A DECADE OF SOUTH AFRICAN HIGHER EDUCATION
POST DEMOCRACY: An Overview
N Barney Pityana1
The decade since the establishment of democracy and constitutional rule in South
Africa in 1994, was marked by feverish activity, policy formation and restructuring of
the fabric of society. Educational reform and transformation have been at the heart of
these major reforms. The transformation agenda has had to be thoroughgoing and, in
some instances, radical. That has had to be so because of over 300 years of white
minority rule and the last 50 years of Afrikaner Nationalism and the pernicious
apartheid dictat. During that very long period, black people have never determined
their own educational system. They have imbibed an educational dispensation that
was designed to secure perpetual inequality and inferiority. Given that history,
therefore, it was to be expected that the new democratic government would prioritise
education for special attention.
And yet, a radical approach had to be tempered with the recognition that the new
government was committed to governing within the precepts of the rule of law and
constitutionalism. The reality is that the democratic government did not have free rein
to govern only according to the historical promises of the ANC, the liberation
organisation which represented the majority of the people of the country. Somehow,
reform had to be orderly and measured – in the process more South Africans would be
won over to value the dividends of democracy. The South African historic
compromise was reflected in the 1993 interim Constitution.
The final Constitution was adopted in May 1996. The Preamble to the Constitution
states the objectives of the new dispensation as follows:
(to) heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values,
social justice and fundamental human rights;
(to) lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is
based on the will of the people, and every citizen is equally protected by law;
1
Principal and Vice Chancellor: University of South Africa.
2
(to) improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person;
and
(to) build a united and democratic South Africa able to take its rightful place as a
sovereign state among the family of nations…
This Constitution also has an entrenched Bill of Rights which is the “cornerstone” of
our democracy. The section on Education (s.29) the Bill of Rights states that everyone
has a right to “further education, which the state through reasonable measures must
make progressively available and accessible.” Elsewhere (s.16(1) (d)) the Bill grants
the right to freedom of expression which includes “academic freedom and freedom of
scientific research…” These developments therefore place certain obligations on state
to “respect, protect, promote and fulfil” these rights. The state has to take positive
measures to bring about the realisation of these rights. Overseen by the Constitutional
Court, with independent bodies like the Human Rights Commission empowered to
monitor violations of human rights, the state remains accountable for its actions and is
bound to give effect to the Constitution.
Education policies fashioned throughout the Decade therefore sought to operationalise
and give effect to these constitutional ideals. The year 2004 saw a reflection on 10
years of democratic rule. This process was led by the government which published its
own thoroughgoing 10 year review of government. Conferences were held which
critically analysed progress made so far and the extent to which changes were made
improved the lives of the people and, indeed, the extent to which the fabric of society
had changed for the better. During such events, South Africans set out for themselves
the challenges of the next decade and strategies for advancing the democratic agenda
further.
Among these assessments is one by the Council on Higher Education, South African
Higher Education in the First Decade of Democracy, November 2004. The document
sets out the achievements of the decade of democratic policy formation and
educational application during the first decade of democracy, including as it does,
policy papers, including white papers on education, laws passed and plans adopted. It
sets out the critical options that were adopted and the challenges faced. In this paper I
shall avoid traversing the same ground but I shall endeavour to highlight aspects of
public policy in higher education and their implications for the future. To do so,
3
however, I shall have to situate my presentation in a context of the apartheid and
white minority dispensation that had settled the South African social and political
environment and was set to shape its future. How this society could break out of that
is an important study in social and political dynamics.
The Social and Political Context
It is not always appreciated that by the end of the second millennium, white
settlement in Southern Africa had been continuous for about 400 years. During that
time Europeans had dug deep roots in Africa, their cultures had become embedded in
African soil. They had brought with them European missionary zeal in education,
religion, the arts and in science. They brought industry and manufacturing. They
established and reshaped, and eventually, dominated the economy of these African
lands for generations. It is in Southern Africa though where they were to make their
last stand, and claimed affinity to Africa as to have no other home but Africa. What
actually happened is that they ceased emotionally to be Europeans but became white
Africans giving new meaning to the identity of Africa
The characteristic of higher education under successive white minority regimes was
that white people were privileged and white consciousness was considered the
intellectual and educational norm. In South Africa the policy was separation or
apartheid. Two parallel public educational systems for the English speaking and
Afrikaner South Africans developed. These universities reflected the twin origins of
settler mentality in South Africa in language and culture, England and Holland; Dutch
reformed and English protestant, liberal and democratic, as against conservative,
puritan and authoritarian. These ideals soon translated into distinct political forces that
contended for power in South Africa since the end of the Anglo-Boer War (1902),
through to the Union of South Africa (1910). It can be said that Afrikaner Nationalism
eventually triumphed.
It was in that battle for total supremacy that the majority black people of the country
fell victim. This oscillated over decades from Afrikaner nationalism, but it also
entailed the pervasive white interests which bound all white South Africans, though at
times, English liberal arrogance contested for the dominance of the wardship of black
4
people. The University College of Fort Hare, therefore, was established in 1916 as an
alternative ideal set in the liberal missionary tradition. It sought to provide for black
South Africans, higher education modelled on the monastic tradition as John Henry
Newman would have understood it, but also affirming of the future of the country
governed by black people.
The landscape by the late 1980s therefore was that all public universities were divided
into English-medium and Afrikaans medium, with different ethos and traditions. Even
in the English-medium universities with their much-vaunted liberalism, black people,
both students and faculty were barely tolerated, alienated and treated no differently
from the dominant apartheid norms. The Afrikaans-medium universities were
uncompromising in their adherence to apartheid dictat and as the intellectual
ideologues of the apartheid system. By 1959, the regime had passed the extension of
Universities Act which led to the establishment of “bush” colleges, tertiary
establishments designed for black people, according to their tribal or language
background as well as for Coloured and Indian South Africans, thereby effectively
reducing the historic Fort Hare to one of these apartheid creations even though the
institution has a different and proud history. Because of the proliferation of apartheid
institutions, the political control and management of these institutions was spread over
some eight government bodies. Separation and proliferation was by no means the
worst of this apartheid dispensation.
A more serious matter for higher education was the fact that universities in my view
at that time represented closed systems. The environment was contrary to the
principles and values of free intellectual exchange and the pursuit of knowledge. The
authoritarian hand of government was not universally and consistently resisted, and at
the height of resistance, institutions were co-opted into the state security system.
Many universities modelled themselves on European universities, where for a time,
academic exchanges were common, and many South African academics acquired
their senior degrees. As the academic boycott and isolation of apartheid movement
began to bite, these exchanges were reduced to a trickle. One can only assume that
this led to universities becoming even more inward-looking, and soon recycling their
own ideas which were not receiving adequate intellectual challenge and evaluation by
5
their peers. Apartheid therefore seriously compromised the legitimacy of the
academic enterprise.
The system of higher education, therefore, in summary, was divided according to
colour and ideology. It was fragmented and uncoordinated. Authority was dispersed
across a number of governmental institutions. It was blatantly unequal, unfair, unjust
and racist. It was breeding ground for all manner of intellectual perversions where
mediocrity became the standard of achievement. And yet, ironically, that is the system
that germinated the seeds for its own destruction. It produced intellectual rebels and
free-spirits who thought beyond the confines of the propaganda that was meted out to
them. They were in a quest for more and better understanding and knowledge.
The Foundations of Higher Education Policy
For the ANC, education policy could best be understood against the background of its
own history and struggles. Not only were many of the ANC leaders first generation
literates in their own families, they had a strongly held view that education was
capable of transforming one’s life circumstances for the better and in an enduring
manner. They also understood that the future for black people was reliant on the
educated elite who would provide leadership to overcome the obstacles of white
minority rule. The Freedom Charter was probably the first definitive policy statement
on how the ANC viewed education. The Charter as, according to Nelson Mandela in
his autobiography A LONG WALK TO FREEDOM (1994:158) was the brainchild of
the revered Prof ZK Matthews. Soon the Freedom Charter adopted at Kliptown 1955
became the rallying cry and statement of the political ideals of the black majority. The
Charter states that “The Doors of Learning and Culture shall be opened…” The ANC
envisioned a qualitatively different understanding of the purposes of education, one
that was free and which freed the minds of learners to think independently, to advance
and develop intellectually. Nelson Mandela stated unambiguously in 1956 that the
Freedom Charter was a “revolutionary document precisely because the changes it
envisages cannot be won without breaking up the economic and political set-up of
present South Africa.” Today, the ANC in government is celebrating the 50th
anniversary of the adoption of the Freedom Charter. South Africa today pays tribute
6
to the foresight and sagacity of ZK Matthews who bequeathed to this nation the idea
of a Freedom Charter.
But the Freedom Charter was only one of the many instruments for the transformation
of education in South Africa. With the outbreak of Soweto 1976, the ANC in exile
matured into a government in waiting. Policy perspectives were produced which
sought to elaborate the Freedom Charter. Internally, a wide-ranging education
transformation movement developed and instruments like NEPI and EPUs were
formed at universities. Upon its return the democratic movement established its own
education think-tanks. By 1993 ideas about education reform were in ferment. The
ANC pledged to establish a commission to investigate higher education immediately
upon assuming the reins of government.
Following the report of the National Commission for Higher Education in 1995, a
White Paper was published in 1997. The Education White Paper No 3 “A Programme
for the Transformation of Higher Education” (July 1997) was preceded as the then
Minister of Education said, by a process of consultation and stakeholder engagement
which led to the emergence of a general consensus about the broad policy framework
for higher education. The White paper itself was later that year translated into the
Higher Education Act, 1997. The transformatory tone of the policy was set out in the
Purposes for Higher Education in the paper:




To meet the learning needs and aspirations of individuals through the
development of their intellectual abilities and aptitudes throughout their lives.
Higher education equips individuals to make the best use of their talents and
of the opportunities offered by society for self-fulfilment. It is the key
allocator of life-chances, an important vehicle for achieving equity in the
distribution of opportunity and achievement among South Africans.
To address the development needs of society and provide the labour market,
in a knowledge-driven and knowledge-dependent society, with ever-changing
high-level competencies and expertise necessary for the growth and
prosperity of a modern economy. Higher education teaches and trains people
to fulfil specialised social functions, enter the learned professions or pursue
vocations in administration, trade, industry, science and technology
and the arts.
To contribute to the socialisation of enlightened, responsible and
constructively critical citizens. Higher education encourages the development
of a reflective capacity and a willingness to review and renew prevailing
ideas, policies and practices based on a commitment to the common good.
To contribute to the creation, sharing and evaluation of knowledge. Higher
education engages in the pursuit of academic scholarship and intellectual
7
inquiry in all fields of human understanding through research, learning and
teaching.
These objectives have shaped the manner in which higher education has been viewed
in South Africa under successive ministers. This clearly marks a transformation
agenda from the legacy of apartheid and centuries of white minority rule.
Transforming the Higher Education Landscape
The period since 1994 was characterised by high expectations and agitation. Many
universities had to face the challenge of admissions. A large number of black students
previously forbidden from these institutions had to be admitted. Many of them had
inadequate financial means to mean the university’s financial obligations. Admissions
and financial aid became the point of agitation for many students. Staff also became
unionised and trade unions became active on university campuses. It meant that a
bargaining system had to be put in place, something that universities were never used
to. Salaries and conditions of service came under the spotlight. With it questions of
employment equity and racial employment practices were under challenge. The
authority of the Vice Chancellor was also under review, and so was the establishment
of governance systems at universities. This meant that the Vice Chancellor had to
manage the university with equal regard to the diversity of interests within then
institution. A consultative approach was considered ideal for this circumstances but it
also paralysed management and weakened the authority of the Vice Chancellor. A
whole new management culture had to evolve in campuses across the nation.
Black staff and students were much more assertive. Demands for reform were urgent
and reaching a crescendo. The appointment system for Vice Chancellors and senior
management was popularised, with participation by all the stakeholders. This tended
to introduce the concept of co-management and blurring of the lines of responsibility.
University councils in these circumstances played a crucial role. In many instances
the Councils shared and expressed the agitation driven by staff and students. They
were inclined to take an activist role in campus politics and interfered with
management in a bid to advance transformation. In such a climate nobody won. This
generated confusion and atrophy. The academic project, it could be said, was the
casualty.
8
Bureaucratic oversight of higher education institutions also increased during this time.
Oversight institutions and accreditation bodies like the CHE and SAQA were
established. This meant that a qualifications regime, quality assurance and an
accreditation system were put in place. The Department of Education adopted a new
language “steering” meaning that the department puts in place certain mechanisms
and monitors compliance. These mechanisms are designed to guide how universities
use resources and account for them. This bureaucratic control was also extended to
the Minister giving himself power in certain circumstances to appoint “an assessor”
and later an “Administrator”. This gave the Minister power to interfere in the affairs
of the university or to put in place corrective mechanisms as necessary.
Under pressure from students for “free” higher education, the government introduced
an innovative system of higher education funding for student fees called NSFAS.
NSFAS has relieved many deserving and indigent students from the burden of paying
their own way through universities. They can now receive a loan which, depending on
progress, can be translated in part into a bursary. It also provides a revolving fund to
meet student fees. The problem, some would argue, is that it burdens students with
debt even before they begin their working or professional lives.
An even greater challenge must involve the funding of higher education. A new
Funding Framework has now been introduced. It makes provision for a block grant,
which includes the weighting of certain CESM categories and levels of study,
postgraduate studies, and throughput incentives. Separately it allows for funding for
special categories and institutional factors for capital development. This is seen as a
steering mechanism to ensure that universities achieve government’s public policy
objectives. With it, as you might expect, comes an enormous administrative burden
and bureaucracy for which universities are not compensated.
Although the agitation of the early ‘90s has now toned down, the underlying issues
have not been resolved. To date we still find students trashing campuses and
demonstrating against fee increases; we get workers demonstrating for higher wages,
universities managements are having to do with dwindling finance resources and must
meet competing demands and a variety of expectations.
9
An Evolving New Higher Education Environment
By the end of the ‘90s it was being questioned whether universities were serving a
useful purpose. Loud criticism was being expressed about the pace of transformation
and about commitment to the democratic ideals set out in the Constitution and
championed by government. More seriously, an imperative was felt that the apartheid
structures of tertiary institutions had to be addressed so that the prevailing inequalities
can be mediated. As the CHE Report puts it
By the mid ‘90s, public confidence in the ability of higher education to deliver
accountably while at the same time satisfying the requirements of the new order was
low (2004:15).
One idea was to establish a “redress fund” for the historically disadvantaged
institutions but this was soon abandoned as unaffordable. There were several other
unstated concerns. One was the fact that many of the historically white institutions
continued to practise forms of discrimination which resulted in many black students
dropping out in large numbers or failing to complete their studies in time. Some raised
questions about the academic merit of some of the historically disadvantaged
universities, “the bush” colleges or the Bantustan universities. Not enough investment
had been devoted to these institutions, the fabric and facilities were not adequate,
library and laboratory facilities were poor. They could not attract academics with
experience and high academic merit because most were located in backward rural
areas.
An opportunity to make a radical restructuring of higher education was, however, lost.
The Macozoma Commission on the size and shape of higher education, failed to
generate enough public confidence in their proposals. In particular, they were
perceived to be targeting historically black universities and boosting the white
universities. They were also thought to have failed to recognise black institutions of
high merit. The underlying principles on which the proposals were made lacked merit.
For example, they argued that universities located in rural areas were not sustainable
and that an ideal size of a university was 8 000 fee paying students. In January 2001,
the Minister of Education published the National Plan for Higher Education. It is,
according to the Minister, “a strategic framework for re-engineering the higher
education system for the 21st century.” The essential elements of the Plan are (i)
10
determining participation rates in higher education; and (ii) steering the balance of
enrolments in the next five to ten years towards increasing participation in the
sciences, engineering and technology and decreasing humanities; (iii) improvement of
graduation rates; and (iv) promotion of equity and access.
In December 2002, following the publication of the report of the National Working
Group, the Minister announced proposals for the merger and incorporation of various
universities and technikons. A separate Working Group had been established to give
effect to the proposal in the NPHE to establish a ‘single, dedicated distance education
institution…” The plan was to decrease the number of higher education institutions
from 36 to 21 and to establish two national institutes for higher education in Northern
Cape and Mpumalanga, where no universities or technikons currently existed. The
first set of mergers came on stream in January 2004, the next in January 2005 and the
last is set for July 2005. Criticism of this policy remains. In the first instance, it is
driven bureaucratically by the Minister without any felt need from within the
institutions themselves. Second, the plan has left untouched, in any event, many of the
concerns about higher education elite institutions remaining untouched and
unreformed and many merged which make no practical sense. Finally, funding for the
mergers remains inadequate.
Fundamental problems about the transformation of higher education remain. In large
measure, many institutions have appointed black people into senior executive
positions. Even though black student numbers have increased almost to parity in
previously white institutions, institutional culture and ethos remain alienating to a
large number of black students. Of equal significance is that many of these institutions
have not attracted and managed to retain many black academics. As a result, students
in these institutions are without role models and mentors in the academic and personal
development. The principle that the university is an inclusive community of
academics and learners reflecting the social demographics of our society has now
been well established in South Africa. That inclusivity, however, has not yet
translated into curriculum and research priorities. The curriculum in many universities
has hardly changed over the last decade. The result is that the vision and mission
statements of many institutions which profess to become African universities or ones
that reflect their African consciousness become empty slogans. The redesigning of
11
curriculum has become an urgent imperative if the integrity of higher education is to
be achieved.
The challenges we face
Public Confidence: Higher education in South Africa needs to earn the confidence
and trust of the communities and nation it seeks to serve. President Mbeki puts this at
the centre of the mission of the university, when he says
If the education system, particularly at higher levels, is to supply society with citizens
of vision and commitment, it must win and enjoy the respect of the whole society and
must be accessible to all.2
Higher education institutions constantly come under intense scrutiny in a manner that
other public bodies are not subjected to. Often the media spotlight and criticism by
public officers and politicians is never justified. For example, in South Africa
recently, one of the newspapers published a story which it represented as a scoop,
about the salaries of higher education chief executive officers. In a way, the article
was sensationalised because the earnings of Vice Chancellors are now disclosed in the
Annual Financial statements which are submitted to the Department of Education.
Besides trashing a particular Vice Chancellor on his earnings, the article failed to
address some obvious matters, not just whether governance procedures were observed
but also criteria for determining an appropriate salary for a Vice Chancellor, factors to
be borne in mind and the performance criteria required of a Vice Chancellor. Equally,
it did not address the manner by which the Vice Chancellors’ salary should be
benchmarked against what? It definitely was wrong to compare against the perceived
salary of the President whose full package and privileges in any event can never be
fully appreciated.
The other was the Minister of Labour in relation to the skills shortage in the country.
Without getting to the bottom of what higher education institutions can do within their
missions, the shortage of skills was blamed on higher education. Finally, there was a
major furore in December, about the proposal of SAUVCA and CTP on enrolment
assessment which should accompany the new FETC. The impression was created that
universities simply want to keep learners out of the university system or make it
2
Inaugural Lecture at ACU/Mandela-Rhodes Foundation and African Leadership Awards, UCT, 4
November 2004
12
difficult for deserving students to access universities. Nothing could be further from
the truth. No one seriously takes account of the fact that part of the reason that the
graduating rates are so low, is because of the gap between school and university.
Universities spend more resources in access and academic assistance programmes –
something that is not their responsibility. It is clear to me that universities are not
going to attract many deserving and gifted young people to enter academic life as a
career. The reason is that universities enjoy such a low public esteem in this country.
President Thabo Mbeki recently stated as follows in a speech at the University of
Cape Town:
…education must be accorded recognition as a space for unfettered intellectual
enquiry. It must be trusted for its critical objectivity, its quality, and for its capacity
for public accountability.
The President missed a golden opportunity to make good this promise when he gave
the State of the Nation Address in Parliament on 11 February 2004. In a wide-ranging
address, the President set out what needed to be done to continue the transformation
of society and to better the lives of South Africans. Nowhere did he mention the
universities. He could have stated that he saw higher education institutions as central
strategic partners in the realisation of the plans. He did not do so thereby failing to
give effect to that which he himself had stated.
.
It is possible that there be a vibrant public debate and intellectual engagement without
sacrificing the image and prestige of the university as a place of pride in national life.
More strategic advantage could be leveraged out of the Presidential Working Group
which the President convenes with Vice Chancellors twice a year. To be of value
though the PWG should be more focused and targeted in its deliberations and
outcomes.
University as a transformed intellectual space: Universities need to advance rapidly
to establish themselves as spaces for intellectual debate and scientific enquiry. It is not
necessary that universities must simply reflect society with all its faults and
shortcomings. Frankly, universities can become the kinds of spaces societies aspire to
become. It should be a place of freedom, of experimenting and of engagement. The
purpose is for the university to establish conditions conducive to such activities in
learning, library, and laboratory, publishing and social dialogue. To do so, universities
13
must attract the best minds possible as students and later as academic staff and
researchers; must be able to retain them and excite them about the possibilities of
university life as a career and excite them to be inquisitive enough to research. This is
the environment that will make Africa the locus for intellectual inquiry that will
establish a community of African scholars, and disseminate world class African
scholarship.
Financing of higher education: The funding of higher education in South Africa has
become an intractable problem. At one level, expenditure on education in general is
high by any standards comparable to the rest of the line items in the GDP. And yet in
real terms, funding for higher education has been progressively decreasing since
1987, even though the rate of the participation rate in higher education has more than
doubled since then. In addition, those new entrants come from underprivileged
backgrounds. In general new demands, as well as public expectations, have increased
the needs for resources. NSFAS has come in to the rescue and has increased
opportunities for many deserving students.
But the aspiration to become not just viable but also reputable universities does mean
that funding must go beyond operational costs in salaries, maintenance. Investment in
plant and facilities, library acquisitions, laboratory equipment and instruments and
new capital developments must be provided for. What higher education managers
need is more certainly and stability. The MTEF and three-year rolling plans provide a
measure of that in South Africa. But besides mere access to resources, however, there
is a need of change of mindset. In truth, the state has responsibility for the provision
of higher education for all the reasons that the Education White Paper No3 and the
NPHE as well as the Constitution so eloquently state. What is often missing is the
understanding that the state needs the partnership with the university management and
governance structures to deliver on what it promises.
Without belabouring the point, the financing of higher education in developing
countries should never be the sole responsibility of the state. The private sector should
be playing its role. In South Africa, the private sector is withdrawing from this
responsibility. What we find is that more corporations are establishing their own
corporate training and education facilities; less funds are available for bursaries and
14
fewer chairs are being endowed by the private sector. It may be that this matter should
be debated at the forthcoming Education Summit in March.
Africanisation: All South African universities have expressed commitment to their
African identity. Many of them, however, still need to work out what this African
identity actually entails. For one thing, South African universities have been attracting
growing numbers of students from an ever expanding number of African states. The
problem is that some universities charge excess fees for non-South African students.
There is a danger that fees in South Africa would soon be as exorbitant as they are in
Europe for expatriate students. What is valuable is that this exercise should bring
mutual benefit. Students would bring into the learning process some of their own
experiences and cultures of intellectual engagement. They could inform and shape the
way in which Africa is viewed in South Africa. A Pan African curriculum could be
developed. Along the lines of the SADC Protocol on Education and Training
harmonisation and equivalence which would lead to the mutual recognition of
qualifications. This could ensure that students accessed the best available and
affordable higher education studies in the region, and costly duplication would be
eliminated. They will also bring different research insights and expand the areas of
research that South African universities could undertake. This could also lead to
collaborations with academics at other universities, making joint supervision of
research students possible.
Conclusion
In the era of globalisation, African universities find themselves having to compete
with the best in the world.3 The mobility of staff and students has now become a fact
of life. Those who can afford can be found at universities in Europe and North
America. The best researchers are in demand at various universities in the world.
Even within South Africa, universities do not only compete with universities in
Europe, North America and Australia, they also have to take account of a growing
number of private higher education institutions, and with statutory research councils.
3
vide Teboho Moja: Policy Responses to Global Transformation by African Higher Education; in Paul
Tiyambe Zeleza & Adebayo Olukoshi (Eds): AFRICAN UNIVERSITIES IN THE TWENTY-FIRST
CENTURY; 22-41 @ 27ff
15
At the end of the decade of democracy, South African higher education has come of
age. I believe that we have matured and could take on the responsibilities which
society bestows upon us.
The first ten years of democracy saw an avalanche of policies, statements, legislation
and leverage mechanisms. Indeed, the system is over-regulated and managerialism is
thought to be the answer. But is it? We also saw institutions pay attention to
leadership of black personalities all in the name of transformation. As former Minister
Kader Asmal puts it, during the first ten years, the foundations have been set, the
groundwork laid. He goes on to say that into the future a more strategic orientation is
demanded. It has to be a re-orienting higher education to even higher ideals so that we
do not fall into the trap of mere musical chairs each and everyone of us who has come
into leadership of higher education institutions, who shape policy in government and
in other state institutions, should be asking ourselves some serious questions: what
contribution have we made to transform higher education beyond the legacy of
apartheid into an instrument for the transformation of society?
The question that we face in South Africa, as in many other developing countries, is
stated crisply by Roger Williamson (September 2004):
…the current reforms in higher education can be characterised as efficient,
responsive, accountable, and competitively healthy. Critics see the changes as
being bureaucratic, intrusive, and a threat to the autonomy of the academe.
They also claim that the changes are characterised by increasing
marketisation, problems for pure research, threats to academic careers, and a
danger to learning and teaching. Those responsible for planning tertiary
education in developing countries must choose between these competing
narratives.4
ends
“Development Priorities and the Role of tertiary education”, September 2004, A Wilton park Paper,
p.26.
4
16
REFERENCES
1. ANC SPEAKS: Documents and Statements; 1977.
2. Nelson Mandela: LONG WALK TO FREEDOM; 1994: McDonald
Purnell, Randburg, South Africa.
3. Luli Callinicos: OLIVER TAMBO: Beyond the Engeli Mountains; 2004;
David Philip; Cape Town.
4. CHE: SOUTH AFRICAN HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE FIRST
DECADE OF DEMOCRACY; Pretoria, 2004.
5. Sipho
Seepe
(Editor):
TOWARDS
AN
AFRICAN
HIGHER
EDUCATION IDENTITY OF HIGHER EDUCATION; 2004, Vista
University & Skotaville; Pretoria.
6. Paul
Tiyambe
Zeleza
&
Adebayo
Olukoshi
(Eds):
AFRICAN
UNIVERSITIES IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY; 2003; Codesria
& Unisa Press, Pretoria & Dakar.
7. Education
White
Paper
No
3:
A
PROGRAMME
FOR
THE
TRANSFORMATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION; Department of
Education, Pretoria, July 1997.
8. NATIONAL PLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION; JANUARY 2001,
Ministry of Education.