ATC180314: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training on its oversight visit to Gauteng, dated 14 March 2018

Higher Education, Science and Innovation

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ON ITS OVERSIGHT VISIT TO GAUTENG, DATED 14 MARCH 2018

The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training having conducted an oversight visit to the post-school education and training institutions in Gauteng on 30 January – 01 February 2018, reports as follows.

1. Delegation list

1.1 Members of the Committee

Hon D Kekana (ANC), Hon J Kilian (ANC), Hon R Mavunda (ANC), Hon S Mchunu (ANC), Hon C September: Chairperson (ANC), Hon B Bozzoli (DA) and Hon A van der Westhuizen (DA).

1.2 Support staff

Mr A Kabingesi: Committee Secretary, Ms M Modiba: Content Adviser and Mr L Ben: Committee Assistant.

2. Introduction

In pursuance of its constitutional oversight obligation, the Committee undertook an oversight visit to the University of South Africa (UNISA), University of Pretoria (UP) and University of Johannesburg (UJ).

The objectives of the oversight visit were to:

• Assess the 2018 registration process;
• Assess the preparedness of the institutions in implementing the 2018 academic programmes;
• Assess the 2017 overall academic performance of students; and
• Undertake site visits to infrastructure projects, student accommodation and registration facilities.

In addition to the afore-mentioned objectives of the oversight visit, the Committee engaged with the relevant stakeholders of each institution which included: student representative council; labour unions and council.

3. Summary of the presentations and site visits

3.1 University of South Africa

3.1.1 Management

The Vice-Chancellor, Prof M Makhanya and members of the executive management made the presentation which highlighted the following. In providing a background on salary negotiations with the unions and the industrial action, the University indicated that management agreed on a final offer of 6.5 percent salary increment to the unions. However, the unions rejected the offer and declared a dispute on 8 December 2017. The matter was referred to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) on 17 January 2018 for conciliation. The strike by members of the National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU) commenced on 17 January 2018. Management made an offer of 7.2 percent salary increment considering the financial position of the University. NEHAWU demanded a 9 percent salary increment, but was willing to consider a full 7.5 percent increment without conditions. Management reached an agreement with NEHAWU on 24 January 2018 at a meeting with the Deputy Minister of Higher Education and Training which ended the strike.

In relation to the students’ demands and strike on 12 and 15 January 2018, the University indicated that the Economic Freedom Fighters Student Command (EFFSC) in the Gauteng region prevented both the staff and students from entering the campus to work or register, and demanded that management accept walk-ins’ applications for new students. Moreover, students at the Sunnyside Campus were also prevented from registering by the South African Student Congress (SASCO) since it had demanded management’s attention. Management met with the EFFSC and SASCO leadership and agreed to consider their demands which subsequently ended the disruptions.

With regard to the 2018 registration, the University indicated that eight (8) days of registration were lost due to the strike by NEHAWU members and two days were lost from student disruptions. However, the online registration remained open during the disruptions. The University has received 76 352 applications since the 15 January 2018.

With regard to the student population based on the October 2017 numbers, the University had 69 648 first-time entering headcount enrolments, of which 68.25 percent were females and 31.75 percent males. Of this number, 49.06 percent of the students were between the ages 18 – 24 and 25 percent fell into the 25 – 29 year age group. The majority of the students at the University were Africans, which constituted 77 percent of the total student population, followed by Whites at 11.28 percent, Coloureds 5.62 percent and Indians 4.81 percent. 43 percent of the student population were employed students followed by 37 percent unemployed students looking for work and 4 percent were students that were not economically active.

The majority of students at the University were registered at the College of Education (79 350 in 2016). The first year dropout rate at the University was relatively higher than the normal 24 percent of the higher education sector.  The College of Science, Engineering and Technology had a first year dropout rate of 38 percent. A total of 32 480 students graduated in 2016. The University had a total of 33 305 NSFAS funded students in 2017.

3.1.2 National Student Representative Council (NSRC)

The NSRC began the presentation by thanking the Committee for visiting the institution and also felt that the oversight visit had been long overdue given the past impasses that had been consistent at the University. The NSRC consisted of nine members out of the 99 total SRC members nationally. The nine NSRC members were located at the main campus (Muckleneuk Campus) and were elected into office in 2016. The NSRC was represented in the Council, Senate and Institutional Forum of the University.

In relation to the 2018 registration, the NSRC indicated that the industrial action impacted negatively on the 2018 registration process. The University had up to eight (8) days of registration for 2018 instead of 21 days as at 30 January 2018 due to industrial action. The NSRC proposed for the extension of the registration period beyond the 31 January 2018 closing date to compensate for lost time.

The NSRC indicated that the 2018 registration process was compounded by inefficient information and communication technology (ICT) systems of the University, which were unable to handle the high traffic volumes of online applications. As a result, the University lost R300 million due to the failure by management to introduce a new ICT infrastructure.  They called for a forensic investigation into the tribal ICT project.

The NSRC said that the ICT systems of the University were not integrated and this affected the entire registration value chain. There were engineers that had approached the University with proposals to fix its ICT systems. However, they were not successful. The NSRC indicated that the management of the University was reactionary and indecisive. They expressed a concern about the University’s enrolment plan which was not consulted with the NSRC, and indicated that the capping of enrolment was against government plans to increase access to higher education.

In so far as the student profile of the University is concerned, the NSRC indicated that the University was attracting a larger number of undergraduate students from all over the country. As a result, these young students came from all over country to register at the Pretoria Campus without a place to stay. Therefore, the University should consider making provision for student accommodation, especially for its young student population.

With regard to the administration of NSFAS funding, the NSRC indicated that students experienced serious challenges to access help from NSFAS pertaining to their applications for financial assistance. The location of NSFAS in Cape Town compounded the situation, since students were forced to call the NSFAS call centre to make inquiries. The University had a bottleneck of applications that were not yet processed by NSFAS, and this also contributed to the late payment of sBux allowances. The NSRC proposed that: the NSFAS call centre should be toll free; all the provinces should have NSFAS offices; the payment of book allowances should be fast tracked; the DHET should increase its subsidy to the University and infrastructure grants should be allocated to the University.

The NSRC expressed concerns about inadequate coordination and poor management of the University. The NSRC elaborated that consequence management at the University was inadequate. In supporting this statement, the NSRC indicated that in 2017, there was a delay in the delivery of learning materials to 244 students. As a result, the University lost R24 million in the process. Many students dropped-out in 2017 due to this difficulty. The NSRC proposed for the establishment of an independent commission of inquiry to investigate financial mismanagement and a loss of R24 million by the University.  The NSRC also urged the Committee to assist in ensuring that there is accountability in the use of public funds by the University.

In so far as teaching and learning is concerned, the NSRC expressed a concern about the inadequate student support services at the University. In support of this statement, they indicated that there was a shortage of lecturers to assist students with academic queries. Moreover, the absence of a call centre compounded the situation. The University was struggling to assist students to access teaching and learning materials and the student lecturer ratio was very high. The University had a high number of staff in acting positions, including the critical position of the Registrar.

The NSRC expressed a concern about the University’s whistleblower whom they accused of being biased towards a certain race. In addition, they also accused the University’s new Ombudsman of being ineffective and favouring certain individuals within the University. The NSRC also indicated that they had called for the Vice-Chancellor to be removed for not dealing with student grievances effectively and not taking the SRC seriously.

In relation to the media reports on freeloading SRC living the high life, the NSRC indicated that they were amongst the poorest SRCs in the higher education sector. In support of this statement, the NSRC indicated that the University did not provide them with transport for their activities. The blazers that were reported in the media to be R7 500 each were mischievous reports meant to undermine the credibility of the NSRC. The NSRC members received accommodation provided by the institution at R3 700 per month, including laptops and cellphones which would be returned to the institutions at the end of the NSRC term of office. They also reported that management was undermining the legitimacy of the NSRC and responded, to unelected structures.

3.1.3 Academics and Professional Staff Union (APSA)

Ms S Malema made the presentation on behalf of APSA. She indicated that the union advocated for the rights of the marginalised and disadvantaged workers at higher education institutions. With regard to the union’s relationship with management, Ms Malema described the relationship as being complex and mysterious as well as unpredictable.

Ms Malema indicated that the union has been experiencing threats of being de-recognised by management of the University, and this was detrimental to the union’s finances since it had been paying for legal fees in its quest to remain relevant and recognised by management. The union was served with letters of interdict by management on 19 January 2018. However, it contested the interdict and won the case in the labour court, and it would continue to advocate for workers’ rights irrespective of the management’s intimidation tactics.

The union expressed a concern about transformation at the University, especially at senior management level. It indicated that the University did not meet its employment equity plan targets. An example was made about the promotions at the University, which favoured a selected few academics, excluding equity candidates. The union called upon the University to assist and develop young and emerging academics to get promoted to senior posts. The union was against the hiring of external candidates to top positions while internal staff remained stagnant. The union also indicated that many black lecturers published in some journals which the University did not recognize and this was disadvantaging most of the black academics when it came to promotion. Furthermore, the union expressed a concern about the lack of transformation in the publishing space.

The union welcomed the decision by Council to establish a task team that provided guidance into the insourcing of cleaning and security staff that were exploited by private service providers. However, the challenge of the union is the integration of the insourced staff into the University so that they can enjoy similar benefits with other employees at the University. The union expressed a concern about the remuneration of senior academics who held professorate titles whilst being heavily indebted.

The union expressed a concern about inadequate transformation in the procurement of service providers by the University. The union indicated that the Purchasing Consortium Southern Africa (PURCO) enjoyed a monopoly in the procurement of the University’s certain goods and services at the expense of emerging service providers. The union noted that PURCO was gatekeeping and not contributing to empowerment of black people. Furthermore, the Council took a decision to decolonise the University but there has not been feedback to staff members on the implementation of the road map towards realizing the goal.

3.1.4 National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU)

Mr S Makena presented on behalf of the union. He acknowledged that the industrial action was led by NEHAWU and took eight (8) days and this affected the 2018 registration process. He blamed the slow pace by management to respond to the union’s demands, which forced workers to down tools and force management to negotiate for a better salary increment. As a result, the union reached an agreement with management to settle for a 7.5 percent salary increment on 26 January 2018 which ended the strike.

The union expressed concerns with regard to: procurement of inefficient ICT systems by the university; purchasing of certain machines that were not required by the institution; biased whistleblower; composition of council with the majority of members from the corporate sector who had no knowledge of the higher education sector; council not prioritising student issues; council sitting for too many special meetings; inadequate oversight role by council over management; two members of council implicated in the state capture allegations; racism at the level of academic staff; unequal remuneration of staff at the same level (Blacks were occupying the lowest quintiles while Whites are on high quintiles). The union also reported that the student lecturer ratio at the University was high.

 3.1.5 Council

The Council was represented by Prof Nkondo who expressed his gratitude about the visit of the Committee to the University. He indicated that the Council supported management in its quest to advance the University’s core mandate of teaching and learning, and council was also updated about the latest developments at the University. In 2016, Council and Senate agreed to reposition the University’s direction to be responsive to latest developments at the University. Council resolved that the University’s curriculum should be reviewed since it was too westernized and should also be responsive to the country’s cultural diversity. Prof Nkondo indicated that the promotion of African languages into the institution’s curriculum is fundamental in repositioning the University’s strategic direction.

Prof Nkondo indicated that the University belonged to a consortium of five universities which had begun to elevate African languages to be used as medium of instruction. He indicated that the University is planning to offer degrees in African languages similar to what the University of KwaZulu-Natal and the University of Limpopo had already been implementing. Council was also planning to reposition the University to be responsive to the call of radical economic transformation. Council welcomed the call for free higher education for the poor and working class. However, it raised a concern about the manner in which it was pronounced which was traumatic to institutions as they were forced to re-plan and revise their budgets.

3.1.6 Site visits

3.1.6.1 Eskia Mphahlele Administration Hall

The Committee was taken to the Eskia Mphahlele Administration Hall where the registration of first time entering and returning students took place. The Committee observed very long queues of students who were waiting to be assisted with their application and registration. The University indicated that the closing date for 2018 applications was 30 September 2017. However, due to the Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher education on 16 December 2017, the University saw it fit to provide additional opportunity for students who missed the cut off date in 2017. The registration process for 2018 was disturbed by the industrial action which lasted for eight (8) days. The University indicated that it was processing both the applications of students that did not apply previously as well their registration simultaneously to accommodate walk-ins. This had contributed to the long queues and the University was able to assist all the students who were in the queues. The staff at the registration facility worked up until 20h00 in the evening in trying to help all the students who needed to be registered.

The University had spaces for 20 000 new entrants for the 2018 academic year mostly in degree programmes. However, not all the students that applied for registration met the minimum entry requirements into degree programmes. The students that did not meet the minimum entry requirements into degree programmes were admitted into higher certificate programmes. The registration for the 2018 academic year would close on 31 January 2018. The University would open for another phase of registration in March for the second semester 2018.

The Committee was informed that students were required to pay a non-refundable amount of R105 to apply to the institution. Moreover, students were given up to the end of February to make a minimum payment of 33 percent of his/her total tuition fees. Students who qualified for NSFAS were exempted from making this payment.

The registration facility was equipped with 195 computers which assisted students with their application and registration. The registration of a single student could take up to 20 minutes. The University’s online registration system was functional. However, some students preferred to be assisted at the registration facility instead of registering on their own. At the registration facility, there were special advisors (experts trained in the curriculum requirements) for each college and access and matriculation exemptions services. Academic support was provided for the returning students who enrolled in Bachelor of Law (LLB) because of new modules which were introduced from 2018 academic year.

 

 

3.1.6.2 Printing facility

The Committee visited the University’s in-house printing facility where the printing of all study materials and examination papers took place. The facility made use of lithographic pressers to print the study materials which was more cost effective and efficient in printing large volumes of papers as compared to digital printers. The University indicated that besides the lithographic machines, they also had digital machines which printed less copies than the lithographic machines. The facility was also equipped with folding and binding machines for the study materials. The University had its own technicians who were responsible for the maintenance of the machines, and some of the machines were 15 – 20 years old. The Committee was also informed that there were cameras installed in the building to record every movement in the unit.

The facility had a dispatch unit which was responsible for storage and dispatch of the learning material to all provinces as well as outside the boarders of the country. The University made use of courier companies and the post office to deliver learning material. The University paid R15 million annually to the post office to distribute its learning materials. The University hired students that assisted with the packing of learning materials into parcels and they were paid for their services. The facility employed 300 people at the main campus and 230 at the Florida Campus.

3.1.6.3 Library

The Committee was informed that the University’s library had eight floors and was the largest library in Africa. The University also had 14 libraries across the regions, including one in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia. The Committee was informed that the first floor of the library hosted a variety of textbooks and other academic collections. The second floor had a digitisation machine worth R2 million and also hosted the learning materials of national heritage, Unisa archives, past exam papers and copies of dissertations. The third floor was responsible for handling of all the students’ queries pertaining the library and its services.

The Committee was informed that the library subscribed to 120 databases and students were able to access online catalogues or journals anywhere as long as they were registered with institution. The library also had 3.5 million books in the shelfs and 6 500 e-books available online. The University experienced a challenge of some students owing library fines up to R2000. However, negotiations were undertaken to ensure that the students were not disadvantaged to access the library material. The University recycled the old books and also donated some of them to needy schools.

3.2 University of Pretoria

3.2.1 Management

Prof C de la Rey: Vice-Chancellor made the presentation with her senior executives. In relation to the University facts based on the 2017 figures, the University had 9 Faculties and a Business School (Gordon Institute of Business Science). The total student enrolment at the University for 2017 was 53 024 and this number excluded the distance learning students who were approximately 10 000. In terms of student demographics, 59.8 percent of the total student population was made up of black students and the majority of students at the University were enrolled in the scarce skills programmes. The majority of students at the University were females who constituted 56.8 percent of the student population and males were 43.2 percent at undergraduate level. At postgraduate level, females constituted 52.3 percent of the student body while males were 47.7 percent.

The University enrolled 24 760 students in scarce skills programmes in 2016 and it produced 5 142 graduates in this field.  The University had the higher number of masters graduates in 2016, 1 811 as compared to other universities. The University also produced the second highest number of doctoral graduates in 2016, 302.

The University had six campuses, namely: Groenkloof; Hatfield; Hillcrest; Illovo; Mamelodi; Onderstepoort and Prinshof. The total staff complement of the University was 5 323 workers including staff on fixed-term contract. 55.5 percent of staff were black and 26.8 percent were academics.

With regard to the University’s research footprint, the University produced 11.3 percent of all South African publications and employed 10 percent of National Research Foundation (NRF) rated researchers. There were 15 NRF A-rated researchers at the University and it produced 3.24 research outputs units per capita in 2016, the highest output per capita in South Africa.

The transformation goals of the University include: ensuring access for a diverse student body; ensuring realization of employment equity goals; enhancing research capacity and productivity of black and women academics and cultivating an inclusive institutional culture. Some of the transformation milestones include: rea bua dialogue series; lekgotla process; new language policy; independent transformation panel and institutional transformation committee.

In relation to the administration of NSFAS funding, there were 3 101 new first year students that were assisted to register without paying the initial fee and 484 senior undergraduate students. The number of returning students without NSFAS financial assistance that were assisted to register were 5 485. NSFAS delayed in confirming students who qualified for funding and this caused anxiety among students during the registration period. The fee-free higher education announcement without aligned processes and systems in place was a challenge for the University. Compounding the situation was confusing communication from the DHET and NSFAS. The outstanding remittance due to the University amounted to R52 million.

In relation to student housing, the University had a total of 34 student residences with a capacity of 10 011 beds. Black students were the majority at the residences at 78.6 percent as compared to 21.4 percent whites. The University had limited capacity to meet the growing demand for student housing. All the residences had IT laboratories and easily accessible WiFi.

With regard to student academic performance, only 40 percent of students completed their degrees within regulation time based on the 2012 cohort and 67 percent completed their degrees on the fifth year. The throughput analysis for a 4 year undergraduate programme for the 2011 cohort was 36 percent. The average drop-out rates for 3-year undergraduate programmes was 21 percent, which was relatively lower than the 24 percent average for the sector

3.2.2 Student Representative Council

The presentation was made by the SRC President, Mr K Moloto. He indicated that the SRC had 19 members made up of 11 members from the Democratic Alliance (DA), three (3) from the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and five (5) other independent members. The SRC came into office in September 2017.

Mr Moloto said that the challenges of students at the University include: lack of affordable food for students especially those living in student residences and students normally exhaust their food allowance funds by September of each academic year; the mental health illness was an ongoing concern for students; shortage of student accommodation remained a serious concern for students. Moreover, the University was unable to meet the growing demand for student housing, and the private accommodation in the Hatfield area was unaffordable for many students; the delays by NSFAS in paying allowances due to students remained a serious concern; the growing number of students with historic debt was concerning and the historic debt at the University was estimated at R300 million; the missing middle students were struggling to cope with their academic work due to insufficient funding from the University to carry their debt; the policy uncertainty on the implementation of fee-free higher education was a serious concern for students; the SRC did not have adequate funding to implement its activities due to budgetary constraints.

The SRC lauded the manner in which the 2018 registration was undertaken. They noted that both the management and the SRC team worked together very well to ensure that prospective students were assisted accordingly. The SRC operated a help desk service to provide information to students who applied as well as the walk-ins.

The SRC proposed that the Committee should consider the possibility of negotiating with the provincial government to provide social housing for poor students; the Department should provide clarity on the implementation of free higher education for the poor; food grants should be provided to higher education institutions and the historic debt should be cleared.

3.2.3 National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU)

Ms K Mathekga: Shop steward made the presentation on behalf NEHAWU. She indicated that the union represented 16 percent of the total staff complement at the University. The union had 12 shop stewards in all major constituencies/campuses as well branch office bearers. The union was not represented in the institutional transformation committee, skills development committee and employment equity forum.

The union’s achievements include: revival of its branch; advocating a demand for a benchmarking exercise for mid-point salary adjustments; additional health providers; reduction of employee cases and continuously protecting workers’ rights in the University.

The union’s challenges include: non-representation in key University committees and forums such as the institutional forum (IF); lack of consultation from management on key decisions affecting staff; lack of interest from academic staff to participate in the labour movement; intimidation of staff especially at lower levels; slow rate of transformation as it relates to representation of black academics, women and people living with disabilities at middle and senior management and tender processes favouring previously advantaged companies. Moreover, the union reported that management had frozen some position indicating financial pressures. They advocated for an establishment of a single national bargaining council for the entire higher education sector

3.2.4 University of Pretoria Workers Union

Mr C Hatting: Secretary and full time representative of the union made the presentation on behalf of the union. He indicated that the union was established in 1996 when the employees of the University felt they were not fairly treated when the amalgamation of various tertiary institutions started.

Mr Hatting said that the union’s members were employees in all categories at the University and there was no barrier to join the union as long as a member was an employee of the University. The union was represented in the Employment Equity Committee, Institutional Forum, the University’s bargaining forum and the Skills Development Forum.  He alluded that the University had good policies in place to structure the relations between employee and employers and the role of the union was to monitor the implementation of those policies. Furthermore, the union was not radical and it was not its role to act in that manner. Mr Hatting indicated that it would take a major incident or event to get academics in this union to embark on industrial action.

Mr Hatting indicated that the two big challenges of the union were: to convince management and the executive that the unions were not a threat and there were a lot of common ground to find solutions to challenges facing the University and the apathy of employees to the unions. The key achievement of the union was to subscribe to the agreements reached with the University management.

3.2.5. Academics and Professional Staff Association (APSA)

The union did not raise major concerns. They indicated that they were accepted at the University on 30 January 2018. They requested that there should be a development of a policy to provide for the unions to support the struggles of students as the student supported the workers when they fought for insourcing.

3.2.6 Site visits Hillcrest Campus

3.2.6.1 Registration facilities

The Committee visited the registration facilities which were situated at the Hillcrest Campus to assess the 2018 registration process. The Committee was informed that the applications for the 2018 academic year were opened in March 2017. The University sent emails for provisional acceptance to students, including student numbers. However, registration at the campus commenced on 10 January 2018 up until 29 January 2018. The University’s online registration system assisted significantly for the 2018 registration process since 90 percent of the applications were completed online. The students who came to apply at the registration facilities wanted to get clarification about other aspects of their registration.

The Committee was taken to the different sections of the registration facilities. The enrolment contract section was where students signed a contract which set a basis for acceptance of disciplinary code and academic performance. The University had a disability section which catered for students with various special needs. The NSFAS section dealt with all the queries of students pertaining to their applications for NSFAS funding. The facility had an international affairs section which took care of all the needs of the international students. Some of the international students came to University without study visas and the University was able to provide assistance required for them attain the relevant documentation.

The Committee observed that the registration value chain of the University was well organized with sufficient personnel to help students with their inquiries. There were no queues at the facilities since the registration process had been closed already. The University indicated that it was not in a position to accept walk-ins. However, they were referred to the DHET clearing house or encouraged to apply when the new registration period for 2019 opens in March 2018. The University had a five-year enrolment plan with the Department which must be adhered to, otherwise it won’t be able to fund the unplanned students.

The University had 60 computers for self-help registration and for students to log into the portal to register modules. The University’s portal was easily accessible to students from any device and they could view their registration status. The IT support personnel was on site during the registration period to assist with any IT related challenges. The students were issued with a student card once they completed the registration process. The student card could be issued within five minutes and the University had issued 10 600 student cards since the beginning of the registration period.

3.2.6.2 Tuks Monate Dining Hall

The Committee was informed that the Tuks Monate dining hall was a state of the art building that was refurbished and re-opened in 2014. The refurbishment project was a joint initiative between the University and the Department. The Department contributed 50 percent of the total cost of the project and remainder was covered by the University. The University took a decision to centralise the dining hall which made it easier to adhere to the food safety regulations. The dining hall catered for 2002 students living in the residences.

The Committee observed that the dining was very clean and a good space for students to enjoy their meals. The University indicated students complained about the expensive food prices at the dining hall in comparison to the nearby food outlets. As a result, students preferred to eat starch and other fast food which were not very healthy. The University also indicated that it provided students with an upfront food allowance of R14 400 so that they do not starve whilst waiting for their allowances to be paid by NSFAS or other bursaries. However, some of the students depleted their food allowances quickly through reckless spending such as buying food for friends. The University was able to track the spending patterns of students and provide the transaction history to the parents or bursars.

3.5.6.3 House Maroela Student Residence

The Committee was taken to one of the old student residence at the Hillcrest Campus which had 236 beds. The Committee was informed that the residence would be celebrating its 50th birthday of its existence during 2018. Furthermore, it was also due for refurbishments in 2018 and its occupants would be moved to alternative accommodation whilst the renovations were underway. The University had a 15-year timeline for refurbishments of each residence.

The Committee was informed that the residence had a house committee which looked after the affairs of the students at the residence. The University placed more emphasis on academic excellence for students residing in residences. There were various student support programmes that were implemented to ensure that students succeed in their studies. The residences also competed for the best performing residence which also encouraged students to study hard.

The University indicated that students had to pass their studies in order to be re-admitted in the residences. The new students were encouraged to limit partaking in many social activities until they settle in their studies. The students were also required to adhere to the code of conduct of the residence. In relation to racial integration, the students indicated that there were no incidents of racial discrimination experienced by students and they got along very well.

3.5.6.4 Tuks Village

The Tuks Village was a state of the art student residences established in 2008 with 640 beds in different residence blocks. The Committee was taken to the village centre which was the main recreational facility at the village. The centre was a social space for students to interact, read and watch variety of sports. The centre provided students with an environment where they could feel welcomed at the village irrespective of their backgrounds. The village centre contributed to a quality living and learning space which had book shelves, televisions and Timbuktu lounge for intellectual space.

The Committee was informed that there were no initiation practices for new students and all the activities at the village were voluntary. Students were encouraged to contribute R70 for the maintenance of the village centre, However, this contribution was not compulsory. The Committee observed that the residence rooms and its surrounding were very clean and well maintained.

3.3 University of Johannesburg

3.3.1 Management

The presentation on the administration of NSFAS bursaries was made Ms N Mamorare: Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Finance and highlighted the following: The University experienced an increase in the number of NSFAS funded students over the past five (5) years from 8 151 students in 2013 to 20 053 in 2018. The growth in the student numbers included the University’s investment of R156 million for students funding over the same period.

Ms Mamorare said that the University started a fundraising campaign to assist the missing middle students. She indicated that the University’s SRC Trust Fund had been allocated R58 million since 2014 to pay registration fees for academically deserving students not funded by NSFAS. Furthermore, the University had raised R355 million since 2014 through the support from students, staff, sector education and training authorities (SETAs), private sector and foundations. The University took a huge financial risk in 2018 by unblocking 12 000 returning students who were not yet funded by NSFAS.

Ms Mamorare indicated that the challenges of the University with NSFAS include: poor administration at NSFAS; ineffective roll-out of the student-centred model; IT systems that were not integrated; delays in funding outcomes; historic debt for NSFAS funded students and senior students that were not funded; highly indebted students and poor response from students in signing NSFAS loan agreement forms.

Prof A Parekh: DVC Academic made the presentation on student success and throughput. She indicated that the success rates for the 2017 academic year were not yet available since the data was being processed. The 2016 undergraduate success rate for 2016 was 84.2 percent. In terms of gender, female undergraduate students were performing better than their male counterparts at 88.2 percent in comparison to 82.2 percent male in 2016. The student throughput rate for 3-year undergraduate programme was 37 percent in 2014 and 58 percent for honours degrees. The dropout rate in undergraduate programmes was 16 percent in 2016. The University produced 12 770 graduates in 2016.

Prof K Burger: Registrar made the presentation on registration. She indicated that the applications for the 2018 academic year closed at the end of September 2017 for undergraduate programmes. Ms Burger said that the University received 115 000 undergraduate applications for 10 500 spaces. The final selection of qualifying students was undertaken after the release of the grade 12 results. The online registration system opened on 8 January 2018 and close to 35 000 (83 percent) of undergraduate students registered through this system.

3.3.2 Student Representative Council

Mr C Kekana: President made the presentation. Mr Kekana said that the delays by NSFAS in the payment of allowances was the biggest challenge of students at the University. He indicated that the University enrolled students from poor family households who did not have means to afford higher education studies. The students were confused about the guidelines of the new student centred model and the need to sign loan agreement forms. As a result, some of the students were owed outstanding claims as far back as 2015.

In relation to the 2018 registration, Mr Kekana said that the registration for new students commenced smoothly. However, some of the returning students who were funded by NSFAS in 2017 were unable to register since NSFAS had not paid for their 2018 academic year. These students were also losing spaces at their residences since the institution cannot register them. The financial aid offices of the University were unable to resolve the challenges of students with NSFAS. Students were advised to call NSFAS to resolve their queries.

The SRC proposed that the University extends the 2018 registration beyond the 02 February 2018 to allow students with NSFAS challenges to register. The SRC also called for a meeting with NSFAS to address all the challenges experienced by students with the new student centred model.

3.3.4 National Education and Health Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU)

The presentation was made by Mr L Modibedi: Branch Secretary. He indicated that the union represented 1 400 staff members at the University which was 32 percent of the staff complement. In relation to insourcing, Mr Modibedi indicated that the University insourced workers from gardening services, cleaners and security. However, the workers that were insourced were not remunerated at the similar level with other low level staff at the University and the union was advocating for fair remuneration of these workers.

The union expressed a concern about the total cost to company remuneration package offered by the University. The union indicated that employees were forced to contribute to the medical aid expenses from their salaries. The minimum contribution for the Discovery Medical Aid was R780 for a principal member and workers had many beneficiaries to add in their medical aid leaving them with very little amount to cover for other expenses. The union proposed that the University should subsidise the medical expenses for workers.

The union expressed a concern about the slow pace of transformation at the University. It indicated that the University did not have a Transformation Committee. The union gave an example of other departments at the University which were predominantly white, such as the central admissions and finance departments. In addition, the union said that the engineering faculty was dominated by foreign nationals at the expense of young and emerging black academics. There were also gaps in the remuneration of male and female workers doing the same job.

The union indicated that the University did not provide sufficient support to workers with special needs. A partially sighted staff member had to resign due to frustrations and lack of support from management. In relation to staff discipline, the union indicated that the staff members at the lower level of institution were easily dismissed, whilst senior managers’ disciplinary processes took much longer.

The union welcomed the dismissal of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Finance who was accused of defrauding the University R25 million. The union indicated that it laid criminal charges against the former DVC. The union requested the Committee to assist in getting information on the management of the University finances, especially the third stream income, since management refused to furnish the union with these documents. The union also called upon the Committee to assist with the establishment of a central bargaining forum for the higher education sector.

3.3.5 Site visits

3.3.5.1 Registration facility

The Committee visited the temporary registration facility which was situated opposite the entrance of the Kingsway Campus. The Committee was informed that the University commenced with registration of new and returning students on 08 January 2018 and the long queues were as a result of walk-ins. The University indicated that 97 percent of new applicants applied online and the IT system was able to accommodate the high volume of new applicants. The online registration took a maximum of 15 minutes. There were no queues at the registration facility during the site visit of the Committee as registration was nearing its closing date.

3.3.5.2 Cornerstone Residence

The Committee was informed that the Cornerstone Residence was formerly known as Dromedaries. However, due to the renaming process, a number of buildings at the University had been renamed as part of transformation. The residence had 232 beds and accommodated male students, especially undergraduates.

The Committee observed that the residence was old, however, it was conducive for living and learning. There were minor refurbishments required especially at the residence’s bathrooms. Students were not allowed to cook inside their rooms since there were kitchens in each floor. The University did not have a dining hall for students. The University had a student centre with many cafes and restaurants were students could buy their meals through Fundi card

The University did not allow students to bring alcohol inside the residence. However, students requested management to apply for a liquor licence so that alcohol can be sold on campus. Students complained that they were being robbed at night and it was very risky to drink outside the campus. The University indicated that it would consult on the matter.

3.3.5.3 Mošate Heights Residence

Mošate Heights residence was a female residence with 274 students. However, during the site visit of the Committee there were 205 students as the residence since registration was still underway. The Committee observed that there were shower doors that laid outside the residence premises. The University indicated that the renovations at residence started in December 2017 when students were on vacation. However, the project delayed and contractors were finalising the outstanding work which would take a week to complete.

Students complained that they did not feel safe in using the showers without doors. An example was given of a construction worker who peeped through the window whilst a female student was using the shower. The Committee expressed its concern about the delays in the maintenance work which also compromised the safety of students. The Committee visited the rooms and observed that students had covered the smoke detectors with plastics. They indicated that the smoke from the hair dryer triggered the smoke alarm.

4. Observations

The Committee conducted an oversight visit to assess the implementation of the Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher education by universities and TVET Colleges; to assess the 2018 academic year admissions and registration processes; to assess the administration of NSFAS funding; to assess student performance in the 2017 academic year; to assess progress made with regard to transformation; and the capacity of the institutions in terms of infrastructure, in particular, student accommodation and teaching and learning facilities.

The Committee having undertaken an oversight visit to Gauteng, made the following observations:

 

 

4.1 2018 Registration

4.1.1 The Committee observed that the 2018 registration process at the University of Pretoria commenced smoothly and over 90 percent of the new applicants registered through the University’s online registration system. The University had efficient systems in place to assist students with their queries. However, the main concern raised by students was the lack of accommodation to house students coming from other provinces.

4.1.2 At the University of Johannesburg, the Committee observed that the 2018 registration process also commenced smoothly with over 80 percent of new applicants using the University’s online registration system. However, the main challenge of the University was the delays by NSFAS to pay for the registration of returning students. As a result, the University took a huge financial risk by unblocking 12 000 returning students whilst waiting for NSFAS to settle their outstanding debts.

4.1.3 The Committee was extremely concerned about the long queues it observed during its site visit at UNISA. The queues were abnormal for a long distance / non-contact institution, which predominantly utilises its online system to register students. The Committee was informed that the long queues were exacerbated by the eight (8) days lost at the beginning of registration period due to industrial action. Furthermore, the inability of the University’s ICT infrastructure to accommodate the high volumes of online applications and registration simultaneously compounded the situation. Nevertheless, the University was positive that it would assist all the students that qualified to register regardless of its difficulties.

4.1.4 Unisa in its written response to the Committee indicated that the closing date for registration had to be extended twice in response to the staff strike, and the fact that the number of students who applied during the applications window in 2018 exceeded all expectations. A total of 92 863 applications were received, of which 8 740 were incomplete. The University undertook to apply enrolment management to limit possible negative effects that extreme oversubscription would have on the operations of the University. The University also undertook to be more disciplined in keeping to cut-off dates and not allowing exceptions.

4.2 Roll-out of the NSFAS student-centred model

4.2.1 The general observation of the Committee is that there are challenges pertaining to the roll out of the NSFAS student-centred model in universities. Compounding the situation is the inability of NSFAS to speedily resolve student queries since the new model is centralised and all queries have to be directed to the head office in Cape Town. This created frustrations amongst students whom some of them were owed outstanding claims of 2017. As a result, they experienced challenges in registering for the 2018 academic due to unsettled debts. The Committee also noted that all the Universities were owed outstanding payment for 2017 by NSFAS.

4.2.2 Unisa in its written response to the Committee indicated that it was owed R116 million by NSFAS for 2017. Moreover, the University has been owed outstanding payments by NSFAS dating back from 2012 to 2016 and that amount was R59.3 million. The total payment received from NSFAS for 2018 without remittances amounted to R60 million.

4.2.3 The University of Pretoria in its written response to the Committee indicated that NSFAS owed the University R50 million for 2017. Moreover, the University was requested in 2017 to indicate all the Quantile 1,2,3 students, South Africa Social Security Agency (SASSA) grant recipients, students on appeal and students who were still unfunded. According to NSFAS, there were still 237 applications that were being processed and not finalised. The impact of this was that at year-end 2017, R9.5 million was owed by these students to the University.

4.2.4 The University of Johannesburg in its written response to the Committee indicated that an amount of R54 million was owed by NSFAS for the 2017 academic year. An upfront payment of R170 million had been received with respect to the 2018 funding.

4.3 Implementation of fee-free higher education

4.3.1 The Committee noted that the Universities welcomed the Presidential pronouncement of fee-free higher education. However, they were concerned about the timing in which the pronouncement was made. The students expressed their concerns about the confusing messages that were communicated by the Department and NSFAS with regard the implementation of this pronouncement.

 

 

4.4. Student housing

4.4.1 The general observation of the Committee is that universities were unable to meet the growing demand for affordable and decent student accommodation. Compounding the situation was the lack of affordable off-campus residential properties in urbanised cities such as Johannesburg making it difficult for students coming from other provinces. Likewise, the universities alluded that they had limited resources to build more residences due inadequate infrastructure grants from the DHET.

4.4.2 The University of Pretoria in its written response to the Committee indicated that it had sufficient land on which to build new residences, but lacked funds to do so. The provincial land and vacant buildings that were located far away from the University campuses created logistical challenges for students who may be accommodated there, especially in terms of commuting to and from the University.

4.5. Infrastructure development

4.5.1 The Universities have indicated a serious challenge with the maintenance backlog. This was mainly caused by insufficient funds to address the challenge.

4.6 Academic performance

4.6.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the overall undergraduate throughput rates which were low and dropout rates which were high. Of great concern to note was the high dropout rate at UNISA which was higher than the national norm. The Universities undertook to put measures in place to ensure that students were able to complete their programmes within the regulation time so that they can exit the system with their qualifications.

4.7 A single national bargaining forum for higher education

4.7.1 The unions made a plea to the Committee to have a single national bargaining forum for the higher education sector. NEHAWU at the University of Johannesburg indicated that the majority of Vice-Chancellors were not keen to such a forum.

 

 

4.8 Harmonisation of conditions of service of insourced workers

4.8.1 Unions at all the three Universities indicated that the Universities have insourced the workers who previously worked for private companies. However, the conditions of services were not harmonized.

4.9 Transformation

4.9.1 Unions at all the institutions complained about the slow pace of transformation and inadequate representation of blacks, women and people with disabilities at the senior management level. At the University of Johannesburg, unions complained about the appointment foreign nationals at the expense of the South African Blacks. Both students and unions raised a concern about the lack of transformation in the procurement of goods and services in the Universities, where previously advantaged companies were procured to provide services at the expense of black empowerment.

4.10 Other observations

4.10.1 University of South Africa (UNISA)

4.10.1.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the delivery of study materials by UNISA to 244 students and some of them had dropped-out of the system. It emerged that the University had inadequate capacity and 72 vacant positions in the study materials section. The University in its written response to the Committee indicated that a variety of measures impacted on the academic programme in the first semester of 2017, which included; inadequate forecasting data and stock planning capacity, and unprecedented growth in the number of students in specific modules. The late submission of study material content from lecturers, challenges with the ICT systems, incorrect student addresses and fragmentation of processes compounded the situation.

4.10.1.2 The Committee expressed concerns about the alleged racism at the University. The Committee welcomed the plan by the South African Human Rights Commission to investigate the allegations at UNISA and also urged the University to provide feedback.

4.10.1.3 The relationship between the University stakeholders and management at UNISA was noted as a concern. The Committee also expressed a concern about the inadequate communication that existed at the institution which contributed to instabilities.

4.10.1.4 The Committee condemned the locking of staff members inside a building by angry students at the UNISA’s Durban Campus due to challenges with the 2018 registration process.

4.101.5 The Committee commended the open distance learning system of the University, but raised concerns about the lack of response by staff members to student queries and unavailability of staff to answer telephone enquiries. It was concerning that even turn-around time of 48 hours to respond to queries was not adhered to. The Committee urged the unions to ensure their members are attending to students needs and are accessible on their emails and telephonically.

4.10.1.6 The reported shortfall of R600 million in the subsidy and its impact to the University was noted as a concern.

4.10.1.7 The Committee expressed a concern about the inability of the University’s inadequate ICT systems. The University in its written response to the Committee acknowledged that it experienced a high volume of applications combined with high levels of transactions and concurrent requests, which led to abnormally high traffic levels which caused a degradation in system performance. However, the University’s vision for ICT systems is to make myUnisa less dependent on the student system for teaching functions and locate myUnisa on a scalable platform that can respond to varying levels of demand without the constraints and limitation of the current infrastructure environment.

4.10.1.8 The Committee noted the concerns raised by the University stakeholders about its relationship with PURCO. The University indicated that PURCO members included all South African universities including TVET colleges. PURCO also focused on providing maximum benefits for its members through collaborative purchasing and professional support. Moreover, the University’s engagement with PURCO formed a small part of its supply chain management.

4.10.2. University of Pretoria

4.10.2.1 The Committee expressed a concern about the declining income from investments as well as diminishing surplus at the University of Pretoria. The University acknowledged that it was experiencing financial constraints similar to other higher education institutions and this also contributed to the freezing of administrative posts. Moreover, the University indicated that it had financial reserves that could keep the University operations ongoing for a period of one (1) year three months in case of emergency.

4.10.2.2 The University of Pretoria had a very good infrastructure maintenance plan for its student residences and the overall infrastructure of the University. The University’s infrastructure was found to be in a very good condition and well maintained. The Committee expressed a view that other historically disadvantaged institutions (HDIs) could learn from the University’s management and maintenance of infrastructure.

4.10.2.3 The Committee was concerned about the disconnect between middle and the executive management.

4.10.2.4 The Committee noted a request from students for social housing. The students indicated that the City of Tshwane introduced affordable housing for poor people and that can be done for students.

4.10.2.5 The Committee expressed a concern about the alleged exclusive residences at the University. In its written response to the Committee, the University indicated that it was committed to transformation and was against all forms of discrimination. While the numbers for 2018 had not been finalised, 67.86 percent of students who had already been admitted to residences were black and 56 percent were undergraduates and 97 percent postgraduates. However, the percentages varied per campus.

4.10.3 University of Johannesburg

4.10.3.1 The Committee expressed a concern pertaining to the request by students at the University of Johannesburg for the institution to apply for a liquor licence at one of the male residence since universities are spaces for teaching and learning. The University in its written response to the Committee indicated that its student centres had service providers licensed to sell alcohol to students within specific times, especially on Fridays (14:00 – 22:00) and Saturdays (10:00 – 13:00).

4.10.3.2 The Committee enquired about widespread media reports pertaining the siphoning of R25 million from the University of Johannesburg (UJ) accounts and this happened over a period of three years. The University indicated that the corruption scandal involved the DVC for Finance, Chairperson of Convocation who did business without declaring his interests and the Chairperson of Council. The fraudulent activities happened in the commercialisation space of the University. The University had established Photovoltaic Technology Intellectual Property (PTiP), a Stellenbosch based company with the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) to develop solar panels. An additional company was established and its directors were UJ managers who channeled money from the UJ company to their own company. The University undertook a forensic investigation into the matter and the report was concluded. The Chairperson of Council subsequently resigned and the DVC for Finance was dismissed. The University was in the process of laying criminal charges against the individuals and aimed at recouping some of the money lost by the institution.

4.10.3.3 The Committee was concerned about the internal control systems of the institution which could not detect the fraudulent activities which took place over a period of three years. The Committee enquired about the strengthening of the internal controls and the recouping of the money. The University undertook to improve its internal control systems to prevent this incident from recurring. One of the measures to strengthen internal control was to have annual reports of commercialisation tabled to Council. The Committee requested that progress reports on the investigations and disciplinary outcomes to be forwarded to Parliament.

4.10.3.4 The Committee expressed a concern about the delays in the completion of the renovation of residences and the safety of students during the renovation process. The University indicated that the maintenance work took longer than scheduled, however, the contractor undertook to complete the outstanding work in a week’s time.

4.10.3.5 The Committee noted a plea by the University to have a national tracking system which would trace mobility of learners from the primary to post-school education and training and to the world of work. The envisaged system would provide relevant and reliable information for planning and policy frameworks.

4.10.3.6. The Committee was concerned about low admission numbers of students with NC(V) and Report 191 qualifications.

4.10.3.7 The allegations of irregularities in the remuneration of staff at similar job level was noted as a concern by the Committee. The University in its written response to the Committee indicated that the remuneration policy of the institution ensured fair and equitable remuneration practices. Moreover, individual remuneration was also affected by the years of service that the employee had, the skills set that the employee brought to the position and the knowledge (qualification) of the employee.

5. Summary

In summary, the 2018 academic year has commenced smoothly at the institutions visited by the Committee except for the disruptions at UNISA as a result of industrial action which lasted for eight (8) days. In so far as the 2018 registration process is concerned, the Committee commended the institutions for the systems in place to register the first-time entering and returning students including walk-ins for the 2018 academic year. However, UNISA was the only institution that experienced difficulties with the 2018 registration process due to its ICT systems which was unable to accommodate the high volumes of applications. The Committee was also pleased that over 80 percent of the new applicants at the institutions visited was done through online registration, and there were no reported cases of stampedes or fatalities during the registration period.

Notwithstanding the important role that NSFAS plays in offering access to higher education for academically deserving poor students, the Committee received complaints from the student representative councils (SRCs) regarding the roll-out of NSFAS student-centred model. The complaints were related to the delays by NSFAS in the payment of allowances to eligible students and the impact this had on teaching and learning. Moreover, the students expressed their frustrations about the poor communication between NSFAS and the institutions which created confusion. The Committee expressed the view that NSFAS should work closely with the institutions to resolve the systemic challenges so that institutions can be paid all the outstanding claims to prevent academic exclusions of academically deserving students.

In so far as student accommodation is concerned, the Committee found that the provision of student accommodation far exceeded the supply, with just under 30 percent of the full time contact students enrolled at UJ and UP housed in the university’s student accommodation or residences. Moreover, the students at UNISA also demanded the University to make provision for student accommodation given the high number of undergraduate students who register at the institution. Meanwhile, UNISA was adamant that it is a distance learning institution which predominantly offers courses/programmes that are available online and there is no need to make provision for student housing. 

In relation to the overall student performance, the undergraduate success rate of students was averaging above 80 percent, which is the national norm for higher education. However, the completion of undergraduate programmes within the minimum time (3 years) still remains a major concern for universities. Moreover, the dropout rate of undergraduate students also remains a challenge. It is apparent that whilst many students are passing their programmes, the number of those completing on time remains low. The Committee expressed a view that universities should improve their student support services to minimise the bottlenecks within the system.

6. Recommendations

The Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training having conducted an oversight visit to the University of South Africa (UNISA), University of Pretoria (UP) and University of Johannesburg (UJ), recommends that the Minister of Higher Education and Training consider the following:

6.1 Registration 2018

6.1.1 Notwithstanding the successful 2018 registration process at UP and UJ, the Committee was concerned about the long queues of students that were awaiting to register at UNISA due to the failure of the online registration system to cater for the high volumes of new applicants and the impact of the industrial action. The Committee recommends that UNISA resolve the ICT related challenges to enable more eligible students to register for the 2018 academic year.

6.2 Roll out of the NSFAS student-centred model

6.2.1 The Committee received complaints pertaining the roll-out of NSFAS student-centred model. The complaints were related to the delays by NSFAS in the payment of allowances due to eligible students. The Committee recommends that the information technology (IT) systems of universities should be integrated with NSFAS IT systems. Moreover, NSFAS should improve its capacity so that it can speedily resolve student queries.

6.2.2 NSFAS should develop clear guidelines pertaining the roll out of the student centred model and communicate more effectively with the institutions to prevent confusion. Moreover, the universities should embark on an advocacy campaign to promote the importance of signing loan agreement forms and schedule of particulars (LAFSOP) by students so that their claims can be processed timeously.

6.3 Academic performance

6.3.1 The low throughput rate of students in undergraduate programmes and the high dropout rate remains a challenge in higher education. The Committee recommends that universities enhance their student support systems to improve the retention and throughput rates of undergraduate students.

6.4 Student housing

6.4.1 The shortage of decent, accessible, affordable and safe student accommodation remains a challenge in higher education. The Committee will confer with the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements to discuss a way forward in the provision of student housing in higher education.

6.5 Transformation

6.5.1 The Committee noted the progress that has been made in transforming the student body at UP and UJ. Notwithstanding the high number of black African students at these institutions, the number of black academics remains a concern. The Committee recommends that more support be given to develop and retain young and emerging black academics.

6.6 Other recommendations

6.6.1 Establishment of a national bargaining forum for higher education: The Committee noted the proposal by the unions for the establishment of a bargaining forum for higher education. The Committee will confer with the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration to find a way forward on this matter.

6.6.2 Allegations of mismanagement and corruption: There were reported cases of mismanagement and corruption at UNISA and UJ. The Committee recommends that the institutions continuously submit updated reports on the developments with the investigations pertaining to corruption and mismanagement.

 

 

6.6.3 The Committee continues to do oversight over UNISA and the University should brief the Committee on progress made in implementing the Committee’s oversight visit recommendations.

Report to be considered.