SYSTEMIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL POLICY
MAPPING
NATIONAL POLICIES
Name
Teaching and Learning
White Paper (3), A Programme for the
Transformation of Higher Education
(1997)
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES OR PLANS
Purpose(s)
Programme for transformation- emphasis
on latter.
Outlines the framework for change.
Relevant words – planned, governed,
funded.
All must support societal transformation
outlined in the RDP
Key elements










National Plan for Higher Education,
2001
Throughput
Quality Assurance
Single coordinated system
Equity and growth
Qualifications framework for HE
Language policy
Programme alignment
Nature of graduates – able to compete in
the labour market and internationally –
have requisite skills – programmes
relevant to labour market but not only
Have competencies for critical
citizenship – participation in society and
contribute to local and national
development
Producing graduates to meet the social and
development needs of SA
Increase in efficiency, quality and number
of graduates
Setting benchmarks and targets for the
system
Move away from equity for institutions to
equity for individuals
As re white paper plus reconfiguring the HE
landscape
Address inequalities in funding, steer size
and shape and emphasise inputs and
outputs, retain form of redress
Foundation grants, Teaching input, output,
research outputs, institutional factors
disadvantage, development grants
Rate for job/ad hom criteria, Strategic Goal 5 on
the quality and profile of UCT graduates
Teaching and Learning Charter (being revised)
University Quality Improvement Plan 2007 –
2010 (signed off)
Monitoring of teaching and learning done via
Teaching and Learning Report
NAPP to improve quality of teaching and learning
Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium and
awards to promote good teaching
Funding Formula
DoE current Funding formula –
Funding allocated to faculties, thence to
departments at the discretion of the faculty
1
SYSTEMIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL POLICY
MAPPING
NATIONAL POLICIES
Name
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES OR PLANS
Purpose(s)
Key elements
White Paper (3), A Programme for the
Transformation of Higher Education
(1997)
Broad vision, principles, values, structures,
governance
Redress past inequalities and how to facilitate
access into HE
Set of initiatives for transformation of HE
through single differentiated system
Promote equity of access and fair chances of
success for all
Identification of barriers e.g. rural financial,
gender, disadvantaged students
Higher Education Act
Provides for institutional autonomy subject
to transparency of admissions criteria
Minimum Requirements for admission to
higher education
Establishment of authority and accountability
Approved targets for 2007 – 2010 - in
process of setting targets for 2010 – 2013
Targets per qualification type and field up to 2013
Size and Shape strategic goal and annual
enrolment targets approved by Council
To promote differentiation with regard to
academic offerings and to ensure
appropriate capacity when offering
programmes
To ensure that all qualifications offered by
various institutions meet minimum criteria
DoE approval for new programmes
Lays down grids where institutions are allowed to
offer programmes
Institutional procedures for programme approval
laid down in the Guidelines for Academic
Planning
Selection of candidates
Curriculum design and outcomes
Teaching and Learning Strategy
Assessment criteria and methodologies
Recruitment of suitably qualified staff
Quality Assurance Policy Framework 2002
Teaching and Learning Charter (being revised)
Guidelines for Academic Reviews, Sept 2008
Guidelines for Academic Planning , May 2008
Templates for academic planning, June 2008
Participation
Rates/Enrolment Planning
Admissions into HE
Gov Gazette, Vol. 482, No. 27961,
Aug 2005
Ministerial Statements on Higher
Education Funding 04/12/09 & 10
November 2009 (possible review of
the formula)
Subjects groupings, minimum grades, subject
requirements
Senate and Council approval of admissions
criteria
UCT Admissions policy (2010) – current still
under review
Academic Planning and
Quality Assurance
Programme and Qualification Mix
(PQM)
HEQC Criteria for Programme
Accreditation Criteria Nov. 2004 and
provision for National Reviews and
Delegations (short courses,
assessment, RPL, certification)
2
SYSTEMIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL POLICY
MAPPING
NATIONAL POLICIES
Name
HEQC Audit Criteria, June 2004 – in
near future criteria for selfaccreditation
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES OR PLANS
Purpose(s)
Directive policy, provides clear guidelines
for quality management within HE system
for purpose of institutional audits by
HEQC
Key elements
Staff development opportunities
Monitoring and improving student performance
Provides 19 criteria for a quality management
system.
Divided into teaching and learning and research I
NQF Act, No 67 of 2008
To provide for quality councils and
transitional arrangements, recognise
professional bodies and professional
designations
comprehensive system of quality assured national
qualifications
SAQA responsible for oversight of QCs and
registration of qualifications
Higher Education Qualifications
Framework GG Vol. 508, No. 30353,
5 October 2007
To establish a single qualifications
framework for a diverse system
Framework and the NQF – defines how HE
qualifications fit into the NQF
9 qualification types (purposes and
characteristics)
Naming of qualifications
Progression within the framework and minimum
admission requirements
(new and stream)
Improving on Strength, University of Cape Town
2005
University Quality Improvement Plan 2007 –
2010 (signed off)
Have worked on aligning Honours, busy with
Masters and will then do PG Diplomas or
Bachelors
Framework is divided into undergraduate and
postgraduate levels from level 5 to 10.
Implementation date is first Jan 2009 for new
qualifications
Higher Education Amendment Act, No
39 of 2008
To amend HE Act to make it consistent
with NQF Act,
Deadline for existing programmes has not been
set but in process of getting alignment
demarcate roles and responsibilities,
establish CHE as the Quality Council for HE with
HEQC as committee responsible for QA
3
SYSTEMIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL POLICY
MAPPING
NATIONAL POLICIES
Name
Research and PG
White Paper
National Plan for Higher Education,
2001
Thutuka
DoHE&T: Measurement of research
outputs
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES OR PLANS
Purpose(s)
Goal – secure and advance high level
research capacity….
Strategic goal – section 5 – sustain
research strength and promote research
and other knowledge outputs to meet
national development needs and to become
globally competitive
Is to sustain current research strengths and
to promote research productivity by
rewarding quality research output at HE
institutions
NRF: overview of grants, scholarships,
fellowships and rating of researchers
Promote and support research in funding
and HRD – collectively seen as rewards
for research efforts
THRIP
MCDM (Multi-Criterion Decision Model
for THRIP. Technology for Human
resources and Industry Programme)
It’s a rating scale for Thrip project
proposals – to promote partnerships with
industry and to promote innovation
DST: Centres of Excellence
Key elements
promotion, audits and programme accreditation.
?standards setting
Creation of centres and networks in centres
of science and technology
Definition of subsidizable research output: criteria
for recognised research.
Describes allocation of units.
Process and procedures for submission and
evaluation.
Grant mgt, evaluation of researchers, investment
strategies, eligibility strategies, rating of
researchers; types of grants; programme funding,
Thrip, Thuthuka et al
Guide for the evaluation and prioritization of
THRIP projects
priority rating for funding
Funding limit of R150 000 for a SA students
Creation of knowledge and innovation
Development of research
Regeneration of the sciences and sustain of the
4
SYSTEMIC AND
INSTITUTIONAL POLICY
MAPPING
NATIONAL POLICIES
Name
INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES OR PLANS
Purpose(s)
add
DST : 10 year plan
To help drive Say’s transformation
towards a knowledge-based economy
NRF: Research Chairs
Present 5 clearly identified purposes in the
guide. The focus is to advance frontiers of
knowledge through focused research and
growth in postgraduate students.
Social Responsiveness
Institutional audit criteria
Programme Accreditation criteria
Council for Higher Education/NRF
Promoting SR and community engagement
Key elements
development
Collaboration between African centres and
research
Use of international competition
 Strategic decisions
 Competitive advantage
 Critical mass
 Sustainable capacity
 Life-cycle planning
Present 3 Parts:
A. Strategic background
B. Description of the submission and assessment
process.
C. Explain the management of the research chair
process.

SR policy framework, rate for job/ad hom
criteria, SR awards, student recognition, MoUs
with City and Province
Strategic Goal 6: Science Shop/Shopfront
And Global Citizenship project
Promote service learning and experiential
training
Possible development of national policy
framework
5
MTEF BUDGETS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION: RANDS MILLIONS
Final allocations
[1] Block grants
[1.1] Teaching inputs
[1.2] Institutional factors
[1.3] Teaching outputs
[1.4] Research outputs
[1.5] Former Vista campuses
[1.6] Veterinary sciences block grants
[2] Earmarked grants
[2.1] NSFAS
[2.2] Interest & redemption on loans
[2.3] Improving infrastructure & output efficiencies
[2.4] Clinical training of health professionals
[2.5] National Institutes
[2.6] African Institute for Mathematical Studies
[2.7] Foundation programmes
[2.8] Veterinary sciences earmarked grants
[2.9] Multi-campus earmarked grants
[2.10] Institutional restructuring
[2.11] Teaching development grants
[2.12] Research development grants
TOTALS
2008/09
12 033
7 747
807
1 859
1 522
40
59
3 267
1 502
70
1 095
200
30
3
131
0
0
235
0
0
15 300
2009/10
13 310
8 497
885
2 123
1 738
0
67
3 832
1 845
41
1 462
300
35
3
146
0
0
0
0
0
17 142
Provisional distribution of
MTEF budgets
2010/11
2011/12
15 090
15 539
9 790
10 714
850
930
2 447
2 142
2 003
1 753
0
0
0
0
4 442
5 837
2 015
2 373
34
28
1 585
1 615
330
350
39
41
4
0
185
193
102
116
148
148
0
0
0
535
0
438
19 532
21 376
6
6.1
The average annual growth rate in head count student enrolments between 2005 (the base year for the enrolment planning process)
and 2008 was 2.8%, compared to the target rate of 2.0% set in October 2007 by the Ministry of Education.
6.2
The latest student data available show that student enrolments surged above these averages between 2007 and 2008. The head
count student enrolment total rose from 761 000 in 2007 to 799 000 in 2008; an increase of 38 000 or 5%. The FTE enrolled total, which
is an indicator of the student load carried by the higher education system, rose from 519 000 in 2007 to 540 000 in 2008; an increase of 21
000 or 4%. If these rates of increase are repeated in 2009, then strains will be placed on the goal of no unfunded students in the system by
the 2010 academic year and the 2012/13 financial year. Table 7 is based on the assumption that each university’s 2009 FTE enrolment will
increase at the same rate which it did between 2007 and 2008.
7
WEIGHTED TEACHING INPUT UNITS FOR 2011/12: THOUSANDS
Generated for 2011/12
by projected 2009 FTE Approved target
student enrolments
total: 2011/12
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
University of Cape Town
Central University of Technology
Durban University of Technology
University of Fort Hare
University of Free State
University of Johannesburg
University of KwaZulu-Natal
University of Limpopo
Mangosuthu University of Technology
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
North West University
University of Pretoria
Rhodes University
University of South Africa
University of Stellenbosch
Tshwane University of Technology
Vaal University of Technology
University of Venda
Walter Sisulu University
University of the Western Cape
University of the Witwatersrand
University of Zululand
TOTAL
50.4
51.1
18.4
33.8
15.1
49.2
77.9
66.3
37.4
13.6
32.9
51.2
92.7
13.1
124.4
60.8
71.9
26.3
16.4
44.4
29.8
59.5
19.2
1055.9
49.3
54.0
16.4
35.6
12.6
45.8
68.9
82.7
36.5
14.0
37.5
57.1
94.6
12.6
97.1
52.0
74.7
25.6
15.2
34.4
31.6
61.7
17.2
1027.3
Generated total less target
total = unfunded students
-1.1
-2.3%
2.9
5.3%
-1.9
-11.6%
1.7
4.8%
-2.5
-19.7%
-3.3
-7.3%
-9.0
-13.1%
16.4
19.8%
-0.9
-2.4%
0.4
3.2%
4.7
12.4%
5.9
10.3%
2.0
2.1%
-0.5
-4.2%
-27.3
-28.1%
-8.8
-17.0%
2.8
3.7%
-0.8
-3.1%
-1.2
-7.7%
-10.0
-29.0%
1.7
5.4%
2.3
3.7%
-1.9
-11.1%
-28.6
-2.8%
8
ESTIMATES OF % OF OVER- AND UNDER-FUNDED STUDENTS
IN 2011/12
University of KwaZulu-Natal
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
North West University
University of the Western Cape
University of Cape Town
Durban University of Technology
Tshwane University of Technology
University of the Witwatersrand
Mangosuthu University of Technology
University of Pretoria
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
University of Limpopo
AVERAGE
Vaal University of Technology
Rhodes University
University of Free State
University of Venda
University of Zululand
Central University of Technology
University of Johannesburg
University of Stellenbosch
University of Fort Hare
University of South Africa
Walter Sisulu University
24.7%
14.2%
11.5%
5.8%
5.6%
5.1%
3.9%
3.9%
3.3%
2.1%
-2.2%
-2.4%
-2.7%
-3.0%
-4.0%
-6.8%
-7.2%
-10.0%
-10.4%
-11.6%
-14.5%
-16.4%
-22.0%
-22.5%
Note: a negative is an indicator of unfunded students & a positive
an indicator of over-funded students
9