THE UPTAKE AND IMPACT OF QUALIFICATIONS
AND UNIT STANDARDS IN THE SUB-FIELD:
EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT
2007
This research report is compiled and distributed by the Directorate: Strategic Support.
SAQA
PostNet Suite 248
Private Bag X06
WATERKLOOF
0145
Telephone:
+27 (0)12 431 5000
Facsimile:
+27 (0)12 431 5147
Website:
www.saqa.org.za
Helpdesk:
086 010 3188
E-mail:
saqainfo@saqa.org.za
Publication date:
August 2007
ISBN:
978-0-9802638-0-0
COPYRIGHT
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA).
The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the South African Qualifications
Authority (SAQA).
PREAMBLE
The uptake and impact of qualifications on education and training, and on individuals, communities
and society at large, was identified as a critical matter in the transformation of education and
training in South Africa. For this reason, a study, with the purpose to investigate the extent to which
qualifications in new and emerging fields of learning are taken up by the sector, and the impact that
such qualifications may have in terms of relevance to the needs of the sector, was placed on the
SAQA Research Agenda in 2005, and was commissioned.
The Centre for Education Policy Development (CEPD) was appointed.
The brief of the CEPD was to:
•
Develop a research design, including a sampling strategy
•
Analyse the unit standards and qualifications registered in the sub-field and the extent to
which the forecast (if available) has matched the uptake
•
Identify and report on the number of accredited providers offering the unit standards and
qualifications
•
Identify and report on the number of learners currently registered for the unit standards
and qualifications
•
Identify and report on the number of learners who have completed the unit standards and
qualifications
•
Determine the impact of the qualifications on individuals and the sub-field of early child
hood development (ECD)
•
Prepare a detailed report on the research design, process, findings and recommendations.
The study is thus both quantitative (assessment of uptake) and qualitative (assessment of impact).
This report deals with the findings of the CEPD.
A key objective of the study was to develop a replicable research design and sampling strategy so
that similar studies can be undertaken in other new and emerging fields of learning. The combination
of a desktop review of relevant literature and the collection of primary data is a workable, replicable
approach, which could be used for future studies.
i
Two matters for consideration arose:
•
The extent to which the scoping forecast is congruent with the uptake of qualifications,
when the need for qualifications in a particular sub-field is identified, was difficult to determine.
•
The lack of verifiable and recent data dealing with the numbers of accredited providers
and successful learners is a concern. In part, this is as a result of data being collected at
different sites, i.e. the Department of Education (DoE), the Education, Training and
Development Practices (ETDP) Education and Training Quality Assurance Body (ETQA)
and provincial offices of the Department.
•
The most recent data as presented in the ETDP Sector Education and Training Authority
(SETA) Annual Report (2005/2006) have been included.
Studies such as these are not only important dipstick indicators for progress in the education and
training sector, but are also indicative of the needs and problems of the sector within which the
qualifications are to be used. It is thus important to make the findings available to the sector, in
particular to the DoE and the ETDP Sector Education and Training Authority (SETA), as well as
the education and training community at large.
ii
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AIDS
BEd
CBO
DoE
ECD
EPWP
ETDP SETA
ETDQA
ETQA
FET
HE
HEI
HEQC
HIV
HSRC
KZN
NCS
NGO
NLRD
NQF
NSC
OBE
PED
RPL
RTO
SACE
SAQA
SETA
TSP
UNISA
viii
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
Bachelor of Education
Community-based Organisation
Department of Education
Early Childhood Development
Expanded Public Works Programme
Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority
Education, Training and Development Quality Assurance Body
Education and Training Quality Assurance Body
Further Education and Training
Higher Education
Higher Education Institution
Higher Education Quality Committee
Human Immunodeficiency Virus
Human Sciences Research Council
KwaZulu-Natal
National Curriculum Statement
Non-governmental Organisation
National Learners' Records Database
National Qualifications Framework
National Senior Certificate
Outcomes-based Education
Provincial Education Department
Recognition of Prior Learning
Resource and Training Organisation
South African Council of Educators
South African Qualifications Authority
Sector Education and Training Authority
Technical Support Project
University of South Africa
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) would like to acknowledge the research team
of the CEPD for undertaking and successfully concluding the study. Thank you to Michele Berger,
Tsakani Chaka, Paul Musker, Sandile Mbokazi and Gill Scott.
The CEPD research team would like to thank the following for their time and insights in support
of this study:
N Mngomezulu
Chief Education Specialist: ECD, Gauteng Department of Education
M L Samuels
Director: ECD, Department of Education
Training providers
Members of the South African Training Institute for Early Childhood
Development
C Forster
Manager: Little Elephant Training Centre for Early Education (LETCEE)
Mrs Mabaso
Parent/ECD Site Management Committee: LETCEE
T Ndlovu
Parent/ECD Site Management Committee: LETCEE
B Shelembe
Parent/ECD Site Management Committee: LETCEE
N Ngubane
Practitioner: LETCEE
F Dlamini
Practitioner: LETCEE
T Mdalose
Practitioner: LETCEE
H Zuma
Practitioner: LETCEE
B Zulu
Practitioner: LETCEE
T Zulu
Trainer: Training & Resources in Early Education (TREE)
C Ndumo
Trainer: TREE
G Bhengu
Practitioner: TREE
H Dube
Practitioner: TREE
T Matenjwa
Practitioner: TREE
Z Mkhwanazi
Practitioner: TREE
iii
P Gcabashe
Provider Management: TREE
N Msimang
Provider Management: TREE
T Mavundla
Provider Management: TREE
N Maduna
Provider Management: TREE
S Xulu
Parent/Site Management Committee Member: TREE
N Mtetwa
Parent/Site Management Committee Member: TREE
M Goliath
Practitioner, Trainer: Kid's Paradise
S Louw
Provider:Kid's Paradise
Imbali
Trainer: New Beginnings
K Phunwasi
Trainer: New Beginnings
P Govender
Director: Provider: New Beginnings
T Naidoo
Practitioner: New Beginnings
A Singh
Practitioner: New Beginnings
X Zungu
Practitioner: New Beginnings
B Xulu
Practitioner: New Beginnings
C King
Practitioner: New Beginnings
A Chetty
Practitioner: New Beginnings
J Hayden
Principal: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
C Jagles
Practitioner: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
S Harvey
Practitioner: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
M Larkin
Practitioner: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
T Naidoo
Practitioner: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
L Jackson
Practitioner: School: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
iv
C Conacher
Parent: Institute for Teacher Education
G Carlson
Parent: Institute for Teacher Education
D Wessels
Provider: Director: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
E Grossi
Provider: Director: Embury Institute for Teacher Education
J Sachs
Deputy Chief Education Specialist: ECD: KwaZulu-Natal Department of
Education
K Mathe
Deputy Chief Education Specialist: ECD: KwaZulu-Natal Department of
Education
G Moroane
Practitioner: Woz'obona
M Mpe
Practitioner: Woz'obona
Group of 9 practitioners Practitioners: ECD Projects
A Bunge
Practitioner: Woz'obona
S Zondo
Practitioner: Woz'obona
M Skhosana
Practitioner: Woz'obona
L Thornton
Manager: Woz'obona
J Armstrong
Manager: ECD Projects
M Mosebi
Manager: GROW
Parent
Parent: Ducklings Pre-Primary School
Parent 1
Parent: True Friends Pre-Primary School
Parent 2
Parent: True Friends Pre-Primary School
L Excell
Lecturer: Wits University
T Phidane
HOD: Learnerships Division, ETDP SETA
S Sibiya
Skills Advisor: ETDP SETA
v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
The broad purpose of this study was to investigate the uptake and impact of new qualifications in
the sub-field of Early Childhood Development (ECD). The study quantifies uptake of the
qualifications, and assesses the impact of the qualifications on ECD sites, practitioners and training
providers. The methodology and research design will be applicable to other fields and sub-fields,
to enable longitudinal and cyclical studies to be taken up by SAQA at a later stage.
Research approach
The first stage of work comprised a desktop review of registered ECD unit standards and
qualifications, and statistics related to the number of accredited providers, learners currently
registered for these qualifications and unit standards, and the number of learners who have
completed these. The second stage of the research entailed case study fieldwork in two provinces.
From the national list of ECD training providers, a purposive, stratified sample was constructed
including each category of provider (such as non-governmental providers), as well as different
geographical areas in each of the two provinces. This enabled the researchers to investigate
regional differences that may affect uptake. Sixty-five providers, practitioners, parents, department
officials and ETDP SETA personnel were interviewed to gain an understanding of how the new
outcomes-based qualifications have impacted on ECD practice. The case study approach provided
in-depth understanding of the impact of the qualifications and a range of strongly indicative
findings.
Summary of findings
The desktop review suggests that:
•
Data availability is poor with respect to numbers of learners who have undertaken and
completed the ECD unit standards and qualifications.
•
The quality of data on ECD training providers, and particularly types of provider, is also poor.
•
Levels of training provision are low considering the numbers of sites and practitioners, and
the distribution of training providers across provinces and urban/rural areas is skewed.
•
Many NGO training providers do not offer full qualifications.
1
•
ECD sites, many of which are rural (40%) and community-based (49%) or home-based
(34%), often lack awareness of and capacity to implement skills planning processes, skills
development programmes, learnerships and qualifications generally.
•
Most practitioners are poorly paid, particularly in poor rural areas where many parents
cannot afford to pay fees.
•
There are important research gaps in the ECD sub-field, notably with regard to the costs
and benefits of ECD provision.
The primary data suggests that:
•
The qualifications are highly relevant to the sub-field.
•
Articulation and progression are stronger in principle than in practice.
•
The impact of the qualifications is very positive in terms of site communities and outcomes
at ECD sites, practitioners' personal and professional achievement, training methods,
learning materials and learner support.
•
The implementation of Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) is occurring only on a relatively
small scale.
•
Factors affecting the impact of the qualifications include, most notably, the need for a
stronger partnership in policy dialogue and delivery, supported by better data and more
comprehensive research.
•
Positive and inhibiting factors in uptake of the qualifications include economic, social and
institutional factors that can be addressed through a stronger partnership approach in the
sub-field.
Our general conclusions and recommendations on impact and uptake follow:
•
While the impact of the qualifications is found to be positive, policy dialogue and partner
ships for enhanced and more equitably distributed delivery can be strengthened. Policy
dialogue and implementation partnerships will be stronger if the quality and availability of
relevant data on provision are improved.
•
This stronger partnership approach will need to focus on the creation of a well-led, more
homogeneous sub-field, eliminating (for example) apparent discrepancies in training and
funding for community-based sites and Grade R, and increasing the equitable distribution
of training provision.
2
•
An economic analysis of the sector, including costs and benefits of various modes of
delivery of ECD provision and ECD training provision, would support the positive policy
trends that are being driven by the DoE towards equitable distribution of provision and
build on the predisposition of providers to increasingly offer full qualifications.
•
A review of the institutional factors affecting uptake (including the paucity of reliable data)
and a plan to address these would also enhance large-scale, equitable delivery in the
sub-field.
The case studies of training providers have generated an in-depth, detailed picture of enhanced
ECD provision across all training providers and sites visited; this strongly indicates that the
qualifications have made a positive contribution to improved delivery in a sub-field which is critical
to national development.
Structure of the report
Four sections follow:
•
Section 1 presents the background to the research.
•
Section 2 presents the desktop review.
•
Section 3 presents the fieldwork data.
•
Section 4 contains our conclusions.
3
4
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND
Introduction
The broad purpose of this study was to investigate the uptake and impact of new qualifications in
the sub-field of Early Childhood Development (ECD). The study quantifies uptake of the
qualifications and assesses the impact of the qualifications on ECD sites, practitioners and training
providers. The methodology and research design will be applicable to other fields and sub-fields,
to enable longitudinal and cyclical studies to be taken up by SAQA at a later stage.
1
Objectives
The following objectives were established for the research:
•
Develop a research design, including a sampling strategy.
•
Analyse the unit standards and qualifications registered in the sub-field and the extent to
which the forecast (if available) has matched the uptake.
•
Identify and report on the number of accredited providers offering the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Identify and report on the number of learners currently registered for the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Identify and report on the number of learners who have completed the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Determine the impact of the qualifications on individuals and the sub-field of ECD.
•
Prepare a detailed report on the research design, process, findings and recommendations.
The study is thus both quantitative (assessment of uptake) and qualitative (assessment of impact).
Research issues
A number of broad social issues informed the design of the research instruments, including:
•
1
Equity, including race-and gender-based equity
For this reason, the research instruments are attached as Annexure 1.
5
•
Access
•
Issues related to all other National Qualifications Framework (NQF) principles.
Research approach
The first stage of work comprised a desktop review of registered ECD unit standards and
qualifications, and statistics related to the number of accredited providers, learners currently
registered for these qualifications and unit standards, and the number of learners who have
completed these. The research did not have an audit component and therefore relied on available
data.
The second stage of the research utilised a case study approach and entailed fieldwork in two
2
provinces. The case study approach is defined by Nisbet and Watt (1984, p.72) as "a systematic
investigation of a specific instance". This approach was selected because it enables the collection
of rich, descriptive data, an examination of the record of past events and observation of present
activity. Although case studies do not allow one to generalise to the fullest extent, they do allow for
transferability of findings from one site to other similar sites (Johnson, 1994, p.22).
Provider s of ECD qualifications and unit standards fall into various categories, including
non-governmental organisations, further education and training colleges, private training services
and higher education institutions. From the national list of ECD training providers, a purposive
sample was constructed including each category of provider, as well as different geographical
areas in each of the two provinces. This enabled the researchers to investigate regional differences
that may affect uptake. Sixty-five providers, practitioners, parents, department officials and ETDP
SETA personnel were interviewed to gain an understanding of how the new outcomes-based
qualifications have impacted on ECD practice. The case study approach provided an in-depth
understanding of the impact of the qualifications and a range of strongly indicative findings.
The following factors were taken into consideration in the selection of providers:
•
Some providers continue to offer qualifications not based on unit standards. These providers
were not included in the sample; the research did, however, assess the impact on provider
behaviour of switching to the new qualifications.
•
The language or languages of learning and teaching used by different providers may impact
on learner uptake of training, involvement and attainment.
•
The research examined the types of learner/practitioner support, learner/practitioner
collaboration and learner/practitioner tracking systems offered by providers (for example,
support for learners who are in isolated rural communities).
2
The selected provinces were Gauteng (well resourced and primarily urban, but with a sizeable number of farm schools)
and KwaZulu-Natal (under resourced and primarily rural)
6
•
There is a varied range of recipients of training, including adult learners who have embarked
on a career path with little prior experience in ECD, and ECD practitioners who have been
running an ECD service for a number of years.
Practitioners were purposively sampled from the population of practitioners who have achieved
unit standards and qualifications in the different NQF bands through the sampled providers.
The sample included practitioners who already manage ECD services and others who have just
begun a career path in ECD. The sampled practitioners participated in in-depth focus group
interviews (four focus groups per province, with six to eight practitioners in each focus group).
The fieldwork supported the assessment of practitioner behaviour, such as the effect of the unit
standards and qualifications on their careers generally and their professional practice in particular.
The following factors were taken into consideration:
•
The ECD Core Unit Standards include the practitioner's ability to manage the learning
programme. The impact of the training on parents in the ECD management committees
of the practitioners sampled was therefore also assessed.
•
Further assessment related to the impact on practitioners' abilities to build collaborative
relationships with their parent body, with their communities and with service providers
such as government's social development and health services.
The fieldwork also comprised interviews with the ECD Directorates of the DoE and the two
selected Provincial Education Departments (PEDs), as well as the ETDP SETA, to obtain their
assessment of uptake and impact, but also to ascertain possible reasons for non-uptake of ECD
unit standards and qualifications. Relevant literature produced by or for these bodies was
reviewed. The relevant ETQAs (including Umalusi) were also interviewed.
7
8
SECTION 2: DESKTOP REVIEW
Introduction
This section comprises a desktop review of ECD unit standards and qualifications, challenges
facing the constituency and statistics related to the number of accredited providers, the number of
learners currently registered for these qualifications and unit standards and the number of
learners who have completed these. It is noted that the research does not have an audit
component and therefore relies on available data. In order to assess the uptake of qualifications,
it is important to understand some of the challenges facing the sector. This section therefore
contains an assessment of the sector and some of the key issues with which it has to contend.
The size and structure of the ECD constituency
In 2000, the DoE, with the assistance of the European Community-funded Technical Support
Project (TSP), conducted a nationwide audit of ECD provisioning in South Africa (Williams &
Samuels, 2001). This audit, although outdated, provides the most recent body of information that
can be used to understand the ECD constituency.
Tables 1 to 3 and Figure 1 provide a breakdown of ECD sites per province, the urban/rural
breakdown of sites, and types of sites:
Table 1: Number of ECD sites per province
Province
No of sites
Eastern Cape - EC
3 231 (14%)
Free State - FS
1 665 (7%)
Gauteng - GP
5 308 (23%)
KwaZulu-Natal - KZN
5 684 (24%)
Mpumalanga - MP
1 367 (6%)
Northern Cape - NC
422 (2%)
Limpopo - LP
1 987 (8%)
9
North West - NW
1 174 (5%)
Western Cape - WC
2 644 (11%)
South Africa
23 482 (100%)
Table 2: Geographical location
Location
Frequency
Urban (formal)
49%
Urban (informal)
11%
Rural (informal)
40%
Table 3: Types of EDC Sites
Type of site
Frequency
School-based
17%
Community-based
49%
Home-based
34%
Figure 1: Geographical spread of ECD sites
GP
FS
EC
WC
NW
LP
NC
MP
KZN
10
Approximately 40% of the identified ECD sites were situated in rural areas, where many children
grow up in conditions of abject poverty and neglect (Williams & Samuels, 2001). According to the
Nelson Mandela Foundation Rural Education Project Report, Emerging voices (Nelson Mandela
Foundation, 2005), 75% of under-fives in rural communities suffer from malnutrition. At the 2005
Early Childhood Development Conference hosted by the DoE (DoE, 2005), the Minister of
Education, Ms Naledi Pandor, stressed that recommendations from the Foundation's study must
be taken up to ensure that all children get access to early learning so that they can be set on the
path to structured learning.
The nationwide audit (Williams & Samuels, 2001) further indicated the following:
•
About two-thirds of the sites were registered with the DoE or the Department of Social
Development.
11
•
Almost half the sites were in community-based settings, one third were home based and
less than one fifth were based in schools.
•
While half of the sites had access to piped water, flushing toilets and mains electricity,
almost a tenth had access to none of these.
•
Almost a third of the sites audited charged fees of less than R25 per month, and in half of
the sites fees were not paid regularly. In addition, more than a quarter indicated that they
had no source of income other than fees. Almost half of the ECD practitioners earned less
than R500 per month. These findings are corroborated by our case study research in
KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng (see Section 3 below).
According to the nationwide audit, there were approximately 54 500 ECD practitioners working
directly with children (Williams & Samuels, 2001). The spread per province is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Number of ECD practitioners per province
Province
Educators
Eastern Cape
6 354 (12%)
Free State
3 964 (7%)
Gauteng
15 052 (28%)
KwaZulu-Natal
10 603 (19%)
Mpumalanga
2 658 (5%)
Northern Cape
844 (1%)
Limpopo
3 615 (7%)
North West
2 910 (5%)
Western Cape
8 503 (16%)
South Africa
54 503
12
The breakdown by race of the population group of ECD practitioners is as follows: 68% African,
19% white, 11% coloured and 2% Indian. According to the ETDP SETA Sector Skills Plan (2005b),
69% of ECD employees in private institutions are African and 99% are female, while the number
of African employees in public institutions drops to 57% and female employees to 97% (ETDP
SETA, 2005b). According to the audit report (Williams & Samuels, 2001), the average age of ECD
practitioners is 38 years.
In addition, according to the ETDP SETA Annual Report (ETDP SETA, 2006), in the reporting
period (1 April 2005 - 31 March 2006) 340 learners entered an ECD learnership programme.
A further 952 African females completed the learnership in the period (this number includes
learners who completed in 2005/06, having enrolled in previous years).
ECD training providers
3
The Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) report of 2003, prepared for the ETDP SETA,
indicates that NGOs and Resource and Training Organisations (RTOs) have carried the
responsibility for ECD provisioning and practitioner training for the past thirty years at the
equivalent of NQF Levels 1 to 4. The cost of ECD training varied considerably across the country.
The average cost to the service provider was as follows: Level 1 - R8 000, Level 4 - R12 000 and
Level 5 - R15 000 per practitioner. The cost of NGO training for practitioners was largely covered
by donor funds, with only between 2% and 5% paid directly by the practitioner. Other training
providers involved in ECD training were higher education institutions, further education and training
colleges, private sector institutions and community-based organisations.
According to the ETDP SETA (2005a), more than a quarter of the ECD RTOs were, at the time of
publication of the report, still providing informal in-service training for ECD practitioners since they
were not yet accredited. Training provided by the accredited RTOs was becoming more formalised
and the training was based on NQF unit standards.
Information about training providers offering ECD training through distance learning is scanty, but
UNISA is probably the largest provider at the moment (ETDP SETA, 2005a). Most of the formal
ECD qualifications offered by universities (such as the BEd or the Advanced Certificate in
Education) focus on Grade R and upwards, so the birth to pre-Grade R component is still
neglected. Most of the Further Education and Training (FET) colleges and universities of
technology were still teaching the N1-N6 Educare courses until 2006, which was the deadline for
phasing out these programmes. It is not clear how many have taken up the new qualifications.
A database of providers obtained from the ETDP SETA, produced in 2005, contains the names
of 156 providers accredited to offer ECD qualifications and unit standards throughout the country.
The distribution across provinces is shown in Table 5.
3
Cited in conference paper on Early Childhood Development, prepared for the ETDP SETA 2003 National Conference, and titled
The National Transformation Agenda and the Role of Early Childhood Development: Challenges and Opportunities.
13
Table 5: Accredited providers by province
Province
Educators
Eastern Cape
10
Free State
6
Gauteng
78
KwaZulu-Natal
22
Mpumalanga
11
Northern Cape
3
Limpopo
5
North West
4
Western Cape
17
South Africa
156
A print-out of providers accredited to offer full ECD qualifications obtained from the ETDP SETA
database on 27 July 2006 indicates that there are 53 NGO training providers who have received
accreditation for full qualifications. A further ten providers are accredited through other ETQAs for
full ECD qualifications.
There are other providers who are accredited for parts of qualifications or unit standards; accurate
4
data for these was not available from the ETDP SETA. However, according to the NLRD, 39 have
been accredited for the Basic Certificate in ECD, Level 1; 66 have been accredited for the National
Certificate in ECD, Level 4; 22 have been accredited for the Higher Certificate in ECD, Level 5; and
22 have been accredited for the National Diploma in ECD, Level 5. In summary, 78 providers have
each been accredited for one or more of these four qualifications.
The ETDP SETA Constituency Service Plan (ETDP SETA, 2005a) reports that 23 NGOs, three
FET colleges and one university were at that time involved in the delivery of the ECD Level 4 and
Level 5 learnerships. In the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu/Natal, the Free State and the Northern Cape,
most of the ECD training providers were involved in ECD learnerships, while in Gauteng capacity
was under-utilised (ETDP SETA, 2005a).
Qualification statistics
Statistics obtained by the National Learners' Records Database indicate that a total of 5 715
students had completed ECD qualifications funded by the ETDP SETA at Levels 1 to 5 in the period
1 April 2005 to 31 July 2006: (Table 6).
4
Statistics obtained by the researcher on a visit to the ETDP SETA's ETQA Division, 27 July 2006 and confirmed in the ETDP SETA
Annual Report (2006).
14
Table 6: Qualification statistics by NQF level (2005-2006)
Number qualified
Qualification title
Basic Certificate: ECD (Level 1)
23114
154
National Certificate: ECD (Level 4)
23116
5 273
Higher Certificate: ECD (Level 5)
23117
170
National Diploma: ECD (Level 5)
23118
118
TOTAL
5 715
The high number of learners qualifying with the Level 4 National Certificate is attributed largely to
funding obtained from the National Skills Fund for learnerships. The statistics above are
incomplete; they do not include, for example, the graduates funded through PEDs. The figures
above refer only to those who have received funding from the ETDP SETA; the SETA was unable
to provide learner achievement data for learners funded through other means, or for learners who
have completed parts of qualifications only.
Challenges
In developing its constituency service plan for ECD, the ETDP SETA identified a number of
challenges with regard to skills planning processes at ECD sites (ETDP SETA, 2005a). There is a
lack of information and knowledge about the skills development processes, structures and
legislation. Many practitioners do not understand these processes, and do not have access to
information and assistance to guide them. Most rural ECD communities prefer that legislation and
skills development processes be communicated and explained to them in their mother tongue.
Most ECD organisations are small and have limited resources (such as books, furniture, toys and
personnel) and income. For most, the only source of income is fees received from parents, often
less than R25 per month per child. They are fighting for survival and skills development is not one
of their priorities and so a training budget is not feasible. Training that does take place is therefore
often subsidised training offered by an NGO or a learnership funded by the ETDP SETA. The SETA
is currently only offering the Level 4 National Certificate in ECD as a learnership for practitioners.
The grant that practitioners on the learnership receive is R520 per month; there were
approximately 340 learners receiving grants in 2005-6. From September 2006, the Level 5 National
5
Diploma in ECD will be offered as a learnership for trainers; the ETDP SETA will give grants to
6
150 Level 4 practitioner-learners and 150 Level 5 trainers. There is also a learnership registered
for the Level 1 qualification.
There are challenges involved in implementing learnerships and skills programmes at ECD sites.
Despite the funding available, the employer has substantial responsibility to ensure that these
programmes are accessed and implemented by employees at the workplace.
5
6
Personal communication (Tshinyiwaho Phidane and Sibongile Sibiya, ETDP SETA, 27 July 2006).
Personal communication (Tshiyiwaho Phidane and Sibongile Sibiya, ETDP SETA, 27 July 2006).
15
Effective implementation requires the employer to manage the payment of learner allowances,
keep effective administrative records of workplace learning, ensure that learners are supervised
and on-the-job assessment is conducted, release the learner for off-the-job training and ensure
that learners are advised on the terms and conditions of employment and workplace policies and
procedures. Because many ECD sites are poorly equipped, especially those in rural areas and
townships, it is difficult for learners to have maximum exposure to ECD resources and to be able
to fully apply what they have learnt. To get a registered ECD qualification at Levels 1 and 4,
practitioners need credits for Mathematical Literacy equivalent to Grades 9 and 10 respectively.
The Mathematical Literacy requirement for the Level 4 qualification is proving to be a challenge for
many practitioners and in some cases is unattainable. In the course of the fieldwork conducted for
this study (see section 3 below), providers who indicated that this component was not such a
challenge were those who had trainers with post-matric training in mathematics.
For many of the learners, the learnership grant is their only monthly income. Employers are not in a
position to contribute towards study costs, learning materials or travel costs. For those practitioners
who do not receive funding from the ETDP SETA, the cost of attending skills programmes may
prevent them from entering such programmes.
The quality assurance body for the FET colleges is Umalusi while the Higher Education Quality
Council (HEQC) is the quality assurance body for higher education institutions. The ECD
NGOs/RTOs are accredited by the ETDP SETA. Although FET and higher education institutions
seek accreditation from a quality assurance body other than the SETA's ETDQA body, they are still
compelled to submit their ECD Level 1-5 learning programmes to the ETDQA for programme
evaluation. According to the Constituency Service Plan (ETDP SETA, 2005a), only nine FET
colleges and one university had submitted their ECD learning programmes for evaluation by the
time of publication.
ECD training providers express a common concern about the lack of accredited training providers
in the ECD sector, especially to service the rural and peri-urban areas (ETDP SETA, 2005a).
Certain provinces, such as North West and Northern Cape, have been most critically affected by
the shortage of accredited providers in their provinces.
Research conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC, 2003) on behalf of the
7
ETDP SETA highlights certain gaps in ECD-related research. Areas that require additional
research include:
•
The link between training and implementation and why implementation is so often poor
•
Establishing the current nature of educator training programmes, identifying the gaps in
provisioning and establishing and quantifying the impact of training at site level
7
This research was commissioned by the ETDP SETA and was completed in 2003. The HSRC report was not available; data used
here is drawn from the ETDP SETA Constituency Service Plan for ECD
16
•
The support systems that are needed for practitioners who are isolated in rural communities
•
How languages are used within ECD sites and how the use of languages of learning and
teaching impacts on learner involvement and attainment
•
The cost of running ECD learnerships across the urban and rural divide
•
The economic benefits to the country that accrue from ECD provisioning.
Conclusion
The desktop review shows that data availability is poor with respect to the numbers of learners who
have undertaken and completed the ECD unit standards and qualifications set out in Annexure 2.
The quality of data on ECD training providers and, particularly, types of provider, is also poor. It is
clear, however, that the levels of training provision are low considering the numbers of sites and
practitioners; the number of learnerships funded by the ETDP SETA is particularly low. The distribution
of training providers across provinces is very skewed, with Gauteng having a provider for
approximately every 67 sites but Limpopo only one for approximately every 400. Provinces with
large rural populations are clearly disadvantaged in this regard.
Many NGO training providers do not offer full qualifications, either because they are not yet
accredited or because they offer core and elective unit standards but not the fundamental learning
component. More generally, providers often lack capacity in terms of RPL, mentors and assessors
and quality assurance requirements generally. It is reported that capacity-building of providers is
insufficient. An imbalance is reported in the higher education band, where qualifications tend to
focus on Grade R and upwards at the expense of the birth-to-five age group. ECD sites, many of
which are rural (40%) and community-based (49%) or home-based (34%), often lack awareness
of skills planning processes, skills development programmes, learnerships and qualifications
generally. Moreover, they often lack capacity in skills development planning and implementation.
The aspects of the review related to finance are alarming. Most practitioners are poorly paid,
particularly in poor rural areas where many parents cannot afford to pay fees. It is noted that there
is insufficient attention to the greater cost of providing unit standards and qualifications (including
learnerships) in rural areas. Training provided by NGOs is largely donor-funded; practitioners
contribute very small percentages of the cost. Learnerships and learnership grants are provided on
a very small scale.
It is reported, finally, that there are important research gaps in the ECD sub-field, notably with
regard to the costs and benefits of ECD provision.
17
18
SECTION 3: PRIMARY DATA
Introduction
Interviews were conducted with representatives of the DoE, two provincial departments of education,
the ETDP SETA, and managers, trainers, practitioners and parents at nine training providers in two
provinces. The interview data is presented below in the following categories:
•
The relevance of the qualifications
•
Articulation and progression
•
The impact of the qualifications on ECD sites
•
The impact of the qualifications on practitioners
•
The impact of the qualifications on training providers
•
The impact of the qualifications on training methods
•
The impact of the qualifications on assessment approaches
•
The impact of the qualifications on RPL practices
•
The impact of the qualifications on experiential learning
•
The impact of the qualifications on learning materials
•
The impact of the qualifications on learner support
•
The impact of the qualifications on communities
•
The impact of the qualifications on national development
•
Factors affecting the impact of the qualifications
•
Positive and inhibiting factors in uptake of the qualifications.
19
The relevance of the qualifications
Respondents generally expressed satisfaction with the relevance of the qualifications. The content
of the qualifications was thought to be appropriate, although one provincial education department
expressed an important caveat about lack of coverage of the National Curriculum Statement
(NCS), especially in the NGO sector:
If you get the core unit standards right, you have a basic working framework. My big concern is
that in Grade R there is not the insistence that the electives are the three learning programmes.
So there are teachers in Grade R without the NQF Level 5 electives in Numeracy, Literacy and
Lifeskills.
One provider argued that there are "two curricula" - one for Grade R and another for the 0-5 age
group:
There is confusion regarding the curriculum for Grade R and that for younger children. There are
two curricula - Grade R, and the other. It's a challenge in training. There is quite a difference
between Grade R and 0-5, which is still a grey area. The sad thing is that people are watering down
the Grade R [curriculum]. The concept of play is being lost there.
According to the DoE, the institutional landscape includes providers of training that fall outside of
the NQF, such as the Montessori programmes, and significant capacity for provision in FET
colleges, which the DoE will fund to offer ECD qualifications. NGOs are also part of this institutional
landscape, but a critique presented was that these institutions in many cases offer practical
programmes without a sound theoretical basis, and do not offer the fundamental learning
component. This theoretical basis should include global issues such as attachment theory and
principles of adult education. The old qualifications also lacked a theoretical basis, and we
therefore need to "expand how the new outcomes are interpreted". In order to achieve increased
provision of full qualifications, the following priorities flow from this critique:
•
The need for enhanced capacity among providers to develop learning programmes
•
Smaller unit standard values to enable more providers to contribute to full qualifications
•
The need to improve trainers' knowledge and skills
•
The need to improve capacity to undertake RPL.
This argument is rooted in the importance of the struggle to develop an NQF, which has generated
significant potential gains for the sector. The "success stories" in this regard will be greater
numbers of practitioners with Level 5 and 6 qualifications in ECD.
20
One provider argued that there is insufficient attention to indigenous knowledge and practices in
the qualifications:
I'm concerned that the unit standards don't give credit to indigenous practices, unless you attempt
to drag out what is implicitly hidden behind the words. But this is a rich wealth of learning, particularly
in dance and music, that could be used to teach the children. It should be the friendliness and
warmth that comes out through those practices. I'm sad that this area is glossed over.
The DoE concurred with this view, advocating attention to "what is indigenous in what we do".
The structure of the qualifications was criticised by one provider as favouring the fundamental
learning component at the expense of the core. This provider also recommended greater flexibility
in terms of content:
I suspect that the fundamentals are taking away from the core, especially in the new [FET
qualification]. And the fundamentals need to be contextualised - they're still pitched at too
academic a level. You need people with expertise to deliver it. There are very few providers with
the appropriate staff.
There are certain things that have changed, for example with registration of ECD sites. There is a
need to include this in the qualification. The qualification should allow bringing in content that
constantly changes, particularly in line with current changes such as the Children's Bill; providers
and practitioners don't know what it is. The debate is located at an academic level. Children's rights
are not there [in practice].
The new FET qualification was criticised by one provider as lacking in consultation:
Provincial consultations are too late because the new FET qualification has been developed
without consultation.
The same qualification has been revamped to meet FET requirements. They put together a team
of mostly government people, universities, etcetera, and mostly left out NGOs. The importance of
play is no longer there. They have brought in second language requirements, [but] they have taken
away some vital things such as HIV/AIDS and working with children with special needs. This is
where providers will have to struggle. It will require us to re-develop our materials.
21
Articulation and progression
According to the ETDP SETA, progression opportunities are adequate but "the learner has to show
interest". Any learner completing a Level 4 learnership can move on to a Level 5 qualification at
any institution and a learner should be able to enter a Level 4 qualification with Grade 9 and some
Level 1 courses.
Learner progression from Level 4 to Level 5 was impressive in one province reviewed, with 86%
of learners continuing in 2006 to the higher level. The PED respondent in this province felt that the
minority who did not persist were largely older trainees for whom the lower level was sufficient. The
same PED noted that the practitioners who are attracted to schools tend to be better qualified.
However, with implementation of the revised NCS their previous training may not have been useful,
so the new qualifications are relevant and they are encouraged to undergo the training even
though this does not move them to a higher NQF level.
The numeracy component of the Level 4 qualification is, according to the ETDP SETA, "a big
problem for many of the learners" in terms of progression and the main reason for learners not
qualifying. The ETDP SETA has considered addressing this through a skills programme, but has
not yet done so. The concern regarding the challenges of the numeracy component was shared
by several other respondents.
One PED representative noted the importance of practitioners getting "onto the NQF ladder",
arguing that the qualifications are in principle a bridge to higher education but that many practitioners
will not pursue that route because of the low levels of remuneration:
[The qualifications] provide an important stepping stone to higher education - a bridge between our
historical past and higher education. From a teaching point of view, it's also provided recognition
for people who have not been recognised previously, and helped them onto the NQF ladder. I think
a lot more work needs to be done in those areas. ... But what is the point of going to university to
get R1 500 per month? Until ECD gets the same professional recognition as all other sectors, we
are not going to get that right. There is a need to link the qualification with remuneration - that
would change the sector completely.
One respondent argued that portability and transfer of credits are difficult in practice, and that if
learners are trained in one organisation they often repeat the same training if they transfer to
another. A serious concern was expressed by another respondent, who argued that the accreditation
of providers has not been well communicated, and many learners are not aware that the
programmes they are undertaking do not lead to a full qualification. It was argued that since a Level
4 practitioner may register with the South African Council of Educators (SACE), it is important to
22
look at the institutional landscape and examine how full qualifications can best be offered, rather
than "the skills programmes that we have been offering for years". An example of the benefits of
the full qualification approach is that educators can teach Grade R in the public school system with
a Level 4 qualification, although the DoE will expect them to upgrade this to Level 6.
The impact of the qualifications on ECD sites
Most providers rated the impact of the qualifications highly in terms of quality of outcomes at ECD
sites. Some examples of their appraisals follow:
The confidence learners now have in themselves is amazing. Children are going to Grade 1 able
to do basic writing, and are much better prepared for formal education. They now start school with
a higher level of conceptual knowledge, and this is a result of the training these practitioners have
undertaken.
The OBE approach is visible in classrooms, and providers seem to have adjusted well to this
approach. We can observe changes, and can sense the extent of what is happening. There are
now portfolios of children's progress, as well as learner progress, and there are record books
detailing learner observations.
However, one provider's overall assessment of the impact of the qualifications on quality provision
is that impact is not direct:
There is not a direct correlation between studying for a formal qualification and good practice at
the site. … When informal training was offered there were some sites whose practice was as good
as it is now.
The qualifications appear to have strengthened the management of ECD sites. For example:
The course included the processes for dealing with the departments; I probably wouldn't have
known that. ... You are aware of all these things - how to register your crèche as a business.
The knowledge really helps in planning the daily routine. I was also able to learn financial
management - it helps with writing receipts, etcetera.
Parents from several sites confirmed that there has been a change in practice as a result of the
qualification - in the "approach to teaching", in the "arrangement of the classroom" and in the
creation of learning materials that now do not need to be purchased. Parents feel that "learners are
now more motivated to attend school and the learning environment is more free". They noted that
23
enrolment had increased, and that "there is an increase in learner confidence to talk about what
they learn". Parents and teachers have a closer relationship than before: "The teacher listens and
is interested in hearing what parents say. ... We are collaborating in bringing the child up." There
is "greater freedom" in the classroom, and higher expectations of what learners can achieve in
terms of literacy and communication skills. Several parents noted that their relationships with their
children had changed in positive ways:
There is an element of trust now in the way I treat my child. It is helped by improved communication.
There is an element of order, with increasing friendliness between parent and child as a result of
the involvement.
Before the training my child reported it was boring at school, she can't do anything, and mostly
sleeps. Now she enjoys it. Even at home she keeps on asking me for help regarding projects at
school.
The children like to imitate what they are doing at school. They most enjoy the fantasy area
(make-believe). They want to tell us what they do at school.
Parents also noted positive changes in health and safety at the sites:
There are thorough outdoors and indoors safety checks, picking up bottles that may be lying
around, checking on safety of equipment being used.
There are parents' workshops that address the issue of safety at home, and strategies to be used
in injuries. They also touch on health issues.
The impact of the qualifications on practitioners
Respondents of all categories - including practitioners themselves - felt that the programmes they
had undertaken had had a very positive effect on their personal and professional development. The
effects included:
•
Improved relationships with children and the community
•
Greater empathy with parents and colleagues
•
A better understanding of children's home contexts
•
Improved knowledge base and curriculum practices
24
•
Leadership capability
•
Better financial management
•
Enhanced self-confidence
•
Enhanced ability to play multiple roles (such as "nurse" and "social worker")
•
Enhanced ability to access information
•
Greater respect from the community
•
Career progression.
Practitioners consistently reported that their ability to relate to children and the community had
improved considerably. Examples of their comments in this regard follow:
I learnt to be calmer. I have a short temper but the minute I walk into the school I calm down. And
I know how to deal with provocative behaviour. I have learned self control.
I would have concentrated on giving love and support but I would have had a lot to learn. It would
have been difficult.
If I hadn't done the course it would be difficult because I didn't know anything, what to do if the child
were sick or uncommunicative. Now I can speak to the child and address the problem.
We are more creative, caring and confident. ... The role models that we used to have were those
who told children how stupid they were. Without the course you'd probably use that approach.
We've learned how to go to the community and ask about the children, [and encourage them]
to take their children to school for Grade R.
Practitioners also reported that the qualifications had helped them to improve both their knowledge
base and their curriculum practices:
I wouldn't have known how to teach the children; you need to prepare a child to be a lifelong learner.
I wouldn't know how to do it; my manner of approach would be terrible; corporal punishment would
be a way to go.
25
Problems would have come with the curriculum - the method of teaching, how do you get to sitting
down with three-year-old kids and telling them a story. I wouldn't have known they have a short
attention span. ... I would have probably confused the kids with mixed-up lessons.
The unit standards gave a clear indication of how the learning programmes should be run in the
school. And even how to manage the school. It's like an instruction: this is how it should be done.
The people who do Level 4 now, if they just implement what they have learnt they will have a very
good centre, if they follow the unit standards closely.
We learnt ideas about classroom arrangements. Now we have a creative section, a quiet area,
a make believe area, a block area for construction.
I wouldn't have known about children's rights; I wouldn't have known about the curriculum statements.
The HIV/AIDS [component] has allowed me to acquire increased personal awareness, and also
how to relate to people living with AIDS.
We are able to cascade to children and the community about HIV/AIDS awareness, particularly
precautions, e.g. handling blood. This was a success.
Several practitioners in different focus groups referred to their greater competence at home as well
as at work. The following response is typical:
[The programme] taught me to handle my own kids in my own home. It made me more aware of
nutrition even at home. ... You can pick up problems among the kids and you can handle things
better.
The positive effect of the programmes was very strongly expressed - for example, one group of
practitioners agreed that if they had not undertaken the qualification "we would be emotionally
scarring our kids". This positive view also applies to the content of the programmes - one
respondent confessed: "I would have destroyed these children's futures because I would have
taught them the wrong stuff."
Some trainers reported that they felt more empowered to participate in policy debates as a result
of undertaking the qualifications - as one respondent put it, "previously it was mostly white people
who made the input".
A caveat was expressed by some respondents with regard to career progression. According to the
ETDP SETA respondents, for example, Level 4 graduates are in demand: "they are snatched up
26
by the Department of Education to teach in Grade R classes." While this was felt to be positive, in
that these practitioners have progressed in their careers, it was felt to be a loss to the
community-based sites. The ETDP SETA respondents noted that once practitioners get posts
in Grade R, they can obtain provisional registration as professional educators through SACE.
The SETA is discussing with SACE the registration of practitioners who are working in
community-based ECD centres, and is optimistic that agreement will be reached in the near future.
The impact of the qualifications on training providers
Training providers also felt that the challenge of designing and delivering programmes for the
qualifications had impacted positively on their organisations and the sector. The effects included:
•
"Status and recognition" for the ECD sector
•
An "amazing degree of collaboration" among service providers
•
Growth in the number of providers
•
Strengthening of the providers as sustainable organisations.
One provider's management felt that the organisation had grown especially as a result of offering
learnerships. Another provider's trainers and managers felt that their organisation had grown in
strength since adopting the new qualifications, although they argued that this growth was due more
to the developmental ethos of the organisation than to the qualifications. Nevertheless, the value
of accreditation was recognised by all providers, as exemplified in this quotation:
Accreditation has been valuable to the organisation, and trainers are encouraged to further their
education. We have attained some Level 5s and 6s in the organisation ... We are accredited, we
are assessors, we are moderators, [and] we have our own curriculum that is used by different
NGOs.
There were some negative appraisals of the impact of the qualifications on providers. For example,
providers mentioned the increased administrative burden of offering the qualifications; many find
that time spent on administration "would previously have been spent observing practice in the
field". The managers of one provider felt that "this is not wrong, but it has changed the focus of our
work the qualification focus is less on the practitioner".
The ETDP SETA respondents felt that the qualifications have generated new demands on
providers, and that providers are changing their practice to meet the requirements. In particular,
27
it was felt that they have adjusted their assessment methods and their learning materials, and that
there appears to be much more workplace support for learners.
However, one PED respondent argued that increased effort in quality assurance is required:
[The qualifications] have provided quality and quality assurance mechanisms - now at least on
paper we have a benchmark of achievement that is portable across the country and abroad.
[But] a lot more needs to be done to monitor actual outcomes across service providers. ... Some
of the training is appalling and some really great - yet they both may be accredited service
providers. You know which ones you would employ and which you would not touch. Accreditation
says we are competent, but I have serious doubts.
The impact of the qualifications on training methods
Respondents' assessment of the impact of the qualifications on training methods was broadly
positive, but not consistently so. One provider argued that training methods had not changed, and
that the new qualifications are "based on what we were already doing":
It's just the terminology shift, other than that it's just the same ... [Except that] now everything is
more public and open for all to see.
This provider's managers argued that the provider had been using the same methods and
strategies since the National ECD Pilot, and that training methods had not changed with the
introduction of the new qualifications. Change in the learning materials was reported to be an
ongoing curriculum development strategy; practical, experiential learning had always been
integrated into the learning programme. It was suggested that the assessment methods had not
changed, although the assessment tools had changed as a result of trainers being trained as
assessors. The trainers of another provider expressed a similar view:
Our training methods did not all change. In practical work we are using things we were using
before. We were using group work. We had goals and objectives then, now we have Specific
Outcomes and Assessment Criteria. Really it's just a terminology change. We used brainstorming,
opening activities, report back, role play, dramatising.
This was not a common opinion, however, and trainers at the first provider mentioned disagreed
with their managers, expressing a very different assessment of the impact of the qualifications on
their work:
Materials have changed; the content has changed. It is not the same as before. Here we have the
unit standard, with specific outcomes and assessment criteria, with performance indicators.
28
Teachers use learning outcomes with the learners and assessment standards. Portfolios of
evidence were brought in with the new curriculum, not in the [national ECD] pilot - previously [the
practitioners] only had assignments. The change was directly due to the new qualification.
Trainers at all providers were generally positive in their appraisal of impact on provision, reporting
consistently that quality of provision had improved as a result of the qualifications - in particular in
the more formalised approach to the training:
There are learner materials, practitioner's manuals, facilitator guides; assessment documents, a
guide for portfolios of evidence, marking memoranda. ... We have a learner feedback form for us
to give feedback to learners. We have forms for interviewing learners before midway and before
final assessments. Marks are entered in a cumulative record sheet. The same applies for each
programme. For our assessment manual, unit standards are there; there are model answers for
the facilitators.
Many trainers reported that quality of provision had improved through promotion of reflective
practices:
Our ethos is to encourage people to always critique their work. One learning programme
("Managing the learning programme") has Specific Outcome 5 that speaks to self-evaluation and
reflection. That really made [the practitioners] reflect on themselves and their practice, especially
in the workplace.
Most respondents reported considerable positive change in approaches. Some examples follow:
The methods definitely have changed. In the beginning we thought you have to spoon-feed the
practitioner. We were falling around trying to get photocopying done, but according to the unit
standard requirements it's all stipulated. The unit standards changed the methods because the unit
standards set it out so nicely, giving the trainee her part, and the trainer their part. Methods change
automatically.
To a certain extent things have changed. All our work is learner-centred, outcomes-based, concrete
to abstract, explore and discover. Exploration and discovery allow people to progress at their own
pace.
It changed a lot of stuff. It put more form to the training. It became more logical. Before we were
just trying to get as much information as possible. It changed a lot and uplifted the quality of the
education. I can personally say from feedback from parents indicating that the practitioners are
implementing the qualification. It's a big adjustment for those who did training ten years back.
29
Our training strategy did change with the introduction of the new qualifications. Before we had
modules. When the unit standards came out we had to re-do all our training modules and align with
the unit standards. It was a quite a lot of work. The information was there but it didn't fall into the
unit standard format. It all changed. Before we could just go out and train the people, but now the
ETDP SETA had to come out and approve the materials. Just last year they reviewed our work.
We had to go through our manuals again, and we had to fill in gaps.
We had to change the strategy itself. We couldn't just go out and speak English, we had to do code
switching. The work wasn't user friendly and we had to workshop it amongst ourselves. We came
up with new strategies, for example use of dictionaries to help us to explain to the people. We put
in glossaries. When it comes to fundamentals you're working with people who have Standard 7.
A common response was that assessment had changed more than any other aspect of training as
a result of the changes - this is addressed in more detail in the next subsection. One provider felt
that their facilitation methods have not changed, since experiential learning and group work had
always been used: "It was never chalk and talk." However, training methods have changed as a
result of the requirement to meet each Specific Outcome and Assessment Criterion of the unit
standards - "training is more technically aligned to the unit standards". Others felt that levels of
support for practitioners had increased:
We visit them at their sites, and also help them during training. With their assignments we see
whether they need help. We help them individually or in groups. Now with the new qualifications,
people are getting extra help to do the fundamentals as well ... We all are working much
harder - there is no spare time. The load has increased.
The impact of the qualifications on assessment approaches
Trainers generally reported that their own assessment methods and those used by practitioners at
their sites had changed as a result of offering the qualifications:
•
The quality of assessment has improved with "constant quality monitoring" - assessment
is "much more formalised" and "more structured", and trainers have been required to
complete assessor courses.
•
The former practice of issuing "attendance certificates" has fallen away.
•
The purpose of assessment is better understood.
•
Assessment is based on more practical tasks, and portfolios of evidence are obligatory a
30
range of assessment strategies are used, such as written tasks, construction of learning
materials and observation in role plays.
•
There is a greater emphasis on reflection, and feedback is "more developmental".
•
Assessment records are produced and kept.
•
Results are verified and registered on the National Learners' Records Database (NLRD).
Trainers and management of the providers visited were unanimous in their appraisal of the level of
effort required to undertake assessment as required by the qualifications. One provider summed
up the views of all, describing the new approach to assessment as "incredibly time-consuming and
costly", in particular because of record-keeping requirements, but acknowledging that the benefits
justified the increased workload:
The benefits are increased quality; generally the awareness of each learner's total progress
(or performance) is better documented than before. Perhaps we've changed from a personal
intrinsic knowledge to the paper trail. The changes are definitely attributable to the qualifications.
The impact of the qualifications on RPL practices
The availability and utilisation of RPL tools was variable. For example, one provider had no RPL
instruments. Another had RPL tools that were not at that stage used to award credits - "RPL is used
to advise how much time a student needs to spend on a module." Managers argued that "the unit
standards are too big for us to be able to assess for RPL and give credits." The RPL instrument
was viewed "merely as a supporting tool", and full implementation of RPL was considered
"time-consuming and costly for an NGO". This provider also argued that there had not been a high
demand from learners for RPL. A third provider was conducting RPL with a small numbers of
learners who were already experienced teachers and "mostly white".
RPL was generally thought to be important as a "tool for recognising what people have been doing
for years extremely well", but respondents broadly agreed that RPL "is expensive and brings lots
of challenges".
31
The impact of the qualifications on experiential learning
Practitioners felt overwhelmingly that practical, experiential learning had been integrated into the
learning programme. One practitioner gave the example that she had made musical instruments
for use at the site; many other examples were provided and observed at the sites. Parents from
several rural sites supported by one of the providers confirmed that the training had led to
increased experiential learning for the children at their sites:
In the past they would draw you a traffic light. Now they take the children to urban areas where
they see these things.
When you observe learners in the park, you can see how they apply first aid to other children.
They have learnt it in the class and are able to apply it. About things that are highlighted as
dangers, they are able to warn at home what these dangers are - such as how to handle blood.
Children's awareness of health and safety issues has impacted on parents' behaviour. With the
help of meetings and workshops at the sites, parents are now able to check their children for
symptoms of illness. Parents were also very happy with health and safety conditions at the sites.
Trainers generally felt that practical, experiential learning had always been present in their
programmes - "this has always been a must for us". Many argued, however, that it had become
more formalised as a result of the qualifications.
The impact of the qualifications on learning materials
One group of practitioners described the following effects of the qualification they had undertaken
on their use and understanding of learning materials:
Making learning materials out of nothing - constructing tables, for example. You should have seen
how strong they are, and yet they are made from waste.
Before we did the course we had to buy everything we used to teach children; but now we know
we can use anything to teach ECD.
Before I came here there was absolutely nothing that I was using to help me teach. But it's also
knowing what can be made, as well as the technical aspects of manufacture.
I now have an understanding of child development that underpins what materials can be utilised.
32
This last point was stressed by one provider, who argued that the practitioners had "learned to use
[learning materials] more effectively".
The impact of the qualifications on learner support
There were disparate assessments of the effect of the qualifications on learner support strategies.
One provider argued that their learner support mechanisms had become more formalised, rather
than driven by individual learners' needs, although support was provided to individual learners who
needed additional remedial work. Their practitioners confirmed that they had been well supported
by the provider in their studies - "trainers could provide clarity at any given time". The trainers of a
second provider felt that time spent on site in support of practitioners had decreased as a result of
the qualifications:
Even before, in [our] courses of the 1980s, we used to visit and give support. We feel that before
it was more than now. The curriculum has impacted on time that could be allocated for monitoring.
Previously they had about a week for the visits, and the trainers would also demonstrate at the
sites. Now the curriculum has come with notional time specified, and they cannot be flexible as
before. Due to this we have cut down on a number of activities such as five-day final assessment
workshops, and prolonged site visits.
Although less time is now spent at the sites providing support, these trainers felt that the new
qualifications had focused the support mechanisms in a beneficial way:
When we go out we are monitoring. For example, the Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria
of the unit standard "facilitating healthy development" are more focused and more pre-planned, so
trainers going to sites know exactly what they are looking for, practitioners similarly. Before it was
more general.
The practitioners of this provider confirmed that both peer group support and trainer support had
been beneficial.
A third provider, for example, noted that site visits and learner feedback had become standard
practice as a direct result of the qualifications. The provider's trainers confirmed that levels of
support had improved:
We were obliged to offer a bit more than previously. In terms of meeting the outcomes, we need to
assess according to criteria, and if they are not yet competent, we need to provide help. ... In terms
of the learnership we have to say specifically how we provide the support. Learnership students
get more support, which is paid for.
33
The impact of the qualifications on communities
The impact of the qualifications on communities is difficult to assess directly, because members of
the community - unlike practitioners and trainers - are usually not able to comment on the specific
impact of the qualifications as opposed to the general impact of the work done at the site. It is
possible to deduce, however, that positive community impact is in some cases attributable to
certain elements of the qualifications. Parents interviewed reported the following benefits for
communities:
•
Enhanced entrepreneurship capability
•
Job creation
•
Increased parental involvement in site management, including responsibility for learning
materials, general routine maintenance and the safety of the environment
•
Free access to the sites for parents to observe and participate in children's activities, and
therefore better awareness of the purpose of the activities
•
Better understanding of the value of ECD among parents
•
A shift towards educational toys at home
•
Community utilisation of ECD site facilities, for example for vegetable gardens.
Practitioners and trainers were better placed to assess community impact that is specifically
attributable to the qualifications, and confirmed the positive responses of parents. The following are
typical comments regarding improved community relationships and improved awareness of health
and nutrition:
The issue of openness and transparency has had a positive impact on the parent community.
All the community knows what the learners are learning, as they take questions home. This is new
with the new qualifications: the issues are no longer silent.
We have also contributed to community building: we encouraged the community to start
community gardens thereby providing fresh vegetables.
Now we are able to keep a careful eye and see who is well and who has symptoms and is not well.
We are more observant now than before.
34
The impact of the qualifications on national development
A small number of respondents commented on the importance of the qualifications in terms of
national development. One stressed the importance of ECD as a basis for all training and
development, and noted that ECD has become a political priority. However, ETDP SETA
respondents argued that that the current policy emphasis is on school-based ECD provision, and
that institutional development of community-based sites and training providers is required:
We are looking forward to a time when ECD is prioritised so that there is institutional development
of sites and training providers. This would result in changed ECD practice in total. Now, there are
visible changes in the shack sites, under-resourced buildings that are better resourced through
home-made materials that learners have learned to make in their course. But the cradle
of knowledge is being neglected because government is concentrating on schools.
Factors affecting the impact of the qualifications
One provider's management group suggested that there are tensions in the field that impact
negatively on successful delivery, and that partnerships need to be strengthened. If there were "an
opportunity for all stakeholders, particularly the DoE and NGOs, to come together and build
a common understanding of ECD", that would, in their opinion, make an important contribution to
the field. An example given was that tensions are created as a result of Grade R teachers being
paid higher salaries by DoE.
According to these managers, the challenge regarding the phasing in of Grade R educators, or the
introduction of ECD teachers into the school while they are still attending NGO training, is that it
brings confusion as a result of "different conceptions of ECD" on the part of the different stakeholders.
In this view, the DoE as employer has expectations that may differ from what would be the case in
"a more homogeneous field". This management group reported a migration of practitioners from
community-based sites to schools as a result of the national drive to provide Grade R:
The role of DoE in providing grant-in-aid is motivating people, but it has a negative impact because
it encourages a move to the schools rather than working in community-based sites. Attitudes to
ECD change - the way they work in the community is different to when they join the formal schools.
There they have a higher status, and they don't do proper implementation according to our training,
although it may be proper with respect to the DoE.
The issue of practitioners' salaries was raised by many respondents. It was argued by one
provider's management group that salaries have been overlooked, that "most practitioners do not
get community support and only get money when the child has paid fees", and that "people leave
35
the field easily wherever any work comes up". Other providers confirmed both the migration to public
schools and the difficulties with salaries.
One provider argued that funding is needed for smaller providers who work with the most vulnerable
groups, and linked this to the problem of practitioners' salaries:
Small providers found it difficult to meet all the challenges of accreditation, with staff development,
RPL policy, etcetera. If you didn't have funds to meet this, you would have found it difficult.
That's why learners are still white. Advocacy is weak for ECD. There is no money spent by
government for the most vulnerable groups. Domestic workers are earning far more than ECD
practitioners. So the bigger providers have been able to handle some of the work, but smaller ones
are still struggling ... NGOs collapsed because they don't have the funding or expertise. They move
away to where there is more reward.
One PED reported that the training focus in the province had previously been Grade R, but that it
is considered that the implementation of the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) is now
beginning, which greatly increases the training for practitioners working with children from birth to
age four. The same respondent noted that "there is minimal funding in [the province] for training in
Grade R" although "there are still 5 000 Grade R teachers to train".
Management of one provider argued for greater support for leadership development in the field:
There is very little indication of new leadership emerging in ECD and there is no development of
ECD leadership. Government and DoE seem not to be taking any notice.
Contextual difficulties that impact negatively on the success of the programmes were noted by
providers working in rural areas - "many deep rural sites are very inaccessible" and "sometimes
we have to leave the bakkie on top of the hill and cross the river". In some rural areas, it was
reported that vehicle insurance is only operative from 08.00 to 16.00 because of high crime levels.
One provider questioned the selection criteria for learners who undertake learnerships without prior
ECD experience; it has already been noted that there may be exploitation of learnerships in that
participants do not always pursue ECD as a career but move on to learnerships in other fields.
A positive factor noted by learners and trainers was the use of African languages in delivering the
programme. One group of practitioners gave the following description of how language difficulties
are overcome:
Language is not a problem. Our teachers explain a lot and if students don't understand we ask.
We use student help in translation. Lecturers give us time to understand. Our English is not like the
young ones who are more fluent. For us it's a bit slower. We think in Zulu then translate. But they
give us time to do that.
36
Positive and inhibiting factors in uptake of the qualifications
This section provides a summary of the interview data in terms of positive and inhibiting factors
that favour and inhibit uptake of the qualifications. The factors are presented in Tables 7, 8 and 9
in the following categories:
•
Political and economic factors
•
Social factors
•
Institutional factors.
Table 7: Political and economic factors
Political and economic factors
Inhibiting factors
Positive factors
•
The National ECD Pilot was a key factor in
uptake of new outcomes-based ECD qualifications.
•
Reasons for taking up the programmes or not
are finance driven. For example, the EPWP
tenders stipulate NQF qualifications, and the
ECD Conditional Grant (2002-2005) stipulated
NQF qualifications.
•
Co-operation to provide full qualifications could
be ensured through tenders.
•
The cost of moving practitioners from Level 4 to
6 could be funded in the future by PEDs, with a
national budget to oversee and monitor the
process.
•
One of the provinces reviewed intends to offer
Grade R in all schools by 2010, with qualified
practitioners. Those who are currently at Level
4 will be required to upgrade to Level 6.
•
Providers interviewed reported that market
demands had brought about the switch to the
new qualifications, and recognised the
importance of providing a full qualification.
•
It is possible that the unit costs of NGO
provision are higher than those of public
institutions.
•
It is possible that NGOs, with donor support,
are able to continue with unit standards rather
than full qualifications. This is not in line with
national strategy.
•
Practitioners' salaries in community-based
sites are often minimal - "funding is going to
providers rather than to teachers".
•
In poor communities fees to support ECD
sites adequately - including practitioners'
salaries - are not affordable for many parents.
•
The learnership stipend is an incentive for
disadvantaged students, but a perverse
aspect of this incentive is that students are
reported to move on from ECD learnerships to
learnerships in other fields as new opportunities
arise -"they use it as a way to generate income,
and we are not stabilising the sector".
37
Table 8: Social factors
Social factors
Positive factors
•
Practitioners are "hungry to be developed"
many respondents reported that learners make
personal sacrifices in order to undertake the
programmes. Practitioners reported that completing
the qualifications required "great determination"
on their part.
•
Reasons for undertaking the qualification
included a "passion for children", an "interest in
enriching my knowledge in working with children"
and "being motivated by the community to do this".
These reasons were reported by all the groups
of practitioners interviewed. Practitioners and
trainers reported that "practitioners have been
recognised by the communities in which they
work as qualified educators who can work with
the children". The desire to "open the gate into
higher education" was also mentioned by some
practitioners.
•
The new qualifications meet learners' needs
more effectively because they get a recognised
qualification linked to a R1 500 monthly salary
in Grade R. Generally, career progression was
widely reported as a result of the qualifications,
notably into Grade R in public schools.
38
Inhibiting factors
Many practitioners are working in very poor conditions
where parents cannot afford fees.
Table 9: Institutional factors
Institutional factors
Positive factors
•
NGOs have taken up the qualifications with
enthusiasm.
•
The DoE is exerting pressure on FET colleges
to take up the new qualifications.
•
The ETDP SETA reported that it is guided by its
Sector Skills Plan, which identifies the need to
train both practitioners and trainers. In the period
2003-2005 the ETDP SETA funded 80 Level 5
learners; in 2005-2006 it funded 340 Level 4
learners. From September 2006, the SETA will
fund 150 Level 5 learners (from training
providers) and 150 Level 4 learners (practitioners).
•
The ETDP SETA does not fund skills development
programmes in ECD, only whole qualifications.
•
Some practitioners felt that "language had been
a challenge", but that this was overcome by
providers' use of multilingual trainers.
Inhibiting factors
•
FET colleges appear to have taken up the
qualifications with less enthusiasm, and it was
reported that many continue to offer the
traditional N1-3 qualifications.
•
Support for practitioners in public schools
seems to be variable and dependent on the
attitude of school management.
•
Support for providers to take up the new
qualifications was reported to be variable. For
example, one provider argued that the ETDP
SETA "did not understand how much change
was required", especially in terms of the
management of assessment and uploading
data for the NLRD, which was "fraught with a
huge amount of difficulty".
•
Some providers expressed concern that they
may not be ready to offer a programme in
January 2007 if the new Level 4 qualification
is registered in November 2006.
•
It was reported that some providers
outsourced the development of the fundamental
learning component, while others had the
capacity to undertake this in-house. Some
providers reported that mathematics, in
particular, is a challenge for both providers
and learners, and "more of a handicap for
older practitioners".
39
40
SECTION 4: CONCLUSIONS
Desktop review of uptake and impact
The desktop review shows that data availability is poor for numbers of learners who have
undertaken and completed the ECD unit standards and qualifications, ECD training providers and
types of provider. A firm conclusion, however, is that levels of training provision are low considering
the numbers of sites and practitioners; in particular, learnerships and learnership grants are
provided on a very small scale. An equally important conclusion is that the distribution of training
providers across provinces is very skewed, and that provinces with large rural populations are
clearly disadvantaged in this regard.
It is likely that many providers lack capacity to offer full qualifications, to conduct RPL, to satisfy all
quality assurance requirements and to plan for and implement skills development. Enhanced
capacity building of providers may be required, in particular for small, rural, community-based sites.
Funding is also a challenge, since most ECD practitioners are poorly paid, particularly in poor rural
areas. Training is also more expensive in rural areas. Training provided by NGOs is largely
donor-funded; practitioners contribute very small percentages of the cost.
A final firm conclusion is that that there are important research gaps in the ECD sub-field, notably
with regard to the costs and benefits of ECD provision.
The relevance of the qualifications
A firm conclusion is that the qualifications are relevant to the needs of practitioners and ECD sites.
Less firm conclusions that would require further investigation follow:
•
There may be lack of coverage of the National Curriculum Statement (NCS) especially in
the NGO sector, which has historically catered for community-based sites rather than
Grade R in public schools.
•
There may (in practice) be "two curricula" - one for Grade R and another for the 0-5 age
group. This is not contemplated in the design of the qualifications, but a closer examination
of this possible discrepancy in practice is needed.
•
There may be a need to strengthen the capacity of some providers to develop a sounder
theoretical basis for their very practical programmes.
41
•
More generally, more providers need additional capacity to offer full qualifications, and to
offer these increasingly up to Level 6. Some DoE and provider respondents noted that
smaller unit standards might enable more providers to contribute to full qualifications.
•
One provider felt that smaller unit standard values would also enable it to implement RPL.
•
Some respondents, including the DoE, felt that the qualifications need to give increased
attention to indigenous knowledge and practices.
•
The structure of the qualifications may favour the fundamental learning component at the
expense of the core.
•
Greater flexibility may be needed in terms of content, as several respondents argued that
the fundamental learning component needs to be contextualised.
•
Implementation of the new FET qualification, to be offered in FET colleges, needs to
be monitored and evaluated in terms of relevance, as several respondents felt that there
had been insufficient consultation in the design process.
Articulation and progression
A firm conclusion is that articulation and progression have a sound basis in policy but not always
in practice. While many learners in one province are currently progressing from Level 4 to Level 5,
respondents noted the lack of incentives to continue to raise qualification levels because of poor
salaries. This will be addressed in Grade R through DoE initiatives to raise practitioners'
qualifications to Level 6, but in community-based sites the problem of salaries may persist.
A less firm conclusion is that practitioners may find that they are not given credits when they
transfer to another training institution. This is likely to be a result of the general lack of RPL
capacity, a point addressed in more detail below.
Although several respondents pointed to a possible lack of progression from ECD training to higher
education, it must be noted that a Level 6 qualification - the level felt to be ideal by most
respondents - is located in the higher education band, and that trainers particularly have other
options that can take them to higher NQF levels. As noted above, however, ECD practitioners may
choose not to raise their qualification levels if the resultant remuneration does not warrant the
effort.
Another possible obstacle to progression - which we cannot confirm - is that some practitioners
may find the numeracy component a challenge in progression to Level 4. Providers argue that this
42
component, and the fundamental learning component generally, could be contextualised for ECD
practitioners.
The impact of the qualifications
A firm conclusion is that the impact of the qualifications is positive at ECD sites. Trainers,
practitioners and parents all rated the impact very highly in terms of quality of outcomes. One
dissonant opinion - that site practices were as good before the introduction of the qualifications
should be seen in the light of the overwhelming (and detailed) examples of positive change given
consistently across providers and sites.
Another firm conclusion is that the new qualifications have had a very positive effect on
practitioners' personal and professional development, on training providers as sustainable
organisations, on site communities as well as parental involvement at ECD sites, and on the status
of the ECD sector and its potential for national development:
•
There is overwhelming evidence from trainers, practitioners and parents that the qualifications
have improved the quality of provision at sites and the effectiveness of site management;
aspects of improvement mentioned included learners' self-confidence, learning outcomes,
improved health and safety and more trusting relationships between practitioners and
parents.
•
Practitioners reported unanimously a very positive effect of the qualifications on their
personal and professional lives. Improvements included improved relationships in
various dimensions, enhanced curriculum practices, greater competence in bringing up
their own children, and enhanced leadership and self-confidence. These improvements were
reported to be a direct result of having undertaken the qualifications.
•
The effect on training providers as organisations appears to have been very positive in terms
of status, sustainability and inter-provider co-operation.
A more controversial question is whether the qualifications have impacted on training methods.
The view that training terminology had changed more than training methods is disconfirmed by the
overwhelming evidence of a more organised approach to training aligned to the unit standards.
Trainers in particular gave detailed examples of how training methods had improved, including
greater organisation and focus in the delivery of the training programmes. These improvements
were directly attributed to the qualifications. More than any other aspect of training, assessment
practices have improved as a result of the qualifications. Trainers and providers' managers
unanimously reported that the new assessment requirements were time consuming, but most
43
reported that the benefits - more formalised and more focused assessment, more diverse
assessment strategies and better record-keeping - justified the increased workload.
The evidence available suggests that certain aspects of training methods, such as the use of
experiential learning, may have been strongly present before the introduction of the qualifications.
Others, however, such as the training of practitioners in fabricating low-cost learning materials,
were widely reported as a major improvement in training; in this and other aspects of improvement,
it should be noted that the qualifications themselves are largely based on historical good practice
in the provision of non-formal training. The evidence suggests that learner support has become
more formalised and purposeful, again because support and feedback are aligned to the unit
standards and also because of training for trainers in moderation and assessment. There is no
evidence that other aspects of learner support, such as multilingual practices in training
programmes, are a result of the introduction of the qualifications.
Specific mention must be made of the apparent lack of implementation of RPL. RPL tools were
available to several of the providers interviewed, but implemented only on a small scale. RPL was
generally thought to be an important mechanism in the pursuit of equity, but providers seem to be
struggling with the complexity and expense of large-scale implementation.
Factors affecting the impact of the qualifications
A firm conclusion that can be derived from this study is that partnerships in the ECD sub-field need
to be strengthened, and that certain factors that negatively affect the impact of the qualifications
could be addressed through stronger partnerships and policy dialogue. These factors are
summarised below:
•
The issue of practitioners' low salaries, particularly at community-based sites
•
The reported migration of practitioners from community-based sites to Grade R
•
The need for a common understanding of ECD in the 0-5 age group and Grade R
•
Adequate funding for community-based sites
•
The need for leadership development in the sub-field, and institutional support for training
providers
•
The effect of learnerships on the sub-field, given the reported lack of impact on learners'
subsequent career choices
•
The relatively small numbers of learners supported by the ETDP SETA.
44
Factors affecting uptake of the qualifications
The positive and inhibiting factors in uptake of the qualifications have been itemised in the previous
section. Some concluding comments follow on the factors affecting uptake from a political and
economic perspective:
•
There has been considerable impetus towards formalising ECD provision through
qualifications-based training. Government interventions in the form of policy requirements
and funding have been crucial in the uptake of ECD qualifications. It is likely that this trend
will continue in the public school Grade R segment of the qualifications sub-field, but
less certainly in community-based sites.
•
Especially in the latter type of site, salaries for practitioners are uncompetitive even with
low-skill occupations, and parents in many community-based sites cannot afford fees.
•
It may be advisable to study the different costs of offering the qualifications across types
of provider.
Other comments follow on social factors affecting uptake:
•
There is a predisposition among the providers interviewed towards offering full qualifications,
and a positive attitude towards such training among practitioners which, together with
government policy, is driving market demand. However, learnership based qualifications
may be susceptible to opportunistic uptake of learnerships in different fields to benefit from
stipends rather than to pursue a career in ECD.
•
Community recognition of practitioners is enhanced through the qualifications.
•
However, as noted above ("Political and Economic Factors"), practitioners are often
poorly paid and work in difficult socioeconomic conditions, particularly in community-based sites.
•
Improved job and career opportunities were widely reported. However, because of this,
the qualifications may be causing migration from community-based sites to Grade R in
public schools.
Finally, there appear to be institutional factors affecting uptake:
•
Generally, the providers interviewed had overcome major c h a l l e n g e s i n u p take
(including language barriers). Capacity to offer the fundamental learning component
seems t o b e v a r i able, however, and some respondents questioned whether it is
sufficiently contextualised.
45
•
The less enthusiastic response to the qualifications among FET colleges is likely to be
successfully addressed through pressure from the DoE.
•
The ETDP SETA appears to have funded relatively small numbers of learners in the
period 2003-2005. The numbers of learners and trainers envisaged for funding from
September 2006 are also small.
•
Departments of education may need to ensure that practitioners in public schools are
given more uniform support in undertaking the qualifications.
•
Greater support for providers may be required to enable them to successfully take up the
qualifications - in particular with regard to assessment practices and the design and
management of learner data systems.
•
Readiness to offer the new Level 4 qualification from January 2007 may not be optimal
given the short lead time available for development.
General conclusions and recommendations
Our general conclusions regarding impact and uptake follow:
•
While the impact of the qualifications is found to be positive, policy dialogue and
partnerships for enhanced and more equitably distributed delivery can be strengthened.
Policy dialogue and implementation partnerships will be stronger if the quality and
availability of relevant data on provision are improved.
•
This stronger partnership approach will need to focus on the creation of a well-led, more
homogeneous sub-field, eliminating (for example) apparent discrepancies in training and
funding for community-based sites and Grade R, and increasing the equitable distribution
of training provision.
•
An economic analysis of the sector, including costs and benefits of various modes of
delivery of ECD provision and ECD training provision, would support the positive policy
trends that are being driven by the DoE towards equitable distribution of provision and
would build on the predisposition of providers to increasingly offer full qualifications.
•
A review of the institutional factors affecting uptake (including the paucity of reliable data)
and a plan to address these would also enhance large-scale, equitable delivery in the
sub-field.
46
It must be noted that the case studies of providers - including interviews with managers, trainers,
practitioners and parents - have generated overwhelming qualitative evidence of improved ECD
practice that is in most respects attributable to the qualifications. The most powerfully expressed
evidence is found in the opinions presented by trainers and practitioners - the former referring to
their training methods and the latter to the effect of the qualifications not only on their professional
practice but on their personal lives, including their competence in bringing up their own children.
There is great similarity of views across respondent types. There were a small number of divergent
opinions expressed by providers' managers with regard to the impact of the qualifications, but
these opinions were consistently disconfirmed by trainers and practitioners.
It should be noted that although the parents interviewed were generally less well placed to assess
the specific impact of the qualifications, the views they expressed (and the manner in which they
expressed them) bore very close resemblance to the positive views expressed by most other
respondents.
We note, finally, that the case studies have generated an in-depth, detailed picture of enhanced
ECD provision across all training providers and sites visited, and that this strongly indicates that
the qualifications have made a positive contribution to improved delivery in a sub-field which is
critical to national development
47
REFERENCES
Department of Education. 2005. Report of the Early Childhood Development Conference.
Department of Education: Pretoria.
ETDP SETA. 2005a. Constituency Service Plan for the Early Childhood Development (ECD)
Constituency 2004-2005: Third Version. ETDP SETA: Johannesburg.
ETDP SETA. 2005b. Sector Skills Plan: April 2005 - March 2010. ETDP SETA: Johannesburg.
ETDP SETA. 2006. Annual Report 1 April 2005-31 March 2006. ETDP SETA: Johannesburg.
Johnson, D. 1994. Research methods in educational management. Longman: Harlow.
Nelson Mandela Foundation. 2005. Emerging voices: a report on education in South African rural
communities. HSRC Press: Cape Town.
Nisbet, J. and Watt, J. 1984. Case study: conducting small-scale investigations in educational
management. In Bell, J., Bush, T., Fox, A., Goodey, J. and Goulding , S. (eds.). Harper and Row:
London.
Williams, T. and Samuels, M. 2001. The nationwide audit of ECD provisioning in South Africa.
Department of Education: Pretoria.
48
ANNEXURE 1: RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS
RESEARCH INTO THE UPTAKE OF QUALIFICATIONS IN NEW AND EMERGING
FIELDS OF LEARNING
Research instruments
Introduction
The broad purpose of the work is to conduct research for the South African Qualifications Authority
(SAQA) into the uptake of qualifications in new and emerging fields of learning. The study will
detail the number of qualifications, and of learners engaged in these qualifications, in the subfield
of Early Childhood Development (ECD). The methodology and research design must be applicable
to other fields and sub-fields, to enable longitudinal and cyclical studies to be taken up by SAQA
at a later stage.
Objectives
This research project has the following objectives:
•
Develop a research design, including a sampling strategy.
•
Investigate the scoping (if available) undertaken by the relevant Standards Generating
Body (SGB) prior to the development of the new ECD unit standards and qualifications.
•
Analyse the unit standards and qualifications registered in the sub-field and the extent to
which the forecast (if available) has matched the uptake.
•
Identify and report on the number of accredited providers offering the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Identify and report on the number of learners currently registered for the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Identify and report on the number of learners who have completed the unit standards and
qualifications.
•
Determine the impact of the qualifications on individuals and the sub-field of ECD.
49
•
Prepare a detailed report on the research design, process, findings and recommendations.
The study is thus both quantitative (assessment of uptake) and qualitative (assessment of impact).
Cross-cutting research issues
A number of broad social issues will inform the design of the research instruments, including:
•
equity, including race- and gender-based equity;
•
access;
•
issues related to all other NQF principles.
Research instruments
The research tasks to be undertaken in the field are essentially qualitative. Four instruments are
required as follows:
•
Interview schedule
(national role players)
•
Interview schedule
(providers)
•
Focus group schedule
(learners/practitioners)
•
Focus group schedule
(parents).
50
Instrument 1: Interview schedule
(DoE, PEDs, ETDP SETA, Field 05 Assistant Director)
Purpose
The purpose of this instrument is to:
Obtain respondents' assessment of uptake and impact, but also to ascertain possible reasons for
non-uptake of ECD unit standards and qualifications. Relevant literature produced by or for these
bodies must be requested and delivered to the project manager, preferably in electronic and print
copy.
Schedule
1.
To what extent have providers taken up the new outcomes-based ECD qualifications?
What kind of providers have done so (or have not done so)? What are the reasons for their
taking up (or not taking up) the new qualifications? For example, are new providers
entering the field? Or are old providers switching to the new qualifications?
2.
Is there anything you would like to add regarding uptake of the new qualifications?
3.
Generally, what is the impact (or emerging impact) of the new qualifications? In what
ways have they helped (or hindered) access to ECD in the country/province? Is providers'
practice changing?
The White Paper on Education and Training of 1995 defines ECD as "an umbrella term which
applies to the processes by which children from birth to nine years grow and thrive, physically,
mentally, emotionally, morally and socially" and stipulates that "the care and development of young
children must be the foundation of social relations and the starting point of human resource
development strategies from community to national levels". The respondent should not be limited
to these broad aspects of policy.
3.1
Have the new outcomes-based qualifications contributed to the achievement of the
NQF objectives? To what degree in each case?
•
Do the qualifications, in your view, "form part of an integrated national framework for
learning achievements"?
51
•
Are they facilitating "access to and mobility and progression within education, training
and career paths"?
•
Are they contributing to the "enhancement of the quality of education and training"?
•
Are they helping to "accelerate the redress of past unfair discrimination in education, training
and employment opportunities" (e.g. race or gender discrimination)?
•
Are they contributing to the full personal development of learners and the social and
economic development of the nation at large? (For example, have the new qualifications
8
assisted in (or hindered) the establishment of RTOs? How many have been established
(or closed)? What are the causes of new ventures/closures?)
3.2
Are providers changing their practice as a result of the new qualifications?
(Are they changing their practice or recasting the learning programme on paper to conform
with accreditation requirements?)
4.
Have the new outcomes-based qualifications contributed to the following NQF principles?
•
Articulation (Do they "provide for learners, on successful completion of accredited prerequisites,
to move between components of the delivery system"? For example, NGO provision,
private provision and public schooling?)
•
Progression (Do they help to ensure that individuals can "move through the levels of
national qualifications via different appropriate combinations of the components of the
delivery system"?)
•
Portability (Are learners able to "transfer their credits or qualifications from one learning
institution and/or employer to another"?)
•
Relevance (Is the content of the qualifications appropriate? Useful? "Responsive to national
development needs"?)
5.
Is there anything you would like to add regarding the impact of the new qualifications?
Prompt: before closing and thanking the respondent, request relevant documentation
such as policy, statistics, audits and evaluation reports.
52
Instrument 2: Interview schedule (providers)
Purpose
The purpose of this instrument is to:
Gain an understanding of why the provider has taken up the new ECD qualifications and what
effect the change has had on their learning programmes, on their training methodology
(e.g. experiential methods), and on the learners and practitioners.
The following factors will be taken into consideration:
•
We note that some providers continue to offer non-unit standard-based qualifications.
These providers will not be sampled; the research will, however, assess the impact on
provider behaviour of switching to unit standards-based qualifications.
•
The language or languages of learning and teaching used by different providers may impact
on learner uptake of training, involvement and attainment.
•
The research will e x a m i n e the NQF principle regarding "guidance of learners" (types of
learner/practitioner support, learner/practitioner collaboration and learner/practitioner
tracking systems offered by providers - for example, support for learners who are in isolated
rural communities).
Schedule
1.
When did you begin to provide training for the new outcomes-based ECD qualifications?
Try to get a full description of which programmes are offered, what NQF level they are
offered at and why the provider decided to offer them. Also, probe the history of the
provider - for example, is the provider new to the field, or was the provider previously
offering ECD qualifications not based on unit standards?
Ask question 2 if it is relevant - otherwise proceed to question 3.
2.
Why did you switch to the new qualifications?
3.
What have been the successes and failures in the implementation of training based on
the new qualifications?
What strategies have you used to address the challenges?
53
4.
Has your training strategy changed as a result of offering programmes based on the
new qualifications?
Ask question 5 below if it is relevant - otherwise proceed to question 6. However, before proceeding,
make sure that the respondent understands that "training strategy" in question 5 refers to the aspects
of training listed under question 5 - methods, learning materials, experiential learning, assessment,
RPL and learner support.
5.
If your training strategy has changed:
Prompt: see list below and ensure that the respondent covers all aspects of "training
strategy".
5.1
Have your training methods changed?
Probe: In what ways are learners able to progress at their own pace?
Probe: Do practitioners get more regular feedback? And more developmental feedback?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.2
Have your learning materials changed?
Probe: For example, have they become more practical and illustrative or more technical and abstract?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.3
Have you been able to integrate practical, experiential learning into the learning programme?
Probe: Do you provide opportunities for practitioners to engage in reflection about their learning
and help them change their future practice as a result?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.4
Have your assessment methods changed?
Probe: Has outcomes-based assessment become a process that is owned by the whole
organisation? If it has, how did you achieve this? If not, what are the challenges?
What strategies have you used to address the challenges?
Prompt: Please describe the assessment approach and provide exemplars.
54
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.5
Do you produce and keep assessment records?
Probe: Have you benefited from this as a provider? If so, in what ways?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.6
Do you have instruments and procedures for recognition of prior learning (RPL)?
Probe: If you have instruments for RPL, what have been the successes and failures in
implementation? What strategies have you used to address the challenges?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
5.7
Do you have support mechanisms for practitioners?
Probe: If so, have these support mechanisms changed as a result of the new qualifications?
In what ways?
Probe:
Have you found that the new qualifications help you meet the needs of the practitioners
more effectively? If not, why not? If they have helped, in what ways?
Probe: Is any change attributable to the new qualifications?
6.
Is there anything you would like to add regarding the way in which the qualifications have
changed the way you work as a provider?
Prompt: Has your organisation grown in strength since adopting the new qualifications?
If not, why not? If it has, in what ways?
Prompt: before closing and thanking the respondent, request relevant documentation such as
learner/practitioner statistics, learning programmes, assessment records, learning materials
and evaluation reports.
55
Instrument 3: Focus group schedule (learners/practitioners)
Purpose
The purpose of this instrument is to:
Gain an understanding of practitioner behaviour, such as the effect of the unit standards and
qualifications on their careers generally and their professional practice in particular. This on-the-ground
aspect of impact will be given special attention.
The following factors will be taken into consideration:
•
The ECD Core Unit Standards include the practitioner's ability to manage the learning
programme.
•
Further assessment will relate to the impact on practitioners' abilities to build collaborative
relationships with their parent body, within their communities, and with other related
service providers such as the social development and health services of government.
Schedule
1.
How long have you been working in the ECD field? Why did you enter the field?
All participants should be given a chance to answer. Note that the group will ideally include
pra c t itioners who already manage ECD sites as well as learners who have just begun a
career path in ECD.
2.
What programme have you undertaken through [the provider]?
Responses must be checked with the provider.
3.
Why did you undertake the programme?
4.
What were the highlights and successes of the programme?
5.
What were the challenges and failures of the programme?
56
Prompt: ask the group to comment on each aspect of the training strategy - see question 5 of
Instrument 2:
•
Training methods
•
Learning materials and the content of the qualification
•
Integration of practical, experiential learning into the learning programme
•
Assessment and RPL - ask specifically if they were assessed prior to commencing the
programme, and if this helped them to identify their real needs in training and how
•
Learner/practitioner support
6.
Imagine that you had not undertaken the programme. In what ways would your work be
different?
Prompt: Would it be better/worse? Easier/more difficult? More/less enjoyable?
7.
Please give some practical examples of the ways in which your work is different.
Prompt: In your interaction with children? In the resources that you use? In your interaction with
parents? With the community? With other practitioners? In the way you manage the site?
In your interaction with government departments?
8.
Once again, imagine that you had not undertaken the programme. In what ways would
your life be different?
Prompt: Were you more/less satisfied in your career? In your life more generally? Has it affected
your understanding of and relationship with children?
9.
Is there anything you would like to add regarding the way the qualification has changed
the way you offer ECD?
Prompt if necessary: Have you become more confident, more creative, more caring?
Prompt: thank the participants for their time and insights.
57
Instrument 4: Focus group schedule (parents)
Purpose
The purpose of this instrument is to:
Gain an understanding of parent behaviour.
The following factors will be taken into consideration:
•
The ECD Core Unit Standards include the practitioner's ability to manage the learning
programme. The impact of the training on parents will be assessed.
•
Further assessment will relate to the impact on practitioners' abilities to build collaborative
relationships with their parent body, within their comm u n i t i es, and with other related
s e r v i c e p r o viders such as the social development and health services of government.
Note: In this focus group it is crucial to understand whether the parents' attitudes and behaviours
have changed as a result of the qualification obtained by the ECD practitioners. Therefore, it is
necessary to ascertain the history of their involvement with the ECD site, and to investigate any
changes in their attitudes and behaviours that may be a result of the qualification. All responses
should be tested in this regard.
Schedule
1.
Have you been involved in the development and/or the management of the ECD site that
your child attends? What does your involvement entail?
2.
Did your child attend the site before [give date of end of training]? If so, in what ways has
the site changed?
3.
Do you have a good relationship with the staff at the ECD site that your child attends?
If not, why not? If you do, in what ways?
4.
Has your involvement in the ECD site improved your understanding of the approach t o
t he education, development and care of children? Can you describe the approach?
Prompt: Has your attitude and approach to your own children changed as a result of your
involvement in the site? In what ways? For example, do you encourage your children to paint, to
58
appreciate nature, to care for one another, to express themselves?
5.
In your opinion, how well managed is the site that your child attends?
Prompt: Use the additional questions below to probe what is meant by "manage" in this question.
5.1
Are there parent meetings? Parent workshops? Please describe some examples of these
activities, and comment on how useful they are.
5.2
How do managers of the site communicate with you? How do you know what is happening,
when there are changes, how the site is financially?
5.3
Are you welcome to drop in any time? Can you spend time at the site and be involved in
the children's programmes?
5.4
What is the approach of the ECD site to safety and health requirements?
6.
Is there anything you would like to add regarding the way the site has changed
(as a result of the qualification obtained by the ECD practitioners)?
Prompt: thank the participants for their time and insights.
59
ANNEXURE 2: ECD QUALIFICATIONS AND UNIT STANDARDS
Registered Qualification - Search Results
Searched system for early childhood development
NQF
Level
Qual ID
Qualification Title
20864
Bachelor of Education
Honours: Early Childhood
Development
15531
Level 7
Bachelor of Education:
Early Childhood
Development: Foundation
Phase
5883
Bachelor of Primary
Education: Early
Childhood Development
23114
Learning Sub-field
[Refine search] [View as list]
Result: 1-10 of 10
Standards
Generating
Min
Credits
Provider
ETQA
Field
120
University of
South Africa
CHE
Schooling
Field
480
University of
Pretoria
CHE
Level 6
Early Childhood
Development
Field
480
University of
South Africa
CHE
Basic Certificate: Early
Childhood Development
Level 1
Early Childhood
Development
Field 05 - Education,
Training and
Development
120
15261
Diploma: Education: Early
Childhood Development
and Education
Level 5
Early Childhood
Development
Field
240
Rand
Afrikaans
University
CHE
15289
Further Diploma:
Education: Early
Childhood Development
and Education
Level 6
Early Childhood
Development
Field
240
Rand
Afrikaans
University
CHE
ETDP
SETA
23117
Higher Certificate: Early
Childhood Development
Level 5
Early Childhood
Development
Field 05 - Education,
Training and
Development
120
15952
Higher Certificate:
Educare: Early Childhood
Development
Level 5
Schooling
Field
150
23116
National Certificate: Early
Childhood Development
Level 4
Early Childhood
Development
SGB Early
Childhood
Development
Field 05 - Education,
Training and
Development
120
ETDP
SETA
23118
National Diploma: Early
Childhood Development
Level 5
Early Childhood
Development
SGB Early
Childhood
Development
Field 05 - Education,
Training and
Development
240
ETDP
SETA
60
Level 7
Higher Education
and Training
Body (SGB)
Field
SGB Early
Childhood
Development
SGB Early
Childhood
Development
ETDP
SETA
Intec College
South African Qualifications Authority
PostNet Suite 248
Private Bag X06
Waterkloof
Pretoria
0145
Tel:
+27 (0) 12 431 5000
Fax:
+27 (0) 12 431 5147
Email:
saqainfo@saqa.org.za
Website:
www.saqa.org.za
Helpdesk: 086 010 3188