Performance Management: HEQSF Scorecard

David BleazardDirector: Institutional Planning

bleazardd@cput.ac.za

Presentation to the HEDA User GroupNovember 2013

Performance_Management_Nov2013_1

Objective

• To show how CPUT is adapting the Performance Management Scorecard to track the HEQSF programme development process

Background

• The alignment of qualifications to the new Higher Education Qualification Sub-Framework (HEQSF) is a huge challenge for UoTs– B.Techs being phased out– New qualification types include Higher Certificate, Diploma,

Degree, Professional Degree, Advanced Diploma

• CPUT estimates that it will have to develop about 200 new qualifications during the next five years

• The processes for development and approval of the qualifications are complex, both internally and externally

Stages and Steps

Category A qualifications: Minor amendments required to align to HEQSFApproximately 40 qualifications – mostly postgraduate qualifications

Category B qualifications: Less than 50% change to existing curriculumApproximately 70 qualifications – mostly National Diplomas

Category C qualifications: More than 50% change to existing curriculumApproximately 110 qualifications – more than half are B.Tech qualifications to be phased out and replaced by HEQSF aligned qualifications

Example of Stage & Steps

Applied Technology

• How to keep track of all the processes and their associated documentation?

• The idea arose of using the newly developed Performance Management Scorecard to track and report on progress

• The various stages (and steps within stages) of the HEQSF process have been incorporated within the model

• Custom-built reports have been developed by IDSC to report on progress to Faculties and Departments

Accessing the Module

Plans List

Plan Example

Updating the Plan

Attachments

Attachment Example

Reporting

• Reporting was a primary requirement in the conceptualisation of the HEQSF Scorecard

• Two levels of reporting are currently available– Detailed Report– Overview Report

Accessing the Reports

Detailed Report

Filter Capability

Filter Outcome

Drill-down Capability

Overview Report

Original Conception

Suggested Enhancements

• Alphabetic Order– Alphabetic ordering of Faculties and Departments can be

achieved, but is clumsy

• Entering Performance– When data is entered in the Performance Agreement

window, the cursor jumps to the top of the page; it should stay at the level of the amended item

• Deletion Warnings– Warnings should appear before Faculties, Departments or

Qualifications are deleted

• Removing Documents– It should be possible to remove a document uploaded in

error

Challenge

• The main challenge in using the HEQSF Scorecard arises from the complexity of the process

• A great deal of information for a wide variety of qualifications needs to be captured and updated

• Only one person, the Head of Academic Planning, is managing the process and implementing the tracking

Advantages

• Without something like the Scorecard, the HEQSF alignment process will become unmanageable

• The Scorecard provides reports that can be shared with the Faculties and Departments

• A central view of the process and its progress is available