diversity, quality and community involvement: key curriculum challenges in south african higher...
Post on 18-Dec-2015
213 views
TRANSCRIPT
Diversity, quality andcommunity involvement:
key curriculum challenges in South African higher education
Ian ScottUniversity of Cape Town
and LearnHigher, Liverpool Hope UniversityMay 2007
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?
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
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)
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
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’?
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
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)
Student performance after 5 years: Overall
Graduated 30%
Still registered 14%
Left without graduating 56%
Estimated completion rate 44%?
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?
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
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
Equity of outcomesGraduation after 5 years in general
academic first B-degrees, excl UNISA
CESM Black White
04: Business/Management 33% 72%
15: Life and Phys Sciences 31% 63%
22: Social Sciences 34% 68%
12: Languages 32% 68%
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Graduated in regulation time:General academic first B-degrees, excl dist ed
CESM Black White
04: Business/Management 11% 43%
15: Life and Phys Sciences 11% 35%
22: Social Sciences 14% 43%
12: Languages 13% 52%
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
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’
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?
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
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’
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?
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
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
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
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
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?
‘What goes on in actual teaching, learning and researching environments
is at the heart of the goal of transformation’
Njabulo Ndebele 2006
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
• SHAWCOhttp://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