Performance Management:
HEQSF Scorecard
Presentation to the HEDA User Group
November 2013
David Bleazard
Director: Institutional Planning
bleazardd@cput.ac.za
Performance_Management_Nov2013_1
Objective
• To show how CPUT is adapting the Performance
Management Scorecard to track the HEQSF
programme development process
Background
• The alignment of qualifications to the new Higher
Education Qualification Sub-Framework (HEQSF) is
a huge challenge for UoTs
– B.Techs being phased out
– New qualification types include Higher Certificate, Diploma,
Degree, Professional Degree, Advanced Diploma
• CPUT estimates that it will have to develop about 200
new qualifications during the next five years
• The processes for development and approval of the
qualifications are complex, both internally and
externally
Stages and Steps
Category A qualifications: Minor amendments required to align to HEQSF
Approximately 40 qualifications – mostly postgraduate qualifications
Category B qualifications: Less than 50% change to existing curriculum
Approximately 70 qualifications – mostly National Diplomas
Category C qualifications: More than 50% change to existing curriculum
Approximately 110 qualifications – more than half are B.Tech qualifications to be
phased out and replaced by HEQSF aligned qualifications
Example of Stage & Steps
Applied Technology
• How to keep track of all the processes and their
associated documentation?
• The idea arose of using the newly developed
Performance Management Scorecard to track and
report on progress
• The various stages (and steps within stages) of the
HEQSF process have been incorporated within the
model
• Custom-built reports have been developed by IDSC
to report on progress to Faculties and Departments
Accessing the Module
Plans List
Plan Example
Updating the Plan
Attachments
Attachment Example
Reporting
• Reporting was a primary requirement in the
conceptualisation of the HEQSF Scorecard
• Two levels of reporting are currently available
– Detailed Report
– Overview Report
Accessing the Reports
Detailed Report
Filter Capability
Filter Outcome
Drill-down Capability
Overview Report
Original Conception
Suggested Enhancements
• Alphabetic Order
– Alphabetic ordering of Faculties and Departments can be
achieved, but is clumsy
• Entering Performance
– When data is entered in the Performance Agreement
window, the cursor jumps to the top of the page; it should
stay at the level of the amended item
• Deletion Warnings
– Warnings should appear before Faculties, Departments or
Qualifications are deleted
• Removing Documents
– It should be possible to remove a document uploaded in
error
Challenge
• The main challenge in using the HEQSF Scorecard
arises from the complexity of the process
• A great deal of information for a wide variety of
qualifications needs to be captured and updated
• Only one person, the Head of Academic Planning, is
managing the process and implementing the
tracking
Advantages
• Without something like the Scorecard, the HEQSF
alignment process will become unmanageable
• The Scorecard provides reports that can be shared
with the Faculties and Departments
• A central view of the process and its progress is
available