Theme

1. Diversity, quality andcommunity involvement:key curriculum challenges in South African higher educationIan ScottUniversity of Cape Town and LearnHigher, Liverpool Hope UniversityMay 2007

5. Theme • HE curriculum implications of meeting developmental needs in the South African context • Sub-theme: To what extent are these issues present in other contexts?

6. Outline • Context: Some key conditions affecting higher education in South Africa • To what extent is higher education meeting key developmental needs? • Implications for systemic change • with particular reference to curriculum

7. What does South Africa (most) need from higher education? • ‘Development’ • economic growth and globalisation • ‘integrated knowledge solutions to deal with complex socioeconomic problems’ (CHE 2004) • universities ‘key agents for the continual improvement of the conditions in which people live’ (Ndebele 2007)

8. What does South Africa (most) need from higher education? • Equity and inclusiveness • distributing the benefits of higher education • contributing to ‘social responsiveness’ in research and curriculum • in the interests of social justice and stability

9. What does South Africa (most) need from higher education? • Special need for ‘good’ graduates: quantity, quality, mix, orientation • Skills shortages as major obstacle • Education key to ‘economic development and … social cohesion’ (Minister of Ed 2005) • The core of higher education’s ‘core business’?

10. The first post-transition decade • Considerable achievements • extensive policy development • a single higher education system • substantial growth: over 50% since 1991 • diversity in the student intake • Time for appraisal of progress and priorities

11. How well is the sector doing? • Performance patterns derived from DoE’s cohort study of the 2000 and 2001 intakes of first-time entering students • Acknowledgements: • Council on Higher Education: ‘Improving Teaching and Learning for Success’ • Department of Education • Jane Hendry and Nan Yeld (UCT)

12. Student performance after 5 years: Overall

13. Do we need to be concerned? • To what extent is the sector doing what it can to meet the country needs? • Are the performance patterns ‘normal’, or perhaps unavoidable?

14. Participation rates* and their significance • Overall: 16% • White: 61% • Indian: 50% • Black: 12% • Coloured: 12% * Approximate gross rates derived from HEMIS 2004:all participants as % of 20-24 age-group

15. Implications of the participation rates • The view that a large proportion of current students ‘do not belong’ in higher education is not tenable • Essential backdrop for assessing equity and social responsiveness

16. Equity of outcomesGraduation after 5 years in general academic first B-degrees, excl UNISA

17. Observations • Among the CESMs and qualification types analysed in the contact universities: • in all cases the number of black graduates is less than the number of white graduates • the gains in access are reversed

18. Implications of the patterns • Output not matching national needs in respect of ‘economic growth … and social cohesion’ (Pandor 2005) • Current system not meeting the needs of the majority • sector successfully accommodating only about 5% of the Black age-group • Pressing need to widen successful participation • high stakes for development

19. Improving the outcomes of the system to meet societal needs • Large proportion of (needed) students not well served by the current system • Improving outcomes depends on systemic change

20. Where does responsibility lie? • Factors beyond the higher education sector’s control • ‘money and poor schooling’ (M&G 2006) • Factors within the higher education sector’s control • Institutional climate and orientation • The educational process in higher education is in itself a major variable affecting who benefits from higher education

21. Where does responsibility lie? • Argument that the higher education sector needs to take its share of responsibility for systemic change • on pragmatic and principled grounds • based on vision of different outcomes

22. Centrality of curriculum • Curriculum structure as the primary framework for teaching and learning • traditional curricula suiting only a minority of the student intake • Curriculum a key terrain of tension between equity, development and social responsiveness

23. Key curriculum challenges • Accommodating diversity • in the SA context, catering successfully for student diversity has become an essential condition for development as well as social inclusion • Quality and standards • allowing for responsible admission on the basis of ‘potential’ • Social responsiveness • preparation for the diversity of contemporary societies, and particularly for the developing world

24. Accommodating diversity • Understanding diversity • cultural diversity widely seen as enriching learning process and outcomes • but diversity in educational background is rooted in inequalities • Key educational challenge for the universities is to cater effectively for the different forms of diversity in the student body

25. Implications for curriculum structure • Traditional, inherited curriculum framework not modified despite major changes in the student intake • inadequacy of unitary curriculum structures for diverse intake

26. Graduated in regulation time:General academic first B-degrees, excl dist ed

27. Accommodating diversity in educational background • Nature of educational disadvantage in SA • disparity and difference in educational capital • home language and the medium of learning • school-teacher capacity and over-reliance on rote • prospects for the improvement of school outcomes

28. The need for curriculum space and flexibility • For HE-orientated developmental or ‘foundational’ learning for all who need it • building on the realities of school outcomes • ‘unjamming’ the curriculum • for academic literacies and skills: e.g. language, information and quantitative literacy • for experiential and community-based learning • not ‘remedial’

29. Towards the desired outcomes: Implications for structures • Viability of alternatives to traditional approaches? • educational development experience in SA • The validity of sub-degree qualifications in the South African context? • Institutional differentiation as the solution?

30. Implications for structures • Need for diversity in mainstream provision • in all institutions • Curriculum flexibility and reform as a key to enabling admission on the basis of ‘potential’ • pointing the way to balancing inclusiveness and quality

31. Social responsiveness • Central concept in SA higher education policy • cuts across research and teaching • reaction to perceived ‘first-world’ orientation • UCT key phrases: • ‘engagement’ • ‘putting knowledge to work in addressing pressing economic and social issues’

32. Aims of social responsiveness irt ‘teaching’ • Preparation for living and working in diverse social environments • balancing local/continental and international relevance • Promoting responsible, active citizenship • Improving quality of life in local communities • Role in promoting inclusiveness?

33. Voluntary service • e.g. UCT’s Students’ Health and Welfare Centres Organisation: SHAWCO

36. Social responsiveness in teaching: issues and obstacles • A fundamental curriculum issue • tensions in values and orientation for students as well as staff • Where does community-based or service learning work? • in areas with inherent community relevance, e.g. health, housing, education • through individual or departmental commitment, e.g. law, politics, environment

37. Social responsiveness in teaching: issues and obstacles • Ethical issues • Who benefits? • Practical and attitudinal obstacles • curriculum space • large classes • assessment and ‘standards’ • safety • lack of recognition of effort and expertise

38. Social responsiveness in teaching • Complementarity in policy and mission statements • In practice, unresolved tension between research, teaching and social responsiveness • Key choices and commitments still to be made

39. Significance of ‘educational expertise’ • Traditional teaching approaches not adequate in SA context • Importance of educational ‘expertise’ (Kreber) • Understanding the core challenge and recognising all the manifestations of scholarship

40. In conclusion • Educational development as a key instrument for meeting priority needs • Consequences of business-as-usual? • In whose interests is the status quo? • ‘Disadvantage’ as a majority phenomenon • Help or hindrance? • Lessons from comparative studies?

41. ‘What goes on in actual teaching, learning and researching environments is at the heart of the goal of transformation’ Njabulo Ndebele 2006

42. Some references • SA Higher Education White Paper, 1997 http://www.education.gov.za/index.aspx>documents>legislation • UCT Social Responsiveness Report 2006 http://www.ipd.uct.ac.za/>social responsibility • SHAWCO http://www.shawco.org • Tensions between research, teaching and social responsiveness in SA http://portal-live.solent.ac.uk/university/rtconference/2007/resources/ian_scott.pdf