Stellenbosch University
Founding document
Division Academic Planning and Quality Assurance
2003
Executive summary
On 12 August 2003, the Executive Committee of Senate expressed their support for
the establishment of a support division for quality assurance as proposed by the
Vice-Rector (Teaching); it accepts that the various existing divisions be joined as
proposed, and that the Rector’s Management Team (RMT) will further discuss the
task description of the proposed division for quality assurance. This decision in
principle was accepted by the Senate on 22 August 2003.
The VR(T) is responsible for the implementation of this decision.
On 28 August 2003, the VR(T) discussed this founding document with his teaching
management team as part of the implementation process.
The teaching
management team in turn recommended this document to the Rector’s Management
Team.
On 29 August 2003 the Rector’s Management Team approved this document.
Prof. Jan Botha was appointed by the University as Director Academic Planning and
Quality Assurance, with the mandate to establish the division and to accept the
responsibilities as stated in this document.
1.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
1.1 Institutional considerations
1.
In light of the University’s strategic priorities, quality assurance is of critical
importance. In the Strategic Framework (April 1999) as well as Vision 2012 the
endeavour for excellence is crucial. However, “excellence” in isolation is an
empty concept. It only finds meaning when it is associated with specific issues
where excellence is aspired to. In the US Strategic Framework 1999 and Vision
2012 excellence is associated with excellent scientific contributions, excellent
participation and role playing in South Africa and Africa and excellent
achievement in the establishment of a diverse university community.
2.
The US sees quality assurance as an important mechanism for institutional
renewal. Quality assurance, with all dimensions of planning (institutional
planning, strategic planning, financial planning, etc.) and the allocation of
sources, is one of the University’s instruments and steering mechanisms to
realise its vision and to reach its goals.
1.2 External considerations and its implications to SU
The new national quality assurance system will take full effect from 2004 under
supervision of the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) of the Council on
Higher Education, as determined by the Law on Higher Education (1997). It therefore
1
follows that all Higher Education institutions in South Africa must formally comply in
their functioning to these responsibilities. The HEQC is responsible for institutional
audits, program accreditation, quality development and the coordination of the
national quality assurance system (including the activities of professional bodies that
are active in Higher Education). It is expected of the University to demonstrate
accountability through internal and external evaluation processes in terms of this
national system. The national quality assurance system includes the following
implications for Stellenbosch University (SU):
a) The first comprehensive external institutional audit of the SU by the HEQC
will take place in the period between 2004 and 2006. The institutional selfevaluating and preparation work with the eye on this audit is an extensive and
drastic task.
b) The new national system of full program accreditation in the case of new
programmes (of all professional as well as non-professional programmes) will
take effect from 2004.
c) At the end of 2006 SU must have the following achievements completed
and/or in place in order to apply for institutional self-accreditation:
a. an institutional audit with a positive result,
b. an effective quality assurance system for research,
c. successful accreditation of new (or drastically changed existing)
programmes between 2004 to 2006,
d. an effective self-evaluating system for existing professional and nonprofessional teaching,
e. successful internal and external evaluation of a number of existing nonprofessional programmes in terms of this system,
f.
successful internal and external evaluation of the MBA-programme as
well as the programmes that will be evaluated by the HEQC themselves
during 2004 and 2005,
g. an effective functioning policy and system for the quality assurance of
community interaction and service learning,
h. an effective system for the assessment and recognition of previous
learning experiences,
i.
an effective system for the training of assessors,
j.
an effective system for the handling of short courses,
k. an effective system for the quality assurance of the management
processes on all levels of the University,
l.
an effective system for the quality assurance of support service
environments (professional, academic, technical, administrative, etc.).
2
d) A key element of the South African national quality assurance system is that
universities must be able to give proof of the progress the institute is making
to satisfy the national aims of higher education (as stipulated in the
National Plan for Higher Education, 2001). According to this national aims,
the performance of the University of Stellenbosch will therefore be measured
as part of the audit and the continuous accreditation activities, i.e.
a. to provide the necessary graduates for the social and economic
development of South Africa,
b. to attain redress in the South African Higher Education system,
c. to attain diversity in the South African Higher Education system,
d. to sustain and promote research,
e. to restructure the institutional landscape of the South African Higher
Education system.
SU cannot afford to be unsuccessful with the first round of applications for
institutional accreditation. The acquiring of self-accreditation is of critical importance
for the reputation of the University. Many activities must therefore be planned,
managed and applied. This is an extensive and gruelling task.
1.3 Establishment of the function “Quality Assurance” on central level
1.
In light of the above mentioned considerations the University formally
establishes the function Quality Assurance on executive management level and
place it in the portfolio of the VR(T).
2.
The management of quality is an integral part of the normal line management
responsibilities of all academic and non-academic line managers at SU.
3.
The management of the extensive and integrated quality assurance system at
SU is assigned to a functionary, i.e. the Director Academic Planning and Quality
Assurance. This functionary has the full time responsibility for this tasks and
supports the VR(T) by the fulfilment of his responsibility for the overhead
executive management of the function Quality Assurance. The appointment of a
functionary to act as manager of quality assurance at institutions is a
requirement set by the HEQC.
4.
To support the Director Academic Planning and Quality Assurance the
University establishes a new support division, known as the Division Academic
Planning and Quality Assurance, commencing 1 September 2003, or as soon
as possible thereafter.
3
2.
ACADEMIC PLANNING
2.1 Internal considerations
At the University academic planning, as such, is first and foremost the
responsibility of the academic managers and academic leaders, i.e. the
departmental chairmen and the deans.
Due to internal institutional matters as well as an entire spectrum of external
developments that impacts on effective academic planning, the responsibility for
function academic planning has for a considerable time already been formally
established on executive management level in the portfolio of the VR(T).
Academic planning forms a key dimension of the portfolio of the VR(T). This
responsibility includes among others that the VRT) will take initiatives to realise the
vision of the University in the area of academic planning. It further involves that the
VR(T) will anticipate future developments that will impact on the University in this
area and in time and pro-actively take the necessary countering steps.
At institutional level, academic planning forms a fundamental dimension of all the
planning activities of the University. Other forms of planning – e.g. institutional
planning, strategic planning, financial planning, physical planning – are
interdependent and arise from the planning of the core academic functions of the
University.
In the current phase of development of SU, and given the current comprehensive and
drastic renewal processes, it is of critical importance that the academic core functions
and the proper planning of this core functions play their proper role in all the activities
of the University.
On operational level overhead management of the internal approval processes of
new and amended programmes is the responsibility of the VR(T), as chairman of the
Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) and the Senate’s Academic Planning
Committee (APC).
2.2 External considerations
The discussions of government with regards to the transformation of Higher
Education in South Africa had great implications for the academic planning function
of institutions. The following aspects of academic planning sets high demands for
the University:
a. the merging and incorporation of a subdivision of the University (School
of Oral medicine) at the University of the Western Cape,
b. the processes of regional co-operation and rearrangement in context of
the Cape Higher Education Consortium (CHEC) (e.g. the future of the
presenting of undergraduate Nursing qualifications),
c. the entire range of regional reviews of “overlapping” programmes
required by the Department of Education and the implementation of the
decisions arising from this,
4
d. other forms of programme co-operation that are required (e.g.
Technikon Port Elizabeth with regards to Forestry programmes),
e. further forms of rationalisation and regional co-operation that are
required, especially in the area of Health sciences,
f.
the development of new programmes and the continuous amendment of
existing programmes and modules,
g. the national processes of (і) approval by the Department of Education
that a new programme can be presented in the programme and
qualification mix (PQM) of SU, (іі) accreditation of new and amended
programmes by the HEQC, (ііі) registration of qualifications by SAQA,
(iv) approval of funding by the Department of Education.
2.3 Establishment of the support service function “Academic Planning”
on central level
It goes without saying that the VR(T) must have enough services to his disposal on
substantial, conceptual and operational level to properly fulfil these responsibilities.
The support function “programmes” was located in the University-Education (Uni-Ed)
Division since January 2000. This function is now being expanded to include support
from other facets of academic planning (as set apart in paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2). The
function will be established on 1 September 2003 or as soon as possible thereafter in
the Division Academic Planning and Quality Assurance.
The Director Academic Planning and Quality Assurance serve as anchor person and
representative of the VR(T) in the planning processes of the University with regards
to the academic proposition of the University.
To support the Director Academic Planning and Quality Assurance in the execution
of this task the Division Academic Planning and Quality Assurance will be
established on 1 September 2003 or as soon as possible thereafter.
3.
DIVISION ACADEMIC
ASSURANCE
PLANNING
AND
QUALITY
3.1 Area of instruction of the Division Academic Planning and Quality
Assurance
1. To serve as anchor point for the institutional academic planning function of the
University (as defined in this document).
2. To develop the comprehensive and integrated quality assurance system of the
University.
3. To facilitate and manage the implementation of the quality assurance system at
institutional level (including the institutional audit, the accreditation of
programmes and the quality assurance processes with regards to support service
environments).
5
4. To initiate and facilitate policy development in the areas of quality assurance and
academic planning.
5. To connect, on behalf of the University, with relevant bodies of national and
regional level specifically with regards to quality assurance and academic
planning. With regards to academic planning it includes connecting with CHEC,
SAQA, Department of Education, the HEQC, etc. With regards to quality
assurance it involves connecting with the HEQC, NRF, MNC etc.
6. To interpret the national policy development in Higher Education concerning
academic planning and quality assurance, communicating it appropriately within
the University and to undertake need directed research in Higher Education.
3.2 Reporting and personnel
1. The Division Academic Planning and Quality Assurance report to the VR(T) with
close links with regards to quality assurance with all three Vice-Rectors, the
Executive Director Finance, the Manager Innovation, the Deans and, as
necessary, with line functionaries within all these responsibility centres.
2. All instructions and requests for the Director Academic Planning and Quality
Assurance are channelled to the VR(T). The Director, therefore, only reports to
one person.
3. There are five personnel members in the Division Academic Planning and Quality
Assurance:
a. A Director (Post level 5)
b. A Co-ordinator: Evaluation (Post level 8)
c. A Co-ordinator: Programmes (Post level 9.1)
d. An Information system officer (Post level 12.1)
e. A Secretary (Post level 11.1)
3.2.1 Membership of committees
The Director Academic Planning and Quality Assurance is member of the following
bodies and committees:
1. Member of the Senate (in terms of the Statute that makes provision for additional
persons to be declared members of the Senate by decision of the Senate and
approved by the Council).
2. Ex officio member of the Academic Planning Committee.
3. Ex officio member of the Institutional Quality Committee.
6
4. Ex officio member of the Programme Advisory Committee.
3.2.2 Linking with other divisions and processes
The Division Academic Planning and Quality Assurance links closely with

the Management Information Division

the functionary/division responsible for Institutional Planning

the functionary/division responsible for other facets of planning (e.g. strategic
planning, financial planning, physical planning, etc.)
Good practices at other institutions suggest that quality assurance and planning must
be closely synchronised and integrated. The HEQC highlights the close connection
between these two matters, which is one of the formal criteria of the institutional audit
process.
Since the national quality assurance system handle both institutional audits and
programme accreditation as part of quality assurance, it is desirable/necessary that
the support of the programme function (as facet of academic planning) and quality
assurance be established in the same service environment. It is currently the practice
at various other South African universities.
7