Sipho Seepe
no blows barred
Education has tended, throughout history, to serve the interests and objectives of political, cultural and economic systems.
In South Africa education was once an instrument that divided people racially and ethnically. This Verwoerdian prescription became the bedrock that was to direct educational policies for 40 years of apartheid rule.
The unequal provision of educational resources was reinforced by a curriculum that promoted white supremacy. And theoretical and philosophical justifications were marshalled to convince the indigenous people of their third-class citizenship.
Consistent with this ideology, black universities were to function more as detention centres for black intellectuals than as centres that would nourish intellectual thought. This point was eloquently articulated by a noted former University of Cape Town scholar, Mahmood Mamdani.
“Both the white and black institutions were products of apartheid, though in different ways. The difference was not only in the institutional culture … The difference was also in their intellectual horizons. The irony is that the white intelligentsia became a more willing prisoner of apartheid thought than its black counterpart.”
It was this ideological thrust and its attendant conditions that formed the basis for resistance. Black institutions served as incubators for the struggle against apartheid colonialism.
It is unfortunate, therefore, that despite occupying a crucial place in the struggles for ideological hegemony, higher education has lagged behind in transforming itself. A thorough transformation must address this ideological onslaught against black people. But tertiary institutions in South Africa continue to bear the indelible imprint of apartheid South Africa.
Because of the critical role that higher education must play in the transformation of the country, there were high hopes that Minister of Education Kader Asmal’s National Plan for Higher Education, announced this week, would make a decisive break with the past. But it is difficult to see how the minister’s national plan will lead to the inauguration of institutions of which all South Africans will feel part. For now, they will remain historically English, Afrikaner and black.
Asmal has also failed to confront directly the systemic disadvantage faced by black institutions and black students. Instead, systemic problems are simply reduced to lack of efficiency, cost-effectiveness, accountability and coherence.
The language of the plan evokes a sense of urgency and boldness “a landmark in the history of higher education … the reform cannot be further delayed … ” and so on. Disrobed of all this hyperbole, the plan in fact represents a major retreat.
While alluding to regional and institutional collaboration, the plan does not indicate how this will be achieved. The Council on Higher Education was more bold and specific in its recommendations for mergers. But these sought to merge institutions on the basis of the existing racialised structure in which white universities were given the status of excellence, with black institutions being reduced to either teaching institutions and/or appendages of historically white institutions. This proposal had the effect of entrenching the racial stereotype that white is good and West is best. These recommendations were roundly condemned within the higher education sector.
To minimise the political fallout Asmal has sought to employ a more reasonable and cautious approach. He left the task of creating the new institutional landscape and institutional collaboration to the national working group to be “established to investigate the feasibility of consolidating higher education through reducing the number of institutions but not the number of delivery sites on a regional basis”. This cushions him from controversial decisions.
There is definitely nothing dramatic or bold in those cases where the minister chose to be specific. The merger between the University of South Africa and Technikon South Africa, and the incorporation of the distance education centre of Vista University, follows the already existing partnership among these institutions. The same could be said of Natal Technikon and ML Sultan Technikon. In addition, the unbundling of Vista University is consistent with the idea of creating regional institutions that will serve regional economic needs.
The real test in reconfiguring South African higher education is the extent to which the systemic disadvantage faced by black institutions and black students are addressed.
The minister and the national working group are faced with the task of coming up with a formula to tackle the following:
l Economic disadvantage and access: Historically disadvantaged institutions (HDIs) continue to serve the poorest of our society. How will mergers between these institutions and advantaged ones affect students’ ability to pay their fees? Will these mergers not undermine massive access to higher education?
l Academic disadvantage and access: HDIs take up a majority of students who normally will not qualify for acceptance at the historically white universities. Will the historically white institutions be willing to carry the burden of the academically weak students?
l Programme and course offerings: The HDIs not only attracted poorly qualified academics, they were also placed on the periphery and rendered irrelevant to the economy because they were unable to offer programmes in mathematics, science and technology.
l Geographic disadvantage: There is also the issue of location. Since most HDIs are located away from the centres of business, they have been unable to form links and partnerships with business and industries.
A failure of the national plan to address these systemic disadvantages will result in a failure to draw people of all races into a new consensus. Black students, in particular, will continue to be on the outside looking in and the creation of a critical mass of black intellectuals and researchers will continue to elude us.