• Comments [0]
• Digg it!
• Facebook

The proposed new educational landscape suddenly makes so much sense.  For the first time, we are looking at a “coherent and single post-education and training system”, to quote the words of the Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr Blade Nzimande.

In his address to SEIFSA on 11 May 2010, he said that it had been a mistake to have separated education and training which had had an impact on horizontal and vertical mobility and flexibility of access between different levels of the education and training system.  There had been a power struggle between the Department of Education (DoE) and the Department of Labour (DoL) and this had had a negative impact on skills development too.  The new system would be integrated with clear learning pathways from one “subsystem” to another.

The subsystems that fall under the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) are:

1. The old training arm of DOL;
2. Setas;
3. The NSF (National Skills Fund);
4. AET (previously known as ABET) (Adult Education & Training);
5. The colleges;
6. HET.

There’s been an unacknowledged hierarchy in the discourse about education and training in this country which has informed perceptions.  We speak about Universities, then Universities of Technology (UOT) and only then about Vocational Colleges.

In that order.

The words we use shape the way we see the world.  This hierarchy has automatically led people to believe that to go to university is essential to be a success in life.

The new positioning of the FET sub-system has become a significant locus of delivery of vocational and continuing education and training with strong links to industry in order to meet critical skills shortages.  The President has identified public FET colleges as primary sites for skills development over the next five years in his State of Nation Address on 11 February 2010.  This was re-inforced by the Minister of Higher Education and Training as well as the Minister of Finance in their budget speeches.  The colleges  have been identified as key institutions to broaden post-school education and training opportunities.  Colleges  are therefore expected to play a significant role in providing training opportunities for school-leavers, including matriculants, who may not be admitted to a higher education institution for whatever reason.

The key to the new education dispensation is to have a clear link between an institution of learning and the workplace.  The emphasis should be on learning by doing.  Each sub-system will have a unique role and identity, but also a clear differentiation and purpose.

It is alarming to note that there are almost 2,9 million (this figure varies) NEETs (Not in Employment or Education and Training) who make up 42.5% of 18 – 24 year olds.  Only 10% of our youth are in colleges and universities.  This is a social timebomb!

Training institutions need to network in the right places and keep abreast with developments and opportunities within the economy and so become important contributors, through strategic partnerships and collaboration, to successfully meet the skills targets set out in the NSDS III.

Many private providers are now feeling like the public colleges used to feel – like cinderellas in the training arena!  They cannot understand why DHET wants to “revive” public colleges  when “they know they do not work” and why they should be forced to partner public colleges when they have managed without them for so long.  The Minister has warned against this type of generalisation in his most recent communique after four principals of private colleges were jailed, as their colleges had not met minimum requirements.  He said that people should be careful not to tar all private providers with the same tarbrush.

There are also some public Colleges that are dysfunctional and many of the functional Colleges  are ashamed to be associated with them.  That is why Mary Mecalfe has requested an HRSC audit of all colleges nationally.  The functional colleges in the sector welcome this.  Everyone needs to stop generalising and start learning to work together for the good of skills development.

In the past, the general attitude towards partnerships was a matter of “what’s in it for us”.  I would propose that this should not be the dominant theme, but that all the subsystems need to focus on “what’s in it for the system” because we are now all subsystems of the same system.

Author: Cathy Robertson

No Comments

Start the ball rolling by posting a comment on this article!