2013 registrations and enrolments in Further Education & Training Colleges and Universities
Meeting Summary
The Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) gave two presentations on the 2013 registrations and enrolments into the Further Education and Training Colleges (FET) and the universities, both of whom absorbed post-grade 12 learners. Both presentations indicated that funding remained the major challenge in higher education, and that although there had been a substantial increase in National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) funding, this should ideally triple to cater for all students. Affordable student accommodation remained another problem, particularly at the FET colleges.
The FETs tended to include a registration fee was included in the course fee, which had to be paid by all students, although universities tended not to call for a separate registration fee. Placement tests were now being run by a number of FET colleges, and the campuses were monitored by trained provincial teams and issued with standardised questionnaires. Pre-enrolments eased the procedures, but there were still differences between the capacity of colleges. The presentation highlighted some of the bursary schemes available, the reasons given for late enrolments and how the problems were being addressed. In the future, it was hoped to standardise the registration procedure and try to achieve standardised IT systems not only to ensure compliance, but to make onward referrals to second and third choice colleges most effective. There was, despite the DHET’s efforts, still a perception that FET colleges offered an inferior qualification.
The universities were about to enter another planning cycle for registrations in 2014, and therefore intending to address the identified problems in the last cycle during meetings later in the year. There were attempts to match enrolments with targets for skills. The DHET had piloted a Central Applications Clearing House (CACH) system, which aimed to help students with referrals should they not gain admission to their institution of first choice, as well as offer career guidance, something that was still inadequate at school levels. Various campaigns encouraging early registration, and trying to address the misunderstandings in the past, were being run. Competency and placement tests were run at the universities. Standardised questionnaires were administered for placements. However, the system of bursaries varied from campus to campus, only some offered academic support, and some offered online registrations, but would offer walk in registration only, based on merit. Key problems from the 2013 enrolments included insufficient funding, insufficient space for certain professional qualifications, shortage of affordable accommodation, misunderstandings about the conditional acceptance process, and the need for more guidance on career and bursary options.
Members unanimously expressed concerns about funding issues, noting that additional problems included lack of communication with students, payment cycles not matching with financial year cycles, students preventing from registrations, and insufficient funding for second and third year studies. They agreed that DHET needed to do more to address misperceptions about FET training, and suggested that perhaps government departments should consciously hire FET graduates. Several questions were asked about Student Representative Councils and their control, the purpose and findings from the placement tests, whether they were properly interpreted, and the need for consistency across institutions. They thought that more current data – even if it was not yet audited – would be useful, asked about the success rates of students who had been redirected, what the DHET had done to ensure that colleges were submitting results and certificates on time, funding for disabled learners, and the need for admissions officers to improve their knowledge of the rules and attitude to students. Members asked for a list of universities to whom allocations had been made for accommodation.
Meeting report
2013 registrations into Further Education and Training Colleges: Department of Higher Education and Training briefing
Dr Maboreng Maharaswa, Deputy Director General: Vocational and Continuing Education and Training (VCET), Department of Higher Education and Training, gave the presentation on the 2013 enrolments into the Further Education and Training colleges (FETs). It was noted that a registration fee was included in the course fee, and there were no exclusions from paying this, even for financially-strapped students. Students who were not accepted at their college of first choice were redirected to other suitable institutions. The enrolment process for 2013 required that students undergo placement for success testing Competency and Placement tests (CAP) at PACE Career Centres for example. These placement tests enabled colleges to handle and redirect students more efficiently. New students would also receive counselling for their career choices as academic support would be integrated into the enrolment process. With regard to the monitoring of enrolment, trained provincial teams would be deployed to visit all campuses to identify issues and to correct them; campuses would be visited with a standardised questionnaire for the students.
The preliminary findings suggested that pre-enrolment (from September 2012 onwards) was improving per campus, and that the examination results had also improved significantly, that testing for placement was widely utilised across all colleges and that colleges with good Information Technology (IT) systems enrolled students faster than those without. Other findings were that marketing and advertising were found to be active in most campuses and few campuses started on set dates. Payment systems in some campuses, especially in rural areas were outdated while others had on-site payment options, bursary systems also varied from campus to campus, leading to variations in financial support mechanisms.
Dr Maharaswa then outlined and compared the indicative budget of 2012 to that of 2013, stating that the R5.4 billion had been allocated to the total programme, which was a 5.3% increase. R1.98 billion had been set aside for the bursary allocation and this represented a 7.5% increase. Gauteng received the largest allocation, which totalled 23% while the Northern Cape received the lowest allocation of about 2%.
Some of the key challenges outlined in the presentation were that there was limited capacity for the DHET to verify enrolments such as those of Human Resources and IT systems, which contributed to inappropriate student placements. There were also inadequate academic support programmes for students and a high rate of non-adherence to the college academic calendar. Also colleges were still experiencing late enrolments due to, among other things, universities closing dates in late January 2013. Lastly, some colleges experienced significant increases in enrolment, which exceeded the planned budget allocations. Another problem outlined in the presentation was the lack of suitable accommodation for students at the FET colleges. The role and legitimacy of the Student Representative Council (SRC) was also sometimes in question
Dr Maharaswa concluded by outlining the Department’s plans for 2013, stating that a standardised enrolment process for all colleges is under development, that there would be closer monitoring and support for the Student Support Services Framework, that the 2013 student surveys would be analysed and their recommendations implemented, and lastly that implementation, monitoring and support of IT support for colleges would be improved to improve registrations systems. It was also noted that the future strategy was to standardise enrolment procedures and have a closer monitoring support at the FET colleges as well as a more efficient and standardised IT system introduced at each college. This would ensure compliance. Many of the questions and comments around the whole process illustrated that funding was the major issue, both because amounts were deemed insufficient, and because of poor administration of the monies. There was still a prevalent perception that a college qualification was inferior to a university education, and would lessen the applicant’s future job prospects.
Dr Diane Parker, Deputy Director General: Universities, Department of Higher Education and Training, then explained the processes for university enrolments and registrations in 2013. Currently the planning cycle was three years for registrations and enrolments and the current three-year cycle ended in February 2013, with the next cycle beginning in 2014.
She presented a table of First Time Entering Students (FTEN) enrolments, as well as the ministerial negotiated targets for skills that were most in need in the country.
The Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET or the Department) hoped that the Central Applications System recently introduced would facilitate enrolments considerably. The first phase of the Central Applications Clearing House (CACH) initiative was implemented in January 2013. The system aimed to assist late applicants or applicants rejected by their first choice of institution with financial and application procedures, as well as offering career information and guidance via an extensive toll free call centre. Details of the call centre, as well as its efficacy, were outlined (see slides 2 to 5 of attached presentation).
Most of the enquiries had related to financial aid, application procedures and career opportunities. The CACH system should be fully operational by 2015, by when there should be a holistic integrated system to deal with all applications, funding, accommodation and displacements Various campaigns that built on principles of CACH – such as “Apply now” were being considered. Universities’ procedures would in future also be monitored via workshops, and there would be constant contact between DHET, call centres and visits so that there would be a well coordinated implementation.
In regard to financing, Dr Parker noted that financially needy students were granted 30% of their total financial needs immediately. All students would undergo a success testing via the Competency and Placement test (CAP). The enrolment process for universities did not exclude financially needy students or demand a separate additional registration fee. Visits were scheduled for all campuses and standardised questionnaires were administered so that problems could be identified, analysed and corrected.
Some of the preliminary findings on universities indicated that students were pre-enrolling, that testing for placement was widely administered, that institutions with good IT systems had facilitated efficient enrolment,
and that records were kept of students who had not been assisted or redirected to alternate campuses.
DHET had found that in some cases, lecturers were used to perform enrolment procedures rather than trained support staff, that bursary systems varied from campus to campus, and payment offices on some campuses were on site, which created difficulties for rural students. Only a few campuses provided academic support to students based on the outcomes of their placement tests. Statistical analysis had been undertaken to identify which institutions needed closer monitoring. Online registration had been introduced at various institutions. Walk in registration could be accepted, based on individual merit. Late registrations may be extended to enable financial problems to be sorted out.
Dr Parker presented tables of head count enrolment and budget and bursary allocations.
She then set out some of the key issues identified in relation to the 2013 enrolments. These included:
- Insufficient space had been allocated for qualifying applicants for professional qualifications, especially in fields of medicine, veterinary science and engineering. These applicants were advised to consider associated fields
- There was still insufficient funding for needy students
- There was a shortage of affordable accommodation
- There were still misunderstandings amongst students on the fact that conditional or provisional acceptance was not the same as final acceptance
- There was a need for extensive career guidance at school and post-school levels, as well as guidance on bursaries and scholarship was required.
One of the key shortcomings of the National Students Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) was that the funding fell far short of demand (see attached presentation, page 8 for comparisons). Although the budget had increased it was still not sufficient, and ideally would have to be tripled to meet demand. Students ended up with heavy debt burdens, because awards of bursaries had been capped. An additional R3.5 million was found by the Department to assist returning students, who had been funded by NSFAS in the previous year, to continue their studies. The problem of shortfall of funding still existed for first time registering students. Universities were encouraged to indicate their anticipated shortfall for the academic year so that the problem could be dealt with.
The DHET planned to hold workshops, probably in November, with University Registrars, Deans and NSFAS to reflect upon and improve registrations and admissions for 2014. Campaigns would be administered to target grades 9 to 12 learners, in partnership with Department of Basic Education, South African Qualifications Authority and NSFAS, to ensure appropriate career choices.
Discussion
Ms A Lotriet (DA) asked whether posting of the results of exams had improved. Often, students who had to register did not yet have their results, or they might also be excluded from registration because their bursaries were not paid. She asked how DHET intended to rectify this problem.
Mr L Bosman (DA) noted some of the problems associated with funding. He noted that currently, 30% of the bursary was paid in May because the financial year did not correspond to the academic year. A student was often unable to register because the amount was not paid. He maintained that more students were attending FET (Further Education and Training ) colleges, yet there was little additional student accommodation available, and this was particularly a problem for those from the rural areas.
Mr S Makhubele (ANC) agreed that when funds were not transferred, a common problem, this penalised the student. He thought that attendance at FET colleges still needed to be further encouraged, and asked what active steps were being taken by DHET to address the misperceptions in regard to FET qualifications and job prospects for these graduates. He also noted the problem of accommodation for students, and wanted to know what solutions were planned. He asked whether student bodies were recognised at colleges and how they should be controlled. He questioned the funding procedures relating to students who had been referred from other colleges.
Ms N Gina (ANC) advised that lecturers at the colleges were complaining about the poor quality of matric results and asked how this should be dealt with. She asked how many colleges used placement tests and whether they were advantageous to the students. She also asked whether part timers could benefit from a funding scheme.
Mr K Dikobo (AZAPO) raised questions about placement tests, and wondered if these were linked to the admissions policy, and whether there were enough trained persons to interpret and assess those tests correctly. He suggested that the DHET should encourage a standardised IT system for the colleges, as well as a common bursary system.
Mr S Mayathula (ANC) asked whether students paid for registration, and how they were redirected to other colleges
Ms D Chilli (ANC) suggested that students should be redirected to colleges within close proximity of their first choice. She also asked which of the colleges was able to provide academic support for the students.
Mr G Radebe (ANC) asked whether the focus was not more on university registration. He questioned whether the SRCs were aware of their responsibilities.
The Chairperson mentioned that funds were often transferred and managed by a private company, because the academic and financial years did not run concurrently, but felt this was not a “benevolent” practice. He also raised questions around the practice of students not being able to receive their certificates, and asked whether they would need to undergo more examinations. He too stressed that more suitable accommodation at colleges would benefit students.
Mr Gwebinkundla Qonde, Director General, Department of Higher Education and Training, firstly addressed the questions around FET colleges. He said that DHET was making extensive efforts to promote FET colleges. 2013 was billed as the” year of the artisan”. A collaborative effort of the community and government was needed to remove the stigma attached to vocational education. Globally, those countries which were doing well all had a strong vocational ability. He said that questions would be raised regarding the throughput rate, and drawing comparisons between FET colleges and private colleges. It was also necessary which of the interventions would be most effective, and whether some of the problems needed to be addressed by better lecturer development, management interventions or alterations to the curriculums. He agreed that funding problems did arise when the financial and academic years did not coincide. However, he explained that 7% of funding was transferred immediately on registration, and 23% became due in May.
Mr Qonde told the Committee that project managers who would complete building projects had been appointed to address the shortage of infrastructure and space on 13 campuses, as provinces were reluctant to release monies to complete a backlog from previous periods. He also mentioned that transport funding was available to students who did not live in the area. However, it had been noticed that students tried to claim the stipend even when they were not attending college.
In regard to employment, Mr Qonde said that there were still about 10 000 unemployed graduates from 2010, but the DHET was negotiating with the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) to try to arrange placements.
Dr Maharaswa firstly addressed the question of exam results, noting that the position had improved, although there were still some collected who had not handed in outstanding marks.
Dr Maharaswa answered questions on the Student Representative Councils (SRCs) by affirming that these were in place at the colleges, and there would be a policy conference to lay down policies, to reinforce the role of leadership and to ensure that SRCs were operating effectively and legally.
Dr Maharaswa noted that DHET had a list of colleges that used the placement tests, but conceded that there had been some problems as to how the results of those tests were interpreted and noted that the tests would be refined. Problems relating to the different IT systems that were employed at the colleges were also identified, including the fact that many records were unable to be found. A pilot would be put in place to determine what would be the most effective standardised system.
Dr Maharaswa noted that there were also various campaigns to encourage students to register earlier. Statistics for full time and part time students would be supplied at a later date. Students were automatically eligible for bursaries, should they pass three out of the four subjects. Lecturers were obliged to work 40 hours per week, engage in 25 contact hours with students per week and not work more than 11 hours overtime.
The Chairperson said it was important that the SRCs should be elected in time, and that ground rules should be established for their constitution and responsibilities.
Mr B Bhanga (COPE) asked what the success rate of CATCH was in the better-advantaged universities, and also wanted to know if the universities were cooperating.
Mr Bhanga thought that government departments must give preference to employing graduates from FET institutions, to help change the perception that a university graduate was more employable.
The Chairperson felt that the report on the universities did not have sufficient current data. He felt that historical data was less useful, even if it was audited.
Mr C Moni (ANC) asked what the success rate was for those students who had been redirected.
Ms N Gina (ANC) emphasised that there were many deserving students who were still denied the opportunity to go on to higher education, because of funding constraints. She suggested that the initial 7% of funding advanced was too small, and also complained that in many cases it was allocated too late for students to register. She thought no needy student should be turned away for lack of funding.
Ms Gina noted the comment that some of the colleges were still submitting certifications late, thus affecting the registration process, and thought this was indicative of the DHET failing to do its job properly.
Ms Gina asked what financial provision was available for disabled learners. Finally, she made the point that many problems of funding arose from poor communication.
Mr Dikobo stressed that gifted students should be financially helped, particularly since many needy students dropped out as a result of financial concerns. Many were not informed in time that they had been awarded bursaries.
Mr Radebe questioned why funds for students had been cut when the government had increased the budget, and asked how students were expected to manage. He urged that the status and appointment of SRCs must be attended to urgently. He asked the DHET what it was doing about the strike at the Walter Sisulu university campus.
Ms Lotriet acknowledged that, as seen by so many questions on the issue, funding was a major problem She questioned the administration of NSFAS funding, and wondered if the administration of the student fund was managed by staff or was outsourced. Some students were very “badly treated” in relation to funding – such as a case at the University of Johannesburg – and she suggested that more precise guidelines should be given to officers as to who was a “deserving” student.
Mr Makhubele thought that walk in registrations arose as a result of issues not being clarified in advance, or through misinformation, and pointed out that many officials dealing with registrations were not knowledgeable because they did not attend meetings. He commented that the bursary payment in May was too late. He asked whether Afrikaans was considered as a disadvantaged language. He asked whether fewer students had been admitted because they were unable to pay.
Mr Mayathala asked why the funding fell short in relation to returning students. He asked what the target figures were for 2011-2013
The Chairperson agreed with comments from other Members that all qualifying needy students should have access to higher education, but regretted that some universities did not have that ”vision”. He said that they should also be better accommodated. He agreed that lack of funding may explain the high drop out rate.
Mr Qonde responded that CACH was not a “stand alone” system. Many students had not perhaps understood the information that was given, so DHET was now undertaking a campaign aiming to give them better guidance. The idea was that CACH should help to avoid walk in registrations. He acknowledged that registration data had not been consolidated as yet for this year, because students were still registering.
Mr Qonde said that FET colleges were being located in industrial areas as it facilitated their interaction with the local industries. Some firms, such as Mr Price, had indicated that they would be interested in absorbing graduates from FET colleges.
In relation to questions about funding, he explained that government had committed huge resources so that academically able but needy students may be admitted. FET colleges received R310 billion in 2010 and an additional R1.7 billion (later increased to R1.8 billion) in 2013. However, he conceded that about triple that amount was needed to meet all the shortfalls. He agreed that the funds from NSFAS needed to be better managed and measures were being put in place to do this.
Mr Qonde acknowledged that the DHET was aware of the strike at Walter Sisulu University. He took note of the comments about the SRC and reiterated that a conference would be held shortly.
Dr Parker added, in relation to financing, that the DHET shared Members’ views that every needy student had to be supported. She agreed that many first year students were unable to register because of lack of financial aid. She added that the strike on 30 January involving 1 700 students, at Walter Sisulu was linked to financial aid problems. Late payment of bursaries related to difficulties from NSFAS, and a workshop dealing with better organisation and the implications of the procedure of “topslicing” would be organised. In future the grants that compensated universities in the past were to be phased out as there were too many associated administration problems, including auditing. Certain funds which had not been spent would be rolled over. Problems of funding at Fort Hare were apparent, and here the funds would be redistributed.
Dr Parker noted that NSFAS did provide some funding for disabled persons, but it was acknowledged that this was not sufficient and financial aid would in future be offered for physical assistive devices and interpreters.
Dr Parker noted the comment on those people who were unaware of what was going on because they had not attended meetings and assured Members that any ministerial appointees who did not attend meetings would be recalled.
Dr Parker said that problems pertaining to scarce skills and languages would be addressed . The study on inflation would be completed. In relation to accommodation, she added to earlier remarks by noting that R1.7 billion had been allocated to universities for student accommodation, with 80% of this going to historically disadvantaged institutions .Special advantageous loan rates have been negotiated through a banking institution for students.
The Chairperson requested that a list of universities needing additional infrastructure should be provided so that the manner of spending of the R1.7 billion could be followed up by the Committee.
The meeting was adjourned.
Documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.