Presenter: Dr Muavia Gallie (PhD)

23 February 2012 muavia@mweb.co.za

Tshwane University of Technology Faculty of Humanities

Green paper for Post-School

education and training �- A critical reflection - �

1

Content 1.  Introduction (3); 2.  Broad Issues (4 – 12); 3.  Chapter Issues (13 – 17); 4.  Conclusion (18).

www.slideshare.net Search “TUT Green paper for Post-

School – Critical Reflection”

2

Introduction •  This green paper gives us a ‘feel’ as to the

thinking of the new Higher Education Department as a separate entity;

•  First significant policy document/ discussion paper since the formation in 2010;

•  Brave attempt to tackle the GAP that exist between ‘world of learning’ and the ‘world of work’.

3

What’s in the name? •  Green paper for Post-School Education and

Training

Terminology: •  The term post-school is used to refer to all

education for people who have left school as well as for those adults who have never been to school but require education opportunities. ???? Those who left school in grade 4 (standard 2)? Did they leave school after passing or failing?

4

Lack of a clear Map!

5

General Education and Training (GET) •  Gr 1 – 3 •  Gr 4 – 6 •  Gr 7 – 9

Further Education and Training (FET) •  Gr 10 – 12 •  N 1 – 3; 4 – 6?

Higher Education and Training (HET)

Schooling X X Vocational Education

X

Occupational Education Professional Education Adult Education Continuing Education Skills Development

If Everything is important, than Nothing is important - CENTRE •  Poverty •  Economy •  Unemployment •  Employment •  Quality assurance •  Alignment •  Poor quality •  Responsiveness 6

•  Capacity •  Resources •  Access •  Funding •  Systems •  Leadership •  Managerialism •  Etc.

Clarify the Journey!

7

2030 2029

2028 2027

2026 2025

2024 2023

2022 2021

2020 2019

2018 2017

2016 2015

2014 2013

2012

8

Employment

Qualification (K, s)

Capabilities Competencies (K, S, A)

“… there has been a tendency towards ‘contractualisation’ leading to short-term thinking and a tendency towards a ‘contract compliance’ culture which reinforces the focus on QUALITY and THROUGHPUT rather than on LEARNING and IMPACT.”

FET as key focus of expansion

•  The weakest phase within education – 37 – 40% success;

•  Does not get affirmed through announcements – not raising the public interest;

•  Seen as a ‘not good enough’ option within education;

9

Confusion – Supply vs Demand •  Supply = ‘what we have’ – institutional

focus, often stagnant, ‘go to sleep’ approach, ‘tomorrow will come’ attitude, focus on Outcome;

•  Demand = ‘what people need’ – client focus, very flexible, ‘checking the terrain all the time’, ‘should be at the best of our game to survive’, focus on Impact;

10

Lack of ‘Systems’ clarity!

1.  Data systems; 2.  Information systems; 3.  Knowledge systems; 4.  Intelligence systems.

Page 26 – 27: focus on data Page 82 (p2): want intelligence

11

Lack of Data-driven Proposals •  “raise university enrolment to 1,5 million

by 2030 (23% participation rate), as opposed to the 2011 enrolment of 0.9 million (16% participation rate) à based on a throughput rate of less than 50%;

• 

12

Chapter 2

• ‘lazy research’ work – data from 2007;

13

Chapter 3 •  Not defining QUALITY – both theory and

practice; •  Is it a ‘catching up’ or ‘add on’ – efficient and

effective; •  Interplay between QUALITY and QUANTITY

– which one comes first? •  Work-based Learning (work life) and Work-

based Experience (was there); •  INPUT rather than IMPACT performance (✓).

14

Chapter 4 •  Strengthen colleges by differentiating between

stronger and weaker institutions (✓); •  NCV offerings after Gr 9 as an alternative

pathway to intermediate occupations – only in theory! (option 1, 2, 3, - contradictory);

•  Entry agreements for NCV graduates at universities – ensure local agreements!

•  Improve relationships with employers (✓); •  Improve Information Management (✓), but not

only ‘end product’ information, but input and process information. 15

Chapter 6 •  Table B & C: Headcount enrolment/graduate

output and growth – not indication what the potential pool of students (only growth);

•  Differentiation – output of universities in terms of Quality and Quantity (teaching and research outputs) (✓);

•  Student success – “graduation rates are calculated by dividing the graduates of a given academic year by the head count enrolment of that year” - ✗

•  Limited supervisory capacity (✓); 16

Chapter 10

• Need institutions to develop realistic bridging programmes, but we also need ‘transitional systems’ (pro-active);

•  Improve skills planning! (✓)

17

Conclusion

•  It is a good enough document that could form the basis of debate/discussion;

•  Should not be seen as an authoritative document on the different areas;

•  Need for the university sector to focus ‘broader than selfish/narrow interest’ (what's in it for us?)

18

Thank You!