Diane Grayson Overview of the South African Quality Enhancement Project

Diane Grayson

Overview of the South African Quality Enhancement Project

SA population (2011) 51.8 million

No. 15-19 year olds (2011) 5.0 million

No. 20-24 year-olds (2011) 5.4 million

No. HE students (2013) 983 698

20-24 year old participation rate 20%

Black African 16%

White 55%

Key statistics

Throughput rates for 3-year degree 2008 student cohort in public HEIs (excluding UNISA)

(VitalStats Public Higher Education 2015, CHE)

non-ac-cumula-

tive 2010

non-ac-cumula-

tive 2011

non-ac-cumula-

tive 2012

non-ac-cumula-

tive 2013*

accu-mula-tive

2010

accu-mula-tive

2011

accu-mula-tive

2012

accu-mula-tive

2013*

Graduated

0.30462075512

1413

0.17530697859

5707

0.0769513427442815

0.0307131702238418

0.30462075512

1413

0.47992773371

712

0.55687907646

1402

0.58759224668

5244

Dropped out

0.0469118412591481

0.0257525186024436

0.0119423094589215

0.02599748905

2883

0.34871543620

0508

0.37446795480

2952

0.38641026426

1873

0.41240775331

4756

-5%5%

15%25%35%45%55%

Throughput rates by race for 3-year degree 2008 student cohort in public HEIs (excluding UNISA)

African Gradu-

ated

African Dropped

out

Coloured Gradu-

ated

Coloured Dropped

out

Indian Gradu-

ated

Indian Dropped

out

White Gradu-

ated

White Dropped

out

2010 0.23030077056922

7

0.36030325627641

1

0.24903225806451

6

0.42580645161290

3

0.27121212121212

1

0.34090909090909

1

0.42646551724137

9

0.31896551724137

9

2011 0.41312453392990

3

0.39709172259507

8

0.40688172043010

8

0.45247311827957

0.48409090909090

9

0.35340909090909

1

0.58629310344827

6

0.33224137931034

5

2012 0.50776783494904

3

0.41461595824011

9

0.48516129032258

1

0.45935483870967

7

0.57878787878787

9

0.36174242424242

4

0.63439655172413

8

0.33827586206896

6

2013* 0.54890628883917

5

0.45109371116082

5

0.51182795698924

7

0.48817204301075

3

0.61363636363636

4

0.38636363636363

6

0.65051724137931

0.34948275862069

5%15%25%35%45%55%65%

(*Potential graduates may still be in the system)

Constituted between late 1880s and 1980s

36 institutions comprising:

• English-medium (“liberal”) universities

• Afrikaans-medium universities

• Dual-medium universities

• Universities for specific racial and ethnic groups

• Technikons

• Distance education institutions

SA Higher Education Institutions in1994

• Technikons became universities of technology

• Government-mandated mergers and absorptions took place in 2004, resulting in 23 institutions of three types:

- Universities (traditional)

- Comprehensives (traditional + technology)

- Universities of technology

• Two new HEIs were opened in 2014

• One merged university was unbundled and part of it formed the core of a new university in 2015

Changes to the HE landscape since 1994

26 PUBLIC HEIs

6 Universities of technology

8 Comprehensive universities

12 Universities

ABOUT 120 PRIVATE HEIS

Very diverse – small single focus to large, multi-focus; certificate to PhD

Higher education institutions in 2015

• Accreditation of HEI programmes

• National reviews of key programmes (e.g. MBA, BEd)

• Institutional Audits

- Once through all public universities (3 still open)

- Need to focus on improving teaching and learning identified

First Quality Assurance Cycle 2004-2011

• Advisory group

• Formal QA structures

• Focus groups

• DVCs meetings

• QA Forums

• Three regional symposia with Vincent Tinto (expert on student success)

• Visit to QAA Scotland and international enhancement conference

THE QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT

2012 to 2013: Exploration of alternatives to institutional audits to focus on improving T&L

The enhancement of student learning with a view to producing an increased number of graduates with attributes that are personally, professionally and socially valuable.

1. enhanced student learning, leading to an

2. increased number of graduates that have

3. improved graduate attributes

STUDENT SUCCESS

Focus of the Quality Enhancement Project

• Institutions engaged simultaneously

• Four focus areas identified to start with for first two years

• Both individual institutions and collaborative groups of institutions are involved

• Inductive and iterative (two 2-year phases)

• DVCs Academic and T&L are co-leaders with the CHE

Approach

Both institutionally-based and nationally coordinated activities

Institutional enhancement

HE system enhancement

Focus areas for Phase 1 (2014-2105)

1. Enhancing academics as teachers

Including professional development, reward and recognition, workload, conditions of service and performance appraisal.

2. Enhancing student support and development

Including career and curriculum advising, life and academic skills development, counselling, student performance monitoring and referral.

3. Enhancing the learning environment

Including teaching and learning spaces, ICT infrastructure and access, technology-enabled tools and resources, library facilities.

4. Enhancing course and programme enrolment management

Including admissions, selection, placement, readmission refusal, pass rates in gateway courses, throughput rates, management information systems.

Teaching

Assessment

Curriculum developme

nt

FA 1: Enhancing academics as teachers Creating an

enabling institutional environment

Teaching

Assessment

Curriculum developme

nt

FA 2: Enhancing student support and development

Developing institutional mechanisms for student support

Su

pp

or

t

Counselling

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Teaching

Assessment

Curriculum developme

nt

FA3: Enhancing the learning environment

Providinginstitutional resources

Counselling

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Su

pp

or

t

Learning environment

FA4: Enhancing course and programme enrolment management

Admit

Mainstrea

m

Extended

Gat

eway

Continue

Continue

Excluded DropoutDelayed

Institutional submissions

Analysis

Feedback

Collaboration

Analysis

Symposia, working groups

Projects of other bodies

Institutional capacity

development

Research projects

Select focus areas

Individual Institutional feedback

Feedback

Institutional reports

Processper phase

2014FebMarMaySeptOctNov

2015MarAprMayJuneAugSeptNovDec

2016

QEP Launch, DVCs meetingQA forumsInstitutional updatesQEP baseline institutional submissions dueQEP representatives meetingQEP DVC Forum constituted

QEP institutional workshops (4 people per institution)QEP DVC ForumContent analysis of baseline submissions publishedWorkshops on assessing and rewarding university teachingQEP DVC ForumScotland tripPeer reviewer trainingPhase 1 final institutional submissions due

Individual institutional feedback; begin Phase 2

Successes so far• The whole HE sector is engaged• HEIs are talking to each other– good ideas are being

shared, common challenges are being identified• DVCs are beginning to work together nationally• Focus areas are getting embedded in institutional plans

Challenges• Need to develop a culture of evidence-based decision-

making• Institutions reluctant to share what is not working• Variation among institutions in understanding the need to

shift from compliance to reflective mode

• Benchmarks and codes of good practice for quality undergraduate provision

• Policy recommendations

• Tools and resources for improving student success

• Research

• Communities of practice

Raise the bar for what can be expected of institutions in promoting student success in future

Expected outcomes of the QEP

1. Enhancement of the quality of undergraduate provision.

2. Enhancement of the quality of graduates.

3. A higher education system that is improving continuously as members of the higher education community collaborate to share good practice and solve shared problems.

Broad desired outcomes