ATC130328: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training on the Strategic Planning Session with the Department of Higher Education and Training and Other Stakeholders, dated 22 March 2013

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON THE STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, DATED 22 MARCH 2013

The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training, having attended the strategic planning session with the Department and other stakeholders, reports as follows:

1. Introduction

The Department conducted a strategic planning session with the Committee on 15 – 17 February 2013 where university Vice-Chancellors and Deputy Vice-Chancellors, Further Education and Training (FET) colleges’ Principals, Chairpersons of Councils, Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), Chief Financial Officers (CFOs), Administrators, Board Members of Quality Councils, Higher Education South Africa (HESA), Sector Education and Training Authorities ( SATAs ) and other stakeholders of the Department where invited to participate in this forum. More than 200 officials from various post school education and training (PSET) sectors were invited to the strategic planning session.

2. Background

The Department organised a strategic planning session where all its entities, the Committee, and the office of the Auditor-General (AG) were invited to engage broadly on an integrated approach to matters related to higher education and training. The strategic planning session began with a Gala Dinner organised by the Office of the Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr B Nzimande, MP on 15 February 2013 where he delivered a speech to all the invited guests in preparation for the strategic planning session.

The strategic planning session was aimed at outlining the vision of the Department towards an integrated programme that would be inclusive of the Department’s entities for a more coordinated and coherent articulation of its mandate, priorities in a manner that was distinct and complimentary. The Committee with the Select Committee on Education and Recreation got an opportunity to interact with all the Department’s entities under one roof.

3. The following were present:

a) Portfolio Committee on Higher Education & Training:

Present: Ms D Chili (ANC), Ms N Gina (Whip) (ANC), Adv I Malale (Chairperson) (ANC), Mr S Makhubele (ANC), Mr C Moni (ANC), Mr S Radebe (ANC), Ms D Sibiya (ANC), Dr L Bosman (DA), Prof A Lotriet (DA) and Mr J Dikobo (AZAPO).

Select Committee on Education and Recreation: Ms M Makgatho: Chairperson (ANC), Ms Z Rentho : Whip (ANC) and Ms M Boroto (ANC).

Support Staff: Mr A Kabingesi (Committee Secretary), Ms M Modiba (Content Advisor), Mr L Komle (Researcher), Ms L Stofile (Researcher Select Committee) and Ms T Majone (Committee Assistant).

b) Department of Higher Education and Training:

Dr B Nzimande: Minister, Mr M Manana : Deputy Minister, Mr G Qonde : Director-General, Mr T Tredoux : Chief Financial Officer, Mr F Patel: Deputy Director-General Planning, Dr M Maharaswa : Deputy Director-General Vocational and Continuing Education and Training, Dr D Parker: Acting Deputy Director-General: University Education, Ms L Mbobo : Deputy Director-General Corporate Services, Mr C Mtshisa : Acting Deputy Director-General Skills Development, Dr B Mahlobo : Chief Director, Ms N Mjajubana : Chief Director Exams and Assistance, Ms V Qinga : Chief Director Media Liaison, Mr Z Mvalo : Chief Director, Ms T Futshane : Chief Director Vocational and Continuing Education and Training, Adv E Boshoff : Chief Director Legal Services, Mr N Nqandela : Chief of Staff, Mr S Makgoba : Chief Director University Education, Mr M Lumka : Chief Director SETAs , Mr M Mabizela: Chief Director University Education Policy, Mr T Mashangone : Director National Skills Fund, Ms G Magnus: Project Manager, Dr F Prinsloo : Technical Advisor, Mr J Slater: Director, Ms L Tlou : Director National Qualifications Framework, Ms B Ntombela : Director, Mr S Ngcobo : Director Information Technology, Mr M Ngubane : Acting Director Supply Chain Management, Mr H Mashabane : Director, Mr M Nkala : Project Manager, Ms G Umeh : Deputy Director, Mr M Mthethwa : Deputy Director, Ms N Sofoyiya : Deputy Director, Ms N Balfour: Regional Coordinator, Mr W Sono : Communications Officer, Ms L Gwebu : Manager, Ms B Sipengane : Project Manager NSF, Mr S Zondi : Parliamentary Liaison Officer Deputy Minister’s Office, Ms P Sekgobela : PLO Director-General’s Office and Mr B Bingwa Intern.

c) Other Guests:

Mr K Makwetu : Deputy Auditor-General Office of the Auditor-General South Africa, Ms T Maluleke: National Leader Audit Services, Mr R Madzihe : Principal Capricon FET college, Mr M Maleka : Deputy Chairperson Quality Council for Trades and Occupations, Mr C van Wyk : Chief Financial Officer Maluti FET college, Mr M Molete : Project Manager, Maluti FET college, Mr A Griesel : Assistant CFO Maluti FET college, Mr S Manese : Principal Maluti FET college, Mr S Manene : Board Member Chemical Industries SETA, Ms A Itzkin : Chief Executive Officer CHIETA, Mr L Coetzee: Principal Western Public FET college, Mr J Chiloane : Principal Tshwane South FET college, Mr A Taylor: Council Member University of Pretoria, Mr N Chagi : Administrator King Sabatha Dalindyebo FET college, Mr M Tsotetsi : Chief Executive Officer Culture Arts Tourism Hospitality SETA, Dr S Moon: Administrator Services SETA, Dr J Mabelebele : Acting CEO HESA, Mr M Peters: Acting Rector Elangeni FET college, Mr M Msiwa : Chairperson Insurance SETA, Ms S Dunn: CEO Insurance SETA, Mr R Rossouw : Administrator Mthashane FET college, Mr M Sekhonyane : Senior Manager Safety and Security SETA, Mr A Witbooi : Chairperson Safety and Security SETA, Dr P Nkosi : Head National Institute for Higher Education (NIHE) Northern Cape, Prof C Mukadi : CEO NIHE Mpumalanga, Ms Q Ndlovu: Administrator Academic Affairs Tshwane South FET college, Mr B Maduna : Board Member Public Service SETA, Dr T Eloff: Vice-Chancellor North West University, Dr A Melck : Executive Director University of Pretoria, Mr S Qwabe : Principal Nkangala FET college, Mr P Balkrishen : Principal Gert Sibande FET college, Mr M Daca : Chief Executive Officer National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS), Mr Z Sogayise : Chairperson NSFAS, Mr S Mailula : Principal Waterberg FET college, Dr C Barnes: Principal Northern Cape Urban FET college, Mr P Sago: Principal Northern Cape Rural FET college, Ms M Marais: Principal Orbit FET college, Mr S Gelderbloem : Principal Taletso FET college, Ms S Huluman : CEO Public Service SETA, Mr E Gradwell : CEO Energy and Water SETA, Mr D Nkosi : Chairperson Local Government SETA, Prof P Mbati : Vice-Chancellor University of Venda, Prof F Mazibuko : Vice-Chancellor University of Zululand, Prof N Morgan: Deputy Vice-Chancellor University of Free State, Dr M Price: VC University of Cape Town, Prof I Rensburg : VC University of Johannesburg, Ms J Mashabele : CEO Quality Council for Trades and Occupations, Prof M Makhanya : Vice-Chancellor Unisa , Mr D Msiza : Chairperson Mining Qualifications Authority, Mr Z Ntsimango : Administrator Ikhala FET college and Mr O Mopaki : CEO Media Information Communication Technology SETA.

4. Summary of presentations

4.1 Input by the Chairperson of the Committee

Adv I Malale , Member of Parliament (MP) made the following input.

· The Committee had zero tolerance towards financial exclusions of students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Universities should not withhold results of poor students because they owed outstanding fees. Students should be allowed access to their results and the university could claim its outstanding money once the student was permanently employed.

· The admission policy of certain universities did not favour students from poor rural schools. The points system made it very difficult for students from rural schools to study in universities. The Committee remained extremely concerned with exclusional admission policies. Admission policies of universities should be reviewed to improve access especially for poor students.

· The Committee passed the Higher Education and Training Laws Amendment Bill [B23-12] last year with a clause that prohibited members of Council, academic staff and student leadership to conduct business with the university. The Bill extended the powers of the Minister to intervene in universities where mismanagement and malpractices were evident. The Minister could appoint an independent assessor and subsequently an administrator when Council was proved to be dysfunctional.

· Academic freedom or institutional autonomy should not be used as a basis for covering mismanagement and malpractices. All universities should account fully on utilisation of state funds and the Auditor-General had begun with auditing of universities financial statements.

· SETAs had an important role in assisting poor students to gain access to higher education and training institutions. SETAs should disburse bursaries to academically deserving students as the demand for financial assistance in higher education exceeded NSFAS supply.

4.2 Input from Parliamentary Papers

Mr M Plaatjies : National Assembly Chief Editor Questions highlighted the following key issues:

· MPs had a responsibility of holding the executive accountable as the representatives of the voters. Parliamentary questions were used by MPs to seek information on progress made in implementing government promises and policies.

· It was a constitutional mandate of MPs to engage with the executive thoroughly. Parliamentary questions were also used to interrogate government policies in detail so that the interests of the public may be prioritised. Different political parties in Parliament also used questions to monitor and evaluate government performance.

4.3 National Student Financial Aid Scheme

Mr Z Sogayise : Board Chairperson introduced Mr M Daca as the newly appointed Chief Executive Officer of NSFAS.

Mr M Daca : CEO highlighted the following key issues:

· The growth from R441 million in 1999 when the NSFAS Act was passed to R8 billion in 2012 was significant. Despite growth in funds, supply still fell short of demand. The entity and its systems had not kept pace with the growth in funds. In 2010, the Ministerial Review recommended the need for transformation design principles at NSFAS.

· In response, NSFAS proposed the following: direct relationship with students from Grade 9, central application process and administration for loans and bursaries, analytical focus to support financial aid policy development, appropriate governance and controls, and new NSFAS student centred model operating by the end of 2013.

· The biggest challenge of NSFAS was that available funding was still far short of the need. For 2013, NSFAS institutional shortfall was about R700 million.

· NSFAS only managed to transfer 7% of 35% upfront payment to FET colleges and institutions of higher. The Scheme could only use funds from recoveries of loans and interests from previous beneficiaries because it was still waiting on the budget for the 2013/14 financial year.

· An improved management system for loans and bursaries management system would be in place by September 2013 and the central applications process for financial aid in 2014 would be implemented this year.

4.4 Auditor-General (Presentation on Audits of Higher Education Institutions)

Ms T Maluleke: National Leader Audit Services led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· Universities financial management had improved over the past 3 years. In 2009/10 financial year, 87% of universities had unqualified audits, 13% with qualified audits, in 2010-11, 91% had unqualified audits, 9% with qualified audits, in 2011/12, 87% had unqualified audits, 9% with qualified audits and 4% with disclaimer.

· The challenge for the AG was that there was no legislation framework in reporting requirements for universities. In 2012, 22 universities submitted reports on time and 1 university submitted reports after 31 July 2012.

· The challenges identified during the audit process included: lack of policies and systems, objectives not measurable, objectives not achieved, selective reporting and misalignment in objectives.

· In terms of supply chain management: internal control deficiencies were identified and procurement was not competitive. Certain annual reports did not include self assessment of achievement of set objectives.

· In terms of FET colleges’ audits: in 2009, 33 FET colleges received unqualified audits, 12 qualified audits, 3 disclaimers and 2 outstanding audits. In 2010, 36 received unqualified audits with no finding, 7 qualified audits, 1 disclaimer and 6 outstanding audits.

· There was no legal requirement for FET colleges to report on predetermined objectives and change of legislation was required. In 2012, 31 FET colleges submitted reports on time and 19 did not submit their reports by 31 July 2012. The nature of findings in FET colleges included: no internal audit function, no risk assessment performed and procurement was not competitive.

4.4 University Education

Dr D Parker: Acting Deputy Director-General University Education led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· Access to higher education and training had increased tremendously in the past decade. The demand for higher education exceeded the carrying capacity of universities. There were 1 million headcount enrolments in higher education in 2011 and by 2030 this number would reach 1.5 million. There were 427 423 headcount enrolments in FET colleges in 2011. The 18- 24 year olds not in education, employment or training was 3 million and this remained a serious concern for the Department.

· The role of the Department in higher education included: oversight and regulation of the higher education system, set national plans and policies, monitor implementation of policies and support development and growth of public higher education system.

· The core business of universities included; teaching and learning, research, knowledge production and innovation and community engagement.

· The key central strategic focus of the Department included: increasing the participation rate in post school education and training, strengthen the higher education system, planning, funding and quality assurance and promotion.

· The student throughput in higher education remained a serious concern for the Department. In 3 year diplomas, the throughput rate was 35% while drop-out rate was 56%, in undergraduate degrees, the throughput rate was 48% and drop-out rate 46%, with Masters, the throughput rate was 33% while the drop-out rate was 57%, with Doctorates, the throughput rate was 35% while the drop-out rate as 41%.

· The high drop-out rate was contributed by various factors such as lack of adequate funding, inadequate academic support, under -prepared students, poor quality of student accommodation and poor career advice and choices.

· Government spending on education was internationally comparable, but the proportion spent on higher education was low. In terms of university expansion, two new universities were planned in Northern Cape and Mpumalanga provinces.

· In terms of infrastructure, R6 billion was committed for priority areas such as student housing, infrastructure maintenance and refurbishment backlogs, scarce skills areas and development of African languages.

4.5 Skills Branch

Mr C Mtshisa : Acting Deputy Director-General Skills Branch led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· The placement of FET colleges graduates in industries remained a serious challenge for the Department and currently there were more than 11 000 FET graduates seeking work placement.

· Articulation of FET colleges’ students to higher education remained a serious concern for the Department.

· The delivery agents of the skills branch of the Department included: SETAS, National Artisan Moderation Body (NAMB), Institute for National Development of Learnerships , Employment, Skills and Labour Assessments (INDLELA), National Skills Fund (NSF) and Quality Council for Trades and Occupations (QCTO).

· The dawn of a new phase of the SETA landscape was implemented on 1 April 2011 where changes were made to leadership, governance and strategies of SETAs .

· The Department was improving in the planning framework to ensure that the National Skills Development Strategy (NSDS III) provided a strong base for the DHET sub-systems and SETAs .

4.6 Articulation within the Post School Sector (Commission 1)

Ms N Mjajubana : Chief Director Exams and Assistance led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· Factors which contributed to lack of articulation included: different and non-aligned Quality Assurance systems between the different sub-systems, outdated and poorly designed curriculum and poor results in FET colleges, poor teaching and learning and funding challenges.

· The Commission recommended the following steps to realise articulation: South African Qualifications Authority’s (SAQA) Draft Policy on Articulation be distributed for comments and discussion by end of February 2013, SAQA’s Revised Policy on Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) be circulated in March 2013, an audit be conducted on the work done around articulation, redesign the N4 - N6 part qualification in line with Higher Education Qualifications Committee (HEQC), the Research Conference on Articulation from 4 - 6 March 2013 to consolidate key challenges and strategies for articulation, a national task team to be convened to develop the draft implementation plan on articulation by September 2013 and the Department to analyse funding mechanism and change funding formula to support articulation.

· The key areas of collaboration included; curriculum development to be responsive to articulation, two year FET foundation programme focusing on National Certificate (Vocational) NC(V) fundamentals, build on interaction and working groups already established between universities and FET institutions and participate in the policy development processes already underway.

· Mechanism to give effect to articulation in terms of RPL between workplace and post school education and training included: publishing of the Ministerial Task Team RPL Strategy as soon as possible, decentralisation of RPL centres for easy access, equal status given to RPL graduates to avoid discrimination and develop coordinated strategy to ensure that learners received outstanding results and certificates as soon as possible.

4.7 Work Placement (Commission 2)

Mr I Mbengo led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· It was noted that monitoring, evaluation and guidance were critical in the levels of implementation of work place integrated learning. Programmes that were already working like the South African Chamber of Commerce and Industries (SACCI) could be utilised to draw good practices.

· In terms of the Ministerial agreement with the President on performance, work placement was one of them. The main challenge was that there was no policy framework on work placement currently and there was a need to develop it.

· Good relationship between universities, FET colleges and SETAs would assist the country in improving work placement opportunities for graduates from FET colleges and universities.

· The issue of teacher training needed to be structured to accommodate practise teaching. Lecturers should be exposed to work placement programmes. A policy on how to manage interns needed to be developed.

· Government needed to play a leading role in creating an enabling environment for work placement and the private sector should assist.

4.8 Addressing the shortfall in the post school sector (Commission 3)

Mr S Makgoba : Chief Director University Financial Planning led the presentation which highlighted the following key issues:

· The misalignment of the financial year of government and academic year of further and higher education and training institutions remained a serious concern and the possible short term solution was a once off initial investment to address the issue of upfront payments.

· Government departments’ contribution of 1% to skills development levy should not be channelled to SETAs rather to NSFAS. The Ministry should present a compelling argument to Cabinet to fund the post school system adequately.

· There was a need to maintain, support and expand current levels of NSFAS funding. More resources were required for students who currently met the means test and the “missing middle” should also be funded.

· The role of institutions in rural settings transcended beyond just provision of learning and teaching.

· The issue of graduate tax must be explored further and it should not only be limited to NSFAS funded students. Employers should fund the students they want to employ and universities that can afford more funding for students should be encouraged to do so.

· Private sector support in infrastructure development should be explored. Parastatal funding should not only be on infrastructure development but also linked to skills development.

5. Discussion

The following formed part of the key discussions:

a) Access

· Access to higher education was partly affected by expensive tuition fees that were charged by universities and inadequate facilities for example infrastructure to increase enrolments in medical programmes, student accommodation in previously disadvantaged universities etc. The last university established in the country was in 1982 (30 years ago) and it was the University of Venda .

· The throughput rate in higher education institutions remained a serious challenge and this was partly caused by poor quality of Grade 12 results. Access should be accompanied by success and the 1.5 million target of headcount enrolments by 2030 would not be achieved without improved matric pass rate.

· The basic education system needed to be fixed in order to have improved results in universities.

· Universities’ reserves were meant for the institutions’ strategic projects and not for operational purposes and funding of poor students. Good organisations need to have reserves.

· It was noted that if the 1% levy contribution was channelled to NSFAS, the Public Service SETA would not exist and skills development in the public sector would be detrimental.

· University of Johannesburg (UJ) used its reserves to expand access and R150 million was used for bursaries to address the challenge of NSFAS shortfall. The University further used part of its reserves together with government funding to establish its Soweto Campus.

· There was a need to build a post-school education and training (PSET) system that would cater for 70% participation rate of youth of between 20-30 years old. Government should devise an equivalent plan for academics that would match the new expanded PSET system. There was a need to build more FET colleges in rural areas to expand access. UJ set a target for admission of students from poor rural schools. UJ reserved 10% of 12 000 spaces available for first year entering for students coming from impoverished schools. It was proposed that other institutions begin to categorise admission targets in order to broaden access for students with potential. They also cautioned against free for all admission which would have unintended consequences.

· Universities needed to re-examine themselves, inter-institutional articulation blockages should be addressed. The Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) and Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) had good examples of articulation of FET colleges students. The current admission policy that required FET students to qualify with 70% to access higher education while matriculants were admitted with 50% should be reviewed.

· The Committee was seriously concerned with financial exclusion of poor students and the current matirc pass rate. Universities that required upfront payment from poor students were doing injustice to the system. Withholding of results because students owed was a serious concern. The NC( V) curriculum should be reviewed and the mixing of Grade 12 with Grade 9 learners to be looked into.

· Fee free education was already implemented in FET colleges and it could be implemented in universities as well. Certification rate in FET colleges was very poor owing to poor pass rates in maths, science and English. Additional funding was required in FET colleges to provide adequate academic support. There was a need for a national facility to train FET college lecturers since there was a dire shortage of qualified lecturers in FET colleges. Late release of results and leakage of examination papers remained a serious concern.

· Articulation from FET colleges to universities remained a serious challenge. The admission requirements for NC( V) students was not the same with Grade 12 learners. The throughput rate of FET colleges remained a serious concern including the NC( V) pass rate which was 16% in 2011. There was need for a policy that would cater for the training needs of drop-outs. Unlike universities, FET colleges did not have a structure like HESA where colleges’ principals could have a platform to discuss their challenges and share good practices. There was a need to establish such a structure for FET colleges. Universities and FET colleges should develop a platform where all the challenges experienced by both sectors were addressed.

· Government needed to invest more funding in improving facilities in higher education and training institutions. FET colleges in rural areas did not have sufficient facilities as compared with the ones in urban areas. Student housing in FET colleges remained a serious challenge. The system was still urban biased in terms of better infrastructure and resources. It was proposed that infrastructure audit be conducted at FET colleges.

· The current disjuncture in basic education and post school education sector was a concern and there was need for the Committee to discuss this matter and propose a way forward. The inter-institutional articulation should be addressed by the Department and HESA. Universities and FET colleges should play a critical role in rural development. E-learning should be considered as an alternative to improve access to higher education.

· A strong partnership between FET colleges and industries was very important for FET students to obtain work placement opportunities easier.

· The skills grant for SETAs had been gazetted and SETAs had a very important role of assisting learners to gain experiential learning in their industries. SETAs should consult with their partner industries on placement of FET graduates.

· It was proposed that the Department should develop FET information management system.

b) NSFAS

· Inadequate information regarding NSFAS bursary for many prospective students especially in the rural areas remained a concern. Late allocation of the NSFAS funding to universities and FET colleges contributed to the drop-out rate.

· Administration of NSFAS bursary in FET colleges was a continuous challenge. Students in FET colleges were using the NSFAS bursary allocation to support their extra mural activities.

c ) Auditor-General

· The constant changes in Auditors sent to universities or FET colleges caused serious challenges because information was mishandled at certain times.

· The Committee was seriously concerned with outstanding audits from the six FET colleges and requested the Department to make follow-up with the matter. It was noted that management of the FET colleges with outstanding audits should be held accountable and the sanctions in the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) should be implemented to combat corruption in FET colleges.

· The Department’s intervention of sending Chief Financial Officers ( CFO’s ) to FET colleges to assist them with financial management was a good step towards improving financial management of FET colleges.

· It was noted with concern that certain auditors have been auditing the same institutions for many years and have established relationship with staff members in those public institutions. There was a concern that those may influence objectivity during audit process, and it was recommended that the AG attend to the concern.

· The Department promised to strengthen monitoring and evaluation of public institutions’ financial performances. However, capacity constraint at the Department was a challenge.

· It was noted that graduation output was a measurable objective of public institutions of which the AG could utilise.

d) Articulation

· It was noted that Cape Peninsula University of Technology (CPUT) and Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) had very good examples of articulation from FET colleges to universities and other institutions should also follow their examples.

· It was raised with concern that artisans and engineers faced a serious challenge when it came to articulation since the occupational programmes ( Nated 4-6) quality assurance bodies were Umalusi and QCTO and did not fit into Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF). It was proposed that Nated 4-6 be redesigned into a Diploma to fit in the HEQF. It was proposed that one quality assurance body was required for the post school education and training sector and that a Task Team on Articulation should be established.

· It was proposed that universities should include NC( V) as a minimum requirement for admission in their application forms so that student from FET colleges may apply for university admission just like matriculants .

· It was noted that intra-institutional articulation was a concern and universities needed to work together to ensure that articulation between institutions was effective.

· Curriculum of FET colleges remained a serious concern in improving articulation. Universities needed to assist FET colleges with their curriculum development to improve articulation.

e) Work Placement

· SETAs had a very important role to play in developing workplace pedagogy. Unfortunately there was no work placement policy in the country and the Department should consider development of such a policy.

· Students in FET colleges should be guaranteed work placement once they complete theoretical part of the training just like the Swiss and German model. This would improve student numbers in FET colleges and reduce unemployment.

· The weak relationship between FET colleges and industries contributed to the 11 000 FET college students who required work placement. There was need for aggressive work placement advocacy so that private sector would take note of the need to assist students.

· The public sector should play a leading role in opening spaces for young people to obtain experiential learning. Outsourcing in the public sector should be minimized so that young people can be assisted.

f) Addressing the shortfall in the post school sector

· Parents had a very important role in contributing to tuition fees of students especially those who could afford to do so.

· More allocation to NSFAS was required and the proposed idea of graduate tax should be explored as it might contribute to the dire shortage of funding in PSET.

· Universities should practice good financial management planning in order to avoid shortfalls and keep their cash flow up to date. The fact that the financial year of universities did not correspond with the state should not affect students.

· SETAs should disburse more bursaries to students in FET colleges and higher education institutions to reduce the burden on NSFAS.

· It was noted that higher education inflation rate which was above the 7% needed to be thoroughly discussed. The various government sources of funding (bursaries) for higher education should be consolidated and disbursed by NSFAS.

6. Summary

The two days strategic session of the Department was highly commended by various stakeholders who participated during the deliberations. It was the first time that the Department, Committee, FET colleges, Quality Assurance Bodies, SETAs , Higher Education and Training Institutions, Auditor-General were gathered in one session represented by their senior officials.

The main focus of deliberations during the strategic session were centred around issues of access in higher education, articulation, shortfalls in funding the post school education sector, work placement integrated learning, financial assistance for needy students and many other related issues. Although there were different views raised by the various stakeholders, it was agreed that access to post school education and training should be broadened in order to address societal challenges of unemployment and inequality in the modern democracy. Of great concern to stakeholders that participated during the deliberations was the dire shortage of financial assistance to needy students which hampered access and success.

In relation to higher education, the participation of black students especially females was commendable. However, the low throughput rate, drop-out rate and graduation rate remained low especially among black students. Universities were critised for delaying the implementation of RPL and lack of commitment in supporting FET colleges with their curriculum. Financial exclusions and withholding of results of needy students that owed fees to universities were among the major concerns of the Portfolio Committee. It was noted with concern that admission policies of certain universities continued to exclude potential students from rural schools.

In relation to FET colleges, the NC( V) curriculum was highlighted as serious concern in the FET sector. The high failure rate of the NC( V) programme nationally was an indictment to the FET system of the country which produced highly skilled artisans in the past. Through the current NC( V) review, it was hoped that the serious challenges experienced by students in this programme would be resolved. Of great concern to the Committee and other stakeholders was the outstanding NC( V) results, certificates, 11 000 students that needed work placement and leakage of examination papers which was directly linked to the Department’s failure. Poor financial management and outstanding audits from FET colleges remained a concern for the Committee.