited into vertical discourse to

2illustrate general principles. We know that the other-than-formal knowledge of an adult who has limited formal education but extensive life experience goes far beyond what Bernstein defines as horizontal discourse.

2.3.4 Practical wisdom or phronesis

It is in this respect that the concept of phronesis is so important. While it might include the sets of strategies of Bernstein's horizontal discourse, it is certain that phronesis is much more than simply a set of strategies for particular contexts.

3Phronesis is a form of reasoning and of knowledge that has a moral or ethical component; is geared towards the achievement of a good life, in a manner which takes account of a wider community; and is acquired with experience. Furthermore, it involves a flexible relationship between general and particular, vertical and horizontal that cannot be determined or taught in advance.

In his explanation of phronesis Aristotle provides a simple example of the difference between particular and universal knowledge. He states that

2 See Breier (2003) for discussion of the role of the everyday example in adult pedagogy.3 In the same way that Science is a form of both reasoning and knowledge.

41

Bernstein Mode of Aristotletransmission

Vertical Explicit Episteme knowledge structure

VerticalDiscourse

Stronggrammar

Horizontal Explicit knowledge structure

Weak TechneGrammar

Tacit(crafts)

Indirect Phronesis

Horizontal IndirectDiscourse

the person who knows only that “light meats are digestible and wholesome, but [does] not know what kinds are light” is less likely to produce health than one who knows only that “chicken is wholesome” (Aristotle [Crisp] 2000:110). The particular knowledge (that chicken is wholesome) is more useful than the universal knowledge in this context, but practical wisdom involves both types of knowledge and extends far beyond simple questions of dietary choice:

It seems to be characteristic of the practically wise person to be able to deliberate nobly about what is good and beneficial for himself, not in particular respects, such as what conduces to health or strength, but about what conduces to living well as a whole (Aristotle [Crisp] 2000:107).

Aristotle emphasises that phronesis is acquired with experience and makes one wise as well as informed:

Though the young become proficient in Geometry and Mathematics, and wise in matters like these, they do not seem to become practically wise. The reason is that practical wisdom is concerned also with particular facts, and particulars come to be known from experience; and a young person is not experienced, since experience takes a long time to produce (op.cit.111).

Gustavsson (Undated: 4, quoting Nussbaum 1985) compares phronesis to the flexible ruler that was used on the Greek island of Lesbos to measure columns which had curves and grooves that could not be gauged with a straight ruler. It “adapts to the form of the stones and yet keeps its own direction” and brings “a kind of complex sensitivity to the outstanding features of a concrete situation”. Gadamer (1985:286) says moral knowledge (as he refers to phronesis) “can never be knowable in advance in the manner of knowledge that can be taught” but “has to respond to the demands of the situation of the moment” (ibid.287).

Source: Adapted from Bernstein (2000:168).Figure 1: Two categorisations of knowledge: Bernstein versus Aristotle.

2.3.5 Professional knowledge and practical wisdom

The Ministerial Committee on Teacher Education (MCTE) (2004) provides a definition of professional knowledge embedded in practice that echoes the concept of practical wisdom:

Professional knowledge is practical knowledge harnessed to an ethical ideal. It is a qualitatively distinct kind of knowledge, different from

42

The diagram in Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between phronesis and horizontal and vertical discourses by means of double-pointed arrows. Like horizontal discourse, its mode of transmission is indirect in that it is not specifically and pedagogically transmitted. Instead it can be gleaned indirectly through narrative, modelling and experience, both verbally and non-verbally. While epistemic knowledge is manifested in propositions and principles, and technical knowledge in products or artefacts, phronesis is manifested in ethically motivated deliberations, judgements and actions.

academic and technical knowledge, although it draws on both (MCTE 2004:20).

For the Committee, “the key to understanding the distinctive nature of professional knowledge is to understand the relationship between theory and practice” and the “necessarily theoretical nature of professional practice” (op.cit.):

The common understanding is that theory and practice are externally related to each other; that is, either can be grasped and cultivated independently of the other, and that whatever relationships there are between them are contingent ... This way of thinking goes along with the common idea that practice might be improved by the application of theory to it (op.cit.20).

The Committee argues that teaching practice is “theory laden”, that theory and practice are internally related to each other, and that “neither can be adequately pursued, understood, learnt or appreciated independently of the other ” (op.cit.21).

In my view, their definition resonates with the notion of practical wisdom and confirms the importance of this form of knowledge and reasoning in teaching and in teacher education.

2.3.6 Summary of the sub-section: Forms of knowledge

RPL was conceptualised, officially, in terms of a division based on sites of acquisition of knowledge (formal, informal and non-formal) but the only aspect of that knowledge that was examined in any depth was formal knowledge expressed in terms of outcomes and unit standards. Academic discourses on RPL tended to emphasise the social currency of formal and informal knowledge, associated with the dominant and marginalised respectively. There were attempts to define the forms of knowledge in terms of Basil Bernstein's (2000) distinctions of

horizontal and vertical discourse (including those by the author) but these distinctions did not capture the dimension of practical wisdom.

The tripartite view of knowledge throws light on the 'other-than-formal' knowledge which RPL policy has consistently failed to define. It shows that this view of knowledge includes and ranges from a form of vertical discourse (craft knowledge) to horizontal discourse (everyday knowledge) to a form of knowledge that requires flexible negotiation between both vertical and horizontal (practical wisdom).

In the next section I show that the NPDE, which offers RPL on an unprecedented scale, has presented enormous challenges for the educators required to implement it. They face all the complexities of the knowledge issues addressed above, while coming under bureaucratic pressure to use the practice to streamline a very large and unwieldy programme.

The pedagogical issues which I address in this part of the paper relate essentially to two underlying contradictions. The first is the contradiction inherent in official definitions of RPL that has been discussed earlier in this paper: how can someone without formal education have knowledge that is usually only gained in formal education contexts? The second contradiction relates to teacher upgrading specifically: how can one recognise, affirm and even accredit knowledge that is also thought to be inappropriate?

Two specific issues that arise out of these contradictions are addressed. The first relates to reflection, a practice which is emphasised in teaching upgrading programmes and in RPL; and the second to the role and recognition of practical wisdom in an RPL context. The focus is on the NPDE, which is where RPL in teacher education is concentrated, and I draw on research that is also

3. Part 2: Pedagogical issues

43

reported in Breier (2008), Ralphs (2006) and Gardiner (2006).

RPL has been introduced in teacher education in South Africa mainly in the context of the NPDE. I found that university departments of education have policies that make provision for RPL at all levels, but I could find no examples of RPL in initial teacher programmes, only a few examples of RPL at postgraduate level. In these cases, the candidates already had extensive formal qualifications (e.g. Honours level degrees), although these qualifications might be in fields other than those the candidates were seeking to access at Masters’ degree level.

The NPDE is attempting to implement RPL on an unprecedented scale. Designed to upgrade the approximately 40 000 under-qualified teachers practising in South Africa, it was first conceptualised as a 240-credit qualification and registered by SAQA on 11 October 2000 (SAQA 2000). It was directed at Foundation-, Intermediate- and Senior Phase educators in the General Education and Training (GET) phase of schooling. In 2004, the qualification was revised to become a 360-credit qualification that included un- or under-qualified teachers from Grade R to Grade 12, and teachers of technical subjects at Further Education and Training (FET)-level (Grades 10 to 12) (SAQA 2004).

The NPDE has the following key features: it is an interim qualification for upgrading purposes only; it is designed to have “a strong classroom focus” and to equip educators with “the foundational, practical and reflexive competences required for further study at NQF Level 6” (SAQA 2000:8 and 2004:1).

Students are required to acquire competences related to all seven roles of educators as set out in the Norms and Standards for Educators: specialist, learning mediator, assessor, manager/admini-strator/leader, interpreter and designer of learning

3.1 RPL in the NPDE

programmes and materials, as well as scholar, researcher and lifelong learner. They are also meant to have proficiency in “the pastoral role” (Department of Education (DoE) 2000) although this

4not accorded much weight.

The qualification rules require the qualification to be assessed through various means: case studies, problem-solving assignments, teaching practice in simulated and in situ contexts, portfolios of learning materials, projects, and written and oral examinations. Most significantly, for the purposes of this study, teachers are also required to 'reflect'.

Under the heading Recognition of prior learning and articulation possibilities the DoE instructed NPDE providers as follows:

This qualification may be achieved in part through the recognition of prior learning and experience. Providers are required to develop structured means for the assessment of individual learners against the exit level outcomes of the qualification on a case-by-case basis (DoE 2000:8).

The 360-credit qualification repeated this definition but omitted “case-by-case basis”. By this stage, it was realised that the scale of the NPDE militated against an individualised form of RPL (see Moll and Welch 2004 for discussion of difficulties associated with the implementation of the NPDE).

It soon became clear that the motivations for the introduction of RPL in the NPDE were primarily bureaucratic, designed to support distinctions between pay classes even though the teachers concerned often taught at the same levels. In the 240-credit qualification, Relative Education Qualification Value (REQV) 12 teachers were automatically credited with 120 credits whereas

4 Significantly, no noun has been found to represent this rather vague concept. The obvious 'pastor' has specifically religious connotations.

44

programmes. In this way, the teachers were able to reconsider their prior practice and knowledge in the light of new learning and with a new 'gaze' (Bernstein 2000:165).

An essential component of this approach was the practice of reflection, which is not new to teacher education, but embedded in most in-service teacher development initiatives. It is also an important feature of certain forms of RPL. In liberal humanist approaches, the candidate is required to reflect on experience and transform it into learning that ideally will match or approximate formal learning outcomes. Sometimes the reflection is required mainly for personal developmental purposes and to show general suitability for access to a programme. Critical/radical approaches associate reflection with the revelation of false consciousness and conscientisation. The technical form that is promoted in official definitions has little place for reflection beyond rational consideration as to how one can demonstrate competencies expected to match specific outcomes.

In the following sections I discuss the forms of reflection promoted in continuing teacher development and their implications for the NPDE.

In education policy, the concept of reflection is embedded in the notion of applied or practical competence. A feature of practical competence is reflexive competence; practical competence:

• is the demonstrated ability in an authentic context to consider a range of possibilities for action, make considered decisions about which possibility to follow, and to perform the chosen action;

• is grounded in foundational competence, where the learner demonstrates an under-standing of the knowledge and thinking that underpins the action taken; and

3.2 The challenge of 'reflection'

REQV 11s had to obtain credits through RPL. In the 360-credit qualification, REQV 10 teachers could be credited with 120 credits and REQV 11 and 12 teachers with 240 (120 automatically and the rest through RPL).

Because of a limited budget, the DoE needed to restrict the programme to a maximum of two years part-time. Instead of requiring the lower-qualified teachers to take an extra two years, it offered them credit through RPL. As the programme unfolded at the 17 institutions offering it, it became clear that the Department regarded the RPL component as little more than a bureaucratic exercise, in which all candidates would inevitably be successful. But educators still had to put together programmes that offered at least a semblance of the practice as it is conventionally understood.

RPL usually occurs prior to commencement of a programme and requires the candidate to demonstrate competences practically, or to show them indirectly in a portfolio in which they reflect on prior experience and their learning derived from it. This proved to be very difficult in the NPDE where providers faced the following conundrum: RPL is all about recognition and affirmation of knowledge and skills of value. The NPDE is an upgrading programme for teachers with insufficient training or who were trained under a system that is now discredited, having led to knowledge gaps and teaching practices that are now thought to be problematic. How then does one acknowledge in a positive way, the experiences of such teachers, as is usually required in RPL? To resort to the contradiction inherent in official definitions of RPL: how can one expect such teachers to know the learning outcomes they would be required to match?

A solution was to avoid 'front-end' RPL that would assess prior learning at the start of the programme in a summative way. Instead, RPL procedures were implemented alongside the formal learning programmes, sometimes quite deep into the

45

• is integrated through reflexive competence, in which the learner demonstrates ability to integrate or connect performances and decision-making with understanding and with an ability to adapt to change and unforeseen circumstances and to explain the reasons behind these adaptations (DoE 2000:2).

The form of reflection in the above definition is similar to that associated with the work of Donald Schön (1983) - that is, reflection in action rather than the reflection on (especially distant past) action associated with critical reflexivity (this idea is discussed later).

3.2.1 Reflection in the MCTE report

The Ministerial Committee on Teacher Education (MCTE) provided a very useful analysis of ‘continued professional teacher development’ that locates reflection within three of four models. In the ‘applied scientist model’, education is regarded as a scholarly science in its own right. Teachers are required to develop the theoretical tools to review the application of their theories, that is “for reflection on practice” (MCTE 2004:64). This model is often regarded as a 'front-loading system' of teacher education in which the novice teacher has to acquire the necessary theory before being allowed to practise. This theoretical knowledge could be knowledge of the subject concerned or pedagogical knowledge (ibid.).

In the 'reflective practice model', the goal is to foster teachers' ability to “reflect on their action in a deliberate manner through the use of conscious strategies” (2004:66), such as the keeping of reflective journals. Action Research (AR) is closely associated with this model of professional development, especially that model of AR which promotes self-reflection as a tool for reconstruction of one's own practices. The Norms and Standards for Educators (DoE 2000) and the qualifications

arising out of this policy document could be located within this model.

The 'critical reflective practice model' of teacher professional development is associated with campaigns for social justice and “attempts to develop a reflective consciousness among teachers to understand the patterns of hierarchy and power within the education system” (MCTE 2004:71). The organisation of teachers into unions and teacher associations could be seen as a means of developing social and political awareness among teachers through collective action and of galvanising support for the campaigns of the proponents of this model.

Only the 'master-apprentice model', which sees teaching, or at least the practical component of it, as a craft, does not accord a key role to conscious reflection. This model is usually used during initial teacher education programmes where teachers are placed within the ambit of a practising teacher. This model requires acquisition of tacit knowledge, usually achievable only through modelling and the showing of exemplars. However, it is possible that the capacity of a practising teacher to reflect on his or her action in an ongoing way (as in the reflective practice model) can be conveyed tacitly to the apprentice and thereby emulated.

Table 2 draws on the categorisations of the MCTE (2004) but supplements these by dividing the critical reflective practice model into two forms, with the new form denoted as Version 1 and the MCTE's form denoted as Version 2. The italicised words are those that have been supplemented. The rest are drawn directly from the MCTE table.

46

Source: Adapted from MCTE (2004:58).Table 2: Models of continuing professional teacher development

The revised categorisation in Table 2 adds a model of critical reflective practice that draws on Interpretivist/Constructivist traditions, like the reflective practice model, and has an emphasis on critique. However, whereas the emphasis of the reflective practice model (1)(epitomised in the work of Schön) is on current action, or the immediate past (i.e. the lessons taught today), the emphasis of the critical reflective practice model (2) is on past practice. More specifically, it is about critique of past practice. The latter model is promoted in situations where 'unlearning' of undesirable practice is required, for example.

In all three reflective practice models, practitioners are required to develop a new 'gaze' through which they can review their practice, whether past or current, far or near. The applied scientist model concentrates on the development and transmission of “theoretical universals” (MCTE 2004:63),

providing concepts and vocabulary whereby future practice (the application of the theory) can be reviewed.

3.2.2 Reflection in the NPDE qualification

In the SAQA specifications for the NPDE qualification, reflection is required in the following contexts: firstly, the final integrated assessment is required to measure 'applied competence'. In other words it should assess whether learners are able to integrate the following three competences:

1. perform important teaching actions competently (a practical competence);

2. understand the theoretical basis for these actions (foundational competence);

3. reflect on and make changes to teaching practices (reflexive competence) (SAQA 2000:78, emphasis added).

Secondly, in a practical situation, real or simulated, the learner must perform a range of functions including “reflect[ion] on learning and perfor-mance” and “develop[ment of] a plan or strategy for future action which reflects an integration of what has been learnt through reflection” (SAQA 2000:8 and 2004:7).

Research reported in Breier (2008) made it clear that many teachers had problems with the practice of reflection, particularly the older teachers who formed the bulk of the 240-credit NPDE which was studied. These difficulties related to their own training as teachers.

3.2.3 Reflection and fundamental pedagogics

Most of the teachers admitted to the 240-credit NPDE which we researched would have studied in the heyday of apartheid - the 1970s and 1980s - when the teacher education system, as the Teacher Education Audit later noted, was “segregated,

47

Development of reflective capacity

Requires modelling

Requires new theoretical tools/ language/ vocabulary

Requires development of new reflective ‘gaze’

Conceptual model

Master-apprentice model

Applied scientist model

Reflective practice model

Critical reflective practice model (1)

Critical reflective practice model (2)

Dominant theoretical bias

Behavioural modification

Empiricism

Interpretivism/ Constructivism

Interpretivism/ Constructivism

Critical, radical, feminist theories

Role of reflection

To perform or produce better results (Reflection is not discussed explicitly but reflective behaviour could be modelled tacitly)

To review the application of theories

To foster teachers’ ability to reflect on and in action

To reflect critically on past practice

To develop sensitivity to poser hierarchies and injustices

fragmented, authoritarian and dangerously unequal and inefficient” (Jaff et al 1996). The curriculum and underlying philosophy of the teacher education institutions where the great majority of South Africans studied was “didactic, authoritarian, outdated and of very poor quality” (Welch and Gultig 2002:4). The underlying philosophy in question is Fundamental Pedagogics (FP), the mix of phenomenological theory and highly prescriptive teacher manuals that emanated from the Nationalist-supporting institutions - the University of South Africa (UNISA) in particular - and radiated through the education colleges. FP is also an extreme example of the applied scientist model of teacher education.

Reflection, as conceived in current education policy and in RPL literature, was certainly not a feature of FP. It could be said that the FP approach offered certain tools (vocabulary in particular) with which to view and theorise the practice of education; but the authoritarianism behind the approach, the emphasis on received and de-contextualised knowledge, and the dense theoretical jargon that attempted to make a science out of the obvious all militated against critical reflection.

Welch has noted (personal communication 2007) that some of the older NPDE teachers would also have been exposed to a version of the master-apprentice model of teacher education that was presented in ‘Bantu Education’ and in mission education (education provided for people classified as Black in apartheid South Africa). Here, teachers were not required to know much more about the subject than what they had learned at school - they just needed to learn the procedures of teaching, and there were some schools with teacher training units attached to them where promising pupils could be taken further and learn from the teachers already there. “The notion of reflection was not much in evidence - the training was mainly procedural related to a set syllabus in a contained environment” (Welch 2007).

3.2.4 Reflection as a way forward

Welch and Gultig (2002:23) note that one easy way to react against FP would be to 'de-theorise' the curriculum; to concentrate on practice to the exclusion of educational theory. This move was to some extent evident in the early work done in Curriculum 2005 (the approach in early democratic South Africa) when the curriculum of teacher education was focused more on 'learner-centredness' than on disciplinary-based subjects. This approach could lead to neglect of development of subject knowledge and “the reflective abilities needed for teachers to develop their competence and transfer it across contexts” (Welch and Gultig 2002:23). Instead, a 'holistic' approach to teacher education “which remains focused on practice but which understands that practice is developed through both theoretical learning and practical doing as they operate reflexively on one another” is argued for (op.cit.24). In effect, Welch and Gultig (2002) are promoting practical wisdom.

The critical difference between technical and holistic approaches to teacher development, say Welch and Gultig, is the latter's focus on the idea of reflection. Reflection is:

(a) a prerequisite of improved practice - only by being able to stand back and monitor one's practice against some idea of an 'ideal' can practice be improved; and

(b) while some reflective abilities do emerge naturally, higher level reflective abilities are dependent on theoretical understanding and an active teaching of their application in practice (op.cit.27).

3.2.5 Difficulties associated with reflection

In Reed et al (2002) the practice of reflection is examined very closely in relation to an in-service programme, the Further Diploma in Education at

48

the University of the Witwatersrand in Math-ematics, Science and English-language teaching, set up in 1996. The authors draw on the theories of Schön (1983) and Farrell (1998) to distinguish between reflection “in, on and for action”, and a description of reflective teachers by Zeichner and

5Liston (1996) to analyse classroom data to group teachers in relation to 'evidence' of reflective practice.

Reed et al (op.cit.) note that it is often presumed in teacher education literature from developed-nation contexts that being more reflexive leads to being a better teacher. Their own research, undertaken in a developing country context, confirms this view:

[T]hose teachers who appeared more able to be reflective-in-action during lessons and reflective-on-action when planning their teaching or discussing their work, did offer learners richer, more coherent and more appropriately scaffolded learning experiences than those who appeared less able to teach reflectively (Reed et al 2002:133).

However, Reed at al. (op.cit.) also note that some of the teachers in their research sample had not mastered the reflective discourse of the programme. They found that differences in reflective capability were related to the following factors:

1. English language proficiency. Primary school teachers in rural communities were the least reflective and the researchers attributed this primarily to the teachers' very limited exposure to English in their school and community contexts. For these teachers, English was a foreign language. In urban and peri-urban contexts, where teachers and learners have opportunities to access English in the environment outside school,

English can be termed an additional or second language;

2. teachers' prior subject, pedagogic and educational knowledge, with those teachers with greater knowledge being more able to reflect than those with less;

3. teacher attitudes, or predispositions towards reflection, with some teachers showing enthusiasm to learn or already working reflectively; and

4. collegial support. The teachers found to be more reflective were those who discussed their work with one or more colleagues at their schools or with practitioners from outside agencies such as education Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs).

Research reported in Breier (2008) confirms the significance of rurality as a contextual factor influencing performance in the NPDE in general and reflective tasks in particular. Foundation-phase teachers who taught in African languages and did not use English to any great extent in their personal lives (which could include urban or peri-urban teachers), appeared to have the greatest difficulties in this regard. Volbrecht et al (2006) found similar problems in their research on the NPDE.

There are also cultural considerations that might militate against reflection. The MCTE, when discussing the reflective practice model of teacher education, notes that reflection is mostly required in writing. “The cultural preferences for particular modes of reflection beyond written reflection have not been fully explored” (MCTE 2004:67). The MCTE also queries “the degree of comfort with exposition of one's thoughts about one's practices within a public space of, for example, peer review/'de-briefing'” (ibid.). The levels of contestation, power plays and hierarchies that exist within the schooling context were not fully recognised, the MCTE suggests. “Reflective practice therefore presumes

49

5 No further reference is given.

particular conceptions of harmony and shared consensus … which is often not the reality of schools” (op.cit.67).

3.2.6 Reflection in a developmental form of RPL

Volbrecht et al (2006), in their report on research for the Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority, note that the dominant approach to RPL observed in their invest igat ion was an ex tens ion of the developmental model advocated by SAQA, in that:

... the entire curriculum including RPL was geared towards allowing learners to build on their prior learning through interaction with the learning opportunities provided. In this developmental model, RPL is integrated into the curriculum in such a way as to ensure that learners reflect on their prior learning and how it relates to new and future learning (Volbrecht et al 2006:59).

The models of RPL in the three institutions for the case studies of the HSRC project (Breier 2008) could be regarded, to a greater or lesser extent, as examples of the developmental form of RPL. At UNISA, RPL students were being given extra modules, which tested them on current practice and ran parallel to other similarly-structured modules completed alongside non-RPL students in the general programme. At the University of Limpopo (UL), RPL-type exercises were offered deep into the programme. All could be regarded as forms of developmental practice, although it is debatable whether they amounted to developmental forms of RPL. Of the three institutions researched, only Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) was offering classroom observations. NMMU also gave its students a chance to express prior learning through life history narratives. The students observed were at Senior Phase level, taught in the medium of English, and produced interesting and comprehensive narratives that were nonetheless more geared to showing their competence in terms

of learning outcomes than revealing their practical wisdom. This wisdom emerged in interviews with Ralphs (Ralphs 2006). At UNISA and UL we observed Foundation Phase teachers whose competence in English made it difficult for them to express themselves reflectively. Nonetheless they suc-ceeded in the reflective exercises set for them through a number of pragmatic means: copying each other's work, repeating examples from the course notes, and sprinkling their texts with jargon phrases.

3.2.7 Summary of the sub-section: The challenges of reflection

In summary, the practice of reflection is not only an important aspect of teacher upgrading programmes in general, it is also an essential aspect of most forms of RPL and was of particular importance in the implementation of RPL in the NPDE. There are, however, a number of factors that make it difficult for some teachers to engage in reflection. There might also be resistance to the practice of reflection given the personal exposure that it demands. In such contexts teachers are likely to find ways to satisfy the requirements as superficially as possible - for example, using jargon words or copying examples or other students' work.

Teacher-students should be taught the concept of critical reflection and ideally given opportunities to practice reflection in their own languages, given the advanced academic literacies it requires. The developmental form of RPL which allows teachers to reflect on their practices as the course progresses should be promoted. Whether it should be called RPL or 'work-based learning' is debatable.

Many of the teachers who embark on the NPDE could be regarded as having the deficits identified in Taylor and Vinjevold (1999:230, 234): “poor conceptual knowledge of the subjects they are teaching”, inappropriate teaching methods and low

3.3 Recognising practical wisdom

50

levels of “English linguistic competence”. A dualistic view of knowledge would write them off as 'incompetent'. A tripartite view of knowledge that encompasses practical wisdom recognises the many great strengths which such people might have, which have also ensured their survival as teachers in difficult times and inhospitable conditions.

The issue with respect to RPL is: how does one recognise practical wisdom and what can one do with it in the formal context?

Aristotle has advised that one should seek to understand practical wisdom by considering “the sort of people we describe as practically wise” (Aristotle [Crisp] 2000:107).

The following are accounts of two women seeking RPL in the context of the NPDE and who appear to be practically wise. I provide a brief description of each before considering the extent to which they were able to articulate their prior experience and the successes they had in demonstrating their practical wisdom.

3.3.1 The practical wisdom of Ms M

Ms M is a Xhosa-speaking woman in her thirties who is seeking RPL in a teacher upgrading programme. The following account draws on research by Alan

6Ralphs (2006) . Ms M has 12 years of schooling and two years of a Science degree behind her. She had to drop out of university in order to support her family, and took a junior teaching job which did not require her to be fully qualified. Now she is studying part-time through a university in Port Elizabeth to complete a diploma designed especially for under-qualified teachers (the NPDE). The course allows her to obtain credit for one year of the two-year programme on the basis of a written portfolio providing evidence of prior teaching experience and a narrative account of other work and life experiences.

In her portfolio, Ms M indicates the origins of her particular approach to life but not how these translated in day-to-day events. She writes that she came from a religious, hardworking family and that her mother was a teacher: “I attribute all my achievements and abilities to my parents ... They instilled values and norms which made me confident and positive under any circumstances” (Portfolio extract).

A crucial experience in her teacher development, as Ralphs discovered later, was teaching in a community wracked by faction fights. In her portfolio, Ms M writes only:

I started working as an educator at X school in Port St John's district which was a new school with a principal and all post-Level 1 educators. This is where I gained knowledge of admini-stration and management through acting as an HOD (Head of Department, Maths and Science) for two years until the school was closed due to faction fights in that community (Portfolio extract).

These two sentences are her only reference to this school in her portfolio, and although they show an alarmingly high position for a junior, unqualified teacher, they fail to reflect the practical wisdom required to work in such a school. In an interview with Ralphs, Ms M gave a far richer account of her experiences at this school and the 'practically wise' way in which she dealt with them:

I gained experience of dealing with traumatised children, having to understand where they were coming from, like they were old in age because they were dealing with this, that kind of stuff ... You have to understand where they are coming from, and that also, it creates compassion and patience with learners, you have not to rush them with anything (Interview extract).

Ms M's portfolio also gave no sense of the difficulties she experienced at the school in which 6 Also reported in Breier (2008).

51

she was teaching at the time of the research. When she arrived at this school she found students studying Physical Science at final-year level who had done no Chemistry at all. The school's Science equipment was almost non-existent and any posters that the teachers put on the walls were stolen. Teachers had to buy their own apparatus and improvise while also trying to keep burglaries at bay. “So it has been that struggle throughout the years. But it gave us strength and experience to continue” (Portfolio extract).

Ralphs' (2006) account of Ms M suggests a woman who is practically wise: one who is able to pursue a goal both her own interests and those of a wider community (education of pupils) in a manner that is both ethical (according to the norms and values imparted by her parents) and also involves a flexible relationship between general rules (her formal knowledge of teaching methods) and particular circumstances (traumatised children, lack of equipment). In the process she acquired the 'strength and experience' characteristic of people with practical wisdom. However, while Ms M was given the opportunity to express this wisdom (in a narrative essay in her portfolio) and had the English literacies to do so adequately, she chose to present an account of her experiences that is devoid of such detail and emphasises rather those aspects that are most likely to approximate the formal learning outcomes of the NPDE course: skil ls in administration, management, Maths and Science. Ms M earned a mark of 90 per cent for this portfolio.

3.3.2 The practical wisdom of Ms T

Ms T is a Zulu-speaking Grade 1 teacher who was 49 years old at the time of the research. I analysed her portfolio in depth and visited her at her Mpumulanga school. After observations and interviews, I concluded that Ms T had practical wisdom that was effective and valued in her life and work context; but hers was far less effective in the context of the NPDE than was Ms M, primarily because she did not have the particular forms of

vertical knowledge and skills that such a context required.

Because Ms T was a Grade 1 teacher she was required to teach in mother tongue, which in the case of this school was her own home language, isiZulu. By all accounts - my own observations as well as the opinions of senior staff members - Ms T was an effective teacher. Her fluency in Zulu was valued and she was also regarded as being a caring teacher, a very important characteristic in a school where, according to the principal, about 60 per cent of the learners are affected by HIV/Aids in some way or other, either through their own infections or those of their relatives. Many were orphans.

In interviews Ms T revealed herself as the sole breadwinner in a family with four children and a husband disabled by mental illness. To survive in such a situation she must have had practical wisdom. However, in the NPDE context, this was not obvious. The course required her to develop a portfolio of evidence in which she displayed how she had achieved certain competences by presenting evidence and then providing written reflection. Students were provided with the following questions to guide their reflection:

• What were you trying to do?• What had you been doing? • Etcetera.

Ms T's use of English is a distinct barrier to understanding as evidenced throughout her portfolio but particularly in her 'reflections' at the end of each RPL module. There is barely a sentence that does not have at least one grammatical error, but this is not the major issue. More significant is her use of jargon and the way in which she repeats words and phrases from the tutorial letter. The letter lists the seven roles of educators outlined in the Norms and Standards for Educators policy document (DoE 2000). Ms T's phraseology indicates that she has followed closely the sample reflections in the tutorial letter without providing the personal

52

detail that it demands (indicated by three dots) but does not state.

Ms T did not have the English vocabulary to reflect in any meaningful way, so she simply sprinkled her text with the Revised National Curriculum Statement/ Outcomes-Based Education/Norms and Standards for Educators-related jargon contained in the tutorial letter example. Ironically, her marker was relatively well pleased with what she did and she scored 70 percent for her portfolio.

The course that Ms T attended did not require personal narratives, which might have given her the opportunity to provide some sense of her complicated life circumstances and her strengths in dealing with them. However, she probably would not have had the academic literacies - which demanded a high level of English competence - to carry out this task appropriately.

A more serious problem is that Ms T encountered difficulties with UNISA bureaucracy which she was unable to overcome. She had been accepted for the course when she did not meet the entrance requirement - she had Matric but not a complete teacher-training diploma. Although she attended and completed the course and was under the impression that she had passed, her results were not released and she was not allowed to graduate. The bursary that she expected was also not paid and she was billed for the course fees. She was advised to settle the bill and register for the 360-credit NPDE.

3.3.3 Practical wisdom on a continuum

The qualitative extracts from Ms M's and Ms T's portfolios presented above indicate dual layers of phronesis that might be available for recognition in adult pedagogy and RPL contexts: the practical wisdom associated with the educational task itself, and that associated with prior experience. Comparison of the effectiveness of Ms M's form of phronesis in the educational context compared with

Ms T's suggests that there might be different forms, some more closely related to vertical (and written) discourses and some more closely positioned to horizontal (and oral) discourses.

Ms M displayed practical wisdom on all fronts. Firstly, she was sufficiently practically wise to present her prior experience in terms that indicated its proximity to formal learning outcomes (acting Head of Department for Maths and Science, Manager, Administrator). She was able to accomplish this expression because she could recognise what was required and had sufficient mastery of the academic literacies necessary to carry it out. She was also practically wise in the informal context, and able to articulate this capability in an interview in which other-than-formal knowledge was clearly prized. She was able to do all of these things because she not only had life experience but also came from a relatively well-educated family (her mother was a teacher) and had a relatively high level of formal education (Grade 12, and two years at a university). Furthermore, being a Senior Phase teacher, which requires teaching in the medium of English, she had daily practice in speaking and writing in English. It was also to her advantage that the portfolio gave her the opportunity to write a narrative, rather than merely performing a task, which might have tested her Maths and Science abilities.

In contrast Ms T probably displayed practical wisdom in her personal and work context but in the NPDE it was less obvious. Nonetheless the method that she did use - the copying of key words and phrases - was relatively effective. However, in dealing with the university authorities she was less than effective and did not obtain her qualification.

On a continuum from horizontal to vertical, Ms M's phronesis was far closer to the vertical than was Ms T's; in an academic context in which vertical knowledge is prized it was also more recognisable.

53

3.3.4 Practical wisdom and the pastoral role

One aspect of the practical wisdom displayed by teachers observed in the NPDE research (Ralphs 2006) related to their role in their communities and amounted to a form of pastoralism. Given the growing recognition that South African teachers lack sufficient knowledge of the subjects they teach, with severe consequences for the academic performance of their learners, there is a tendency to ignore the pastoral role. At the same time there is growing recognition that in the context of the HIV/Aids pandemic, the pastoral role is of great importance even if it has received little attention in education policy. Bhana et al (2006) note the huge amount of pastoral work which teachers in under-resourced schools in poor communities have to perform. This work

does not count towards promotion nor is it noticed in any public way by the teacher hierarchy. But, we argue, it is this work that is cushioning learners from the trauma of loss that many are confronting. It is thus vital for the well-being of schools, even as it is hidden from public recognition (ibid.5).

3.3.5 Summary of the sub-section: Recognising practical wisdom

A three-part vision of knowledge, which incorporates practical wisdom as well as academic and everyday knowledge, provides an opportunity to broaden the concept of RPL to overcome its contradictions and acknowledge the mastery of those who did not benefit from formal education and are therefore unlikely to meet formal learning outcomes.

However, practical wisdom is difficult to recognise in an educational context - except where it relates to educational tasks themselves - and difficult to express.

Personal, life-history narrative might provide an opportunity but herein one reverts to the

underlying issue: those with inadequate formal education are also unlikely to have the formal literacies necessary to construct such accounts.

This paper has presented a number of epistemo-logical and pedagogical issues related to RPL that are ultimately intricately interwoven.

Firstly, it has been argued that there is an underlying contradiction in official definitions of RPL: how can someone without formal education have knowledge that is usually only gained in formal education contexts? The paper relates this contradiction to the dual conceptualisation of knowledge in official definitions and argues that a tripartite notion of knowledge would be more appropriate. The dual categorisation does not capture the form of knowledge and reasoning that is acquired with experience, has an ethical ideal, builds communities, and has a flexible relationship between general and particular information a knowledge form Aristotle has called phronesis or practical wisdom.

A three-part vision of knowledge that incorporates practical wisdom as well as academic and everyday knowledge provides an opportunity to broaden the concept of RPL, to overcome its contradictions and acknowledge the mastery of those who did not benefit from formal education and are therefore unlikely to meet formal learning outcomes. However, practical wisdom is difficult to recognise in educational context, and difficult to express: it needs to be related to educational tasks themselves.

The second contradiction relates to teacher upgrading. How can one recognise and affirm knowledge that is also thought to be inappropriate? Many NPDE teacher-students acquired their teacher education in now-discredited programmes. They are likely to have large gaps in conceptual and content knowledge, and inappropriate teaching

4. Part 3: Conclusions and recommendations

54

practices. Many teach Foundation Phase learners in mother tongue languages and have difficulties with the English requirements of the NPDE programme. Their strengths are not in the vertical knowledge associated with the course, but in practical wisdom.

To recognise such wisdom, the course would have to provide teachers with opportunities to show their pastoral strengths in school settings and to tell their life stories in individual interviews or written narratives, ideally in their mother tongues. This requirement is extremely difficult to achieve in the context of a very large-scale programme.

If so, then the question arises: should RPL be attempted at all? There can be no doubt that the development of a portfolio is a valuable, even life-changing event for an adult. If it provides opportunities to display practical wisdom, it could be a major affirmation of life experience. But such a portfolio would do little to meet the specific outcomes of a course that emphasises vertical knowledge.

The Education, Training and Development Practices (ETDP) research report (Volbrecht et al 2006) provides an important solution in the vision of a 'developmental' form of RPL that is integrated into the NPDE curriculum and theorised as 'work-based learning'. The challenge for the Department of Education is to find another bureaucratic means to streamline the NPDE.

Aristotle. Circa 330 BC (Ed. R. Crisp. 2000). Nicomachean Ethics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bhana, D., Morrell, R., Epstein, D. and Moletsane, R. 2006. The hidden work of caring: teachers and the maturing AIDS epidemic in diverse secondary schools in Durban. Journal of Education 38:523.

Bernstein, B. 2000. Pedagogy, symbolic control and

References

identity. Revised edition. London: Taylor and Francis.

Breier, M. 2003. The recruitment and recognition of prior informal experience in the pedagogy of two university courses in Labour Law. Doctoral thesis, University of Cape Town.

Breier, M. 2006. 'In my case' … the recruitment and recognition of prior informal experience in adult pedagogy. British Journal of the Sociology of Education 7(2):173 - 188.

Breier, M. 2008. The RPL Conundrum: Recognition of Prior Learning in a teacher upgrading programme. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council Press.

B re ier, M . a n d B u rn es s , A . 2003 . T h e implementation of RPL in universities and technikons in 2003. Bellville: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.

Cooper, L. 1998. From “Rolling Mass Action” to “RPL”: the changing discourse of experience and learning in the South African labour movement. Studies in Continuing Education 20(2):143 - 157.

Department of Education (DoE). 2000. Norms and standards for educators. Government Notice 82 of 2000, Government Gazette 415 (20884), February 2000. Available at: www.education.gov.za/ dynamic/dynamic.aspx?pageid=326&dirid=46 (accessed March 2008).

Farrell, T. 1998. Reflective teaching: principles and practices. English Teaching Forum: October - December:10 - 17.

Gadamer, H.G. 1985. Truth and method (Second edition). London: Sheed and Ward Limited.

Gamble, J. 2004. Tacit knowledge in craft pedagogy: a sociological analysis. Doctoral thesis, University of Cape Town.

55

Gardiner, M. 2006. Research in the Limpopo Province for the project on Recognition of Prior Learning in teacher education, with a focus on the National Professional Diploma in Education. Case study report for Teacher Education Project 13. Unpublished report.

Gustavsson, B. (undated). Phronesis as knowledge. Unpublished paper made available to the author.

Harris, J. 2006. Questions of knowledge and curriculum in the Recognition of Prior Learning. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester, United Kingdom: National Institute for Adult Continuing Education (NIACE):51 - 76.

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC). 1995. Ways of seeing the National Qualifications Framework. Pretoria: HSRC.

Jaff, R., Rice, M., Hofmeyr, J. and Hall, G. 1996. The National Teacher Education Audit: the Colleges of Education. Report for the Department of Education funded by the Danish International Development Agency. Johannesburg: EDUPOL, National Business Initiative.

Lugg, R., Mabitla, A., Louw, G. and Angelis, D. 1998. Workers' experiences of Recognition of Prior Learning in South Africa: some implications for redress, equity and transformation. Studies in Continuing Education 20(2):201 - 215.

Michelson, E. 1996. Beyond Galileo's telescope: situated knowledge and the assessment of experiential learning. Adult Education Quarterly 46(4):185 - 196.

Ministerial Committee on Teacher Education (MCTE). 2004. Developing the field of teacher education in South Africa. Pretoria: South Africa, CD Rom.

Moll, I. and Welch, T. 2004. Recognition of Prior Learning in teacher education: lessons learned from the National Professional Diploma in Education. Journal of Education:23 June 2004.

Muller, J. 2000. Reclaiming knowledge: social theory, curriculum and education policy. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.

Nussbaum, M.C. 2001. The fragility of goodness. Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy (Revised edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ralphs, A. 2006. Recognition of Prior Learning in the National Professional Diploma in Education at the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University: case study report based on teachers from the Bizana District in the Eastern Cape. Case study report for the Teacher Education Project 13. Unpublished report.

Reed, Y., Davis, H. and Nyabanyaba, T. 2002. Teachers' take-up of reflective practice in underresourced multilingual contexts. In: J. Adler and Y. Reed (Eds.). Challenges of teacher development. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.

Republic of South Africa (RSA). The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) Act No. 58 of 1995. Pretoria: Government Printer.

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 1998. National Standards Bodies Regulations. Government Notice No 452, Government Gazette 393 (18787). 28 March 1998.

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 2000. National Professional Diploma in Education. Government Notice 898, 7 September 2000. Available at: www.info.gov.za/gazette/notices/ 2000/21554b.pdf (accessed December 2006).

56

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 2004. National Professional Diploma in Education. Government Notice 706. Government Gazette 26443, 11 June 2004.

Schön, D. A. 1983. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith.

Taylor, N. and Vinjevold, P. (Eds.). 1998. Getting learning right. Report of the President's Education Initiative research project. Johannesburg: Joint Education Trust.

Volbrecht, T., Tisani, T., Hendricks, N. and Ralphs, A. 2006. Recognition of Prior Learning in the National Professional Diploma in Education. Draft report prepared for the Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA).

Welch, T. and Gultig, J. 2002. Becoming competent: initiatives for the improvement of teacher education in South Africa 1995 to 2002. Paper presented to the Pan-Commonwealth Conference, Durban (July).

Welch, T. 2007. Personal communication.

Zeichner, K. and Liston, D. 1996. Reflective teaching: an introduction. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Reddy, V. 2005. The state of Mathematics and Science education: schools are not equal. In: S. Buhlungu; J. Daniel; R. Southall and J. Lutchman (Eds.). State of the nation: South Africa 2005 - 2006. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council Press.

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 2002. The Recognition of Prior Learning in the context of the South African Qualifications Framework. Policy Document. Available at: www.saqa.org.za (accessed 4 September 2008).

Bibliography

57

Work-integrated learning and RPL in programmesfor serving teachersProfessor Terry Volbrecht, Cape Peninsula University of Technology

Summary

This paper focuses on in-qualification Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and Work-integrated Learning (WIL) as related means of enabling in-service teachers to reduce the time taken to complete qualifications and register as fully qualified teachers.

The paper begins by comparing ways in which WIL has been conceptualised by the Department of Education (DoE) in the new Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF) and by the Work-Integrated Learning Research Unit (WILRU) which coined the term. Whereas the WILRU approach sees WIL as integrating 'work' into the whole curriculum, the DoE is primarily concerned with ensuring that learning in work placements is appropriately integrated into the rest of the curriculum and properly assessed. Both conceptions of WIL have implications for the design of in-qualification RPL.

It is suggested that a notion of WIL that goes beyond the above conceptions is implicit in the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (DoE 2006). The policy has a vis ion of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) that requires the integration of various modes of learning. This integration could include formal qualif ications along with programmes run by employers, schools and/or other role-players, and would need to address the policy's concern with ensuring the integration of contextual knowledge, subject knowledge and pedagogy. This expanded notion of WIL presents multiple challenges for the various role-players. Although the policy is silent on RPL, it is argued in this paper that RPL could play a pivotal role in CPD.

The emergence of in-qualification RPL in the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE) is discussed in relation to other approaches to RPL. These include the relatively familiar 'credit-exchange' and 'developmental' models usually associated with pre-qualification RPL. These familiar

models are considered in relation to other approaches that can be found in the RPL literature, such as 'Trojan Horse RPL' and 'lower-case rpl', both of which can be applied within in-qualification RPL.

The next section of the paper is concerned with the ways in which a professional development portfolio could be used within in-qualification RPL as well as within the broader conception of CPD. It is argued that the three features of collection, selection and reflection are central to the notion of portfolio development, and that these aspects present a variety of challenges to those involved in developing and assessing portfolios. A key consideration in designing portfolios and the related developmental processes is their location in the curriculum.

Pre-qualification RPL portfolios need to be re-conceptualised in the context of in-qualification RPL. Four options are worth considering. One option is the portfolio as the only form of assessment, as has been practised in some programmes for university lecturers aiming to professionalise their teaching. A second option comprises the portfolio as a tool for integrative reflection and assessment within a 'spine module' running through a formal learning programme. A third possibility is the 'Patchwork Text' as a kind of portfolio within other modules. A fourth option is the portfolio within Integrated Workplace Learning (IWL), in which curriculated school-based practice forms a major part of the curriculum. The potential of digital portfolios in the context of formal programmes and CPD is discussed briefly.

After a brief indication of the challenges involved in using digital portfolios, the paper sums up the general challenges presented by using portfolios as the key vehicle for in-qualification RPL. These challenges are the often underestimated com-plexities of portfolio development and design; capacity building required for effective integration of portfolio development into curriculum design and pedagogy; finding a place for indigenous languages in portfolio development; and ensuring

58

that portfolios contribute to the building of reflective capabilities.

In conclusion, the paper makes some suggestions for the way forward, the main point being that in-qualification RPL is not an easy option. The suggestions are for a situation analysis to gauge the readiness of role-players to engage with this option; for making in-qualification RPL an option in designing new qualifications and programmes for the HEQF; and national or regional workshops aimed at building the capacity of relevant role-players who would be involved in 'in-qualification RPL'. A final suggestion points to the large-scale planning required if South Africa is to follow international trends (with its distinctive trans-formational priorities) toward making portfolio development integral to lifelong learning.

This paper is concerned with one of five alternative routes that serving teachers are envisaged following to reach Relative Education Qualification Value (REQV) 14 level (DoE 2008) so that they can be fully qualified and registered as educators. The alternative discussed here is the third route, that of enrolment in a relevant qualification shortened by in-qualification RPL or WIL, the argument for this alternative being “that for serving un- and under-qualified teachers, there should be a reduction in the time spent on an upgrading qualification through integrating study for the qualification into the work that the teacher is doing on a daily basis” (DoE 2008:4). In discussing this alternative, I briefly consider the extent to which it may be desirable or possible to combine it with the DoE’s (2008) second and fourth alternatives, namely, enrolment in a relevant qualification shortened by pre-qualification RPL, and job competency evaluation independent of a qualification respectively. My main focus, however, is on how portfolio development, as a well-established RPL process, can, in various ways, be

1. Introduction

modified and extended with a view to shortening the number of notional learning hours associated with the credits required to complete a qualification.

I begin my discussion of the third alternative by looking at the definition of WIL in the new HEQF (DoE 2007), and comparing this conception to that developed by WILRU (Engel-Hills et al 2007). Then, within the framework provided by the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (DoE 2006), I consider the implications of each notion for South African teacher education and development in general, and for the particular alternative under discussion.

Next I consider where RPL might fit into the framework provided by WIL and by the national policy framework previously discussed. I give a brief account of how the idea of in-qualification RPL for in-service teachers has arisen as a consequence of research conducted into RPL in the NPDE (Volbrecht et al 2006) and then consider how this alternative could relate to the other main approaches to RPL identified and characterised in the relevant national and international literature. I go on to discuss some of the ways in which in-qualification RPL could be approached in line with the requirements of the DoE, SAQA, and the Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) of the Council on Higher Education (CHE), and other relevant stakeholders.

I go into some detail when discussing some of the forms a professional development portfolio could take in this context, including the electronic or e-portfolio. My main focus is on the possibilities and pitfalls of using portfolio development and assessment as the main means of shortening the time taken to complete a qualification.

I conclude the paper with suggestions regarding some of the actions that could be taken in the event of a decision to implement the third alternative. Some of these actions could be short-term ones focused on the practicalities of using this approach

59

in the current context. Other actions could be part of a long-term strategy for making teacher education and development part of a renewed national strategy for transformational lifelong learning.

The HEQF contains the following paragraph explaining what WIL is:

Some qualifications will be designed to incorporate periods of required work that integrate with classroom study. Where Work Integrated Learning (WIL) is a structured part of a qualification the volume of learning allocated to WIL should be appropriate to the purpose of the qualification. It is the responsibility of institutions which offer programmes requiring WIL credits to place students into WIL programmes. Such programmes must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed (DoE 2007:8).

This conception of WIL is significantly different from a definition put forward by WILRU, the unit which coined the term in proposing and then establishing a National Research Foundation (NRF) research niche area devoted to investigating various aspects of the relationship between the world of work and learning in Higher Education:

Work-Integrated Learning describes an approach to career-focused education that includes theoretical forms of learning that are appropriate for technical/professional qualifications, Problem-based Learning (PBL), Project-based Learning (PjBL) and Workplace Learning (WPL). What distinguishes WIL from similar concepts such as Work-based Learning (e.g. Brennan and Little 1996; Boud and Solomon 2001) is the emphasis on the integrative aspects of such learning. WIL could thus be described as an educational approach that aligns academic and workplace practices for the mutual benefit of students and workplaces (adapted from Engel-Hills et al 2007).

2. Defining Work-integrated Learning

The main difference in these two ways of seeing WIL is that the DoE conflates WIL with workplace learning, so that, seen from WILRU's perspective, it would be more accurately characterised as Integrated Workplace Learning (IWL). IWL may in some contexts be seen as a necessary condition for WIL, but it is certainly not a sufficient condition for WIL as defined by WILRU.

A component of workplace learning is often added to a curriculum without regard for how the rest of the curriculum should be designed in relation to the added component. This practice is sometimes linked to a related practice in which the added component is itself not properly designed in terms of being integrated into the purposes and outcomes of a qualification. It is the latter practice that prompted the DoE's position on WIL. For our purposes, this means that “a reduction in the time spent on an upgrading qualification through integrating study for the qualification into the work that the teacher is doing on a daily basis” (DoE 2008:4) will have to be the result of this work having been carefully structured, in an academically and educationally credible way, into the learning programme leading to a qualification.

The DoE's approach to WIL seems to assume pre-service qualifications, that is, qualifications and formal learning programmes for school-leavers that will prepare them for the world of work, rather than qualifications and programmes concerned with the professional development of working adults. In order to conceptualise in-qualification RPL in relation to WIL, however, it is necessary to consider some unusual features of teacher education and professional development.

Firstly, not all forms of initial teacher education conform to the concept of a professional degree, a concept exemplified by the relatively new professional four-year B.Ed as analogous to similar degrees in other professional fields. Pre-service teacher education may also comprise a formative first degree followed by a (usually shorter) teaching

60

qualification. In the latter scenario prospective WIL curriculum design or pedagogy may be entirely absent during the formative degree. In the context of the teacher upgrading project under consideration here, there are likely to be similar situations in which qualifications or non-formal programmes for serving teachers build on prior qualifications or experience in ways that go beyond WIL as defined in the HEQF.

There is a sense in which the DoE's characterisation of WIL as “a structured part of a qualification” (op.cit.) could be contrasted with or complemented by a more learner-centred notion of curriculum, one in which WIL is part of the development of lifelong learners who can integrate work and various modes of learning in multiple settings. The latter approach is strongly implied in the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (op.cit.).

The National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (DoE 2006:16) emphases that:

... both conceptual and content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge are necessary for effective teaching, together with the teacher's willingness and ability to reflect on practice and learn from the learners' own experience of being taught (op.cit.16).

The policy adds that “[t]hese attributes need to be integrated, so that teachers can confidently apply conceptual knowledge in practice” (op.cit). The policy further points out that research studies in 1995 and 2003 showed the limited impact of qualifications-driven and other teacher develop-ment opportunities (op.cit.17). This claim suggests that these interventions did not succeed in enabling

3. WIL and the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa

teachers as learners to integrate their new learning into their school-based practices as teachers.

In linking qualifications to CPD, the guiding purpose of the DoE policy is “to enable teachers to become less dependent on outside agencies and more responsible for their own professional deve-lopment” (op.cit.18). This purpose is based on international evidence which:

... shows that the professional education and development of teachers works best when teachers themselves are integrally involved in it, reflecting on their own practice, when there is a strong school-based component; and when activities are well-coordinated (op.cit.5).

The policy goes on to add that all CPD programmes:

... must emphasise the integrated development of learning area or subject content knowledge and pedagogical skills, together with a thorough understanding of the changing social character of schools and the skills required to manage learning in diverse classrooms (op.cit.20).

Other significant features of the policy response to the challenges of professional development are the promotion of the “link between language and learning, including the use of indigenous languages”; and the improvement of “teachers' competence in the language of learning and teaching, and in the teaching of literacy and reading [sic] skills” (op.cit.20).

It is important to emphasise here that the policy does not confine itself to qualifications-driven professional development. In addition it envisages school-driven programmes, employer-driven pro-grammes and other programmes which may involve Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), teacher unions, community-based and faith-based organi-sations or private companies. The effective coordination of the four types would require an expanded conception of WIL, one related to

61

WILRU's (Engel-Hills et al 2007:23) argument that effective WIL is dependent on workplaces being enabling environments for learning:

In establishing 'transdisciplinary partnerships, the problem is usually constructed as one for the university, its structures and traditions' (Boud and Tennant 2006), but there are equal challenges for workplaces and their practices. These involve workplaces becoming more 'academic' and 'educational' in the sense of providing opportunities for learning, support, guidance and reflection - all of which require an understanding of the constraints of contextual embedding and local practice on student development (Winberg 2007:23).

It is significant that the policy seeks to link whole school evaluation policy to the development of an integrated quality management system for the appraisal of teachers (DoE 2006:22) because this, if successfully implemented, could eventually lead to the development of schools as enabling learning environments for the upgrading of teachers and to ways of integrating appraisal and job competency evaluation with other forms of formative and summative assessment.

Where does RPL come into all this? It is notable that RPL is never mentioned in the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa. However, if there is to be CPD that includes a ladder of qualifications, RPL should surely be one means of making it possible to weave formal, non-formal and informal or incidental learning into a broadly conceived WIL fabric, thus making WIL a part of lifelong learning. I now turn to the notion of in-qualification RPL and how it relates to the other main approaches to RPL that have been identified and characterised in the relevant national and international literature.

4. WIL and RPL in teacher education and professional development

The idea of in-qualification RPL emerged during a research project investigating the use of RPL in the NPDE (Volbrecht et al 2006). There were meant to be two forms of pre-qualification RPL for serving teachers doing the NPDE: exemption from 120 credits for REQV 12 teachers and the earning of 120 credits by RPL assessment for the REQV 11 teachers. However, providers were rushed into offering RPL in their NPDE learning programmes before they were adequately prepared to do so, with the result that in most institutions RPL was offered within these programmes.

REQV 11 teachers were thus earning their RPL credits as part of the learning programme and in many cases having their RPL portfolios assessed near the end of the programme. For those used to seeing RPL assessment happening prior to a learning programme, either for purposes of access or advanced standing (exemption from parts of the programme), this approach seems contradictory and is one that blurs the distinction between prior and current learning. However, a possible rationale for the approach is captured by Moll and Welch in their description of the approach adopted within the NPDE at the University of the Free State (UFS):

The University of the Free State has put in place a continuous RPL system that recognises that some educators will not have achieved the required outcomes on entry into their programmes. What it seeks to do is to identify learners who are not yet competent, to put in place a support system whereby learners can be assisted to develop the required knowledge and skills during their period on the programme, with a view to them being successfully 'rpl-ed' by the end of the programme (Moll and Welch 2004:175 - 176).

Subsequent research (Volbrecht et al 2006) showed that this approach did involve some problematic duplication of RPL and integrated assessment, but UFS's approach could be justified to a significant extent if it could be demonstrated that the

62

applicants who would have been excluded in a pre-entry RPL assessment, did eventually achieve the exit outcomes of the NPDE and gain access to further professional study.

The UFS approach could be seen as an extension or modification of what is often called the developmental approach to RPL (Butterworth 1992; Trowler 1996; Harris 1999; Osman 2003; Breier 2005). Trowler (1996) sees this approach as being on a continuum with the 'credit exchange' model of RPL in which prior learning is seen as currency that can be cashed in to gain access or advanced standing. In Trowler's view, the developmental model simply gives candidates an opportunity to raise the exchange value of their prior learning to the required level. In the UFS approach, this opportunity is extended into the learning programme.

A third approach to RPL, sometimes referred to in the literature as the 'radical' approach, is meant to involve an epistemological challenge to the content or knowledge of the formal curriculum. This approach has had minimal impact in South African Higher Education, so I do not discuss it here. This does not mean, however, that I am dismissing the radical or transformational possibilities of RPL. Rather, I am suggesting that it might be more productive to use transformational perspectives to frame teacher education and development as a whole, and to embed the implementation of practices related to these within a “critical frame” (New London Group (NLG) 1996).

In this regard there are two other approaches to RPL discussed in the l iterature which merit consideration here. One is 'Trojan-horse RPL', the key feature of which is the location of RPL in a 'spine module' (Harris 2000:11) that begins prior to a formal learning programme and then extends, in contrast to the usual developmental approach,

5. In-qualification-RPL in relation to other recognised approaches

through the gates of the 'Trojan' academy, into the main curriculum. Harris identifies two strands within this approach:

One strand is to exploit and further develop the effects of globalisation and marketisation in education on education and the privileging of experiential knowledge and practice-based learning. A second is to do the same but with a more critical orientation, i.e. to keep open power and authority questions regarding the nature of new relationships between education and the economy (Harris 1999:135).

The location of RPL portfolio development processes within NPDE programmes clearly has elements of this model, with the extent to which the model is “critical” being dependent on whether, or in what sense, academic staff teaching particular programmes espouse a critical pedagogy or andragogy.

The other approach to RPL that is different from the usual suspects (the credit-exchange, developmental and radical approaches), is 'lower-case rpl' as discussed by Mignonne Breier (2005) in her account of how the prior learning of working adults comes into play in a law curriculum. Lower-case rpl resonates with approaches to adult education that treat recognising (and also problematising) the prior learning of working adults as necessary for meaningful and effective learning. One could go further and argue that relating new learning to prior learning is a necessary element in all education, but for our present purposes we need to focus on lower-case rpl as part of in-qualification RPL for serving teachers.

To do this requires first relating in-qualification RPL to the credit-exchange model of RPL, which Breier (2005) has argued is the dominant model currently practised in South Africa. In South African education a credit in a qualification is equated with 10 notional learning or study hours, so that it would notionally or normally take 1 200 learning or study hours to

63

complete a 120-credit qualification. However, a key principle of Outcomes-based Education (OBE) as practised in South Africa is that there are many different ways of arriving at or attaining a learning outcome or set of outcomes. This is well exemplified in the NPDE, in which providers were allowed to design their own learning programmes within criteria set by the DoE (DoE 2001) in order to arrive at a common set of outcomes, as specified in the qualification registered on the National Quali-fications Framework (NQF) (South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) 2000). Another key principle of South African OBE is that outcomes should be part of 'applied competence' that has foundational (theoretical), practical and reflexive elements. Here we need to look again at the DoE's policy document on the HEQF and in particular the section which reads:

Some qualifications will be designed to incorporate periods of required work that integrate with classroom study. Where Work Integrated Learning (WIL) is a structured part of a qualification the volume of learning allocated to WIL should be appropriate to the purpose of the qualification (DoE 2007:8).

As previously mentioned, what is envisaged, are primarily pre-service qualifications, but the statement has to be extended to all professionally oriented qualifications and take into account working adults entering formal programmes, in which required work cannot involve the kind of work placement that institutions have to secure for pre-service students. Furthermore, it is difficult to see how years of working experience could be translated into notional learning or study hours. Since there will have to be curriculated required work for serving teachers doing a qualification, the years of working experience can only justify a reduction in the time spent on an upgrading qualification if the experience concerned enables the learner to attain and demonstrate competence in the target outcomes more quickly and efficiently than a learner who has less experience and/or ability.

Here there are two main ways in which a learner's progress to a target outcome may be accelerated: firstly, if the learner completes given tasks more quickly than would normally be envisaged in the relevant 'notional' time; and secondly, if the provider uses assessment methods that enable some learners to bypass some of the formative and summative assessment processes intended for other learners. An example of bypassing formative assessment would be a scaffolded task in which some learners have to complete and submit all stages of the task, whereas others could complete the task with the scaffolding removed. An example of bypassing summative assessment would be doing one integrated assessment for a module or for the entire programme, rather than a series of summative assessments constituting what is sometimes referred to as continuous assessment.

Different providers will have different assessment strategies aimed at enabling learners to attain the desired outcomes. What matters in in-qualification RPL is that it should enable deserving candidates to reduce the number of notional learning or study hours that would normally be taken to complete the qualification.

At this point it is necessary to point out briefly that the number of notional learning hours could be further reduced through pre-entry RPL. There could be standardised and/or customised challenge tests focusing on:

• discipline-, field- or learning area-specific content knowledge and/or pedagogical content knowledge;

• language proficiency in the relevant language(s) of learning and teaching (medium(s) of instruction);

• the relevant academic literacy or literacies;

• the ability to reflect on practice;

64

• other appropriate target components of a qualification.

In addition to or instead of challenge tests, pre-entry RPL through portfolio development could create an articulation pathway and facilitate (re)orientation to formal study. If pre-entry portfolio development is situated in a spine module, this could be extended into post-entry developmental/Trojan Horse RPL/ rpl in a way that is fused with integrative assessment.

Pre-entry RPL that complements in-qualification RPL and is situated in a broadly conceived WIL as described earlier could also bring into play learning that has occurred in the CPD processes envisaged in the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (DoE 2006).

Such learning could be documented and assessed in various ways, depending on the kind of evidence required by the provider of the formal programme leading to the qualification in question. For example, a non-formal professional development course could have an optional summative assessment component specifically designed for articulation with the requirements of formal qualifications and programmes. It would also be possible, but not easy, to find ways of aligning job appraisal practices with the requirements of formal programmes. For example, documented reflection could be made a part of job appraisal in such a way that it meets the criteria for assessing reflection in a formal programme, or similar methodologies could be used for peer or mentor evaluation of practical teaching competence as part of job appraisal and of workplace learning in a qualification.

The various permutations possible in in-qualification RPL and in linking this to forms of pre-qualification RPL would have to be explored and validated through dialogue among the various stakeholders. If my argument about the relationship

between credits and learning hours is sound, SAQA should not object to in-qualification RPL if the assessment of the relevant exit outcomes is valid, fair, reliable and authentic.

For similar reasons, the DoE should not object in principle to subsidising programmes that allow for accelerated progression that is academically and educationally justified. It may, however, wish to provide criteria and guidelines for programmes that include in-qualification RPL. The nature of such criteria and guidelines would depend on the modes of WIL accepted by stakeholders as viable for teacher upgrading. The HEQC would have to be satisfied that its criteria for programme accreditation and quality are met, particularly with regard to IWL. All stakeholders will need to consider what vehicles could be developed to ensure that efficient and economical teacher upgrading happens in a way that does not compromise the quality of teaching and learning in our schools.

I now turn to what could be a key vehicle for WIL in teacher upgrading - the professional development portfolio - and discuss some of the forms it could take in this context, including the electronic or e-portfolio. In discussing the portfolio I draw on relevant literature, as well as my own experience of designing and teaching in an RPL portfolio course; of using portfolios for individualised RPL assessment for purposes of access and advanced standing; of using portfolios in professional development programmes for university lecturers; and of using portfolios to demonstrate the teaching competence of university lecturers seeking promotion. I begin with a general definition of a portfolio that is relevant to our concerns, and then consider briefly how this relates to the popularity of the portfolio in RPL. I then turn to a main concern of this paper, which is to examine some of the possibilities and pitfalls in using portfolio development and assessment as part of in-qualification RPL and WIL.

6. The professional development portfolio

65

One of the more frequently used definitions of a portfolio in formal education is the following:

A portfolio is a purposeful collection of student work that exhibits the student's efforts, progress or achievements in one or more areas. The collection must include student participation in selecting contents, the criteria for judging merit, and evidence of the student's self-reflection (Paulsen, Paulsen and Meyer 1991:60).

Dysthe and Engelson (2004) suggest that the key features here are collection, selection and reflection and add that each of these features presents challenges for the educator as well as for the student concerned. A challenge for the teacher as student or employee in the context of professional development is how to work with the features so that they serve the performative or represen-tational purposes of the portfolio (for forms of summative assessment, evaluation or appraisal), as well other personal and professional purposes related to private reflection and to the building of a database that could be drawn on selectively for a variety of audiences.

The three key features of collection, selection and reflection are useful for specifying concisely what one might expect to find in a pre-entry RPL portfolio. An influential model in South Africa, widely used in the NPDE, typically includes an introductory rationale for the portfolio, a curriculum vitae, a reflective autobiographical learning history, an exercise intended to demonstrate relevant academic literacy, and a set of appendices as supportive evidence related to the main body of the portfolio. This is a useful model for a generic and cross-disciplinary portfolio development course, with adult education and/or RPL specialists working in collaboration with academics from specific fields or disciplines who will assess the finished products. The pre-entry portfolio can take many other forms (Michelson et al 2004), but at the end of the day the portfolio has to convince an assessor that, based on his or her professional judgement, the candidate is

“ready enough” to undertake study in the target qualification, and, in some cases (as was intended in the NPDE), “good enough” to be exempted from components of that qualification.

Evidence gathered in researching the NPDE (Volbrecht et al 2006) suggests, however, that this is generally not a suitable model for in-qualification RPL. Firstly, the rationale motivating access has to be reconceptualised because access has already been granted, thereby requiring a different kind of focus on current learning as well as on retrospective and prospective reflection. Secondly, the autobiographical learning history, while often empowering for candidates and useful in bringing to light kinds of learning that might be disregarded in formal modules, might be less effective than other reflective genres in relating theory and new knowledge to prior learning and current competence. And thirdly, an exercise intended to demonstrate readiness in terms of academic literacy makes little sense after access has been granted, when students should be expected to exercise and demonstrate their academic literacy on a regular basis.

I turn now to a consideration of ways in which portfolio development could be used as an integral part of in-qualification RPL and WIL, and discuss some of the possibilities, challenges and pitfalls involved in four different approaches. First I discuss how the portfolio could be used for the formative and summative assessment of a whole qualification. Second, I consider portfolio development in a “spine module” (Harris 2000:11), looking in particular at the “capability envelope” (Stephenson 2001). Third, I discuss ways in which portfolio development might be used in other modules, looking in particular at the “Patchwork Text” (Winter 2003). Lastly, I look at the possibilities of a portfolio designed to be used as part of the IWL component of a qualification.

7. Portfolio development in in-qualification RPL

66

7.1 The 'portfolio only' approach

My understanding of how the portfolio can or could be used for the formative and summative assessment of a whole qualification for teacher upgrading has been significantly shaped by my experience of participating in the design of the Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education (PGCHE) (referred to in some universities as the Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education (PGDHE) and in universities of technology as the Higher Diploma: Higher Education and Training (HDHET)), and in the design, delivery and assessment (as internal and external examiner) of learning programmes leading to this qualification.

It is interesting to note that pre-qualification RPL has hardly if ever been used in South Africa to assess the extent to which lecturers might be awarded part of an educational qualification. But in universities that have used the portfolio as the sole or integrative means of assessment of this qualification, I have frequently seen what must undoubtedly be regarded as a form of in-qualification RPL, when lecturers who already have high levels of competence as educators are able to provide sufficient and convincing evidence of competence in fewer than the 1 200 notional learning hours estimated as necessary to complete the qualification. How could something like this work for serving teachers, most of whom are likely to be less strongly based in academic discourse than their tertiary counterparts?

In a 120-credit qualification for part-time students, this approach makes it possible to spend one year using only formative assessment of a variety of tasks including the kinds of collection, selection and reflection required to engage in them, and to devote the second year to the construction of the portfolio. In my experience, designing a programme with the only summative assessment occurring at the end of the second year presents major challenges in getting (part-time) students who are busy working adults to complete and hand in given tasks during

the (minimally two) years of study, thereby severely limiting the extent to which formative assessment can occur, and consequently failing to contribute to consistent high quality in the final products. I have, however, seen many excellent portfolios that have been the result of processes like these.

In my own university however, we have eventually come to the conclusion that summative assessment should occur throughout the programme. Initial indications are that this is a preferable approach. Another significant development in our own programme has been the shift toward greater integration of the daily working experience of students/lecturers into the design of the programme. This has brought its own challenges, both for those teaching the programme, and for the workplaces (departments) where the lecturers are based. In the case of serving teachers, integrating learning and assessment in the workplace is likely to present similar challenges. Research into the NPDE has shown that Education faculties in universities have variable levels of engagement with the schools where their students/teachers are working.

In considering the viability of the 'portfolio only' approach it is important to bear in mind that academic staff in education faculties are not necessarily well acquainted with the now con-siderable scholarship of portfolio assessment in Higher Education. Lack of this kind of expertise may be the biggest stumbling block to implementing this model, as portfolio assessment, if it is to be the only form of summative assessment in the programme, has to be very carefully designed and managed as an integral part of the design and delivery of the programme. It would be unwise to implement this model without ensuring the readiness of Education faculty staff. I have seen instances of portfolios developed by practitioners in Higher Education that fall well short of the required standards. Unless approached with great caution and rigour, this model could have disastrous effects. I would advise piloting the model in a few institutions that provide evidence of their readiness after an initial induction

67

into the model through academic staff development activities.

As I have already indicated, this approach can involve pre-entry portfolio development that then extends into and though a learning programme in a 'spine module' that allows integrative reflection on past, current and future learning, including the learning in other modules of the programme. John Stephenson (2001 and 2002) has used this approach in his 'Capability Envelope', in which the “envelope is a sequence of stages formally established as part of the total programme and is wrapped around the specialist content” (Stephenson 2002:2). His approach is based in a context where universities have more freedom than their South African counterparts to offer “customised curricula” that allow students high levels of participation in the design of the learning programme and its assessment strategies. The envelope is divided into three stages:

The envelope begins with an Exploration Stage in which students are helped to plan and negotiate approval for their programmes of study; continues with a Progress Stage running through the main study phase, in which students are helped to monitor and review their progress; and ends with a Demonstration Stage in which students show what they have learnt through the application of their learning to real situations relevant to their intended career[s] (ibid.2).

Stephenson's (2002) approach would have to be adapted in the context of South African teacher upgrading, particularly in the first stage, which could either focus on RPL for advanced standing or on orientation to the design of the programme and of the envelope within it, or both. The model has considerable potential for giving students integrative perspectives on their learning. It is strikingly similar in intent to Personal Development

7.2 Portfolio development in a 'spine module'

Planning (PDP), which has now become mandatory in British universities (Pottinger 2008), although often with a different location in the curriculum (that is, within one or more modules not designed as single, discrete 'envelopes').

The main challenges of the model are in curriculum design, coordination and management, even more so if the curriculum includes workplace learning. Aspects of the model could be incorporated into the portfolio-only approach, and my cautionary remarks about needing to pilot the portfolio-only approach apply here as well.

A key consideration in using a spine module to accelerate progression through a qualification would be the number of credits assigned to the module. The guiding principle here would need to be the extent to which the module contributes to the attainment of the exit and cross-field outcomes of the qualification. I have externally examined an e-portfolio in which a lecturer, after completing a portfolio development module comprising approximately 60 credits, provided convincing evidence of competence in relation to the exit outcomes of the PGCHE.

The possibilities for using portfolio development to reduce the time taken to complete a qualification need not be confined to the portfolio-only or spine module approaches. Portfolio development, particularly in the form of what is currently referred to as PDP, can be a feature of any module in a programme. Here I will focus on the Patchwork Text, since I believe it could be used to build flexibility into assessment strategies aiming to use a mix of formative and summative assessments in pro-moting learning and measuring achievement.

The Patchwork Text approach has been developed by Richard Winter (2003) and others as a critical

7.3 Using portfolio development in other modules: Personal Development Planning and the 'Patchwork Text'

68

response to some of the dominant forms of assessment in Higher Education, particularly the essay which, to the extent that it often involves “reformulating texts” (Lea 1999), is limited in its ability to favour a model of teaching and learning focused on dialogue, critical reflection, reflexivity and self-evaluation (Barnett 1992:26).

The Patchwork Text is defined as follows:

The essence of a patchwork is that it consists of a variety of small sections, each of which is complete in itself, and that the overall unity of these component sections, although planned in advance, is finalised retrospectively, when they are “stitched together” (Winter 2003:112).

He acknowledges that the Patchwork Text may be seen as a modification of the portfolio, but claims the term is not important:

What is important, however, is that a patchwork is not just a 'collection' but a 'pattern': in the end it does have a unity, albeit made up of separate components. The unity of the Patchwork Text has two dimensions. To begin with it is defined by academic staff, as they carefully derive a series of tasks from the course material. And finally it is, as it were, re-defined by individual students, who review (and perhaps edit) their separate pieces of work in order to write their final section as an interpretation of what the course material 'means' to them now (see Scoggins and Winter 1999). In this way, one might argue, the Patchwork Text seeks to integrate the different (and apparently opposed) assessment advantages of the essay (unified structure) and the portfolio (individual reflection) (op.cit.119).

This suggests that we should add 'connection' to the three features of collection, selection and reflection referred to earlier. This practice could also bring portfolios of all kinds closer to the intentions of WIL. My own experience of working with the pro-

fessional development portfolio in tertiary staff development has revealed considerable difficulty in achieving the kind of pattern to which Winter (2003) refers. The greater the span of work to be integrated (as in the portfolio-only approach), the greater the difficulty. This suggests that it might be preferable and more manageable to use the Patchwork Text approach in structures or modules that are not meant to be envelopes. Brown (2004) points to the potential in this regard in her example of the use of the Patchwork Text in a module entitled Perspectives on Research and Knowledge in Professional Practice. In opening the final 'Synthesis' section of her Patchwork Text she writes:

Prior to starting this module I believed that my previous knowledge of research, both qualitative and quantitative, enabled me to critically analyze the validity of research articles before applying their recommendations. Thus I believed that my practice was underpinned by research. On reflection, however, my knowledge was inadequate to effectively judge the context and relevance of a piece of research and therefore its true implications for my professional practice (Brown 2004:178).

Brown concludes:

I now believe that an understanding of the research process and ongoing multi-agency reflection is key in the relationship between research, knowledge and professional practice (op.cit.179).

These views seem to resonate with the kind of learning and professionalism envisaged in the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development in South Africa (DoE 2006).The kind of module referred to here has the potential for integrating work, knowledge and learning in ways that may be more limited than in the previous approaches I have discussed, but may be more manageable, especially in the initial stages of implementing in-qualification RPL and WIL. The

69

challenges for this approach include identifying and designing the most appropriate module(s) that could benefit from the approach, assigning the appropriate number of credits to these modules, designing optimum assessment strategies and tasks, and developing staff and student awareness of how to use unfamiliar written genres.

This IWL approach would need to build on whatever experience and expertise is available to adapt and modify cooperative education work placements and/or teaching practice periods so that they address the challenges of a more extensive partnership between a student, a particular educational faculty offering a professional development programme, and a school employing the student as a teacher. .

Curriculum designers would need to consider how many credits could be legitimately allocated to a workplace module, bearing in mind the variable capacity of schools to create enabling learning environments for serving teachers.

Capacity issues could possibly be addressed through using a cluster of schools, particularly to increase the potential for collaborative work, peer feedback and/or mentoring. Even more than in the Patchwork Text approach, a major challenge in IWL would be designing the optimum assessment strategy and tasks, in this case needing to involve assessors in the workplace as well as the university, and developing the capacity of teacher-students and other assessors to ensure effective formative assessments as well as valid, reliable and authentic summative assessments. There are certainly possibilities here for assessment strategies to be constructed around portfolio development (including Patchwork Texts).

This approach has potential to be linked constructively to the implementation of whole-school evaluation policy and the development of an integrated quality management system for the

7.4 Portfolio development in the IWL approach

appraisal of teachers (DoE 2006:22). Any project aiming for this would need to be research-based, drawing on relevant literature (e.g. Eraut 1996 and 2002) and use some of the more recent theoretical perspectives that could be applied to in-qualification RPL, such as Activity Theory (Engeström 2001; Anderson and Harris 2006).

Bearing in mind current national attempts to improve success rates in Higher Education through extended curricula, it might be possible to make the work placement a 'capstone module' and to extend the period required to complete this module by complementing the formal programme with relevant non-formal interventions, for the student, for the school(s) involved and/or for all role-players working collaboratively.

Extended curricula, as currently practised and contemplated by the DoE, also bring in the possibility of having a common curriculum for the first stage of a learning programme, after which students who demonstrate the requisite com-petence levels could be streamed into standard, extended or accelerated tracks. Portfolio develop-ment could, in different ways, be built into each of these tracks, with clearly defined places for IWL.

Before concluding this section on possible approaches to in-qualification RPL, I comment briefly on the possibilities and challenges presented by digital technology for portfolio development in teacher education and upgrading.

Dysthe and Engelsen (2004) have drawn attention to the potential of the new technologies to enrich and expand the learning environments in professional development. The model they propose seeks to use these technologies in new ways to promote collaborative learning, meta-reflection, criteria development and self- and peer assessment (ibid.255). The technologies have potential to address a number of other challenges. This

7.5 Digital technologies and portfolio development

70

potential includes designing effective formats for long-distance collaboration involving the generation and sharing of resources, and using multimedia effectively as tools in multilingual methods of delivery and forms of assessment that give students opportunities to represent their competences in media other than written texts (in for example, videographic representations of classroom practice). Digital technologies have potential to give teachers a powerful tool for documenting and integrating material that could be used, either in formal educational settings, or in the school-based appraisal of teaching, to facilitate their professional development and represent their achievements. In using e-portfolios for collaborative academic staff development (Volbrecht et al 2008), I have experienced both the positive potential and challenges of using the new technology. As Dysthe and Engelsen (2004) point out, a great deal of learning has to go into using the technologies effectively. There may be Education faculties and schools that are ready to work collaboratively on the use of e-portfolios in the professional development of teachers, but at this stage I expect these to be few and far between. The University of South Africa (UNISA) being a distance-learning organisation may of course be expected to explore the use of e-portfolios, but whether this could involve the effective collaboration of schools is another matter.

To conclude this section on some of the possible approaches to in-qualification RPL, I sum up what I see as the general challenges for all the approaches. The first is the often underestimated complexity of portfolio development and construction. I have seen poorly constructed portfolios intended to represent quality in teaching and learning not only in the much-maligned NPDE, but at all levels of Higher Education, including portfolios presented by academic staff seeking full professorships. The main

7.6 General challenges for portfolio development in in-qualification RPL

difficulties are integrating the portfolio into curriculum design and assessment strategies (where Dysthe and Engelsen (2004:255) suggest that the core issue seems to be the relation between formative and summative assessment); creating a patterned structure for the portfolio; finding a harmonious blend of academic and personally reflective registers; finding the right balance between description of practice and theorised analysis of practice; finding ways of demonstrating or ascertaining whether teachers have extended or restricted repertoires of practices; and making use of multiple genres and technological modalities to represent the self and one's knowledge, practical skills and reflective capabilities as a teacher.

A second challenge is related to the first: how to build the capacity of academic staff in Education faculties to master the complexities involved in teaching their students how to use portfolios effectively, particularly as tools for developing reflective capabilities. This capacity-building would need to involve academic staff with experience of portfolio development, either in teacher education (as in the case of Dysthe and Engelsen 2004), or in academic staff development in qualifications like the PGCHE.

The centrality of portfolio development to in-qualification RPL presents a third major challenge, which is to adapt and/or design curricula that can accelerate teacher upgrading and development without compromising quality, and to ensure that teachers not only have opportunities to be rewarded for what they have already learned, but keep abreast of new developments both nationally and internationally.

A fourth major challenge given the central importance of reflection in portfolio development, is how to bring indigenous languages into reflective processes, and to give multilingual teachers opportunities to benefit from demonstrations of competence in the use of their multilingual repertoires in their classroom practice and

71

interactions with fellow students in formal and non-formal teacher education programmes.

The final challenge is a long-term one on a large scale: that of making the building of reflective capabilities part of a renewed national project to implement a transformation philosophy of lifelong learning. Efforts of this kind, including the use of e-portfolios at all levels of education and in workplaces, are already in evidence in some developed countries.

By this point it should be clear that implementing in-qualification RPL is not an easy option. Nevertheless, the possibilities are intriguing, and I conclude the paper with a few suggestions for some of the actions that could be taken in the event of a decision to implement one or other approach regarding in-qualification RPL. Some of these actions could be short-term ones focused on the practicalities of using this approach in current contexts; others could form part of a long-term strategy for making teacher education and development part of a renewed national strategy for transformational lifelong learning.

A first step could be to conduct a survey of Education faculties, investigating the extent to which they are already implementing and/or have experienced problems with aspects of one or more of the approaches I have discussed, and then gauging their willingness to try out or pilot more extensive use of in-qualification RPL. To a certain extent this has already been done in previous research into the use of RPL in South African teacher education (Shalem 2001; Osman 2003; Shalem and Steinberg 2006), and into the NPDE in particular (Mays 2004; Moll and Welch 2004; Volbrecht et al 2006; and Breier et al 2007).

A second step could be establish the extent to which planning for in-qualification RPL should or could be part of designing new qualifications and learning

8. Conclusion: looking ahead

programmes related to the new HEQF. This action would need to involve relevant stakeholders, including RPL and Higher Education curriculum experts, in exploring the possibilities and constraints in the various relevant contexts.

A third step, if there is sufficient interest in implementing or developing some of the ideas in this paper, could be to organise national or regional workshops involving relevant stakeholders that could enhance the capacity of staff teaching in teacher development programmes to design appropriate in-qualification RPL curricula, including the relevant assessment strategies and methods.

Alongside these moves, if there is interest in expanding the use of PDPs and/or the use of e-portfolios at several or all levels of national and or provincial education and training, steps could be taken to explore the possibilities around policy development and implementation in this regard. It goes without saying that taking this long stride will need considerable vision and political will.

Andersson, P. and Harris, J. (Eds.). 2006. Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education.

Barnett, R. 1992. Improving Higher Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Boud, D. and Solomon, N. (Eds.). 2001. Work-based learning: a new Higher Education? Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Boud, D. and Tennant, M. 2006. Putting doctoral education to work: challenges to academic practice. Higher Education Research and Development 25(3):293 - 306.

References

72

Breier, M. 2005. A disciplinary-specific approach to the recognition of prior informal experience in adult pedagogy: 'rpl' as opposed to 'RPL'. Studies in Continuing Education 27(1):51 - 65.

Breier, M, Gardner, M. and Ralphs, A. 2007. Conundrum, compromise and practical wisdom. The Recognition of Prior Learning in a teacher upgrading programme. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.

Brennan, J. and Little, B. 1996. A review of work-based learning in Higher Education. Higher Education Quality and Employability. Available at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/dfee/Hege/wblindex.htm (accessed 11 September 2004).

Brown, L. 2004. Patchwork Text - Example Two: perspectives on research and knowledge in professional practice. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 40(2):174 - 179.

Butterworth, C. 1992. More than one bite at the APEL - contrasting models of accrediting prior learning. Journal of Further Education and Staff Development 20(2):127 - 142.

Department of Education (DoE). 2001. Criteria for the evaluation of programme proposals leading to the National Professional Diploma in Education. Pretoria: DoE.

Department of Education (DoE). 2006. The national policy framework for teacher education and development in South Africa. Pretoria: DoE.

Department of Education (DoE). 2007. The Higher Education Qualifications Framework. Government Notice No. 928. Government Gazette No. 30353. 5 October, pp. 3 - 29.

Department of Education (DoE). 2008. Report on Research into Teacher Upgrading. Pretoria: DoE.

Dysthe, O. and Engelsen, K. 2004. Portfolios and assessment in teacher education in Norway: a theory-based discussion of different models at two sites. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29(2):239 - 258.

Engel-Hills, P., Garraway, J., Jacobs, C., Volbrecht, T. and Winberg, C. 2007. Position Paper on Work-integrated Learning in the Higher Educaton Qualifications Framework (HEQF). Prepared for the South African Technology Network (SATN) by the Work-integrated Learning Research Unit (WILRU).

Engeström, Y. 2001. Expansive learning at work: toward an activity-based theoretical reconcep-tualization. Journal of Education and Work 14(1): 133 - 156.

Harris, J. 1999. Ways of seeing the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL): what contribution can such practices make to social inclusion? Studies in the Education of Adults 31(2):124 - 139.

Harris, J. 2000. RPL: Power, pedagogy and possibility: conceptual and implementation guides. Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.

Lea, M. 1999. Academic literacies and learning in Higher Education. In: C. Jones, J. Turner and B. Street (Eds.). Student writing in the university: cultural and epistemological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamin: 5 - 16.

Mays, T. 2004. Developing a community of practice among educators: a case study of the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE) in South and Southern Africa. Paper presented at NADEOSA conference. Available at: http://www/col.org/pcf3/ papers/PDFs/MaysT.pdf (accessed 10 February 2005).

Michelson, E. and Mandell, R. 2004. Portfolio development and the assessment of prior learning: perspectives, models and practices. Second Edition. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

73

Moll, I. and Welch, T. 2004. Recognition of Prior Learning in teacher education: lessons learned from the National Professional Diploma in Education. Journal of Education 32:161 - 181.

New London Group (NLG) . 1996. A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harvard Education Review 66:60 - 92.

Osman, R. 2003. Equity, Justice and Recognition of Prior Learning? A glance from three perspectives. Paper presented at South African Association for Research and Development in Higher Education conference. Stellenbosch, 25 - 27 June.

Paulson, F., Paulson, P. and Meyer, C. 1991. What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership 48(5):60 - 63.

Pottinger, I. 2008. Personal communication, including reference to a report on 'Personal Development planning in the first year'. Available at: http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/documents/firstyear/PDP_First_Year_draftreport (accessed May 2008).

South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). 2000. The National Professional Diploma in Education. Government Gazette vol. 423, No. 21544. September. General Notice 898 of 2000. Available at: http://www.saqa.org.za/ publications /legsregs/notices/2000/not0898.html (accessed May 2004).

Shalem, Y. 2001.Recognition of Prior Learning in and through 'the field of academic practice'. Perspectives in Education 19(1):53 - 75.

Shalem, Y. and Steinberg, C. 2006. Portfolio-based assessment of prior learning: a cat and mouse chase after invisible criteria. In: P. Andersson and J. Harris (Eds.). Re-theorising the Recognition of Prior Learning. Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education.

Stephenson, J. 2001. Ensuring a holistic approach to Work-based Learning: the capability envelope. In: D. Boud and N. Solomon (Eds.). Work-based learning: a new Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press:86 - 102.

Stephenson, J. 2002. The Capability Envelope: framework for a negotiated curriculum . Conceptions and visual representations of the curriculum, Part II: Illustrative examples. LTSN Generic Centre (now the Higher Education Academy).

Trowler, P. 1996. Angels in marble? Accrediting prior experiential learning in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education 21(1):17 - 30.

Volbrecht, T., Tisani, N., Hendricks, N. and Ralphs, A. 2006. Recognition of Prior Learning in the National Professional Diploma in Education. Research report. Johannesburg: Education Training and Develop-ment Practices Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA).

Volbrecht, T., Coleman, L., Maree, M. and Scholtz, D. 2008. Weaving in the web: investigating con-nections among agency, structure and community/ ies in using Personal Development Planning through e-portfolios to promote collaborative staff development. Paper presented at Higher Education Close-up (HECU4) conference, University of Cape Town.

Winberg, C. 2007. Communication practices in workplaces and Higher Education. South African Journal of Higher Education 21(4):781 - 798.

Winter, R. 2003. Contextualizing the Patchwork Text: addressing problems of coursework assessment in Higher Education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International Journal 40(2):112 - 122.

74

Bibliography

Eraut, M. 1994. Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer Press.

Eraut, M. 2002. The interactions between qualifications and work-based learning. In: K. Evans, P. Hodgkinson and L. Unwin (Eds.). Working to learn: transforming learning in the workplace. London: Kogan Page:63 - 78.

Evans, K., Hodgkinson, P. and Unwin, L. (Eds.). 2002. Working to learn: transforming learning in the workplace. London: Kogan Page.

75

Managing RPL in institutionsDr Elizabeth Smith, University of South Africa

1. Introduction

There is an intrinsic value in the learning of every individual acquired informally, non-formally and even formally. When this learning is presented by a reflective candidate to an appropriately geared assessing institution, it gains extrinsic value by becoming a means to gain access to, or advanced standing in, formal training programmes (Simosko et al 1988:4; Whitaker 1989:xvi7; Evans 2000:15; Day 2002:1). The process involved in converting this intrinsic to extrinsic value is a complex one, especially in the unique South African context of transformation. However, in the interests of redress and open access to education for all, as espoused in post-1994 education and training legislation, it is of crucial importance.

This paper sets out to offer workable methods in which practising teachers can be successfully integrated into existing professional teacher training programmes with a maximum number of 'Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) credits'. These are formally curriculated subjects comprising the training programme in which the relevant candidate has proved him- or herself to be competent, by fulfilling the learning outcomes specified by the institution offering the training programme.

This integration raises an interesting paradox: although learning outcomes, unit standards and criteria have been stipulated by the professional teacher-training context and teacher-training communities of practice, 'competence' and what constitutes competence should be located in the teaching fraternity. This means that the ultimate determination of the standards to be achieved by teachers rests within the stakeholder context: the teaching fraternity.

Whereas the teacher-training context emphasises formal knowledge criteria (content knowledge, pedagogic knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge), the stakeholder context emphasises local knowledge, the popular determination of

standards and an approach to teacher certification that is based on labour rights. Broadly, we might characterise this as a university-stakeholder tension. The question raised here can be summarised as: Who should authorise the standards to be achieved by teachers in the RPL process? A possible solution could be found by incorporating both perspectives into a competency scorecard for teachers and assessing teacher competence against these requirements. This paper endeavours to provide some practical pointers for such an approach.

The process of assessing adults' learning is not simply a matter of techniques, procedures and institutional models; it is also an epistemological issue built around questions such as: What is knowledge? What is achieved in the learning process? What makes an educated person? What relationship is there between an educated person and an effective worker or citizen? To practise assessment and accreditation successfully, advisers and assessors need to know what is expected of learners at various levels, from academic as well as industry perspectives, and to develop fair and reliable methods of assuring the evaluation of candidates' achievements in view of these expectations. Assessors must be aware of individualised diverse learning and achievement, and respond by being flexible in the ways in which they define and assess this knowledge and apply assessment tools.

Before judgements can be made regarding the assessment and accreditation of prior learning, it is essential that the learning expected for credit be defined and that criteria for success be clearly articulated. The lecturer/trainer/assessor must consider the discipline as a whole, and determine which skills, techniques, competencies and attitudes must be present; at which level the learning should be; which baseline core elements must be present in the candidate's learning profile; and how best to assess the elements of the candidate's achievements in order to meet the

76

requirements of formal curricula. In present-day South Africa, it is commonly accepted that in order to follow best assessment practice for proving competence in formally designed curricula, assessment should occur in terms of learning outcomes/unit standards.

Learning outcomes/unit standards specify the knowledge, skills and/or attitudes a learner is expected to acquire in a given curriculum framework, and enable both assessor and candidate to know what it is that learners are expected to know and be able to do.

In terms of the university-stakeholder tension which has emerged in assessing the prior learning of practising teachers, criteria and standards must be negotiated and agreed upon by all relevant Communities of Practice (CoPs).

Having established a set of learning outcomes, the next step is to set standards, since fairness and consistency are important objectives in standard setting. Clearly, not all learners can know everything. How does the assessor or learner know what constitutes 'enough' learning? Which criteria can be used to differentiate between those learners whose learning is adequate, and those who have not yet reached the required standards? There is no absolute standard and for this situation, the Simosko et al (1988:23) concept of a 'minimally competent student' is useful.

Simosko (op.cit.) states that since no two learners in a traditional classroom can or do know exactly the same material, assessors must appreciate that when assessing RPL candidates' prior learning, they will encounter a range of competence and ability levels. When applying standards and making assessments, traditional students need only to meet the institutionally accepted minimum requirements in order to enable them to progress to new work in the same discipline. Simosko warns that assessors should guard against over- or under-assessing RPL candidates in comparison to traditional students;

this aspect of assessment is echoed by other RPL specialists such as Evans (2000). Evans (ibid.19-20) states that the bottom end of assessments for RPL must be at the same pass/fail levels as for traditional students, and suggests that “at the top end, recognition of excellence must be at a common standard”.

By way of an example, at South African Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) the current sub-minimum (allowing access to examinations) is 40%, whereas 50% constitutes a pass mark. Following Evans' (2000) reasoning, the RPL candidate should then not be assessed to standards higher than 50%. There can be no possible motivation on the part of the assessor to suggest that the adult student applying for credit on the basis of workplace exposure to the practical aspects of knowing must be superior to the school-leaver who has attended classes throughout the year but may have learned a limited amount.

The practical implication of the above arguments by Simosko (1988) and Evans (2000) for RPL assessors, is that before embarking on any assessment they must have a clear concept of the minimum requirements that candidates need to meet in order to be classified 'competent'. Decisions need to be clear regarding questions such as: Which outcomes of the training programme are of critical importance and as such must be seen to be evident? Which classroom skills, techniques and management strategies must be evident, and seen to be practised effectively?

It is vital here to have a breadth of assessor perspectives. Would an assessor drawn from the teaching fraternity view 'competence' in the same way as a lecturer would? And if the RPL candidate were to be found 'competent' in applied knowledge but should evidence gaps in his or her theoretical knowledge, could this be rectified by recom-mending further study rather than by refusing the credit?

77

Having made an analysis, an assessment panel can make an informed decision about a non-traditional RPL candidate's future educational needs and the best way to address these.

The point of departure of this paper is that individual functions involved in recognising the prior learning of South African teachers with a view to improving their qualifications within a fixed period of time is such an enormous task that it can only be carried out successfully if most or all the currently active HEIs in South Africa become involved. A model must be developed which allows for nationally centralised functions, as well decentralised functions (possibly based on geographical and institutional principles).

The process of assessing and accrediting prior learning is highly complex, requiring a delicate balance between academic assessment, assess-ment by the teaching fraternity, and recommended learner support. Prior learning is often acquired non-formally, and often informally, and needs to be assessed against specific requirements in accordance with national and international criteria. It needs to be benchmarked against standards set by the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) as well as internationally accepted standards.

At HEIs, the RPL assessment process must bear witness to academic rigour. Once minimum standards denoting 'competence' have been agreed upon, a way must be found to assess candidates so that all three stakeholders are satisfied: academic specialists, the teaching fraternity and certified assessors specially trained in RPL practice. In order to be fair to the candidate who has amassed his or her learning in a plethora of contexts, the relevance and value of a candidate's prior learning cannot be assessed by a single assessor, but should ideally be examined by an assessment panel (see Section 4.2.4b).

Adopting a panel approach requires clear, definite role clarification regarding the aspects each panel

member will assess. A suggested means of role clarification is for differing panel members to focus on the following areas:

• competence in classroom practice and classroom techniques. These aspects need to be assessed by 'assessment bodies' comprising experienced practitioners such as senior teachers or heads of department who have been sensitised to and trained in assessing previously negotiated and agreed national criteria. Such criteria should be the result of input gained from the relevant CoPs;

• candidates' formal learning (content knowledge, pedagogic knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge), and alignment of this learning with specific levels (e.g. first year, second year, Master's level) in order to grant credits in actual subjects in actual training programmes. These assess-ments need to be done by academic staff members represent ing the formal teacher-training sector;

• quality assurance of processes and procedures followed, as well as ensuring consistent application of assessment standards across disciplines. These aspects are the responsibility of RPL assessors.

Finally, once assessment has been carried out and the so-called non-traditional (RPL) learner has been declared competent and ready to enter formal training at a certain level, every learner-support opportunity possible, must be made available. Structured learning support needs to be scheduled to meet the unique needs of the candidate to enable him or her to bridge the gap between non-formal and formal learning and potentially succeed in his or her chosen lifelong learning path.

RPL practice since 1999 at the University of South Africa (UNISA) has shown that in order to effect a

78

successful RPL system which balances academic rigour with user-friendliness, and candidate cost-effectiveness with sound financial practice, certain core elements must be present. The following core elements draw on the experience of UNISA, and have been adapted with practising teachers in mind; (brackets denote the suggested centralisation or decentralisation of the functions):

• an application process (centralised);

• an RPL advisory service to counsel RPL candidates as to how to pitch their prior learning against academic requirements (decentralised);

• a coordinated initial screening process by the relevant academic staff involved in offering the qualification/s (decentralised);

• advisory services for evidence-gathering by RPL candidates, provided by RPL advisors trained in accordance with national standards set by SAQA and elsewhere (decentralised);

• assessment (in terms of SAQA specifi-cations) by panels of trained assessors and subject specialists (decentralised);

• a procedure to obtain verification and ratification of the recommendations of the assessment panel by key national decision makers (centralised);

• regular coordinated communication between national RPL coordinators and representatives from the other CoPs involved in assessing the prior learning of practising teachers (centralised);

• regular communication between the RPL providers and the candidates (depending on the model followed, either centralised or decentralised or both);

• highly respectful structured post-assess-ment feedback to RPL candidates, which acknowledges his or her human dignity (decentralised);

• structured feedback to candidates reflecting the panel's recommendations for specific continued learner support (decentralised);

• financial collection and control systems (centralised);

• a system for tracking the progress of RPL candidates (centralised).

These core elements could form the cornerstone of a national process for recognising the prior learning of teachers.

Drawing out the functions in relation to their levels of organisation, it is of key importance that the following aspects are centralised:

• negotiation of competency standards; • training of assessors;• the application process;• communication between national RPL • coordinators and representatives from the

other CoPs;• negotiating departmental/national verifica-

tion and ratification of results;• financial collection and control systems.

On the other hand, it makes sense to decentralise the following functions, as they are highly individualised:

• an RPL advisory service for candidates;• a coordinated initial screening process;• advisory services for evidence-gathering by

candidates; • assessment by panels of trained assessors; • regular communication between the RPL

providers and candidates; • structured post-assessment feedback to RPL

candidates;

79

• the taking into account of responses to a survey of user perspectives on their lived experiences of current RPL processes (such as those in use at UNISA) - the perspectives of groups of users on 'both sides' of the process, namely RPL finalists and academic assessors.

RPL processes within organisations cannot be considered as processes in isolation. RPL is a process of assessment closely aligned with institutional academic and administrative processes as well as with human resource development strategies. For example, in South African institutions of Higher and Further Education, RPL must form part of processes such as curriculum design, access management, learner support, and transformation.

RPL at UNISA has three main focus areas:

• RPL-for-credit, to assist RPL candidates who have undergone assessment, counselling and career pathing; whose skills and knowledge gaps have been identified and remedied, and who are ready for enrolment in formal/ non-formal training programmes;

• RPL-for-access, to create alternative access routes for students to enter university if they do not meet the entry requirements;

• RPL for corporate clients, to create RPL routes customised for specific corporate clients, and generally allowing fast-tracking of groups of candidates who have undergone homogenous in-house training.

2. RPL as a value-adding development process

• structured feedback to candidates reflecting recommendations for specific continued learner support.

Since there must be close symbiosis between academic judgement, academic planning and structured involvement of the teaching fraternity on the one hand, and learner support on the other, RPL needs to be positioned within these major functions in Higher Education (HE) institutions.

Decisions made regarding the readiness of non-traditional learners to enter HE cannot be made by administrative officials based on paper evidence of formal training alone. There seems to be a widely held opinion at many institutions, that if institutional staff can manage the technicalities of RPL, the institution's RPL system will be sound. RPL is often viewed as nothing more than a paper-based process similar to granting exemptions or credit transfers, instead of the complex academic assessment and alignment process that it is.

A strategy design for recognising (that is, assessing and accrediting) the prior learning of candidates for a variety of purposes builds on international RPL models which have proven and well-documented track records. However, these models need to be modified for use in the required Southern African context.

A sound RPL implementation strategy will reflect:

• a foundation developed from a literature survey of the nature of RPL and current international RPL practice;

• criteria extracted from stipulations in post-1994 South African education legislation and national directives;

• alignment of the RPL strategy with international, national, institutional, faculty/agency and candidate requirements;

80

• institutional level (pertaining to the organisation as a whole);

• agency level (pertaining to the responsible assessing agencies such as RPL offices/ faculties/champions within the organisa-tion);

• candidate level (for each individual candidate requesting RPL).

This theoretical framework is further clarified by means of a matrix (see Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c) constructed and customised on the basis of data gained from literature reviews and empirical study. Figure 1 below is a visual representation of this matrix.

Figure 1: A visual representation of an RPL strategy

AMEND DECISIONS

APPROVE IMPLEMENTATION

APPROVEPROJECTS

PLAN ATMACROLEVEL

CUSTOMISE RPL

RESEARCHRPL MODELS

REVIEWDESIGN

PROCESSESPLAN

MICRO LEVEL

PLAN INDIVIDUALASSESSMENT & ACCREDITATION

stCONDUCT 1MEETING

SCREENAPPLICATION

IDENTIFY PRIORLEARNING

IMPLEMENT RPL

PROCEDURES

IDENTIFYNEW LEARNING

ASSESSLEARNING

ACCREDITLEARNING

PROVIDE POST-ACCREDITATION

CARE

IMPLEMENTPLANNING

QUALITYASSURANCE

PROCEDURESREVIEW

COMMIT TORPL

SPECIALISED ACTIVITIES

INSTITUTION

AGENCY

CANDIDATE

DEVELOP MANAGE MAINTAIN

3. Strategy design for the implementation of RPL

The design for RPL strategies needs to include three types of specialised activity, which need to be carried out systematically. These specialised activities are:

• planning the RPL strategy;• implementing the RPL strategy according to

a designated plan; and• quality assuring the RPL processes involved.

Each of these specialised activities comprises sets of functions containing a number of procedures. These procedures need management at three levels:

81

Table 1a: Possible planning of RPL strategies in South African organisations

Right:Table 1b: Possible implementing of RPL strategies in South African organisations

LEVEL FUNCTIONS PROCEDURES

Institutional Committing to RPL. Formulating and documenting top management commitment.

Researching RPL models.

Researching and customisation at a pace with national and international developments in RPL.Customising RPL

practices for SA conditions.

Planning at macro-level. Formulating institutional RPL policy;

Assigning responsibility for RPL functions to specific individuals/ departments;

Identifying decision makers;

Raising awareness of RPL available;

Addressing institutional staff issues relating to RPL.

Agency Planing at micro-level;

Designing at micro-level.

Designing awareness campaigns for potential users;

Designing processes for assessment, accreditation, record keeping;

Designing the required documentation;

Designing management information systems (e.g. databases, record keeping).

Candidate Conducting meetings with candidates;

Planning individual assessment and accreditation.

Listening carefully;

Ascertaining candidates' exact needs;

Advising where necessary;

Discussing further meetings and work to be done;

Using interpreters if necessary;

Documenting successive

Implementing RPL procedures.

Providing regular institutional feedback.

Approving pilot projects. Maintaining records.

Amending institutional decisions.

Communicating changes to all affected parties.

Approving scale of implementation of RPL.

Communicating/ negotiating within the institution.

Developing, managing, and maintaining the RPL procedures;

Adjusting procedures.

Implementing candidate tracking processes;

Implementing screening processes;

Selecting and contracting assessors;

Implementing assessment process;

Implementing verification and ratification processes;

Implementing record-keeping processes; maintaining up-to-date records;

Implementing feedback processes;

Reviewing processes and procedures regularly.

Identifying candidates' relevant prior learning.

Supplying guidelines for portfolio building.

Identifying candidates' relevant new learning.

Ensuring that portfolios include RPL-related new learning.

Assessing candidates' relevant learning against learning outcomes/ unit standards.

Academic procedures - establishing learning outcomes, standards, criteria and principles;

Choosing assessment techniques or combinations of techniques;, e.g:

• Portfolio assessment

• Interviews

• Challenge exams

• Site-visits/demonstrations

• Projects/assignments etcetera

Carrying out assessment; avoiding assessment pitfalls;

Documenting decisions/findings/ recommendations.

Accrediting candidate learning.

Carrying out administrative procedures such as:

• Verifying and ratifying decisions

• Informing candidates

• Maintaining documents

• Updating candidate credits

Providing post-accreditation care to candidates and where relevant, to other stakeholders such as requesting organisations.

Sending formal documentation to candidates;

Sending formal documentation to other stakeholders;

Scheduling top-up training for candidates.

LEVEL FUNCTIONS PROCEDURES

Institutional

Agency

Candidate

82

Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c provide a summary of the key elements of an RPL strategy. They depict graphically, descriptions just given of the specialised activities, functions and procedures in a clearly thought-through RPL strategy. It is argued that if the matrix elaborated in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c is used as a point of departure by organisations, and is customised for individual and corporate contexts, it could provide sufficient guidelines for the implementation and management of a user-friendly, academically rigorous RPL practice.

based it on eight criteria taken from the relevant literature (Smith 2003:87-88). These criteria reflect an extract of core elements from data gained by the following means:

• study of current learning theories and inter-national thinking on RPL;

• post-1994 South African national legislative perspectives incorporating all key relevant national directives issued for South African education and training with bearing on RPL;

• a descriptive cross-sectional survey among a group of users of the RPL strategy (RPL candidates) at a single HEI;

• a descriptive cross-sectional survey among a second group of users of the RPL strategy (RPL assessors) at the same HEI.

The following eight criteria emerged for a mindful RPL implementation strategy; this strategy:

1. needs to reflect academic rigour (and to incorporate perspectives from all CoPs concerned);

2. is user-friendly and client-centred;

3. upholds the notion of equality among individuals regardless of social background;

4. is participatory and stakeholder driven;

5. fosters partnerships and articulation (portability) of qualifications;

6. serves the needs of candidates as individuals, and as members of communities and organisations within the economy;

7. is a well-managed, cost-effective process;

8. provides relevant support and post-assessment care to candidates to enable them to bridge gaps between informal/non-formal prior learning and formal learning.

Planning for introducing an RPL policy within the organisation needs to be done at two levels: at

Institutional Benchmarking processes and procedures against national and international standards, client needs, and ISO 9000.

Conducting regular research;

Delivering papers at national and international forums.

Reviewing RPL regularly, and improving, documenting, and communicating changes.

Conducting periodic institutional reviews;

Conducting periodic inter-institutional peer reviews;

Monitoring standards of assessment and accreditation;

Conducting longitudinal monitoring of candidates.

Agency Ensuring uniform standards of assessment across disciplines.

Adequately training/ overseeing training of assessors in all subject fields, regarding RPL principles and use of RPL assessment tools;

Ensuring trained RPL assessor presence in all interviews (possibly through random sampling);

Ensuring uniform standards in assessment reporting;

Ensuring uniform standards of depersonalised and respectful feedback to candidates;

Monitoring success rates of RPL candidates and investigating instances where successful pathways are not followed;

Inserting checks and balances in administrative processes to eliminate errors (e.g. checking correctness of subject codes, entries on academic records, etcetera).

Candidate Monitoring candidate satisfaction with processes and/ or outcomes of assessment.

Requesting feedback from candidates on assessment and accreditation processes undergone.

LEVEL FUNCTIONS PROCEDURES

83

Table 1c: Possibilities for quality assuring RPL strategies in South African organisations

Specialised activities relating to the implementation of an RPL strategy such as that just outlined need to be clarified. Some details relating to functions and procedures in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c are provided in this section.

4.1.1 Planning at institutional level

UNISA, when planning an institutional RPL strategy,

4. Specialised activities for the implementation of an RPL strategy

4.1 Planning RPL

macro- (institutional) level (i.e. general preparation and planning functions for the whole institution, as can be seen in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c above), and micro-level (i.e. specific planning by agencies or champions within organisations, such as, for example, by an RPL office (see procedures outlined in Tables 1a, 1b, and 1c).

When institutional planning occurs at macro-level, general decisions need to be taken by the relevant institutional decision makers. These decisions need to be suitably documented. Institutional planning and preparation include, but are not limited to, these five functions:

a) formulating institutional RPL policy;b) assigning responsibility for RPL functions to

specific agencies (individuals, departments, sections, etcetera);

c) identifying decision-makers at different levels;

d) planning awareness campaigns;e) addressing institutional staff issues.

Suggestions are given here, for the kinds of things that could be borne in mind as these aspects of institutional planning are attempted and accom-plished.

a) Formulating institutional RPL policy

In formulating Institutional RPL policy, a number of requirements need to be taken into account: policies need to be benchmarked against organisational and national criteria and standards, and need to meet candidates' requirements.

National benchmarkingRPL policy decisions and resultant RPL procedure(s) formulated, designed and developed for South African organisations need to be in line with South African post-1994 transformative educational legislation and directives in order to assure open access to education for all.

Organisational benchmarkingCertain organisational baseline competencies need to be determined by negotiation between three parties: academic/training staff in the organisation offering the qualification, the teaching fraternity, and RPL assessors. Examples of these competencies include:

• determining the baseline for acceptance of candidates into RPL programmes such as the lowest Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET)/NQF levels, grades or standards relevant to the level of education/training offered, and the minimum number of years' experience in the workplace which could realistically be construed as sufficient prior learning for a particular standard;

• determining what form deliverables will take at the end of the RPL process. For example, will the product of the RPL process be a certificate, an institutional academic record, a formal departmental letter on a Department of Education (DoE) letterhead, or another type of record?

• determining (if the organisation is an educational institution), what relevance an institutional residency clause would have on the RPL process (i.e. must a candidate complete a certain number of courses at the institution before the institution will issue a qualification?);

• determining the fees structure; who will bear the cost of the RPL process; whether or not RPL will be subsidised by the institution. An important question is: Are fees realistic in that assessment costs are covered so that the RPL process is affordable for those sectors of society that most need it?

84

Possible guiding questions when considering national RPL policyThe following questions might be useful when formulating a national RPL policy for practising teachers:

• Why should RPL be implemented? (How is it linked to the DoE's mission statement?)

• Who should benefit from national RPL policy, and who should implement it?

• How should national RPL policy be implemented?

• Which specific contextual issues need to be addressed in the process?

• When should the national RPL be implemented, and what are feasible timelines to follow?

• Where should RPL assessment functions take place?

• Which processes and procedures need to be designed and developed?

Meeting learner requirementsInstitutional support structures available for learners at HEIs in the various provinces across the country need to be identified, to enable individuals or groups of individuals to bridge gaps between prior learning (i.e. informal and non-formal learning), and formal learning.

b) Assigning responsibility for RPL functions to specific agencies

A national RPL task team as well as decentralised institutional champions of RPL processes need to be appointed and have access to RPL budgets. It has already been mentioned that ideally, aspects surrounding responsibility and role clarification need to be negotiated with the various CoPs at

national level, before responsibility for RPL functions is delegated to participating institutions.

c) Identifying national and organisational decision-makers

It is important to identify particular individuals who will be involved at various centralised and decentralised levels of service to RPL candidates. In order to facilitate mutually acceptable role clarification within and between the various Communities of Practice involved, questions such as the following might be useful:

• Who will advise RPL candidates?

• Who will assess RPL candidates?

• Who will make recommendations for candidate accreditation and suggest appropriate top-up training?

• Who will verify these recommen-dations?

• Who will ratify the results of RPL processes? Ideally, in a project of this scope and size, verification and ratification should occur centrally at DoE level.

d) Planning awareness campaigns

During the first years of RPL implementation, one of the main functions of RPL agencies (eg.national and institutional RPL offices) is to make known the RPL strategies and policies available within HEIs and/or nationally, to practising teachers. For this reason, it is important that the decision to participate in a project of such national significance be taken institutionally at top management level and that top management is seen to support the initiative.

Awareness campaigns for stakeholders (learners, professional bodies, industries, related academic

85

86

departments, and others), and continued training for those involved in the RPL project are crucial.

e) Addressing institutional staff issues

As a first step in implementing an RPL strategy within an institution, there are likely to be a number of staff-related issues to be dealt with, such as:

• the need for staff to be sensitised in an initial awareness campaign, to the advantages, benefits and limitations of an RPL system;

• the need to reassure staff that the introduction of an RPL strategy will not endanger their positions, result in credits being given away or threaten their autonomy as academics/trainers. Staff are not likely to react favourably to an approach in which the organisation's 'RPL people' tell them how to do their work;

• the need to negotiate RPL processes with all stakeholders concerned, and especially with the academic/training staff involved, and their partners in practice. This step is essential to ensure buy-in regarding RPL assessment processes, criteria, standards, and accreditation levels;

• in-depth discussion around RPL processes with administrative staff to ensure streamlined administration procedures;

• clarification of roles (What, for example, will the functions of the RPL office, the academic/training staff and the administra-tive staff be?);

• the need for staff to be trained, for example: - assessors need training in RPL assess-

ment practices and procedures;- frontline, helpdesk staff, and switch-

board operators need to know how best

to answer RPL-related queries, and transfer potential candidates to the relevant qualified people;

- marketing and sales staff need to know about the costs and benefits of RPL.

4.1.2 Planning at agency level

The agency within the institution which is responsible for RPL (the RPL office, department, and others) is responsible for planning on behalf of the organisation at micro-level. This encompasses planning day-to-day operational processes and procedures. This planning should be carried out by an institutional champion (individual or office) of the RPL process whose main responsibility is to drive the process. This entails, inter alia:

• designing processes for assessment, accreditation and record keeping;

• designing documentation such as relevant forms, brochures, guidelines and training materials;

• designing management information systems such as databases and record-keeping systems;

• sensitising staff to the processes involved and liaising with academic/training and administrative staff;

• overseeing staff and assessor training in RPL and RPL-related functions;

• monitoring assessment and accreditation procedures.

4.1.3 Planning at candidate level

Each candidate approaching an RPL office for assessment and accreditation will require an individual approach. Each RPL case needs to have its

87

own project plan. A project plan would include timelines, budget, outcomes, specified standards and a project team (Neveling 2000:100).

Policies and practice for the implementation and management of candidate assessment and related services need to incorporate the following procedures:

a) identifying candidates' exact needs;

b) advising where necessary, including discussing further meetings;

c) documenting successive procedures as soon as possible after the meeting concerned;

d) sending documents outlining these procedures to the candidates.

a) Identifying candidates' needs

Candidates have a number of possible reasons for applying for RPL. These may vary from sophisticated queries involving the dovetailing of lifelong learning paths and envisaged future careers, to requests at the simplest levels. An example to illustrate this range: within an educational institution, the former group may wish to be granted advanced standing within a formal training programme or to fast-track a qualification; the latter group may merely wish to obtain a formal list of their skills, issued by a responsible, recognised assessment organisation, which they could then use as leverage for applying for new positions.

For this reason, it is imperative that at the first meeting with the RPL candidate, the RPL adviser should listen carefully, try to ascertain exactly what the candidate's needs are, and advise where necessary. If needs be, the services of an interpreter should be called in. Should the candidate request such, further meetings could be arranged with the

candidate and his or her employer for career pathing, or with relevant academic/training/ counselling staff.

b) Advising where necessary

The RPL advisor needs to bear in mind that the candidate may have been out of touch with the formal education system for a number of years. The candidate may be confused by the various educational options presently available in the country. He or she may harbour feelings of low self-worth, or may be unfamiliar with academic terminology and jargon that educators/trainers take for granted.

The RPL advisor needs to explain, in the simplest or most appropriate language possible, the many implications of the RPL process for the candidate. Aspects candidates need to be made aware of include:

• workload associated with the assessment processes;

• accreditation procedures and their implications;

• financial implications;

• timelines to be expected.

Together with candidates, RPL advisors need to decide on the deliverable/s: what exactly does the candidate require? Does he or she need a letter which would enable admitting him/her to a subsequent level of a training programme? Is a formal certificate of assessment which can be submitted to a professional body/employer required? Or is a formalised list of the candidate's skills, which has been documented and verified by a workplace supervisor or accredited assessor, what is wanted?

tioning. In this model, the DoE could remain responsible for approving pilot projects, amending institutional decisions and approving the scale of implementation. It could also maintain records of progress made in relation to the initiative, and provide feedback to interested parties.

Whatever the model, once RPL agencies and champions have been assigned, responsibility for the implementation and management of RPL processes moves to the level of the agents concerned.

4.2.2 Implementing RPL at agency level

Implementation of RPL at agency level involves developing, managing, maintaining and adjusting RPL processes. Examples of the types of processes that may need ongoing refinement include processes for selecting and appointing assessment panels; selecting and developing assessment tools; conducting assessment interviews; and reporting on assessment processes and 'events'. Developing existing assessment processes and instruments for use in RPL activities may assist buy-in to new ideas for staff already familiar with these tools and their uses.

Table 2 shows an example of an RPL process in use at present at agency level - at UNISA. This process could potentially be adapted for use in other RPL agencies.

In cases where a candidate pays for the RPL service, he or she has the rights of a consumer. He or she must have upfront access to criteria and standards which will be used in his or her assessment, and must have well-founded assurance that assessment and accreditation processes are fair, transparent, open and provided by a registered assessing body/ organisation.

c) Documenting successive procedures as soon as possible after the first meeting

Further meeting schedules and successive procedures should ideally be documented as soon after the first meeting as possible. Once the RPL application has been screened and assessment methods have been recommended, these items should also be documented: the keeping of 'evidence trails' is important for maintenance of the reliability of services.

d) Sending documents containing agreed-on procedures to candidates

Once academic/training staff and assessors have suggested follow-up actions (either for screening or for assessment), records of the decisions taken need to be supplied to candidates. It is useful if these communications are sent soon after agreements have been reached, as RPL processes can be lengthy in their own right. It is also useful to include in these communications, what is needed from candidates, and by when. Copies of all such correspondence would ideally be filed at the agency for purposes of record-keeping.

4.2.1 Implementing RPL at institutional level

One possible model for the implementation of a national RPL strategy for up-skilling or upgrading serving teachers involves the DoE making a commitment to implementing an RPL process and assigning responsibility for its operational func-

4.2 Implementing RPL

88

Table 2: Example RPL assessment and accreditation process at institutional/agency level

At the end of the RPL process, candidates receive formal documentation confirming the outcomes/ results of process(es) undergone. Care is taken so that wording on this documentation does not unwittingly lead to unrealistic expectations on the part of candidates. It is useful for candidates' mobility in the education and training system if sufficient detail regarding their achievements is provided in nationally and even internationally - understandable terms and formats. It is useful for example, to explain acronyms, and to contextualise the number of credits awarded through RPL, in relation to the weighting of subjects within the qualification concerned.

For review and marketing purposes, the levels and extent of candidate success offer the best quality assurance data. Further, it is useful if RPL staff can identify key questions needed for longitudinal

studies on candidate success, and ensure that the associated data is gathered.

4.2.3 Implementation of RPL at candidate level `The following processes are useful for building policies and practice for implementation of RPL strategies at candidate level:

a) identifying candidates' relevant prior learning;

b) identifying candidates' relevant new learning;

c) assessing candidates' relevant learning;

d) accrediting candidate's learning;

e) providing post-accreditation care for candidates and where relevant, for other stakeholders such as requesting organisations.

In an attempt to address some of the tensions between the formal knowledge required in academic training programmes and local knowledge developed in teaching practice, when seeking to determine the relevance of particular areas of knowledge and skill, UNISA has consistently made use, and notes the usefulness of, assessment panels made up of members from the various Communities of Practice concerned (see Table 3).

a) Identifying relevant prior learning

The standards and principles of sound assessment practices are remarkably similar across contexts. In this sense the benefits of RPL are not that different from formative assessment in other contexts. Assessment of prior learning is potentially an essential part of successful planning for candidates' future learning. It yields information which potentially assists new learning; it can foster awareness of the strengths and weaknesses of

Stage ofRPL

Activity in RPL process

1 Candidate's application is screened and evaluated for viability by the agency

2 Evidence is submitted by the candidate (e.g. a portfolio, challenge exam answer script, work-based project, etcetera)(assistance is given in some instances, with the development of candidates' portfolios)

3 Evidence is assessed by panel of assessors within the agency

4 Panel interviews the candidate, or conducts site visits so that the candidate can do demonstrations, etcetera (candidates are allowed to bring support persons to testify to their skills and competences - these testimonies are especially useful when candidates cannot submit portfolios or do activities involving writing)

5 Assessors recommend placement of the candidate. Alternatively, assessors recommend 'top-up' training strategies for the candidate

6 Assessors' recommendations are submitted to organisational decision-makers for verification and ratification

7 Candidate is notified of the outcomes of his/her assessment; candidate is put into contact with learner support where recommended

8 Documents and records of candidate assessments are updated

89

candidates' learning styles; it can aid improvement of individuals' learning processes; it can be used to identify the quantity and quality of past learning - and - it can be used to provide a kind of content analysis, the findings of which can form foundations for setting new learning objectives. Relevant prior learning is thus existing knowledge and skill levels upon which new learning can be built.

b) Identifying relevant new learning

Some RPL practitioners draw a distinction between 'prior learning' and 'new learning'. Prior learning assessment stimulates further (new) learning by helping learners to understand the limits of their knowledge and by requiring them to assess critically, some of the fundamental assumptions they use in their daily work. This critical engagement in turn tends to increase learners' openness to new ideas. For RPL candidates, learning involves more than merely acquiring new information: it involves critical examination of previous assumptions as new knowledge is taken on board.

Mature learners often enter Higher Education/ training programmes with records of prior accomplishments. They are often reluctant to abandon their “life-tested strategies” for textbook solutions (Simosko and Cook 1996:176). However, critical reflection is an important prerequisite for successful lifelong learning, and RPL fosters this kind of reflection.

An example of the way RPL encourages reflection is provided by candidates with incomplete- or without senior certificates wishing to access university-level studies at UNISA. For entry to tertiary-level courses, these candidates need to be successful in UNISA's Pre-Access Programme. This programme includes a three-day portfolio development workshop. Its stated aim is to assist candidates in the completion of a number of assignments that demonstrate their competence levels in relation to the critical cross-field outcomes seen to be part and parcel of the competences required of university-level students.

Candidates build reflectively on what they know in order to complete the assignments that together form the portfolio.

The three year period over which this Pre-Access programme has been implemented with a variety of target groups has demonstrated its value. This value resides not so much in its requirement for submission of written portfolios of evidence, as it does in the reflection process that occurs under guided supervision as these portfolios are created. Candidates realise the value their experiences in the workplace have, for the formal learning aligned with the requirements of university training, which for many years may have seemed to be beyond their grasp. Their learning may earn them RPL credits. Intrinsic and often tacit learning, which participants often do not realise they possess, is given explicit value. As it becomes extrinsic, it can be documented, assessed and accredited. The processes thereby involved often result in an increase in feelings of self-worth for candidates.

4.2.4 Academic procedures involved in RPL assessment: some suggestions

Planning and implementing RPL assessment processes involve activities such as establishing learning outcomes, standards, criteria and principles; selecting and contracting assessment panel members; making decisions about levels of candidate competence; choosing, managing, and developing assessment techniques. Some lessons from UNISA are elaborated below.

a) Establishing learning outcomes, standards, criteria and principles

Since different learners learn differently from their experiences, and a wide range of experiences are rich potential sources of learning, a sound basis for recognition of learning thus achieved is to focus on assessment of the actual learning and competences demonstrated in individual instances.

90

In assessing a candidate's prior learning, it is the assessor's responsibility to evaluate and judge the degree of equivalence of candidates' prior learning and the outcomes/unit standards required in traditional routes of study. Given the variety of experiences potentially affording learning, and candidates' various routes of learning, it would be unwise to consider factors which could lead to errors of judgment. Whitaker (1989:5-6) identifies such factors as including:

• credit granted for 'seat time' (time spent in formal learning contexts);

• credit granted for input rather than for outcomes;

• overemphasis of the assessor's personal conceptions of learning objectives;

• absence of clarity with respect to learning outcomes/objectives.

At UNISA, the main cause of 'assessment error' (mismatch between candidates' capabilities and their assessment results), is the lack of clarity in conceptions of learning outcomes/objectives. Academic staff members assess RPL applications regularly as part of their weekly tasks. Yet when asked what the learning outcomes for their specific subjects against which they assessed candidates were, their answers were often vague. UNISA has no publicly available central repository for learning outcomes which could be accessed by potential RPL candidates. There is nothing against which candidates could measure themselves in order to develop their applications for RPL in the first instance.

Publicly available outcomes would increase the transparency of RPL processes at UNISA. Further, explicit rules, practices and procedures are needed for quality assurance of the assessment and accreditation of prior learning.

b) Setting up assessment and accreditation panels

Using assessment and accreditation panels rather than entrusting RPL assessment and accreditation processes to individual assessors would go some way towards making RPL processes fair. This principle is especially the case given the heterogeneity of the South African target population for RPL, where potential RPL candidates have an extremely wide range of skill and resource levels (from being highly skilled or well-resourced, to having minimal literacy levels and no resources for formal study). Table 3 shows possible composition of an assessment/accreditation panel and a candidate support panel.

ASSESSMENT PANELAcademic(s)Interpreter

Industry representativeRPL assessor

CANDIDATE SUPPORT PANELRPL applicant

Support person(s)

Table 3: Possible compositions of assessment and candidate support panels

c) Standards for assessing candidate competence

It is worth remembering that there are generally accepted international standards for quality assuring RPL. Whitaker formulated the original and now upgraded standards (see Whitaker et al 2006) adopted internationally by the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning as Ten standards for quality assurance in assessing learning for credit (these standards are outlined briefly in Annexure A).

d) Selecting and managing assessment techniques

Although portfolio-assisted assessment is the preferred method in many countries, there is a plethora of assessment tools available for RPL assessors. Such instruments include but are not limited to, the assessment of products, per-

91

carried out not only at the outset of the process, but also periodically throughout its introductory phase. Second, the system needs to be reviewed once it has been implemented, and this reflection should ideally occur regularly throughout the life of the project. Both these activities need to be carried out at national/institutional, agency and candidate levels.

4.3.1 Benchmarking and review of RPL processes at national, institutional, and agency levels

a) Benchmarking in the initial stages of RPL processes

Quality assurance of RPL processes and procedures at institutional and agency levels ideally involves benchmarking with national professional bodies against national and international standards. These processes are discussed briefly.

National benchmarkingNational quality assurance is carried out in the South African education and training system by quality assurance bodies with legislated mandates. There is still a need however, for professional bodies to have their own individual quality requirements, regardless of whether these are contained in legislation (Singh 2000:54, 56).

There are a number of professional bodies in the country, some of which have statutory powers while others have a history of exercising quality assurance functions within the system (Isaacs 2000:3). Ideally all of these bodies could be involved in RPL processes, since they provide a much-needed industry perspective on training and expected outcomes. Examples of such bodies include the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA); the South African Institution of Civil Engineering (SAICE); the South African Institution of Mechanical Engineering (SAIME); the South African Nursing Council (SANC), and others.

formances, and simulations; site visits and interviews; oral and written tests; essays; projects; case studies; presentations, and others. Further, assessment tools are often used in combination to afford candidates the best chance of fair assessment.

Quality assurance is variously defined; a useful description is the following, pertaining to Higher Education, of quality assurance as:

... balancing value for money, fitness for purpose, a transformation at individual, social and systemic levels and all this within the encompassing goal of fitness for purpose (in terms of the responsiveness of provision in relation to broad national priorities). It also presupposes a firm commitment to partner-ships and co-operative agreements with

1professional councils and SETAs (Singh 2000:55).

The following conditions specified by Isaacs (2000:5) for a successful system of quality assurance are also key:

• rigorous standards;• robust assessment systems;• pressure in terms of accountability;• equity of opportunity.

SAQA rightly cautions that the relationship between RPL, integrated assessment and credibility of certification is a very real issue in South Africa, since traditional assessment models widely used internationally create problems in the South African context (Oberholzer 2000:59).

Quality assurance of an RPL system needs to comprise two activities, first, benchmarking the design of the process - an activity which needs to be

4.3 Quality assurance of the RPL process

92

1 Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs)

International benchmarkingInstitutional and agency benchmarking against international standards can occur through international agencies such as the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO). The ISO, representing 27 countries, has compiled quality system standards to identify those features key for assisting businesses to meet their customer needs consistently. These standards are aimed at establishing and maintaining companies' quality systems by focusing on the successes of procedures and assuring the quality of certain elements presumed necessary in all quality systems.

b) Reviewing RPL systems

Institutional and agency functions and procedures need to be reviewed regularly. This reflection could be accomplished through institutions' remaining abreast of current RPL-related research and literature; obtaining stakeholder feedback (intra- as well as inter-institutional feedback); submitting to international scrutiny through participation in international conferences; and working towards ensuring quality standards and criteria in training, assessment and accreditation procedures as far as possible.

4.3.2 Quality assurance of RPL at candidate level

It is important to ensure that candidate assessment processes are consistent throughout an organisation. This even-handedness is especially important for RPL for teachers if carried out at national level. If RPL is to be carried out similarly across disciplines and institutions, there would need to be uniform criteria for aspects such as length of assessment interviews; turnaround time for completing portfolio assessments; number of examination opportunities; types of tasks required, etcetera.

One of the recommendations emerging from the exemplar provided by UNISA's implementation of RPL is that all feedback to candidates needs to be channelled through the RPL office of the institution.

In this way feedback becomes consistent and depersonalised. Appeals need to be processed by RPL offices for the same reasons.

Implementing RPL in South Africa for practising teachers is not a process which can occur haphazardly, or on a need-to-know basis: it is too complex a process. If the DoE is to offer a fair and transparent national RPL service to teachers, it is clear that a systematic RPL strategy needs to be followed. This paper provides some suggestions for such a strategy, based on UNISA's experiences regarding RPL. Care has been taken to base suggestions on in-depth study of literature on the nature of RPL and current international RPL practice. Criteria in post-1994 South African education and training legislation and national directives; and alignment with international, national, and institutional standards, and faculty/ agency and candidate requirements have been taken into account. In addition, suggestions are based on lessons learned from 10 years' of implementation of RPL by UNISA.

Day, M. 2002. Assessment of prior learning. A practitioner's guide. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

Evans, N. 2000. Experiential learning around the world: employability and the global economy. London: Jessica Kingsley.

Isaacs, S.B.A. 2000. Issues of quality in standard setting and quality assurance. South African Qualifications Authority Bulletin 4(2). Pretoria: South African Qualifications Authority.

Neveling, N.J. 2000. 'n Raamwerk vir die ontwikkeling van selfrigtinggewende studie-pakkette vir verdere en hoëronderwysstudie. Doctoral thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg.

5. In conclusion

References

93

Oberholzer, A. 2000. Qualifications with components that are shared by more than one Education and Training Qualifications Authority (ETQA): credit accumulation and issuing of the qualification, certification and qualification ownership. South African Qualifications Authority Bulletin 4(2). Pretoria: South African Qualifications Authority.

Simosko, S. 1988. Assessing learning. A Council for Adult Experiential Learning (CAEL) Handbook for faculty. Patuxent Parkway.

Simosko, S. and Cook, C. 1996. Applying Adult Experiential Learning (AEL) principles in flexible assessment: a practical guide. London: Kogan Page.

Singh, M. 2000. The Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) and quality assurance in Higher Education. South African Qualifications Authority Bulletin 4(2). Pretoria: South African Qualifications Authority.

Smith, E. 2003. An RPL strategy for South African Technikons. DPhil thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, Johannesburg.

Whitaker, U. 1989. Assessing learning standards, principles and procedures. Philadelphia: Council for Adult Experiential Learning (CAEL).

Brookfield, S.D. 1994. Understanding and facilitating learning. Milton Keynes: Oxford University Press.

Candy, P.C. 1991. Self-direction for lifelong learning: a comprehensive guide to theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Gravett, S. 2001. Adult learning, designing and implementing learning events: a dialogic approach. Pretoria: Van Schaik.

Bibliography

Knowles, M.S. 1989. The making of an adult educator. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Lamdin, L. 1997. Earn college credit for what you know. Chicago: CAEL.

Whitaker, U. 2006. Assessing learning standards,

principles and procedures. Second edition. Philadelphia: CAEL.

Policies, procedures and criteria applied to assessment, including provision for appeal, should be fully disclosed and prominently available to all parties involved in the assessment process. All personnel involved in the assessment of learning should pursue and receive adequate training and continuing professional development for the functions they perform. Assessment programmes should be regularly monitored, reviewed, evaluated, and revised as needed to reflect changes in the needs being served, the purposes being met, and the state of the assessment arts. Credit or its equivalent should be awarded only for learning, and not for experience. Assessment should be based on standards and criteria for the level of acceptable learning that are both agreed upon and made public. Assessment should be treated as an integral part of learning, not separate from it, and should be based on an understanding of learning processes. The determination of credit awards and competence levels must be made by appropriate subject matter and academic or credentialling experts. Credit or other credentialling should be appropriate to the context in which it is awarded and accepted. If awards are for credit, transcript entries should clearly describe what learning is being recognised.

Annexure 1

CAEL-endorsed standards for quality assurance in assessing learning for credit (Whitaker et al 2006)

94

Proposals for the up-skilling of different categories ofun(der)qualified educatorsTask Team 5 of the Occupation-Specific Dispensation

1. Introduction to the work of Task Team 5

1.1 The Collective Agreement and brief of Task Team 5

Task Team 5 was set up in terms of Collective Agreements Nos. 1 and 2 of 2008 on the Framework for the Establishment of an Occupation-Specific Dispensation (OSD) for educators in Public Education (Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) 2008: Annexure F, Section 2.6.6.2). This agreement aims to:

• ensure a fair, equitable and competitive remuneration structure for identified categories of teachers;

• put in place a career-pathing model for specialists and management that does not include automatic increases but is based on performance, scope of work, experience, qualifications and competencies;

• introduce incentives and commitments to retrain and qualify un- and under-qualified teachers (all teachers are to be qualified by 2013).

In respect of the last point, the Agreement requires a second look at what is regarded as 'Qualified Teacher Status'. The current definition of a qualified teacher is as follows:

The minimum qualification requirement for a new appointment to a teaching post in public education in South Africa is an approved and recognised professional teaching qualification

1evaluated as REQV 13 at least (Loots 2008:2).

The South African Council of Educators still uses the above definition as a guide to eligibility for registration. However, in terms of the Agreement, the norm for qualified teachers is set to move to

Relative Educational Qualification Value (REQV) 14/ Matric plus four years (M+4). This implies a need for up-skilling or upgrading in many cases. There is however a concern that teachers who will (in terms of this new norm) become under-qualified should not be disadvantaged in the process. It is recognised that as far as possible, salary adjustment should be achieved through “the formal recognition of experience in the public education sector” (ELRC 2008:Section 4.1.1).

The Task Team was therefore set up with the brief of researching and planning for the up-skilling of educators in order to ensure that all existing educators could become qualified in terms of the new required levels, or be recognised as being such. Details for this work are provided in Paragraph 5.8 of the Collective Agreement (ELRC 2008):

5.8 Up-skilling and improvement of qualifications of educators.

2The up-skilling of educators, including RPL and the improvements of qualifications are subscribed to by the parties and will be dealt with in terms of Paragraph 4 as follows:

5.8.1 Position and status of educators with Matric plus two years of teacher training (M+2);

5.8.2 Position of M+3 educators;

5.8.3 Respite period allowed to educators to upgrade their qualifications to M+4;

5.8.4 Principles pertaining to Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) to achieve M+4;

5.8.5 Employer initiatives for the up-skilling of the categories of educators stated here above and provision of a detailed plan to reflect the following:

2 Recognition of Prior Learning

95

1 Relative Education Qualification Value

5.8.5.1 Preference to be given to M+1 and M+2 teachers;

5.8.5.2 Followed by M+3 teachers;

5.8.5.3 Followed by teachers in the Specialist Stream;

5.8.5.4 The prioritisation of the funding of educators for the proposed qual i f i cat ion improvement to M+4. The principle of preference for educators in poorer schools shall apply starting from Q u i nt i l e 1 a n d g i v i n g preference to M+1 and M+2 teachers, followed by M+3 te a c h e rs , fo l l o we d by teachers in the Specialist Stream;

5.8.5.5 The parties agree that a thorough investigation into the most effective metho-dology for the training and development of teachers needs to be done as a matter of urgency. To this end an investigation under the auspices of the ELRC will be completed by 30 September

32008. The ELRC will make funds available and arrange a conference by 30 November 2008 to facilitate discussions in this regard.

Annexure F of the Agreement (ELRC 2008) contains further elucidation that a task team will be set up to deal with the following:

2.6.6.1 The upgrading of qualifi-cations of educators to M+4;

2.6.6.2 The RPL of educators to M+4 and/or M+3 for both pay and/or qualification pur-poses;

2.6.6.3 The prioritisation of the funding of educators for the proposed qual i f i cat ion improvement to M+4. The principle of preference for educators in poorer schools shall apply starting from Quintile 1 and giving prefe-rence to M+1 and M+2 teachers, followed by M+3 te a c h e rs , fo l l o we d by teachers in the Specialist Stream.

Annexure F also states that there should be finalisation by 31 December 2012 (ELRC 2008: Section 2.6.5.4).

The Agreement refers to “the up-skilling of educators, including RPL and the improvements of qualifications” (ELRC 2008: Section 5.8). This suggests that the brief of the Task Team was to include determination of a range of up-skilling routes for serving educators. Some of these routes may be improvement of qualifications/upgrading, but others could be alternatives to formal qualifications (such as various forms of the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)). The goal of such up-skilling is achievement of M+ 4 or, improving the REQV level of serving educators who have not yet reached the required REQV 14/M+4 level.

3 Education Labour Relations Council

96

2. Overview of the work of Task Team 5

2.1 Unpacking and prioritising the different categories of educators in need of up-skilling

2.2 Analysing different possible up-skilling routes

The Agreement refers to different categories of educators in need of up-skilling. In the work of the Task Team the educator qualification categories of M+1, M+2, M+3 and M+4 were clarified and the 'position and status' of the various educators in these categories were discussed.

The relationship between REQV level and qualifications was clarified, and the available data from the Personnel and Salary Administration System (Persal) was analysed in order to yield a sense of numbers of teachers at each REQV level, as well as the age profile and provincial distribution of these teachers.

Finally, findings from the Department of Education 4

(DoE) (2007) research on current teacher upgrading were presented to enhance understanding of the target educators.

The Agreement makes clear that RPL of educators to M+4 and/or M+3 could be for pay and/or for qualifications purposes. The Task Team interpreted this to mean that there could be a route for up-skilling that raised the REQV levels of sufficiently skilled educators without them necessarily having to go through formal qualifications.

However, in order to determine the range of up-skilling routes needed, the Task Team started with

the qualifications and determined which were available for 'improvement of qualifications' in both the short- and long terms. In this exercise the Task Team was guided by the DoE through the Higher Education Qualifications Framework (DoE 2007a), the Norms and Standards for Educators (DoE 2000a) and the National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development (DoE 2007b) documents.

Once the up-skilling routes and different categories of target educators were understood, appropriate up-skilling routes were proposed, and the implications for individual educators and the system discussed. These proposals are still in draft form.

The Task Team has not yet completed the final part of its work - developing a detailed plan for the up-skilling/upgrading of educators.

In order to develop this plan further, it is necessary to have a clearer understanding of the precise numbers of educators in each category, so that the following can be determined:

• cost implications of the selection of particular routes for up-skilling/improve-ment of qualifications;

• implications for the provision of bursaries and or leave for educators;

• time-frames for the achievement of up-skilling according to selected routes;

• involvement of and responsibility for carrying out the up-skilling of the various categories of educators in the various provinces;

2.3 Determining appropriate up-skilling routes

2.4 Developing a plan to implement the selected up-skilling routes

4 The brief of the Task Team overlapped with that of research commissioned by the DoE in September 2007, the purpose of which was to undertake the necessary research (mainly on the main current upgrading route, the National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE)) to develop an implementation plan for the upgrading of un- and under-qualified teachers in the public system. It was agreed that the work of the Task Team and the DoE research should inform each other.

97

• advocacy and communication planning in relation to selected routes;

• system implications such as cost impli-cations for provinces in terms of the salary bi l ls of educators; pol icy changes required; and quality assurance (accredi-tation and monitoring).

Provisioning of bursaries and granting of study leave will be critical for a plan of this nature. Some work has already been done in this regard, but it is not included in this Report.

3.1.1 The difference between REQV and M + 1/2/3/4

The DoE is responsible for evaluating the qualifications of educators to determine the categories of their qualifications. This analysis is done in terms of the national policy document entitled Criteria for the Evaluation and Recognition of Qualifications for Employment in Education (DoE 2000b). This policy document is based on the primary policy document Norms and Standards for Educators in Schooling (DoE 2000a).

Prior to 1996, educator qualifications categories were as follows:

• M+1 = Category A - one year of teacher training after a Senior Certificate;

• M+2 = Category B - two years of teacher training after a Senior Certificate;

• M+3 = Category C - three years of teacher training after a Senior Certificate.

3. Target educators

3.1 Unpacking the relationship between REQV and educator qualifications

With the advent of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) in 1998, it became necessary to take the NQF level of the qualification into consideration, and to quantify study in terms of credits, rather than years of study.

As pointed out by Loots:

5REQV is based on multiples of 120 SAQA credits at specific levels of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF); 120 SAQA credits refer to the equivalent of one-year full-time study. A three-year qualification carries 360 SAQA credits and 480 credits refer to the equivalent of four years' full-time study (Loots 2008:2).

The relationship between the M+ classification and REQVs is therefore roughly as follows:

• M+0 = REQV 10• M+1 = REQV 11• M+2 = REQV 12• M+3 = REQV 13• M+4 = REQV 14

However, the awarding of an REQV level is more complex than simply counting the years of teacher training after Matriculation. For example, an additional REQV level will be awarded for a maximum of two approved qualifications at the same NQF level:

A teacher may receive REQV recognition for a maximum of two post-professional qualifi-cations at the same level (for example an old Further Diploma in Education and an Advanced Certificate in Education) provided they are in different fields of specialisation (Loots 2008:3).

This should not be taken to imply that the REQV level is not important. It is critical. As Loots points out:

REQV plays an important role in determining the

5 South African Qualifications Authority

98

correct salary level of an educator, whether a person may be employed in a particular post, to establish whether a person may be registered with the South African Council for Educators, whether an educator qualifies for a once-off cash-bonus on qualification improvement, or whether a particular person is considered to be under-qualified or unqualified for employment in education (Loots 2008:3).

Table 1 shows the framework in terms of which the DoE evaluates qualifications possessed by educators in order to allocate REQV levels.

3.1.2 The relationship between educator qualifications and REQV level

Source: Loots 2008:66Table 1: Qualifications framework for educators

The following brief example discussed at the meeting of Task Team 5 on 11 June 2008 indicates the complexity of the process.

6 Please note that the number of credits indicated in brackets after each qualification are minimum credits, of which a minimum of 72 should be at or above the level at which the qualification is registered.

99

NQF Level

Academic and other occupational qualifications

Educator qualifications

8 Doctoral degree/ DTech (360) (in an appropriate field of study)

DEd (360)

Master's degree/ MTech (120/240)(In an appropriate field of study)

MEd(Research)(240)

7 Honours degree, Post-graduate Diploma, or BTech degree (120)(in an appropriate field of study)

BEd (Honours) (120)

6 Three/four-year Degree or Diploma (360/480)

PGCE(120)

First qualification(2 - 1)

(teaching subjects)

Further qualification(4 new courses)+(4 new courses)

5 N/A

NPDE(240)

4 FET Certificates

3 School-leaving Certificates

2 School-leaving Certificates

1 GET Certificates

MEd(Dissertation)(120)PGDE(Coursework)(120)

ACE(120)

BEd(480)

Old FDE/HDE (1 year)

Old Teachers' Diplomas(3 years)

Old Teachers' Certificates(2 years initial and 1 year post-professional)

Two different types of teacher might want a degree/ diploma:

• a person who moves straight from school into a degree (first qualification);

• a teacher who has completed a Professional Teacher's Diploma (PTD) and then registers for a degree (further qualification).

For evaluation as an approved first qualification, the student must have two teaching subjects, one at first-year level and one at second-year level (e.g. History 2, English 1). This degree (360 credits) is then approved for teaching and is awarded REQV 13 (see DoE 2000b:20 - must have two/one). Even though the student has no professional qualification, he or she could be employed. The point about a teaching subject in an initial teaching qualification is that it must form the basis to offer a teaching method when the teacher finally does a professional qualification. If a 360-credit degree is approved as a first qualification, then it is evaluated at REQV 13. If it is a 480-credit first degree such as the BA Fine Art, it will be evaluated at REQV 14. It could also be partially approved and be evaluated at REQV 12.

If the teacher already has a PTD or other professional qualification, and then does a degree, the evaluation is different. Teaching subjects are interpreted more liberally - because the teacher has already studied teaching methods and particular subjects. Degree subjects could be, for example, Political Science or Criminology - subjects under-stood as providing an extension of knowledge, rather than as being a basis for teaching. Also, a degree could be completed in two parts - with four courses forming the first part (worth 1 REQV) and four courses forming the second part (worth 1 REQV).

So a possible route could be:

• PTD (REQV 13);

• + part-completed approved Bachelor's degree (REQV 14);

• + completed approved Bachelor's degree (REQV 15).

or even:

• Professional Teacher's Certificate (PTC) (REQV 12);

• + part-completed approved Bachelor's degree (REQV 13);

• + completed approved Bachelor's degree (REQV 14).

Although the concept of REQV level is used in definitions of levels of educator qualification, it does not stand on its own as a description of whether or not an educator is qualified.

Although an educator may be at REQV 13 for salary purposes, he or she may not be professionally qualified at all. The following list prepared by Martiens Loots for Task Team 5 indicates the different kinds of qualifications that REQV 13 educators may have:

• Std 10 plus a three-year teacher's diploma;

• a two-year teacher's certificate plus Std 8/ 10 plus a completed 240-credit National Professional Diploma in Education (NPDE);

• a completed 360-credit NPDE;

• an approved three-year degree or national diploma (which includes at least one scarce teaching subject or at least two non-scarce teaching subjects);

• a partially approved four-year degree (which includes only one non-scarce teaching subject or two first-level teaching subjects);

100

101

• Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET) practitioner qualifications (see DoE 2000b: 63) - only those done at ABET centres;

• N 3 c e r t i f i c a t e p l u s a c o m p l e t e d apprenticeship or a passed trade test (only for the teaching of technical subjects/ technology) (REQV 13(s));

• National Diplomas in Engineering, Hotel-keeping, Ballet, Music, Drama (DoE 2000b: 32);

• Std 10 plus a two-year teacher's certificate plus a partially completed degree or an ABET practitioner certificate.

Only the first three qualifications would make a teacher qualified in terms of the definition: “an approved and recognised professional teaching qualification evaluated as REQV 13 at least” (Loots 2008:2).

Although it is clear that REQV levels can be awarded for a variety of different kinds of qualification, and that REQV alone cannot be used to describe whether or not an educator is qualified, unqualified, or under-qualified, the existing numerical data has been gathered only in terms of REQV. The major source of current information available to quantify un- and under-qualified teachers is the Personnel

7Salary System (Persal) .

A table such as Table 2 below is helpful in indicating two things: the approximate numbers of teachers at each REQV level, and the provinces in which there are particular needs for upgrading of teachers.

3.2 Quantifying un- and under-qualified teachers

Province REQV 10

REQV 11

REQV 12

REQV 13

Totals REQV 14+

Totals

E Cape 173 983 1 640 22 818 25 614 37 588 63 200

Free State 471 826 1 016 8 418 10 731 14 714 25 445

Gauteng 31 259 779 13 305 14 374 38 760 53 134

KZN 6 461 388 2 776 21 560 31 185 53 681 84 866

Limpopo 96 193 1 397 22 984 24 670 32 223 56 893

M'langa 362 223 1 044 12 161 13 790 19 703 33 493

N West 109 312 1 552 7 839 9 812 16 713 26 525

N Cape 307 137 356 2 977 3 777 5 425 9 202

W Cape 239 369 1 311 8 326 10 245 20 395 30 640

8 249 3 690 11 871 120 388 144 198 239 200 383 398Totals

Source: Persal, March 2008Table 2: Numbers of educators by REQV per province

It is clear from this data that:

• there are very few REQV 11 teachers left in the system;

• the REQV 13 group is the largest group;

• there are relatively few REQV 10 teachers on Persal;

• the provinces with the largest numbers of un- and under-qualified teachers are KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern Cape and Limpopo.

However, there is a need to look more deeply into the information that we have from Persal, particularly for REQV 10s.

From the Persal data we know that there are about 8 249 teachers at REQV 10. In most provinces there are very few such teachers, except in KwaZulu-Natal. This is likely to be the case because the practice in KwaZulu-Natal is to use REQV 10 to 'store' teachers until their real REQV status has been determined.

7 Although potentially more fruitful, educator information collected through the Annual School Survey for the Education Management Information System (EMIS) has a number of problems. It is self-report data from the educators themselves, it is not complete, and there are varying systems across the provinces for gathering the information.

102

The instability of the REQV 10 category, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal, is clear when the March 2008 REQV figures (see Table 2) are compared with the September 2008 figures (Table 3):

REQV 10 REQV 11 REQV 12 Totals

E Cape 190 914 1 752 2 856

Free State 458 797 962 2 217

Gauteng 50 243 760 1 053

KZN 8 275 384 2 524 11 183

Limpopo 96 178 1 321 1 595

M'langa 408 215 1 014 1 637

N West 353 136 331 820

N Cape 99 294 1 405 1 798

10 220 3 540 11 464 25 224Totals

Source: Persal, September 2008Table 3: Numbers of REQV 10, 11 and 12 educators by REQV per province

Whereas the numbers of REQV 11 and 12 teachers decrease by a reasonable amount between March and September 2008, in KwaZulu-Natal the number of REQV 10s increases by about 1 800.

Persal data also yields the ages of teachers - see Table 4 below.

Province

REQV 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-64 65-79 Totals

10 48 3 277 2 568 1 625 663 68 0 8 249

11 – 113 180 990 2 152 243 12 3 690

12 – 178 1 632 4 416 5 120 517 21 11 884

13 – 3 331 42 961 48 821 23 702 1 832 42 120 689

Totals 48 6 899 47 341 55 852 31 637 2 660 75 144 512

Source: Persal, March 2008Table 4: Numbers of educators per REQV by age group

Table 4 shows that:

• the largest proportion of REQV 10s are in the 20 - 29 age group (3 277), followed by the 30 - 39 age group (2 568) and then the

40 - 49 age group (1 625). This suggests that there is both continued employment of unqualified teachers, and a historic group of unqualified teachers in the schools;

• the majority of REQV 11 teachers are aged between 50 and 59 (2 152);

• the majority of REQV 12 teachers are also aged between 50 and 59 (5 120) but there is a sizeable number who are between 40 and 49 (4 416);

• the age profile of the largest group, REQV 13s, is as follows: mainly 40 - 49 (48 821) followed closely by 30 - 39 (42 961), with quite a sizeable number between 50 and 59 (23 702).

Persal data could be analysed for numbers of years of experience. However, this is complicated for a range of reasons, including that:

• certain provinces employ temporary teachers in February or March, and then dismiss them in October, so that they do not have to pay them over the holiday months. However, the same teachers are re-employed the following year. Start dates of current employment are therefore not helpful - only the full service records of temporary teachers contain sufficient information;

• in many instances the service records for teachers are not available. For example, there are no historical records for teachers in the former Transkei;

• temporary teachers are not necessarily temporary by choice. Certain provinces declare large percentages of their educator force as 'temporary' during periods of rationalisation/restructuring (currently under way in both Limpopo and the North West provinces);

• the practice in the past was to terminate the permanent employment of African women teachers if they became pregnant outside of 'marriage'. Many women with children have therefore been teaching for a number of years in a temporary capacity.

It is hoped that the Teacher Qualifications Survey currently being conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) as part of the DoE teacher upgrading research will produce a more nuanced picture of the position and status of un- and under-qualified teachers than can be provided by Persal. However in the interim, the Task Team used information gained through research conducted by the DoE (2008) on current teacher upgrading through the NPDE.

The NPDE was originally a 240-credit qualification intended to provide an opportunity for older experienced REQV 11 and 12 teachers with outdated qualifications to become qualified. It was extended 'downwards' in 2004 to make provision for REQV 10 teachers.

The research (DoE 2008) yielded five important pieces of information: first, un- and under-qualified teachers continue to be employed for a variety of reasons, including:

• when there are no vacant positions for qualified teachers at primary school level, primary-school trained teachers are employed to teach in secondary schools, and vice versa;

• when there are shortages in particular subject areas at certain schooling levels (particularly Maths and Science), either Matric students are recruited, or teachers with degrees but no professional training are appointed, or foreign teachers are employed;

3.3 Position and status of un- and under-qualified teachers

• when no qualified teachers are available to teach in remote rural areas, the schools request permission to employ un- or under-qualified teachers in a temporary capacity.

Second, the NPDE has been a qualification for primary school teachers, mainly for those teaching at Foundation Phase level but with significant proportions of Intermediate Phase teachers, and fewer Senior Phase teachers, going this route.

Third, although the NPDE still serves mainly primary school teachers, the emphasis has shifted to Early Childhood Development (ECD) teachers and ABET educators who are either employed, or wanting employment in public schools. Fourth, current NPDE cohorts contain few in the 'historic' category of teachers for whom the NPDE was originally intended - experienced under-qualified teachers at REQV 11 and 12.

Fifth, a cause for concern is that the NPDE qualification is increasingly being used as an alternative initial teacher education qualification. Many in the current cohort of NPDE teachers are young and/or relatively inexperienced. The extremely heterogeneous nature of the 360-credit NPDE target group, as well as their relative youth and inexperience, is illustrated in Figures 1, 2 and 3 below which were drawn from the 85 teachers enrolled for the 360-credit NPDE at the University of Fort Hare in 2008.

Figure 1 shows the range of qualifications with which students enter the 360-credit NPDE, the largest groups being those with a Senior Certificate (M); Senior Certificate plus ECD Level 4 certificate; Senior Certificate plus an ABET certificate or diploma; or Further Education and Training (FET) college lecturers with a Senior Certificate and a Technical Diploma (TechD). In the sample, there is also one student with an incomplete three-year Diploma in Education (DE), a teacher with a foreign

103

21 to 30 YRS

31 to 40 YRS

41 to 50 YRS

51 to 60 YRS

104

degree, and two or three people with no school-leaving Senior Certificate at all. The traditional target group for the NPDE - teachers with Senior Certificates plus two-year qualifications (such as the Junior Secondary Teacher's Certificate, Professional Teachers' Certificate (PTC), or Certificate in Education (CE)) - forms a very small minority.

Figure 1: Qualifications profile of 2008 NPDE enrolments at the University of Fort Hare

In Figure 2 it is clear that the age profile of the sample group shows that though the bulk of teachers fall between 31 and 50 years of age, there are six teachers in the sample below 30 years of age.

37

28

613

Age

Years of Teaching Experience

5 YRS

6 to 10 YRS

11 to 15 YRS

16 to 20 YRS

20 YRS PLUS36

24

12

4

8

Figure 2: Age breakdown of 2008 NPDE enrolments at the University of Fort Hare

Figure 3 presents a striking picture. In this pie chart showing proportions of NPDE enrolments with particular numbers of years of teaching experience, it is clear that the bulk of those enrolling are in the category 'five years or fewer' years' experience.

DE (inc)ECD 4Foreign DegreeGr 8, NQF 4MM, ABET CertM, ABET DipM, CEM, CE, ECD 4M, degrM, ECD 4M, ECD 4, CEM ECD 5M, JSTCM, PTCM, Tech D

8

32

15

1

13

1

2

1

6

7 1 3 1 1

1

Qualifications

Figure 3: Breakdown of years of experience of 2008 NPDE enrolments at the University of Fort Hare

105

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111

2

1

2 2 2 2

3 3 33

18

6

4

5

4

5

DE (inc) ECD 4 Foreigndegree

Gr 8,NQF 4

M M,ABETCert

M,ABETDip

M,CE

M,CE,

ECD 4

M, degr M, ECD 4

M, ECD 4,

CE

M, ECD 5

M,JSTC

M, PTC

M,Tech D

4 YRS5 YRS6 to 10 YRS11 to 15 YRS16 to 20 YRS20 YRS PLUS

Qualifications by Years of Teaching Experience

Figure 4: Qualifications by years of experience of 2008 NPDE enrolments at the University of Fort Hare

Figure 4 emphasises the fact that the NPDE qualification is being used as an initial teaching qualification. It shows that when qualifications are cross-tabulated with years of experience, the largest number of students with five years of experience also have only a Senior Certificate (M) qualification.

The discussion thus far suggests that there are a number of issues to be considered in relation to the teachers at each REQV level before final recommendations for upgrading can be made.

3.4.1 Regarding teachers at REQV 10 level

NumbersAccording to Persal data of March 2008, there are 8 249 educators in this category. As reflected in

3.4 Main upgrading issues for teachers at each REQV level

8 Further Education and Training

previous discussion however, the REQV 10 category on Persal is unstable - it is not an accurate indication of the numbers of educators that may be involved in reality.

Possible qualifications of teachers at REQV 10Teachers at REQV 10 level could have the following:

• school-leaving certificates;

• any non-recognised qualification, for example, degrees or national diplomas which do not include any school teaching subjects; certificates/diplomas at NQF

8Levels 4 or 5 offered by FET institutions;

• qualifications obtained from non-accredited and non-registered private institutions;

• incomplete professional qualifications.

Possible qualifications of educators at REQV 11Teachers at REQV 11 level could have the following:

• Std 8 plus a two-year teachers' certificate;

• Std 10 plus a 120-credit Level 5 Certificate in Education; or

• Std 10 plus a 120-credit Level 5 Certificate in ABET Practice (only for employment at an ABET centre).

Issues regarding REQV 11 teachers• For REQV 11, the concern is primarily with

experienced older serving teachers with outdated qualifications. Although it is possible for some teachers to have obtained this qualification status relatively recently (as is the case for Teachers with Matric plus a CE), the first qualification in this category (Std 8 plus a two-years' teaching certificate) is an outdated one - most teachers in this group are between 50 - 59 years old.

• As for the REQV 10 teachers, it is important to identify under-qualified teachers of Grade R and find ways for them to get qualified quickly.

• Similarly, appropriate routes for ABET educators at REQV 11 need to be provided to equip them for employ in public schools.

3.4.3 Regarding teachers at REQV 12 level

NumbersAccording to Persal data of March 2008, there are 11 871 teachers in this category.

Possible qualifications of educators at REQV 12Teachers at REQV 12 level could have the following:

• Std 10 plus a two-year teachers' certificate;

106

Issues regarding REQV 10 teachers• In terms of up-skilling or upgrading of

teachers at this REQV level, the concern is primarily with serving teachers with long experience.

• The situation of the extremely variable situations of teachers enrolling for the NPDE has to be resolved, as it is impossible to provide quality upgrading programmes for teachers with such widely varying profiles. To achieve resolution it will be necessary to do three things: distinguish between those who are new entrants and those who have been serving in schools for a reasonable length of time; distinguish between re-entrants, new entrants, and serving unqualified educators; and make itimpossible for new entrants to use upgrading qual i f icat ions as in it ia l qualifications, while at the same time making it possible for experienced teachers to obtain qualifications that acknowledge that experience.

• There is a large influx of unqualified teachers to cater for the opening of Grade R classes in public schools. It is important to identify

9unqualified teachers of Grade R in public schools, and find a way to get them appropriately qualified quickly so that they can perform their important roles successfully.

• An appropriate route for ABET educators needs to be provided so that they can qualify to enter the employ of public schools.

3.4.2 Regarding teachers at REQV 11 level

NumbersAccording to Persal data of March 2008, there are 3 690 teachers in this category.

9 Grade R being the year before the first compulsory school year.

Possible qualifications for teachers at REQV 13Teachers at REQV 13 level could have the following:

• Std 10 plus a three-year teacher's diploma;

• a two-year teacher's certificate plus Std 8/ 10 plus a completed 240-credit NPDE;

• a completed 360-credit NPDE;

• an approved three-year degree or national diploma (which includes at least one scarce teaching subject or at least two non-scarce teaching subjects);

• a partially approved four-year degree (which includes only one non-scarce teaching subject or two first-level teaching subjects);

• ABET Practitioner qualifications (see DoE 2000b:63) - only those done at ABET centres;

• N3 certificate plus a completed appren-ticeship or a passed trade test (only for the teaching of technical subjects/technology) (REQV 13(s));

• National Diplomas in Engineering, Hotel-keeping, Ballet, Music, Drama (op.cit.32); or

• Std 10 plus a two-year teacher's certificate plus a partially completed degree or an ABET Practitioner certificate.

Issues regarding REQV 13 teachers• The primary concern here is with serving

teachers who are currently professionally qualified, but are soon to be regarded as not being at the desired REQV levels - such as teachers with an old Diploma in Education (DE), or an NPDE, or a combination of outdated professional certificate(s) and the NPDE. These teachers are mainly in the 40 -

107

• a partially approved three-year degree or national diploma (which includes only one non-scarce teaching subject, for example English 2, or two first-level teaching subjects, for example English 1, History 1);

• only a completed apprenticeship or a passed trade test (without a National Level 3 (N3) certificate or a Level 4 FET certificate (REQV 12(s)); or

• a combination of ABET practitioner certificates (see DoE 2000b:63).

Issues regarding REQV 12 teachers• The primary concern for REQV 12 is the same

as that for REQV 11: that is, experienced older serving teachers have outdated qualifications. There are relatively few REQV 11 teachers with outdated qualifications in the system, and work in the NPDE has shown that there is not much difference between REQV 11s and 12s, so it would be possible to have the same solution for REQV 11s and 12s.

• As in the case of the REQV 10 teachers, there is a need to deal with ABET educators as a separate category - as educators with some teaching knowledge, but in need of initial qualifications.

• There is also a need to deal separately with teachers at REQV 12 level with incomplete or partially recognised academic qualifications.

3.4.4 Regarding teachers at REQV 13 level

NumbersAccording to Persal data of March 2008, there are 120 388 teachers in this category.

49 years age group, but there is also a sizeable number in the 30 - 39 years age group. As these are teachers with careers ahead of them, a qualifications route is advisable. An important challenge to be resolved here is whether the Advanced Certificate in Education (ACE) (or, in future, the Advanced Diploma (AD)) is the most appropriate qualification for upgrading, or alternatively, whether these teachers should be channeled into Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) degrees. Selection of an appropriate qualification will also need to take into consideration those teachers who have used the NPDE as initial teaching qualifications, and who may not have the foundational learning for simple upgrading qualifications. This group may need something more fundamental.

• There are large numbers of these teachers; an upgrading route requiring a qualification or RPL assessment would need to be implemented over an extended period of time.

• Unqualified FET college lecturers form a category on their own, and since they are not on Persal, should probably not be included in an upgrading scheme for school teachers.

• As for ABET educators at lower levels, a route for up-skilling ABET educators at REQV 13 level is needed to make possible their employment in public schools.

• In certain provinces there are sizeable numbers of teachers with academic qualifi-cations in scarce subjects, and no professional teaching qualifications. This group needs to be channeled into professional teaching qualifications.

4. Alternative RPL routes

4.1 RPL for access, RPL for redress

One of the major issues in Task Team 5 discussions relating to the up-skilling of teachers was RPL. Presentations on RPL were made to the Team by the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), Jean Dyzel of SAQA and Terry Volbrecht, member of the team responsible for the Education Training and Development Practices (ETDP) Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA)'s evaluation of the NPDE, as well as by two representatives from the South African Police Service involved in job competency evaluation there. The Collective Agreement encourages the use of RPL to achieve “M+4 and/or M+3 for both pay and/or qualification purposes” (ELRC 2008: Annexure F, Section 2.6.6.2).

In the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) policy, RPL is defined as:

... the comparison of the previous learning and experience of a learner howsoever obtained against the learning outcomes required for a specified qualification, and acceptance for purposes of qualification of that which meets the requirements (SAQA 2002:9)

It is clear from this definition that RPL is tied to a qualification; it is not presented as an alternative to a qualifications-based route for up-skilling teachers. In the work for the OSD however, the term 'RPL' is used loosely to describe a range of alternatives to actually studying for a qualification over a set period of time. The Task Team identified two broad purposes for which candidates could require RPL: for access, and for redress or affirmation of skills already held. Each of these underlying purposes is discussed briefly here.

108

RPL for access to further learningCandidates seek access when they wish to study further. They tend to seek access to target qualifications, or advanced standing towards completion of target qualifications.

Access to qualifications for which candidates do not meet minimum requirements on paper is potentially provided through assessment of prior learning to see if candidates have the required competences in the relevant entry level qualifi-cations. Application for Senate discretion can be made for exemption from meeting entry requirements when applicable. Application can also be made for exemption from meeting entry requirements on the basis of mature age.

Granting of advanced standing is potentially achieved through assessment against selected outcomes/modules of target programmes; applicants can receive credits and reduce periods of study required either before the start of programmes (conventional RPL), or during the course of programmes (also referred to as work-integrated learning). Credit can also be transferred: credits from completed qualifications can be granted towards target qualifications.

RPL for redress or affirmation of knowledge and skills in the workplace Redress is needed in order to recognise employed candidates who are competent and possess knowledge and skills, but do not have the minimum qualifications for positions they occupy.

RPL for redress can be done in a range of ways:

• by assessment of prior learning against minimum qualifications for particular positions to see if candidates have the knowledge and skills required in order to be graded as being qualified for particular jobs (this assessment would also potentially allow access to higher qualifications);

• by job competence evaluation to see if candidates have the competence to perform particular jobs satisfactorily, even if they do n o t h ave t h e re q u i re d m i n i m u m qualifications for that job (if candidates are successful here and are paid at the new levels accordingly, they would still need to achieve the minimum qualifications before proceeding to higher level qualifications); or

• by occupational re-designation - by which employers deem particular qualifications or skills equivalent to minimum qualifications for the job, so that candidates are automatically re-categorised without having to go through assessment processes (this route would result in candidates being paid at the new levels, but having to go through minimum qualifications before gaining access to higher qualifications).

As mentioned in the notes of the Task Team meeting of 4 August 2008, this last option would be suitable for teachers regarded as qualified in the past, but suddenly became under-qualified when the REQV levels for qualified teacher status were raised. In terms of the DoE (2000b) document, qualifications obtained retain their status. This fact could be built on as a basis for continued recognition for particular groups of teachers.

As these different forms of RPL may be suitable for different categories of un- and under-qualified teachers, their characteristics and advantages/ disadvantages (as understood by Task Team 5) are described in a little more detail below.

4.1.1 Assessment for RPL prior to, or instead of, engaging in a qualification

The advantage of conventional RPL is that it provides candidates with access to learning, not simply access to higher salaries. It is potentially a way to shorten periods of required study, or to avoid having to study content that is already known.

109

However, on the downside:

• it is time-consuming and involves a wide range of different personnel (evidence-gathering facilitators, assessors, mode-rators, employers/workplaces, admini-strative support, RPL consultants). The RPL process may not be much quicker than actually doing a qualification;

• it can be quite costly;

• it is difficult for the above two reasons, to organise RPL for large numbers of students, and the experience of the NPDE suggests that mass-scale RPL tends to degenerate into a somewhat meaningless bureaucratic exercise;

• it requires high levels of ability to reflect on practice, which is often only held by candidates whose basic education has been sound, and who are seeking entry to higher qualifications;

• it is more successful with practical qualifications than with those that require theoretical content knowledge;

• very often only portions of qualifications can be obtained via RPL, and candidates may still be required to complete certain sections of qualifications in order to be awarded full qualifications. This makes designing and delivering programmes difficult, as different students are likely to be doing different modules/part-modules;

• in the case of the target audience for RPL in teacher education, the need for up-skilling arises because qualifications are regarded as outdated, or lacking, and methods learned in the past were governed for the most part by curricula of the apartheid past. It does not make sense to argue for recognition of the

kinds of experience and practices that are discredited. In these instances it would be better to argue for actual up-skilling.

4.1.2 Assessment for RPL during a qualification

Assessment for RPL during a qualification is more accurately described as Work-integrated Learning (WIL). Although WIL does not avoid the need to enrol for qualifications altogether, and although it does not provide opportunities for advanced standing, it has a number of advantages. WIL links prior RPL and in-programme RPL. The notion of the 'capability envelope' was a key recommendation in the RPL work for the NPDE. It was proposed that there be a spine module starting prior to the programme, and continuing throughout the programme so that teachers consider past, present and future learning. Teachers should be required to reflect on what they are currently learning in relation to their schools, and what difference this new learning will make to them after the end of the programme.

Although WIL can shorten the period of study for a qualification, its main advantage is that it provides an opportunity to teach reflection on learning.

4.1.3 Credit transfer

Currently most of what is called RPL is actually credit transfer - an examination of existing qualifications in order to determine whether or not they are equivalent to a target qualification, or the minimum entry requirement to another qualification or to a job.

The advantage of credit transfer is efficiency. It can take place in an office and be uniformly applied to candidates meeting certain requirements. A disadvantage is that it can assume that past qualifications were developed logically according to comparable competence requirements.

110

The case of the NPDE indicates that the decision to credit REQV 12 teachers with 120 credits on the basis of their previous qualifications (Matric plus a two-year qualification), although it seemed fair at the time, was not actually fair. Those who actually delivered the NPDE found that there was no difference in competence between REQV 11 (M+1) and REQV 12 (M+2) teachers.

However, if the approach were adopted with current qualifications rather than historic ones, there would be greater chance of success.

4.1.4 Job competence evaluation

The heart of the argument for the job competence evaluation route is that equal work demands equal pay: it is candidates' competence levels in doing particular jobs that are important, rather than whether or not they possess the associated qualifications.

Teaching is however a complex occupation and assessing whether or not teachers are competent is a complex and time-consuming task. If this assessment were to be done for teachers, it would have to be within the framework of the Integrated Qualification Management System (IQMS) because devising another system would be wasteful of resources. Currently, the salary rewards possible through successful IQMS evaluation are kept at manageable levels. Were there to be considerable salary increases possible through successful job competence evaluations, there would need to be strict measures in place to ensure funding and to avoid corruption.

Finally, job competence evaluation is not qualifications-based, and teachers would still have to study the required minimum qualifications for entry to higher qualifications and access to career pathways dependent on those higher qualifications.

4.1.5 Occupational re-designation

As pointed out, it could be argued that occupational re-designation is an employer responsibility in the case of teachers whose qualifications were previously regarded as adequate, but are no longer so. Occupational re-designation has the advantage of being a mere bureaucratic procedure, rather than requiring complex assessment or qualification processes. It is efficient, and can be carried out quickly. On the down side it does not create access to further learning or facilitate career progression. It is therefore most suitable as a reward for teachers at the ends of their careers and not interested in further study. It could be argued that if serving teachers in the middle of their careers are provided with salary recognition at levels higher than their current qualifications merit, these increases could result in lack of motivation to study further, with a subsequent impact on the quality of teaching.

The proposals in this section are the subject of discussion and negotiation in Task Team 5 of the OSD. In the Task Team, the two main routes under consideration for the different categories of serving teachers are occupational re-designation on one hand, or the qualifications route on the other, with in-qualification RPL or Work-integrated Learning.

Existing qualifications and the qualifications framework (DoE 2000a) need to be revised for alignment with new DoE requirements (2007a). However, it will be approximately two years before the new framework is fully implemented.

In respect of the qualifications route it is being recommended that existing qualifications should be

5. Proposals for qualification/RPL routes for different categories of teachers

5.1 Two main up-skilling routes with various forms of RPL

111

used in the short term, but that there will be transitional arrangements to two new possibilities for upgrading of teachers in the future.

The existing upgrading qualifications are as follows:

• 360-credit NPDE (for teachers on REQV 10, 11, or 12 levels) for upgrading to REQV 13;

• Advanced Certificate in Education (ACE) (for teachers on REQV 13 for upgrading to REQV

1014) ;

• Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) (for teachers who have academic quali-fications evaluated at REQV 13 or higher, but no professional teaching qualifications).

For the future, the following are the two possible qualifications routes for un- or under-qualified serving teachers needing to move from REQV 10, 11, 12 or 13 to REQV 14: either B.Ed (part-time, mixed mode) or Higher Certificate followed by a cognate diploma, followed by a cognate Advanced Diploma

11(AD) .

The PGCE for academically qualified but professionally unqualified teachers will be replaced by the postgraduate AD. Work on the development of new qualifications will only be possible once rules for credit accumulation and transfer and what constitutes a cognate qualification in a particular field have been determined.

The proposals below state that two new upgrading qualification routes (the B.Ed and the Higher Certificate/Diploma/Advanced Diploma routes) should be made available simultaneously,

depending upon what providers can offer. The reason for this suggestion is that while some Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are preparing to do B.Ed degrees in flexible mode, others are not. It would be unwise to close down an existing route or proscribe a route on which HEIs are disposed to embark - such an action would reduce the number of available programmes for teacher training, creating further problems for teacher supply.

However, the Higher Certificate/Diploma/Advanced Diploma route should be available for primary school teachers only. The main reasons for this are:

• the majority of serving teachers in need of upgrading are primary school teachers;

• there is a great shortage of primary school teachers and particularly African-language Foundation Phase teachers;

• there is a need to provide a viable crossover from ECD practitioner qualifications to encourage unqualified serving Grade R teachers to become fully qualified, and to provide a pathway into formal schooling for ECD-trained potential Grade R educators.

Assessment for RPL prior to qualification enrolment, or credit transfer from one qualification to another may be carried out by HEIs for certain categories of teachers and within certain parameters. But this form of RPL will not be used as a mass access mechanism for un- and under-qualified teachers, as it demands a one-on-one individualised process which is not practical.

A limited form of job competence evaluation may be necessary in the case of serving teachers or teaching assistants who fail their initial/upgrading qualifications, or do not complete them within reasonable periods of time. Such evaluations can be used to make decisions as to whether to allow teachers to continue to try to pass, or to replace them.

112

10 Some providers use the second half of the four-year B.Ed qualification for teacher upgrading as an alternative to the ACE providing for 60 credits to be earned by RPL, and requiring 180 new credits.11 Please see DoE (2007a) for descriptions of these qualifications.

5.2 Measures to deal with the quality impact of continued employment of completely unqualified 'teachers'

5.3 Proposals for up-skilling of five categories of un(der)qualified teachers

If the alternative route (Higher Certificate/Diploma/ Advanced Diploma) is created, the following measures would need to be insisted upon in order to ensure a sense of urgency about addressing the continued existence of un- and under-qualified teachers in schools:

• if unqualified persons are employed by provincial departments of education, they should not be called teachers, but given another name such as 'teaching assistants';

• if unqualified persons are employed by provincial departments of education, they should simultaneously be enrolled in professional teaching qualifications;

• if unqualified persons in schools fail in their upgrading/initial qualifications or do not complete these within reasonable periods of time, they should first be subject to job competence evaluation, and if this exercise indicates that their teaching performance is poor, they should be replaced.

Finally, the experience of the NPDE has shown that completely unqualified serving teachers need extended periods of face-to-face instruction, and cannot pick up the content knowledge that they need without this. It is therefore recommended that upgrading qualifications for completely unqualified teachers consist of three- to six-month contact blocks at HEI.

The following are the Task Team 5 proposals for the five main categories of un- and under-qualified teachers. The starting point for the determination of the categories was REQV level, but, as will be seen

below, a category can in some instances straddle a number of REQV levels, and/or there may be different sub-categories within a single REQV level. In addition, special redress needs to be given to teachers of a certain age with long experience in the profession.

5.3.1 Category 1: Teachers above 50 years of age, at REQV 10, 11 or 12 levels

The rationale determining an up-skilling route for teachers in this category is redress for teachers who have done long service in schools and are nearing retirement. The majority of these teachers have either been professionally qualified but with outdated qualifications, or have been teaching for years without qualifications or with qualifications not recognised for employment in public schools.

It is recommended that these educators are deemed to be REQV 13 for salary purposes only by occupational re-designation. However, if educators in this category wish to enrol in upgrading qualifications, they are free to do so.

Since the numbers involved are relatively small, this re-designation will not have a serious impact on the salary bills of provinces. The numbers of REQV 10, 11, and 12 educators in the 50 - 59 years age group (according to Persal in March 2008) is 7 935, with another 1 000 or so older than this.

The criteria for successful application for occupational re-designation to REQV 13 should be as follows:

• teachers would need to be 50 years of age or older (identity documents to be submitted);

• at REQV 10, 11 or 12 the relevant qualifi-cation(s) would need to be submitted (school-leaving/Matric and/or Professional Teachers' Certificate, Junior Secondary Teacher's Certificate, etcetera);

113

• teachers would need to be currently teaching in public schools (they would need to furnish their letters of employment);

• teachers would need to be on the Persal system (Persal number to be supplied);

• teachers could be serving in a permanent or temporary capacity;

• teachers need to have more than 10 years of continuous teaching experience in public schools (candidates would need to produce service records to support their appli-cations).

5.3.2 Category 2: teachers at REQV 10 level

The total number of teachers at REQV 10 according to Persal in March 2008, is 8 249, although this is likely to be unreliable for the reasons already suggested. In addition, there are a number of different sub-categories of teachers placed at REQV 10 and there is no way of quantifying the numbers in each at the moment. The results of the Teacher Qualifications Survey are needed to do this.

5.3.2.1 Category 2 (a): Professionally and academically unqualified teachers

The qualifications route is necessary for all of these teachers, except for those in the 50 - 59 years age category who are dealt with in Section 5.3.1 above.

If these teachers are not currently serving in schools, they need to make use of one of the two main routes for initial professional education, the B.Ed degree, or a degree plus PGCE (or future equivalents). The NPDE/ACE or future equivalents are specifically intended for teachers whose current teaching practice forms a basis for study and can be accessed and reflected upon in school-based assignments.

ECD educators are the exception in this group - if they have Level 4 or 5 ECD qualifications and are

working in ECD centres, the argument is that they could use that experience at least in the first year of study, for school-based assignments.

5.3.2.1.1 Category 2 (a) (i): Professionally and academically unqualified teachers currently practising in primary schools

For 2009 and 2010, these teachers need to enrol for a 360-credit NPDE. From 2011, these teachers either need to do a mixed mode B.Ed degree, or Higher Certificate followed by cognate Diploma and cognate Advanced Diploma.

5.3.2.1.2 Category 2 (a) (ii): Professionally and academically unqualified teachers currently practising in secondary schools

These teachers need to do B.Ed degrees. Alternatively, they need to do a first degree plus PGCE or, when it becomes available, the postgraduate Advanced Diploma. Existing programmes that provide learnerships for unqualified teachers in secondary schools to facil itate their obtaining of professional qualifications after their degrees should be strengthened.

5.3.2.1.3 Category 2 (a) (iii): Professionally and academically unqualified serving teachers with incomplete professional qualifications

Teachers in this group need to follow the qualifications routes described for teachers in categories 2(a)(i) and 2(a)(ii) above, depending upon whether they are primary or secondary school teachers. In addition, HEIs may assess such teachers for RPL to achieve credit for up to 50% of the target qualifications.

5.3.2.2 Category 2 (b): ECD educators

For ECD educators/Grade R educators with

114

unrecognised ECD qualifications currently teaching in primary schools or ECD centres:

• with ECD Levels 4 or 5 plus Matric, educators should follow the routes for professionally and academically unqualified serving teachers (see 2 (a)(i) above), but HEIs may recognise some credits from ECD Level 5 and higher qualifications, to a maximum of 120 credits;

• with ECD Level 4 only and no Matric, HEIs may assess educators via RPL, for access to Higher Certificate programmes.

For ECD educators/Grade R educators not teaching in primary schools or ECD centres: the B.Ed degree needs to be done, but HEIs may recognise ECD Level 5 or higher qualifications for exemption from part of the B.Ed (to a maximum of 120 credits).

5.3.2.3 Category 2 (c): ABET educators at REQV 10, 11, or 12 levels

The DoE recognises certain ABET educator qualifications, but only for employment in ABET centres (DoE 2000b). Some ABET educators are in fact employed in schools, and their learning paths need different treatment from those employed in ABET centres: these two groups of educators are dealing with very different learners.

For ABET educators serving in public schools (not ABET centres), the route for professionally and academically unqualified serving teachers (see 2(a)(i) above) must be followed, but HEIs may recognise some credits from ABET educator qualifications at Level 5 or above (up to a maximum of 120 credits).

For ABET educators not teaching in schools, B.Ed degrees need to be completed, but HEIs may recognise ABET Level 5 qualifications for exemption from part of these degrees (to a maximum of 120 credits).

5.3.3 Category 3: School teachers at REQV 11 and 12 levels who are below 50 years of age

If the additional subcategories within these REQV levels are dealt with in other ways, the educators that form the bulk of those at REQV 11 and 12 levels will be recognised as the traditional NPDE target. They can be largely dealt with through the mature age occupational re-designation strategy described above (in Sections 5.1 and 5.2).

However, for those educators at REQV 12 level with Matric plus a Certificate in Education (CE) (or equivalent) in the 40 - 49 years of age group (and below):

• for 2009 and 2010, the final 120 credits of the 360-credit NPDE are needed;

• from 2011, either a mixed mode B.Ed degree (if an institution is available at which to do this degree), or a Diploma and cognate Advanced Diploma are needed.

5.3.4 Category 4: Academically qualified but professionally unqualified teachers

In this category there are teachers who may hold approved or partially approved academic qualifications. Depending on the subjects they have taken, and the number of years they have studied, they could be at REQV 12, 13, 14 or 15 levels. Since the proportion of these teachers at each of these REQV levels is not specified in Persal, the numbers in the system are not clear.

Those who have not completed their academic qualifications must do so and those with insufficient teaching subjects in their academic qualifications should do further study in recognised teaching subjects. They should then be sponsored to study for a PGCE, or an Advanced Diploma (postgraduate), when the latter becomes available through the Higher Education Qualifications Framework.

115

116

In the case of teachers who are already in schools, a specified period should be given for them to complete their professional qualifications. If they do not achieve these qualifications within this period, the results of job competence evaluation should be used to determine whether or not they should be replaced.

5.3.5 Category 5: Teachers at REQV 13 level

Although there are different subcategories of educators at REQV 13 level, the major concern in this category is making provision for teachers with professional qualifications evaluated at REQV 13 and now required to move to REQV 14. There are two types of such teachers: those who are in schools, and those who may be seeking re-entry into schools.

The vast majority of the target educators for the up-skilling plan are at REQV 13 (approximately 120 000 if figures are taken from Persal in March 2008). A qualifications route for this group must therefore take into consideration the capacity of the Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) involved. As the experience of the NPDE has shown, the capacity of the HEI system is not sufficient to provide qualifications routes for more than 10 000 teachers per annum.

One way to deal with this capacity problem would be to argue for occupational re-designation for this category of teachers. However, this option would be problematic for the following reasons:

• it would assume that the qualifications already possessed by these teachers would equip them to deal with the new curriculum. However, outdated three-year diplomas would certainly not do this;

• the quality problems relating to the NPDE mean that one cannot assume that teachers who have reached REQV 13 through that

route are necessarily as well-equipped as they should be;

• there are a number of teachers who have used the NPDE as an initial training route, and if they were to be re-designated REQV 14 it would make a mockery of the drive to improve the quality of initial training;

• the NPDE demonstrated the importance of a sustained programme for building teacher confidence and competence, particularly if teachers' previous educational backgrounds have been weak.

For these reasons therefore, a qualifications route is recommended. The two routes concerned are outlined in the following two sections.

5.3.5.1 Category 5 (a): Serving primary or secondary school teachers professionally qualified at REQV 13

Two routes are envisaged here:

• for 2009 and 2010, these teachers do an accredited Advanced Certif icate in Education (ACE);

• from 2011 for approximately eight years with an intake of about 10 000 teachers per year, this group does Advanced Diplomas (ADs).

5.3.5.2 Category 5 (b): Unemployed primary or secondary school teachers professionally qualified at REQV 13 and seeking re-entry into teaching

The purpose of the ACE or AD is essentially for continuing professional development. It should not be used by teachers who do not have current experience in schools, and whose previous training might have taken place so long ago as to be outdated.

117

The appropriate qualification for this group of teachers is the B.Ed degree. The HEI may recognise their previous qualifications for exemption from part of the B.Ed (to a maximum of 240 credits).

There is a group of educators at REQV 12 and REQV 13 levels who have National (N) diplomas and trade test certificates/completed apprenticeships, and who have been employed as professionally unqualified lecturers in FET Colleges. Although two of the institutions that serve this target group have developed separate programmes, others offer a programme very similar to that for teachers in schools.

It is therefore recommended that future upgrading of school-teachers and FET College lecturers be managed through separate qualifications.

The numbers of foreign teachers and teachers with foreign qualifications in South African schools are not known, nor is there a distinction in the statistics, between foreign teachers and teachers with South African nationality but teaching qualifications obtained in other countries.

However, it is recommended that, whether or not they are South African nationals, these teachers be treated in the same way as South Africans in respect of upgrading, as they are responsible for teaching in South African schools and need to be equipped to do so and/or recognised for what they contribute.

Department of Education (DoE). 2000a. Norms and Standards for Educators. Government Gazette, Vol. 415 no. 20844, 4 February 2000. Pretoria: DoE.

6. A note on FET College lecturers

7. A note on foreign teachers and teachers with foreign qualifications

References

Department of Education (DoE). 2000b. Criteria for the Recognition and Evaluation of Qualifications for Employment in Education. Government Gazette, vol. 423 no. 21565. Pretoria: DoE.

Department of Education (DoE). 2007a. The Higher Education Qualifications Framework. Government Gazette vol. 508, no. 30353. Pretoria: DoE.

Department of Education (DoE). 2007b. The National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development. Pretoria: DoE.

Department of Education (DoE). 2008. Report on Research into Teacher Upgrading. Pretoria: DoE.

Education Labour Relations Council. 2008. Collective Agreement No. 1 of 2008. Framework for the Establishment of an Occupation Specific Dispensation (OSD) for Educators in Public Education.

Loots, M. 2008. Recognition of Qualifications for Employment in Education. Unpublished paper made available to Ocupation-Specific Dispensation Task Team 5.

South African Qualifications Framework (SAQA). 2002. The Recognition of Prior Learning in the context of the South African National Qualifications Framework. Policy document, June 2002. Pretoria: SAQA.

ConclusionsProfessor Ian Moll, University of the Witwatersrand

The purpose of the Colloquium was to present and discuss papers on different aspects of the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and consider how they might inform a strategy for RPL in the upgrading/up-skilling of serving teachers.

This publication is evidence that this purpose was achieved. More precisely, however, the introductory and concluding pieces are intended to be a synthesised account of the papers and discussion in the Colloquium, with a set of recommendations to inform a strategy for RPL in the upgrading/up-skilling of serving teachers.

It was assumed that by the end of the two days the Department of Education (DoE) would have at its disposal, a set of recommendations to inform a strategy for the implementation of RPL for teachers in the future. These recommendations would have been developed with the participation of a range of stakeholders, from teacher union representatives to academic experts in the field of RPL as well as a significant number of the responsible implemen-tation agencies - the teacher training institutions of the universities and significant Non-Gopvernmental Organisations (NGOs) in the field.

Instead of a set of precise recommendations, what the DoE got was a much richer understanding of the depth and complexity, but also of the importance, of the envisaged RPL project for teachers. Discussions throughout the Colloquium proved to be exciting for the people present. Much of the feedback that I have heard, both during and after the two-day event, indicates that most participants, no matter what their backgrounds or institutional locations, felt challenged and enthused, by the quality and depth of the debate that they heard. Note that there is obviously overlap - in this audience, a high degree of overlap - between the different 'categories' that I adduce below:

(a) The academics, for example, seemed to be

Many voices, one RPL strategy

encouraged by the fact that knowledge was firmly back on the RPL agenda. There had been a tendency in RPL policy directions in the past, and much of its theoretical justification, to flatten distinct kinds of expertise - for example, the formal knowledge of the school or the academy, the tacit knowledge of the workplace, the practical wisdom of everyday life - into each other. This meant that clear developmental strategies had not been built into RPL strategies for teachers in the past, with the consequence that subject content knowledge and pedagogic expertise had often got lost in the process. At the same time, academics also seemed to be very taken with the introduction of a new knowledge category into the debate: practical wisdom, or phronesis. Breier's suggestion seemed to fit into an obvious gap in the appreciation of what needed to be recognised and, indeed, certified in the accumulated experience of practising teachers over time. There was a sense that the academic debate about RPL had moved on in some significant way.

(b) The teacher trainers seemed to be happy that the practical wisdom of teaching had gained strong recognition at the Colloquium. While there has been an increasing academic recognition in recent years of the significance of expertise built up by teachers in practice - for example, in the notion of pedagogic content knowledge proposed by Lee Shulman - many teacher trainers still complain that the craft of teaching has often been pushed into the background when colleges have merged with universities to produce new kinds of teacher-training institutions. Here, at this Colloquium, was a strong appreciation of the wisdom of teachers built up over time in real classroom contexts. The problem to be faced was that of developing an understanding of how to go

118

about recognising and assessing this wisdom, and thus contribute to the emerging RPL project.

(c) The unionists present appeared satisfied that the career aspirations of teachers had been taken into account in the discussions. However, th is was not a narrow, 'economistic' interpretation of events: some of the most telling contributions to the debate from the unionists were those that clearly linked the development of teaching and learning in schools to the development of teachers, though an active RPL process, in those schools. While there was a consensus at the Colloquium that many teachers, close to retirement, who have been dis-advantaged career-wise and remuneration-wise by the legacies of apartheid, should 'simply' be advantaged by RPL, the strong commitment was to putting in place a real developmental agenda for teachers that would contribute to national education imperatives. This message was most strongly articulated in the Colloquium by the comrades from the South Afr ican Democratic Teachers' Union (SADTU) and the col leagues from the National Professional Teachers' Organisation of South Africa (NAPTOSA).

(d) The activists present were apparently enthused by the continuing recognition that the nature and character of workplace-based experience and the formal knowledge requirements of teacher qualifications needed to be bridged. This was perhaps most strongly reflected in the consensus view of the Colloquium that the locus of expertise built up by practising teachers is in the first place the classroom. The old, naïve view that everyday knowledge (of the workplace, of the community, of life in general) and systematic, formal knowledge (of the school or the university) simply map

onto each other is thankfully gone. But following Alan Ralphs' lead, the Colloquium engaged with a much deeper under-standing, that the expertise of the workplace could be re-described (or recontextualised, to use Bernstein's term) in such a way that it became a foundation for the development of the formal knowledges of the academy. A developmental RPL process, it seemed, could achieve this if it was conceived properly and implemented strategically.

The government leaders present were somewhat 1

discouraged , since they did not achieve what they might have wanted from the Colloquium, which was a clear strategic direction for the future and the beginnings of an implementable RPL programme. On the other hand, they were clearly enthusiastic about the sense of a community of people interested in working on and supporting the envisaged RPL initiatives for teachers that emerged at the Colloquium.

So there were many strands to the debates and discussion that took place over the two days. At the end of the process, there was a good sense of the complexities and the significance of the RPL project that we are undertaking. It must be distinctively about teachers and their development, its specificity must be about schools and schooling, but it is not just about teachers. As one participant put it, “the implications of this project will have ramifications way beyond teacher development, or even education. The whole future of RPL in South Africa will stand or fall by it.”

Throughout the Colloquium, there were various moments in which the developing arguments about

Mapping the terrain of RPL for teachers

1 It must be said that the RPL technicists present, who were not necessarily from the DoE, were thoroughly disappointed by the discussions at the Colloquium.

119

RPL were summarised in order to pull together their various implications. A number of tensions were evident in the debate. While these were recognised by participants as productive tensions - the idea being that if they were worked through systematically in the development and implemen-tation of RPL policy, they would make for stronger interventions - they represented deep-seated differences between various participants, given their various institutional and organisational locations in the RPL terrain.

One notable tension on the first day was that between a perception that RPL, and its implicit location in the processes of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF), was prone to flatten knowledge criteria in teacher development, and a perception that RPL could work with criteria too far removed from locally established wisdoms and norms of career advancement established on the basis of community consensus. The former argument tended to be driven most strongly by the academics present, and the latter by the trade union representatives. However, this was not a bald dichotomy: Ralphs argued strongly that local wisdoms established in both community and workplace contexts needed to be bridged into formal learning contexts, and that this was a central imperative of RPL. And members of both SADTU and NAPTOSA recognised the importance of systematic subject content knowledge for teaching, and the need for it to be foregrounded in any future RPL processes.

On the second day, an implied tension between 'theory' and 'practice' began to surface, following the presentation by Smith. Notions that academics involved in RPL theorising and research were 'airy-fairy', trapped in 'ivory towers', and unable to understand 'realities on the ground' were bandied about, as was the idea that RPL practitioners tended to be 'technicist', unable to see 'the bigger [developmental and knowledge-related] picture' beyond the immediacy of their institutional context. However, there was a strong appeal on the part of

the majority of participants that this kind of dichotomy should be resisted: “practice is always theoretical, and theories always imply particular kinds of practice” is the way that one contributor put it. There was a strong consensus at the Colloquium that RPL for teachers, if it is to succeed in its objectives which are as much about the development of effective schooling as about the development of individual teachers, must be implemented with a strategy that is at once theoretically and pragmatically sophisticated.

A particular methodology was used to try to capture these tensions and reflections over the course of the Colloquium. Participants were posed five questions, each to be captured on a different-coloured card, as follows:

These cards were then mapped onto a conceptual grid which characterised important institutional locations which the tasks of an RPL process for teachers would have to straddle. The four nodes on the grid represent an important consensus on role-players that had emerged quickly in the course of the Colloquium (see Figure 1):

(a) What is being judged? GREEN CARD(b) Who does the judging? YELLOW CARD(c) Against what criteria? ORANGE CARD(d) Where do these criteria

reside? PINK CARD(e) Against what evidence are

these judgements made? BLUE CARD

PROFESSIONAL CONTEXT(THE SCHOOL)

TEACHER TRAININGCONTEXT

(UNIVERSITIES)

COMMUNITYCONTEXT

PROFESSIONAL CONTEXT(COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE)

Figure 1: Locations involved in an RPL process for teachers.

120

Figure 2: Mapping of response cards on the locations grid.

When the cards were mapped onto the wall in the conference centre, they produced the conceptual map shown in Figure 2. Every participant at the Colloquium produced text that is represented in the map, and the patterns produced by the mapping of the coloured cards provide a telling overview of the points of consensus and dispute that emerged in the course of the two days.

The conceptual map reveals interesting tendencies. Figure 3 shows the overall tendencies that emerged from the thinking of Colloquium participants. Five points can be made regarding patterns found.

First, it is notable that the green cards - which represented various views on what kinds of knowledge, skills and other forms of expertise should be the priority of an RPL process - mapped closely around the locus of the school, as the immediate professional context of teaching and learning.

Second, the orange cards - which represented the locus in and processes through which participants felt that the criteria for the certification of teachers needed to be established - mapped closely on the terrain of the broader profession communities of practice. It is particularly notable that, to the extent that this locus was conceived as running into the terrain of either universities or the community context, this was on the basis that relevant people located in those social spaces were also members of the broader community of professional practice.

The four contexts were conceived as follows: the professional context of the school refers in the first place to the classroom in which teachers build up expertise and wisdom over the course of time, and also to the broader context of the school in which educational leadership is exercised by more experienced colleagues and school managers, in relation to the work of the teacher in question. The professional context of a community of practice refers to the broader community of teachers and educators, networked across multiple schools and also in teacher-training institutions and provincial education department curriculum sections, which warrants the formal curriculum and interpretations of it in the implementation at school level. It is a community which is about ongoing engagement with the criteria of good practice (in a phase of schooling or in a specialist school subject area), and novice teachers gain access to it progressively over time.

The teacher training context refers to the Higher Education institutions formally charged with the responsibility for training teachers in the country, and the community context refers to the political networks in civil society - including organised teachers, parents and learners - that have interests in, and ultimately, through formal political processes, regulate the institutional delivery of schooling. The notion of a government or policy context was held back from the initial conceptual mapping exercise, on the assumption that it would be possible, on the basis of whatever framework emerged, to better understand the role of government as the ultimate enabler and regulator of systematic teacher up-skilling and re-skilling programmes.

Each card was considered from the point of view of which institutional location it implied most strongly. It was then mapped onto the grid accordingly. The photograph (Figure 2) provides a sense of the conceptual map as it developed in the context of the workshop.

121

Figure 3: Conceptual map of the responses to the five questions.

Third, the mapping of the yellow cards, which represent ideas about which agencies should be charged formally with doing the required assessment in the RPL of teachers, reflected a deep tension that ran through the Colloquium. To some extent, the organised community does not trust the universities to do this job, because there is a perception that they will not adequately recognise local knowledges and wisdom. Similarly, the teacher trainers in the universities are sceptical about whether 'community-based' assessors (and often, this means NGOs or the like) will recognise the formal knowledge that good teachers should have mastered in order to ensure effective schooling. These tensions will require considerable, skilful leadership on the part of government in future.

Fourth, the blue cards - which represent conceptions of the evidence against which RPL judgements of teachers should be made - tended to move, as one would expect given the first two bullets in the current series above, between the terrain of the school and the domain of the professional community of practice. Some reflect the concerns that universities have about valid and reliable assessment evidence. More, in this Colloquium, tended toward the 'community' pole, reflecting the kinds of evidence that we know parents in particular are concerned about in relation to their own children's progress through schooling: Will my child get a job? Will my child become a useful member of the community? Etcetera.

Finally, the orange cards - which represent views about what or who should be the custodian of the criteria used to evaluate teachers - were mapped in the terrain between schools and the community. A moment's reflection will reveal that this is the terrain of government, and in a secondary way, of quality assurance bodies such as Umalusi and the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). While government will clearly have a role in the overall implementation and regulation of RPL for teachers, it is also significant that a clear set of responsibilities emerge for it from the conceptual mapping exercise that was carried out at this Colloquium.

In summarising the main outcomes of the Colloquium, then, the following conclusions can be reached:

1. There was a tension between the view that the ultimate determination of the standards to be achieved by teachers should be located in the professional teacher-training context and the view that these should be located in the civil society or community/stakeholder context with regard to the ultimate determination of the standards to be achieved by teachers. Whereas the former

That there was such strong consensus amongst participants on these two concerns is a particularly significant outcome of the Colloquium. Despite tensions at other levels, which we shall come to in a moment, this seems to be an overall consensus in relation to RPL for teachers: that is the place in which the knowledge and skills required of teachers should be established, and that a broader community of expert practice needs to establish the requisite criteria for such knowledge.

122

PROFESSIONAL CONTEXT(COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE)

PROFESSIONAL CONTEXT(THE SCHOOL)

COMMUNITYCONTEXT

TEACHER TRAININGCONTEXT (UNIVERSITIES)

context emphasises formal knowledge criteria (content knowledge, pedagogic knowledge and pedagogic content knowledge), the latter emphasises local knowledge, the popular determination of standards and an approach to teacher certification that is based on labour rights. Broadly, we might characterise this as a university-stakeholder tension. The question here is one of who should authorise the standards to be achieved by teachers in the RPL process.

2. What this situation means is that responsibility for RPL needs to be located in a professional community that somehow embodies and works with this tension. It was recognised by the workshop that we need to develop the notion of communities of practice in order to understand the nature and parameters the professional community that teachers are part of, work within, and develop within, over time.

3. Despite these difficulties, there was strong consensus that the school, and more specifically the classroom, must be the context in which the knowledge, skills and practices of teachers are judged. We should not be judging the performance of teachers, for purposes of RPL, in the academic domain as such, nor should we be doing so in the organisation (union or community) domain. It is the professional work of the teacher in the classroom that needs to be judged in its own context.

4. Government will face enormously complex challenges in implementing the imperatives faced by a programme for the RPL of under- and unqualified teachers. However, it is important that it gets it right, not just for the wellbeing of the education system, but for an understanding of how RPL might be used

in future for the up-skilling and re-skilling of South Africa's workforce at large.

A significant step forward appears to have been taken at this Colloquium. It remains to thank Dr Diane Parker and her team at the DoE for the vision and commitment to the sound strategic planning that led to the Colloquium. I am sure that the Colloquium, and this collection of documents that emerged from it, will go some way towards the realisation of a sound system of 'RPL in the upgrading/up-skilling of serving teachers'. But there is much work to be done.

123

Acronyms and abbreviationsABET Adult Basic Education and Training

ACE Advanced Certificate of Education

AD Advanced Diploma

ANC African National Congress

AR Action Research

ATRAMI Artisan Training and Recognition Collective Agreement for the Metal Industries

BEd Bachelor of Education

CE Certificate of Education

CHE Council on Higher Education

CPD Continuing Professional Development

CoP Communities of Practice

COSATU Congress of South African Trade Unions

CPUT Cape Peninsula University of Technology

DE Diploma in Education

DoE Department of Education

ECD Early Childhood Development

ECSA Engineering Council of South Africa

ELRC Education Labour Relations Council

EMIS Education Management Information System

ETDP Education Training and Development Practices

FET Further Education and Training

FP Fundamental Pedagogics

HDHET Higher Diploma: Higher Education and Training

HE Higher Education

HEI Higher Education Institution

HSRC Human Sciences Research Council

IQMS Integrated Quality Management System

ISO International Organisation for Standardisation

IWL Integrated Workplace Learning

JSTC Junior Secondary Teachers' Certificate

M Matriculation Certificate

MCTE Ministerial Committee on Teacher Education

NAPTOSA National Professional Teachers' Organisation of South Africa

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

NIACE National Institute for Adult Continuing Education

NMMU Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University

NPDE National Professional Diploma in Education

124

NQF National Qualifications Framework

NRF National Research Foundation

NSB National Standards Body

NSE Norms and Standards for Educators

NTB National Training Board

NTSI National Training Strategy Initiative

NUMSA National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa

OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

OSD Occupation-Specific Dispensation

PDP Personal Development Planning

Persal Personnel and Salary Administration System

PGCE Post-graduate Certificate in Education

PGCHE Post-graduate Certificate in Higher Education

PGDHE Post-graduate Diploma in Higher Education

PTC Professional Teachers' Certificate

PTD Professional Teachers' Diploma

RDG Research and Development Group

REQV Relative Education Qualification Value

RNCS Revised National Curriculum Statement

RPL Recognition of Prior Learning

SADTU South African Democratic Teachers' Union

SAICE South African Institution of Civil Engineering

SAIME South African Institution of Mechanical Engineering

SANC South African Nursing Council

SAQA South African Qualifications Authority

SATN South African Technology Network

SETA Sector Education and Training Authority

TechD Technical Diploma

UCT University of Cape Town

UFS University of the Free State

UKZN University of KwaZulu-Natal

UL University of Limpopo

UNISA University of South Africa

US University of Stellenbosch

UWC University of the Western Cape

WILRU Work Integrated Learning Research Unit

125

126

Bekeer, MI SADTU

Bird, A Independent

Blom, R Umalusi

Breier, M HSRC

Buchler, M CEPD

Dlamini, A PSA/ CTU SADTU

Faller, F University of the Witwatersrand/ CHE

Green, W DoE

Isaacs, SBA SAQA

Loots, M DoE

Mahomed, H DoE

Mataboge, T DoE

Mayet, A JET

Mays, T UNISA

Mdongeni, M ELRC

Mohlangu, M DoE

Mohosho, PM SADTU

Mohosimo, P SADTU

Moll, I University of the Witwatersrand

Mőller, S CTU NAPTOSA

Moroethata, D CTU SADTU

Mpungose, BP SADTU

Mukora, J SAQA

Nyama, MM DoE

Parker, D DoE

Peane, K CTU SADTU

Ralphs, A UWC

Rudman, N NMMU

Sepanyebo, SFD CTU SADTU

Shalem, Y University of the Witwatersrand

Slater, J DoE

Smith, E UNISA

Tomson, C UKZN

Toolo, T CTU SADTU

Van der Walt, M UFS

Volbrecht, T CPUT

Welch, T DoE/ SAIDE

List of participants

Photographic creditsCopyright of the photographs rests with the individual photographers, agencies and Media Club South Africa.

Cover Page (Third Photograph): Corporate Social Investment project funded by Sasol Oil,a division of Sasol, South Africa’s petrochemicals giant.

Photo: Sasol, MediaClubSouthAfrica.com.