/ 22 April 2005

Looking good – but could do better

It used to be called the Cinderella of the education system. But South Africa’s Further Education and Training (FET) system is in the process of having its rags replaced with the finery of a new era.

Since the passing of the FET Act in 1998, FET colleges have been positioned to provide a ladder of essential intermediate skills training. The sector has enabled learners to enrol at affordable institutions and acquire the relevant tools for employment. This has been in accordance with the government’s Human Resource Development (HRD) strategy, which underscores skills development as a key to breaking the cycle of social exclusion and poverty.

From 152 technical colleges, the FET sector was relaunched as 50 multi-campus colleges earlier this year. The formation of fewer mega-colleges located in key economic regions is seen as a means of renewing the relevance of these institutions to South Africa’s social and economic needs.

Labour legislation supports this transformation process. For example, the Labour Relations Act has two key prongs that are directly related to training within corporations: the Skills Development Act (incorporating the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA), National Qualifications Framework (NQF) and the 1% training levy on businesses) and the Employment Equity Act.

Partnerships have been formed between the Department of Education (DoE), the Department of Labour (DoL) and the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), as well as with the private sector. These alliances aim to nurture a culture of learnership and enterprise.

Currently there is at least one learnership programme per Sector Education and Training Authority (Seta) in each college.

In addition, the business and development communities sponsor a number of capacity building programmes. These include the Tirisano International Exchange Programme (IEP) sponsored by the British Council and the joint KPMG/National Business Initiative programme.

Initiatives such as the Ministerial College Award programme also serve as a mechanism to encourage colleges to prioritise management, administration, learner support, and financial and marketing systems. A draft National Curriculum Framework has been drawn up that sets the parameters for the development of responsive programmes, as well as a FET funding framework.

The government currently funds colleges to the tune of R840-million.

The FET college sector has also benefited from an investment of over R270-million through nationally directed support programmes, invested primarily in the development of skills of college personnel.

All of this means that FET colleges have shifted radically from the inferior, now obsolete, ‘trade school” identity of yesteryear.

‘We’ve just completed our first phase [of transformation] and already student enrolments are up by 17% since 1998,” says the director of public and private FET colleges, Steve Mommen. ‘The number of learners in learnership and skills programmes has also expanded significantly.”

But amid all the positive cheers are concerned murmurs that Cinderella could turn into the dysfunctional stepsister if glaring problems within the sector are not adequately addressed. Ongoing questions include: are FET colleges doing enough to provide quality learning? Do they adequately respond to the needs of the economy and the labour market? And is the overall FET system supporting colleges?

Recent studies conducted by the National Professional Teachers Organisation of South Africa (Naptosa) indicate ongoing uncertainty around the implementation of the FET curricula in schools and the delivery of curriculum in FET colleges. Naptosa says the situation in FET colleges is becoming untenable owing to confusion over qualifications accreditation and funding.

A feature of the NQF is that it must be driven by sectors of the economy, both in terms of qualifications (through the National Standard Bodies) and quality assurance (through the Setas and their Education and Training Quality Assurance bodies). Over the last few years, various economic sectors have been involved in developing new qualifications and unit standards and getting these registered on the NQF. But the process has been clumsy. For example, according to Naptosa, there is a lack of shared understanding about the process of revising the NATED 190/191 programmes of the DoE to make these more relevant to the FET colleges’ new mandate. Furthermore, inconsistencies between policies from stakeholders like Umalusi, Saqa, the DoE, the DoL and the Setas are constraining public colleges’ participation in learnership delivery. Simultaneously, the Setas are blaming much of their own poor performance on the lack of available training providers.

‘The overall FET system does not do enough at present to help colleges in their transformation efforts,” says Simon McGrath, director of the Human Sciences Research Council’s research programme on human resources development.

McGrath is the editor of a recently published research report on FET colleges entitled Technical College Responsiveness. The report acknowledges a growing language of responsiveness at the college level. But it points out that its labour market outcomes need to improve significantly, given the ‘very high levels of graduate unemployment from FET programmes”.

McGrath believes the theory/practice relationship in FET college courses still needs to be better balanced: ‘Colleges face the continuing challenge of negative perceptions from those who deem them second best when compared to more ‘academic” offerings. Many colleges did have strong linkages with employers historically, but the demise of apprenticeships has led to an urgent need to build new relations with employers.”

McGrath points out that there is also a pressing need for new curricula.

‘Far more attention needs to be paid to supporting learners in the areas of languages, mathematics and science. Colleges need to develop far better guidance and counselling systems for learners, including systematic approaches to dealing with HIV/Aids awareness and support for HIV-positive learners,” McGrath says.

Provincial commitment to FET colleges also remains contentious, particularly in poorer provinces, such as Limpopo, the Eastern Cape and the North West which only committed 1% of their 2002/3 budget to the sector. However, Mommen points out that overall provincial spending on FET colleges has improved in the last few years. For example, Gauteng spends 4% of its budget on the sector as compared to 1,9% previously.

Mommen emphasises that the first phase of the FET transformation process has been successful in getting the system up and running. But he acknowledges that they are yet to iron out curricula problems within the schooling system, as well as curriculum delivery in accordance with the needs of the global economy. Delivery of a relevant curriculum, he says, will have to deal with the changing profile of South African learners.

The greatest challenge facing FET colleges is transformation in the context of mass youth unemployment and a legacy of employer indifference to training and development. Unless the energies and resources of multiple stakeholders are effectively harnessed to address these problems, Cinderella is in danger of remaining a wallflower – all dressed up but going nowhere.