colloquium
Pule Radingwana
Apartheid was created to further the particular norms and values of the white community. Taxpayers’ money benefited that group at the expense of black people.
Since 1994 there has been a misconception that transformation merely means reformation. Transformation should have a political philosophy, with the aim of meeting the needs and aspirations of the whole electorate.
The higher education funding framework, unveiled last year, does not attempt to solve the problems of previously disadvantaged higher education institutions, instead providing for their slow extinction.
Though the legal framework mentions redress and equity as fundamental elements to close the gaps created by apartheid in education, the funding framework does the contrary. It puts formerly white institutions on the same footing as disadvantaged institutions.
Most disadvantaged institutions, such as the University of Venda for Science and Technology, did not start with infrastructure comparable with advantaged institutions such as Wits, Rand Afrikaans University and the University of Cape Town. It is unfortunate that the funding framework does not encompass social and institutional redress in a way that takes this fact of disadvantaged institutions into account.
It was common sense to the architects of apartheid that particular disciplines, especially natural sciences like engineering, physical sciences, mathematics and computer sciences, were meant for white institutions. Consequently, the advantaged institutions benefited from that arrangement. But the funding framework provides for funding and planning grids that are not biased towards assisting disadvantaged institutions.
It is disturbing that even the so-called research output subsidies will not in any way assist disadvantaged institutions to establish masters and doctoral programmes. For example, how can institutions advertise posts for an intended programme without being sure of funding from the government or even that approval will be forthcoming? The government should have been giving funding commitments for such programmes and instructing institutions to establish such programmes for the benefit of students from disadvantaged communities.
The same applies to earmarked funds, which should be biased in favour of disadvantaged institutions. For example, although the National Student Financial Aid Scheme is for redress, it accumulates interest from the same disadvantaged students even before they get employed.
The higher education funding framework does not address the imbalances of the past. Its purpose is to widen the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged institutions. It does not create space to support and facilitate empowerment of the disadvantaged institutions. That is why the National Qualifications Framework and the South African Qualifications Authority serve only as guards and not as institutions to assist in evaluating the capacity of institutions not to phase them out but in becoming more effective and efficient in their programmes.
In order to educate to liberate, we need a government with the political will to redress the imbalances of the past. Promoting competition in higher education between unequal partners is not the way to do this.
Pule Radingwana is national publicity secretary of the Azanian Students’ Convention, University of Venda. Colloquium is a regular column usually written by students, though staff are welcome too in the M&G education supplements, and covers all aspects of campus life and education generally. If you’re interested in writing for us, contact the editor of the supplements, David Macfarlane: Tel (011) 727-7000; Fax (011) 727-7111; E-mail [email protected]