Transcript A South African Big Picture for Teaching and Learning The

Nico Cloete
26 November 2013
Policy Frameworks in SA
1.
2.
3.
4.
Policies: Implementation strategies – legislation and funding
Incentives: direct – indirect
Symbolic (compensatory legitimation)
National – institutional (development- support- incentives)
Policy Moments in SA
•
1996/7
•
2000/1
•
2004
•
2008
•
2011
National Commission on Higher Education Report,
Green and White Paper (1997)
Council Higher Education Differentiation report,
National Plan on Higher Education
mergers of intuitions and funding linked to
enrolment planning
new funning framework fully operational, end of
Programme Qualification Mix reviews
latest accredited HEMIS data, and start of Green
Paper and National Development Plan 2030 process.
Diagnosis: National Planning Commission (2011)
From Numerous Reviews (World Bank; Harvard; WEF)
1. low participation and high attrition rates
2. medium knowledge producing
3. insufficient capacity for adequate skills production
4. differentiated (not formal policy)
5. minority (+/- five ) of ‘chronic crisis’ institutions (bad press)
Shift from Equity to Development, and the Return of Equity
(Transformation Oversight Committee, 2013)
SA continually paralysed by inability to prioritise
Shape of the SA Post-School System (2010)
4
Gross enrolment ratio and global competitiveness
5
Graduates by field of study
6
Throughput of graduates
7
Race composition of SA universities
8
Research output of academic staff
9
Impact of SA science
10
Figure 2: R&D expenditure
Higher education income
12
A differentiated public university system
13
Policy Focus to Strengthening the Doctorate
1. Doctoral enrolment must grow – absent in NCHE, symbolic in
White Paper, stronger in National Plan and strong funding from
2008 (ranging from $40 000 to $60 000 per student/graduate).
Priority in NDP 2030 with graduate targets (from 1500 to 5000
in 2030. Focus on SET and business management.
2. Output efficiency must improve - from 1997 focus on efficiency
in general, 2008 funding weak on efficiency, 2012 Green Paper
and NDP much more explicit (throughput of 75%). CHET and
CREST performance and efficiency indicators (symbolic)
3. Academic staff must have PhD - Financial and Fiscal
Commission (2012) and NDP (increase from 35% to 75%)
4. Internationalisation - NPHE (2001) and Green Paper (2012)
encourages post graduate recruitment, particularly SADC
5. Differentiation – policy covert/ambiguous, funding explicit
Figure 1: The rise of doctorates (1998–2006)
16
Source: Garbers (1960), DNO (1982), DoE (1999), DHET
(2013)
17
Source: Garbers (1960), DNO (1982), DoE (1999), DHET
(2013)
Average shares of the doctoral graduates in the various fields of study, 1996 to 2011
Source: DoE (1999), SAPSE; DHET (2013), HEMIS data (2000-2013)
18
Progress of 2004 intakes of new doctoral students after 7 years, according to bands of performance
19
Progress of the 2004 cohort of new doctoral entrants by nationality, gender and race after 7 years
Source: DHET (2013). PhD cohort studies.
20
Comparison of international PhD completion rates
Country
Period of analysis
Norway
(2002/3 cohort)
8 years
Completion Rate
(FT & PT)
76%
(FT & PT)
United States
(1992/3/4)
10 years
Canada
(2001 cohort)
9 years
57%
International
67%
(FT & PT)
71%
(FT & PT)
United Kingdom
(1996/7 cohort)
7 years
61%
(FT)
71%
(PT)
South Africa
(2004 cohort)
34%
(FT & PT)
46%
7 years
International
52%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
21
Percentage of the academic staff with doctorates by institution, 2011
Source: DHET (2013), HEMIS data (2000-2013)
22
Comparison of PhD production in South Africa with a number of selected OECD countries, 2000 and 2011
2011 SET PhD
Average annual
graduates as % of growth rate in
Country
all 2011 PhD
total PhDs 2000
graduates
- 2011
Australia
58.4%
4.7%
Canada
62.8%
3.3%
Czech Republic
61.8%
9.6%
Finland
61.2%
-0.2%
Germany
72.5%
0.5%
Hungary
52.9%
5.1%
Ireland
64.1%
10.1%
Italy
63.8%
11.1%
Korea
59.7%
6.0%
Norway
63.9%
6.4%
Portugal
52.1%
3.5%
Slovak Republic
52.0%
12.8%
Switzerland
68.5%
2.2%
Turkey
55.7%
7.4%
United Kingdom
59.9%
5.1%
United States
55.4%
4.5%
South Africa
54.2%
4.5%
Population
2011
22 324 000
34 483 980
10 496 670
5 388 272
81 797 670
9 971 726
4 576 748
60 723 570
49 779 440
4 953 000
10 557 560
5 398 384
7 912 398
73 950 000
61 761 000
311 591 900
51 770 560
2011 SET PhD
graduates per
100,000 of 2011
population
15.9
10.3
14.5
21.1
24.2
6.5
20.3
11.8
14.0
16.7
11.4
16.1
30.1
3.5
19.5
13.0
1.6
2011 total PhD
graduates per
100,000 of 2011
population
27.2
16.5
23.5
34.4
33.4
12.4
31.6
18.6
23.4
26.2
21.9
31.0
44.0
6.3
32.5
23.4
3.0
Source: OECD (2013) Graduates by field of study, data extracted on 4 July 2013.
23
Where Are We at End of 2013?
1. Autonomy - a big issue for some universities, but Higher
Education SA divided
2. Differentiation – official policy but no clear implementation
steps
3. Knowledge production - (postgraduate, doctorate, research
output) very strong with Presidency and Dept Science and
Technology
4. Efficiency – DST, DHET and CHE using performance indicators
5. Equity – Equity Index (DHET)
Shift from Equity to Development, and the Return of Equity
(Transformation Oversight Committee, 2013)
SA continually paralysed by inability to prioritise
25
Dr Nico Cloete
[email protected]
www.chet.org.za