ATC120530: Report: Seminar with Higher Education South Africa (Hesa) dated 30 May 2012
Higher Education, Science and Innovation
REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON ITS SEMINAR WITH HIGHER EDUCATION SOUTH AFRICA (HESA) DATED 30 MAY 2012
The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training, having conducted a seminar with Higher Education South Africa , reports as follows:
1. Introduction
The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education & Training in strengthen its relationship with HESA, conducted a seminar on 20 April 2012 at the Stellenbosch Institute for Advance Study (STIAS) Conference Centre, University of Stellenbosch . The seminar provided a platform for deeper insight into critical issues for consideration in the higher education sector. In addition, the briefing sessions of the seminar provided Members with an appropriate introduction to key concepts and terminology in the higher education sector.
2. Delegation
Adv I Malale (Chairperson) (ANC), Mr S Makhubele (ANC), Prof S Mayatula (ANC), Mr S Radebe (ANC), Dr L Bosman (DA), Prof A Lotriet (DA) and Mr N Bhanga (COPE).
Support Staff: Mr A Kabingesi (Committee Secretary), Ms M Modiba (Researcher), Ms F Kwaza (Communications Officer) and Mr G Mankay (Committee Assistant).
Higher Education South Africa
Prof A Bawa: Chairperson / Vice-Chancellor Durban University of Technology, Dr J Mabelebele: Chief Executive Officer, Dr S Badat: Vice-Chancellor Rhodes University, Prof I Rensburg: Vice-Chancellor University of Johannesburg, Prof R Botman: Vice-Chancellor University of Stellenbosch, Dr M Price: Vice-Chancellor University of Cape Town, Dr T Ellof: Vice-Chancellor University of North West, Prof M Nkomo: Deputy Vice-Chancellor Tshwane University of Technology, Dr I Machi: Executive Director University of Zululand, Dr J Smit: Director Vaal University of Technology, Prof N Grove: Registrar University of Pretoria, Mr H Amoore: Registrar University of Cape Town, Ms P Lenkabula: Director University of South Africa, Ms R Blom: Researcher, Ms J van Wyk Senior Manager, Mr D Thompson: Manager Communications University of Stellenbosch
Department of Higher Education and Training
Ms S Mampane, Branch Coordinator, University Education.
3. Objectives of the Seminar
The objectives of the seminar were as follows:
v To create a platform for HESA and the Committee to discuss and share each others perspectives on emerging Higher Education priorities and challenges;
v To proactively sensitise the Committee to projects initiated by HESA and the sector to enhance the Committees appreciation of Higher Education challenges;
v To enhance the recognition and the value of Higher Education in contributing towards national development, in order to ensure a comprehensive knowledge of, and respect for, the role and position of Higher Education in society; and
v To create a platform for the Committee to engage HESA on priority issues and challenges arising from its members own constituency work and broader parliamentary activities.
4. Summary of presentations
4.1 Overview of HESA as an Organisation (constitution, mandate, priorities and challenges)
Prof A Bawa, Chairperson of HESA, led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:
v HESA was formed on 09 May 2005 and was the successor to the South African Universities Vice-Chancellor Association (SAUVCA). HESA represented 23 public universities and was a Section 21 company, non-statutory, and the membership of universities was voluntary.
v The board consisted of 23 Vice-Chancellors (VCs) and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and it met thrice per year. Its main role included the approval of strategic and operational plans, budget and higher education matters.
v HESAs work was organised into three core functions, namely, policy analysis and strategic research, advocacy and stakeholder influence and sector support.
v The major projects and initiatives of HESA included; building the next generation of academics, the Rural Campuses Connection Project, and the contribution of Higher Education to the economy.
v The challenges of HESA included; developing a self regulation framework for the sector, developing HESAs position on the differentiation of the HE sector and managing sub-voices within HESA for the common good of the sector.
4.2 Overview of the role, powers and functions of the Committee
Adv I Malale, Chairperson of the Committee, led presentation which highlighted the following key issues:
v Chapter 4 of the Constitution gave powers to the Committee to exercise an oversight responsibility over the executive (the Department and its stakeholders) on the utilisation of state resources. The Committee can call upon anyone to appear before it and acts as an intermediary between society and Parliament.
v The Committee was extremely concerned with the financial exclusion of poor students in HEIs. Some institutions forced poor students to pay upfront payment before they could register. The Committee opposed any HEIs that continued with this practice.
v The withholding of results with the objective of recouping money owed to the institution mostly affected poor students. HEIs should allow all students who have completed their degrees access to their results to enable them to make repayment after obtaining employment. Blacklisting of students owing to non-payment was not good practice.
v The abuse of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) voucher system and refunds by students remained a concern for the Committee.
v Fee increment by HEIs should be in line with the current interest rate and all structures of the institutions should be properly consulted before matters are concluded by management.
v Institutional governance remains a serious concern for many HEIs. HESA should assist HEIs who were unable to manage their affairs accordingly.
v There was a need for openness and transparency into the financial statements of HEIs. The Committee would request audited financial statements from all HEIs with a view to scrutinizing them to ensure the proper use of public funds.
v The Committee was opposed to academics who conducted business with HEIs with the objective of enriching themselves. HEIs should adopt FET colleges and develop training programmes to capacitate FET college lecturers.
4.3 Legislative, policy and regulatory framework for Higher Education in South Africa
Mr H Amoore: Registrar of UCT led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:
v The Higher Education Act No 101 of 1997 regulated the higher education landscape of the country. The roles and functions of the university council and management were articulated in the Act. The relationship between university council and management was critical for good governance of any public HEIs.
v The Auditor-General (AG) had a good working relationship with public HEIs. The AG was not solely responsible for the auditing of HEIs. All universities reported through the annual Higher Education Management Information System (HEMIS), a detailed report of all universities.
v The Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF) had been under review for the past 24 months and was a very important regulatory framework to ensure a system of quality that provides proper articulation.
v Stipends paid to PhD students remained a serious concern in attracting more local black academics. The South African Revenue Service (SARS) also taxed the stipends paid to PhD and HESAs view was that stipends should not be taxed as they are not salaries.
v The funding formula for universities was very important and HESA was waiting for the outcomes of the Ramaphosa Report. Universities differed in terms of their resource base and future funding should take cognisance of this norm.
v The low productivity in HE remained a serious concern for the sector. Factors such as drop-out rates, students under-preparedness for higher education, low throughput and graduation rate were negatively affecting the sector.
v The capacity of HEIs to accommodate the growing numbers of students registering for higher education remained a serious concern for the sector. The majority of the Matriculants who passed with university exemption expected an automatic acceptance to higher education. Unfortunately, this was no longer the case since HEIs considered top achievers for admission.
v In terms of the Central Applications Process, the Registrars Forum was working with the Department to look at the feasibility of this process. Although a National Applications Office may have many advantages for students, HEIs had to regulate their current registration systems in order to be efficient. There was a need to encourage students to apply in advance in order to solve the challenge of late registrations and walk-ins.
v It was unfortunate that the role of FET colleges was not properly articulated in the Green Paper for Post-School Education and Training.
4.4 Valuing Higher Education
Dr S Badat, Vice-Chancellor of Rhodes University, led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:
v A changing world: The world was dramatically different from a few decades and even a few years ago, owing to globalisation. Globalisation has exercised an immense influence on the nature of institutions that impact on higher education, and on the ways and means of providing higher education. It also shaped education both in terms of content and that which was researched, both in student interests and university offerings away from broader academic studies and towards narrower vocational programmes. Public investment in higher education had come to be justified largely in terms of economic growth and the preparation of students for the labour market. Neo-liberalism had come to define universities as supermarkets for a variety of public and private goods that were currently in demand, and whose value was defined by financial value.
v The purposes of higher education: The first purpose of higher education was the production of knowledge which advances understanding of the natural and social worlds, and enriches humanitys accumulated scientific and cultural inheritances. The second purpose of universities was the dissemination of knowledge, in ways that contributed to the formation and cultivation of the cognitive character of students as well as the wider public. The other purpose of universities was to undertake community engagement. Higher education should play at least five key roles, namely, the cultivation of highly educated people, research and scholarship, engagement with the intellectual and cultural life of societies, democracy and democratic citizenship and development needs and challenges.
5. The following formed part of the discussion
· The Central Application Office was already in operations in KwaZulu-Natal . This project was such a success that it was even adopted by FET colleges. The Committee was interested in being informed of the progress made by HESA in expanding this project to other provinces.
· University relations with their nearby communities was highlighted as a key concern. Most high schools especially in townships did not have a direct relationship with HEIs and this affected learners in these schools when choosing their career path.
· The notion of financial exclusion on the basis of being poor was detrimental towards the development of young black suitably qualified individuals. Financial exclusions in HEIs had always been the major concern of student leadership whom the Committee has met in its oversight visits and HESA had a critical role to ensure that HEIs abandoned this practice.
· Institutional governance, particularly in HEIs, was an ongoing concern to such an extent that the Minister had already placed three HEIs under administration and two Independent Assessors were sent to other HEIs. This was an indictment on the leadership of HEIs and HESA had a very important role in ensuring that HEIs complied with the regulation of good governance.
· The inadequate development of the next generation of academics was highlighted as a major concern for the HE sector. This resulted in an influx of foreign academics occupying senior positions in HEIs across the country. HESA had a critical role in ensuring that the future of the HE sector is sustainable and spearheaded by local academics.
· Factors such as inequalities, poor economic background and the language barrier remained the key challenges that delayed the growth of participation of the minority in higher education.
· HESA has engaged the Department on the issue of fee increment on numerous occasions. The main challenge was the declining funding allocated to HEIs by the Department. Universities spent 65% of their budget on salaries of academic staff. However, the resource base of HEIs was different.
· Students with good academic records were given an opportunity to complete their studies even if they owed the university and were also allowed to graduate. However, the results of the students were withheld as an incentive for repayment. The students employer, however, may contact the university to access the students results upon request.
· HEIs were aware of the situation of many poor black students who were in need of financial assistance. However, there was a shortfall of R80m from NSFAS for HEIs and this increased the pressure for HEIs to assist poor students. The student debt, for an example, at Durban University of Technology (DUT) was R280m and the institution could not afford to increase this debt.
· Institutional governance was the responsibility of the Councils as statutory bodies of the institutions with the statutory role of monitoring the performance of the HEIs, and HESA did not monitor HEIs performance as it fell outside its mandate.
· HESA was funded through a proportional income from its member body and universities had a right to withdraw their membership from HESA.
· Institutional autonomy was very important for universities although they still had to be accountable. Universities had no power to influence each other as they were independent institutions. The Department had a policy monitoring role over all HEIs. However, the main challenge was the capacity in the Department to exercise this function.
· The AG reached an agreement with HESA that, in future, universities would report on pre-determined objectives including human resources, supply chain management policies and compliance with the HE Act.
· The increase in the number of learners passing Matric meant that FET colleges had an important role to develop these young people into active participants of the economy, hence FET college should be elevated to the same level as HEIs and not as second choice institutions.
· The high unemployment rate was a broad social challenge and the role of universities was to produce qualified people ready for the market, rather than to create solutions to the challenge of unemployment.
· Universities needed R150m to start the next generation of academics project. Universities would recruit 300 young black talented students and be trained and developed into future academics of the country.
· It would be a challenge to source academics for the proposed universities in Northern Cape and Mpumalanga . However, there was a need to obtain appropriate candidates to lead those institutions.
6. Summary
The one day Seminar of the Committee with HESA was a very important gathering aimed at addressing the critical challenges that faced the higher education sector. The seminar was the first of its kind for the Committee whereby Members had an opportunity to express their views in the presence of Vice-Chancellors and other leaders of HEIs of the country. It was agreed that a Seminar of this nature would be necessary in the future and perhaps more time should be allocated for a thematic conversation.
The main issues which the Committee raised during the Seminar included; financial exclusion of poor students, inadequate institutional governance by HEIs, the withholding of results of students owing HEIs, fee increment, the implementation of the Central Application Process to address registration challenges, the development of the next generation of academics, the abuse of the NSFAS voucher system and refunds by students, the role of the universities in society and the challenges of merger.
From the proceedings of the seminar, it was clear that HESA, as a voluntary body representing HEIs, had a lesser role in terms of monitoring the performance of HEIs, since they evince a highly differentiated and diverse institution characterized by different missions, varied social and economic goals and different academic policies. The main concern of HESA was the decline in the funding of HEIs and inadequate income from tuition fees which resulted in an increase of student debt. The fact that R80m was unavailable from NSFAS to assist poor students was a constraint for HEIs. HESAs view on the development of the next generation of academics was that the Department should allocate R150m to HEIs to begin with the project. Inadequate remuneration in the higher education sector was emphasised as a major concern in attracting and retaining specialist staff who were increasingly attracted to the better remuneration offered by the public and private sector.
7. Recommendations
The following formed part of the key recommendations:
Given the fact that poor students were mostly affected by financial exclusion and withholding of results, HEIs should not exclude any academically deserving students on this basis, and students should be afforded an opportunity to access their results whether they were indebted to the institution,
To improve career guidance, opportunities especially for learners from poor backgrounds, universities should undertake community engagement seriously and develop working relations with their nearby secondary schools,
The development of the next generation of academics project should be prioritsed by the Department for the cultivation of highly educated academics, particularly in preparation for the proposed universities in Mpumalanga and Northern Cape .
The role of universities in developing African languages as languages of tuition in HEIs should be given priority emphasis.
Documents
No related documents