University of Zululand: Student representative Council & curriculum challenges

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks
The Chairperson was pleased to announce that the final year students from the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) of the University of Zululand delegation were currently studying with the aid of National Student Financial Aid Service (NSFAS) loans, but if they passed all their modules, these would be changed to a full bursary.

University of Zululand Challenges: Student Representative Council submissions
Mr Bongani Sithole, President, Students’ Representative Council, University of Zululand, and Master’s student in Environmental Studies, outlined the problems facing the SRC and student body at the University of Zululand (the University), as well as the state of the University as a whole.

He noted that the University had great potential both internally and externally, and that the challenges could be solved if all stakeholders became involved and moved at a faster pace. The first challenge the University faced was its geographic location, in the north of Kwazulu Natal, in a remote rural area, with the closest town being Richards Bay. Secondly, the SRC believed that an institutional audit was needed. The University should create public / private links. It was on the coast, close to industries and businesses, and surrounded by “amakhosi”.

Mr Sithole commended the office of the new Vice–Chancellor on the improved registration process, compared to the previous years when it was chaotic, due to poor administrative systems, sometimes stretching over into three to four months and hampering many students’ academic studies. This year, applicants were informed timeously that they must register. SRC had called for a dedicated admissions office that was adequately staffed. An IT system had been introduced, but there was still the need to link registration, residents services and housing and the dining hall systems, as they were not currently aligned.

Mr Sithole noted that there was disjuncture in University policy, since honours students were not permitted to take up posts as tutors, although some lecturers only held honours degrees. Even Mr Sithole’s own supervisor only had a Master’s degree. The quality of education was affected negatively by lack of qualified lecturers. The report of the Vice–Chancellor also spoke of these problems and of the need to overhaul programmes. Some programmes were relevant years ago, but were now redundant or outdated. SRC therefore called for a re-examination of the curriculum, which was not aligned to other national curricula, and for accreditation of the all unaccredited programmes by professional bodies. He explained that many of the modules at the University were not currently recognised by outside bodies and many students from the University ended up having no alternative but to teach, as they could not enter their chosen professions. Mr Sithole thus urged all stakeholders to meet, discuss, engage and forge a way forward to academic excellence

Mr Sithole then commented on the state of support services. The library books were outdated, especially in the scientific and research departments. The Council for Higher Education (CHE) had visited the University in the preceding year and called for the renovation of the library, with internet connections, new library books, a computer lab and other facilities. The state of the University’s health clinic was appalling, there was only one ambulance to transport ill students and if there had been violence, the injured students were sometimes never assisted. The dispensary was still holding expired medication, and its stocks were inadequate so that students would be given the wrong medication for their conditions. In the computer laboratories, students would be told simply that “the server was down” despite being charged levies for the use of internet. There was no air-conditioning in these laboratories.  

There were also structural problems. The University was not fenced, and cows would be grazing on the lawns where students walked to lectures. Poor security threatened the safety of the students, who were often harassed and threatened by the locals. Recreational facilities and the dining halls needed to be improved. The food was full of saturated fats and high in carbohydrates.

Mr Sithole noted that although assessors had been sent in to investigate the most pressing issues, this was not sufficient. He thought that a forensic audit was needed to weed out fraud and corruption by the management of the University.

Mr Sithole then commented on the financial position of the students. Students in the past had a right to approach NSFAS for financial aid, but things seemed to be different at the University of Zululand. A student could qualify for financial aid through a means test, and provided he or she passed half of the modules enrolled for in the current year. However, students from the University of Zululand had to pass all modules. Many students were told, by the NSFAS office, to sign blank agreement forms in which the amount of the loan was not recorded, and some found that although they had been told they would obtain R26 000, NSFAS would then pay R2 900. The question of who should pay the balance of the outstanding fees, and who was liable, was unanswered. These were the kinds of fraud, corruption and maladministration faced by students on a daily basis at the University. In addition, NSFAS does not grant students a book allowance and the University did not have a book shop where they could purchase books.

The SRC estimated that the University needed approximately R350 million in student loans to enable its students to study. The SRC championed free registration for 8 000 financially needy students who were orphaned, from the rural areas, or particularly disadvantaged backgrounds. The state of the NSFAS administration forced the SRC to write to the National Office of NSFAS and involve the media, calling for a NSFAS office to be opened at the University. Students had their results withheld, owing to unpaid fees, and many could therefore not complete their degrees or graduate. SRC needed vital information about amendments and changes from NSFAS – such as the conversion of loans to bursaries on fulfilment of certain conditions -  but this was not provided, and he feared this was a recipe for corruption, e.g. the SRC was never made aware that “final year students upon passing all modules their loan is converted to a full bursary”.

Mr Sithole urged the Committee to meet with the SRC and the management of the University, to addresses these burning issues that were “eating away at the core of academic excellence”. The SRC noted unnecessary infighting in the University Council, and between management and the Council. The Council was not receptive to the SRC’s views on student issues and governance. However, he was grateful that Professor Africa had heard their concerns. He reiterated that the University, under the new Vice-Chancellor, had possibilities of links with international exchange programmes, bursary offerings in Africa and other initiatives.

Mr P Mthethwa, Secretary: SRC, University of Zululand, said that it would be ideal if the Committee could visit the area and assess what needed to be done. He noted that it made little sense for this university to be situated near Richards Bay, yet not to offer marine studies. A former Minister of Education had declared the University to be a “Comprehensive Institution”, offering 60% to 70% practical training coupled with 30% to 40% academic theory, because of its geographical location and community needs. However, even under the current dispensation the University was still largely theoretical, and its curriculum did not speak to the skills shortage in the country.

The SRC had identified areas in which the University could offer niche services – such as agriculture, livestock husbandry, sugar-cane farming, fishing, education, nursing, tourism – yet the University still offered an academic, not a practical approach. The Eshowe and the Eskhaweni Colleges of Education were converted to Further Education and Training (FET) colleges, but this did not add value. Mr Mthethwa had suggested that the University’s Education Faculty should partner with the FET Colleges to create a greater impact and improve both.

Ms S Masikana, Treasurer: SRC, University of Zululand, again highlighted some of the problems around NSFAS. She stressed again the criteria that the University applied before allowing applications for financial aid, the difficulty of accessing information, and the inconsistency in relation to the pass-rate for modules as a qualifying criterion, as well as lack of transparency. She also noted that students were not aware whether they were eligible to claim a rebate on their agreement should the full loan not be used. Many students were unable to obtain residential accommodation, which was very short, and were therefore virtually destitute.

Mr Siphelele Jiyana, Projects and Funding Officer, University of Zululand, alluded to the number of vacant posts, saying that there were many Acting Heads of Departments. The Honours programme had been discontinued for lack of staff. In the previous year, 20 students were enrolled for Honours. Two international students passed, but the South African students all obtained 50%. The lecturer, a foreigner, denied any irregularities. Exam time-clashes were an annual occurrence, and the time-table for exams was congested and resulted in high failure and many “drop-outs”. The University was spending “lavish” amounts on tenders, and he cited that despite three security companies being employed, there was still high theft and other violent crimes on campus, with the security companies being corrupt.

Mr Jiyana cited an instance of one student who was admitted despite not qualifying for admission and having a number of previous rejections. The fraud in this instance was reported to the South African Police Service (SAPS) but no further investigation was done, as it appeared that SAPS and the then-Vice-Chancellor were in cahoots.

Mr S Mtimukulu, Human Rights Secretary: SRC, University of Zululand, said that the SRC’s legitimacy was being undermined at Council sittings and by the management of the University, thus undermining the interests of the students.

Discussion
Dr J Kloppers-Lourens (DA) asked for the numbers of female representatives on the SRC, noting that there were apparently more female than male students, and the process followed to elect the SRC representatives. She also asked whether SRC conducted workshops and seminars on student governance and student orientation and what student orientation would entail. She wondered how the institutional support unit in the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET or the Department) would be involved in the process of student orientation.

Mr Sithole said that the ratio of female to male students was 60% female and 40% male. The Constitution of the SRC had not reflected this ratio, and would be amended. The student governance policy would be realigned to iron out challenges linked to student orientation, and orientation programmes would then be held. This would enable transparency and ownership, as well as the formation of a student parliament. It would be done through the proper channels.

Ms N Vukuza (COPE) reminded the Committee that during a previous visit to the University, the SRC had not been in existence. There had been political issues around this. She enquired whether the SRC members were now affiliated to particular political parties. She further noted that since the Vice-Chancellor had informed the Committee that there had been progress and that an SRC had been elected, it was surprising to hear that the SRC was not recognised. She said that she would have liked to hear how the SRC hoped to turn the situation around, what its vision and plans were, and to hear a positive side.

Mr Sithole shared the concern that the Constitution of the SRC was not yet proportionally representative, so if one political faction won the elections, then all those supporting that faction would be in the SRC. At the time the Committee had visited the University, there was still engagement and debate on these issues, but there had been some resistance by the Council and a ploy to sideline the University Rector in favour of the Chief Financial Officer. There was a factional split here, which had resulted in clashes and had hampered progress on the SRC, since the Rector favoured the SRC’s existence.

Mr Sithole outlined that the SRC’s vision was to promote academic excellence, ensuring that students were attending their lectures on time, and engaging in study and learning, to qualify within the right time to graduate. An environment conducive to learning must be achieved. This would require a bookshop, qualified lecturers and tutors, a good library and functioning computer laboratory for research.

Ms Vukuza asked how the current SRC had been constituted.

Mr Sithole explained the political formation as including the Young Communist League, SADESMO, DASO, Independents, South African Student Congress, Progressive Youth Alliance and African National Youth Congress. Most members from the delegation represented the Progressive Youth Alliance, with one from SADESMO.

Mr S Makhubele (ANC) was pleased that both sides of the story had been told. He thought that it would be necessary to have a round-table discussion between the Committee, NSFAS, the University Council, the DHET and South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) to engage on the issues and try to reach a solution. The SRC should draft documents, which should be provided to all stakeholders. These presentations had spoken to core issues facing the University. Statistics were needed from NSFAS about the students who passed, how much they owed and if they would be allowed to proceed further. He thought that students should not claim rebates, but should fully use all funds granted in each year of enrolment.

Mr Jody Cedras, Director: Special Projects, DHET, said students who had passed should be allowed to proceed. He agreed that students should utilise all funds granted for studies in each year that they were enrolled. He then spoke about the means test referred to, which looked to the family’s financial contribution, as guided by the national policy on student financial aid. The questions and practices at the University of Zululand that the delegation had described seemed to violate the NSFAS policy. Private accommodation could be paid for under the NSFAS, if the students qualified for aid. The Department would support the attempts to overhaul the SRC Constitution and University Statute. The Minister could brief the Committee on student support services.

Mr C Moni (ANC) thought that an SRC should follow protocol rather than present a long list of grievances. He would like to see an SRC rally the students and draft a plan to turn the University around. He was concerned about the request for a financial audit. The SRC should investigate the allegations further, as they were serious, and draft a comprehensive report building a case for having a forensic audit. Mr Moni was also very concerned about students being required to sign blank forms. He thought that the SRC was too complacent in allowing this. The University had assured the Committee that funds by NSFAS were paid. Either the University or NSFAS was misleading the Committee in that regard.

Ms N Gina (ANC) commented that there were Ministerial representatives on the University Council, and called them to task. She asked for clarity whether the foreign lecturers were suitably qualified to lecture. She asked if the tavern at the University was still operating and why it was there.

Mr Sithole admitted that the tavern was still on the University premises but was closed, since it had been determined that it was inappropriately situated close to the library. SRC had explored other uses for the building, including a conversion to a news café or coffee shop.

Ms W Nelson (ANC) was shocked that the University had offered redundant or unaccredited courses, and asked why DHET was not aware of this. She asked if the University had registered nursing students in the previous year.

Mr Sithole confirmed that 20 students had been enrolled for nursing in the current year, in spite of the University having been instructed not to enrol them. This was very serious and action should be taken.

Ms N Magazi (ANC) wanted the Committee to look into how the University could take advantage of the natural resources in the area to boost the economy. She too asked if the foreign lecturers were qualified to lecture, and at what level. There seemed to be a trend countrywide of foreign nationals filling high posts in all sectors.

Mr A van der Westhuizen (DA) noted that the Higher Education Act required representation of the SRC in the Council. He asked if the SRC had attended any Council meetings or had engaged with management on these issues presented to this Committee, and, if so, what the response of Council had been.

Mr Sithole conceded that management had made promises, some of which were taken to Council but referred back to management on the grounds that they were operational issues, such as whether funding was available to put up fences.

Mr K Dikobo (AZAPO) thought that a forensic audit was much needed, based on fraud, the offering of unaccredited courses, corruption and the University’s apparent dysfunctionality, coupled with the deep seated conflict and lack of an SRC for some time. The University management should be taken to task

Mr G Radebe (ANC) commented that if the SRC had been taken through a proper induction process many of the issues would have been curbed. He pointed out that the SRC, whose members were themselves research students, ought to learn to do things for itself, and should take on the responsibility of information dissemination from NSFAS and management. Corruption could be reported to the Presidential Hotline. The SRC was also asked to legislate against a tavern on campus, which created a disturbance. He suggested that this SRC should engage with others on how they liaised with management.

Mr Mthethwa said that the Ministerial representatives on the Council were not in fact representing the Ministry, and did not resolve the issues raised. They were well aware of the state of the premises and grounds, as well as the academic problems. He pointed out that some of these issues were not isolated to University of Zululand.

Mr Moni asked if the SRC formed part of the Council, noting that Mr Mthethwa claimed that others “locked themselves in the Council Chambers”.

Mr Mthethwa responded that the SRC formed part of the delegation to Council, but had effectively been sidelined because of the split in Council over the feud between the Rector and Chief Financial Officer. A letter was written to discredit and expel the Rector even before she assumed office. In most instances, the Council had no interest in resolving the issues.

Ms Vukuza applauded Mr Makhubele’s suggestion for a round-table discussion involving all stakeholders, as well as for his suggestion that the SRC should build up and present a stronger case. She wanted the SRC to understand the position, and stressed that the visit to the University in the previous year did not mean that Parliament should get directly involved in the business of the University to produce and pursue knowledge, although it did exercise oversight over the Department of Higher Education and Training and entities. The Committee, however, did wish to help universities and their bodies such as the SRC and the fact that they had been given a hearing did mean that something was being addressed. She said that it was of the utmost importance that the SRC should give a coherent and well-structured presentation, clearly outlining the infrastructural issues, functional and structural issues, systematic issues, operational issues, and environmental issues.

Mr Makhubele added that the Committee had chosen to visit this University out of the 23 universities country-wide, and had invited this SRC to present to Parliament. If the SRC did not obtain a solid solution to all the problems raised, this was due to the enormous task facing the SRC and other stakeholders. He added that figures and statistics would have to be produced to substantiate the figure of R350 million mentioned in the presentation.

Dr Kloppers-Lourens thought the main issue revolved around the curriculum, and she thought the response of the DHET must be obtained on this and issues linked to it.

Mr Moni concurred on the importance of round-table discussions, and commended the presenters on their efforts, also supporting the suggestion that they present something in writing.

Mr Mtimkulu thanked the Committee for some of the solutions suggested, and said that the placing of a tavern inside the University was trying to address the problem that student safety was compromised by the amount of violent crime off the campus, fuelled by the overcrowding in the area.

Mr Cedras said that the current Vice-Chancellor took office in January 2010, and the Minister had asked that a report on the situation be compiled in November 2010. The recommendations emanating from this would be shared with the Committee shortly. The Minister had a firm commitment to turn the situation around.

The Chairperson recommended that the SRC inform the Council and Senate in writing about the issues raised in this meeting. DHET should note the problems, and pay regard to the Review Commission report.  He was concerned that NSFAS had not been open with the students and University. He urged all students to be responsible and concentrate on their studies without other distractions. He noted that all institutions stressed the importance of African scholarship and rural universities in particular needed money, as well as to ensure transparency, openness and transformation. The Minister would have to address key issues. The Department must examine the problem of unaccredited courses, which not only violated student rights but was also tantamount to fraud and undermining of democracy. A task team should be established to meet with all stakeholders.

The meeting was adjourned.