Access and Success in Higher Education in South Africa (ASHESA) Preliminary Research Findings

Research Questions How is access and success work defined in the South African higher education system? What is the policy context within which access and success work takes place? What are the main types of activities that constitute access and success work, both within and across institutions, and who carries out and supports these activities? What are the key debates taking place in the academic development environment and how do these manifest in the work being done? What are the main themes framing access and success work, including the challenges and gaps identified? How is access and success currently measured? What data is being collected at system and institutional level, and how is it being used?

Methodology Literature Review and semi-structured interviews with primarily academic development/teaching and learning professionals, institutional planners, and a small group of national policy experts 30 Interviews in total: – 21 heads of academic development and/or nominees – 5 institutional planners/researchers – 4 policy and higher education experts 18/23 universities engaged - 4 comprehensives, 4 UOTs and 10 traditional universities

Access and Success “Access without success is a hollow achievement”(Scott, 2012) Access and success are linked – “revolving door”, meaningful and epistemological access. Articulation gap between school and higher education. High attrition and poor throughput rates, as cohort studies show. Success not merely about graduation. Includes quality, graduate attributes, and employment articulation considerations. Imperatives for change: social justice, greater efficiency, and greater contribution of HE to development.

S S STUDENTS Policy, political and economic context Partnerships HE system Policy Funding Quality assurance Data Expectations of HE Political, economic & social forces impacting on HE Economic determinism – ‘high skills discourse’ Post school pathways Youth unemployment & NEETS Articulation Institutional accountability Social context Race Gender SES Schooling Choice Career guidance Preparedness Academic Literacy Post school opportunities “Disadvantage” Equity Family support SUCCESS INSTITUTIONS ACCESS GRADUATION THROUGHPUT ACHIEVEMENT POSTGRADUATE PATHWAYS EMPLOYMENT GRADUATE ATTRIBUTES CAPABILITIES ADMISSIONS/APPLICATION/TESTING STOPOUT, or DROPOUT Academic staff Enrolment/Placement Transition Leadership Systems Data Academic Non-Academic Retention Attrition Personal motivation/agency Student engagement Campus culture Peer support First year experience Curriculum Pedagogy Teaching Technology Language Theories of knowledge, Teaching, & Learning Academic Dev Tracking - early warning systems Finance Housing Student Support services Counselling Orientation

Interventions Factors influencing success are complex and diverse. No single intervention is likely to shift the current poor success rates. Integrated structures providing psycho-social and academic student support Access and entry into university programmes are centred around transition, admission and first-year experience; Social factors impacting success are addressed mainly through programmes clustered under the psycho-social support banner, and mentoring; Promoting academic success through programmes that provide better learning opportunities, includes activities such as extended curriculum programmes; systems for early detection of students who are struggling academically; Supplemental Instruction; tutoring, writing, literacy and numeracy support; and infrastructure improvement. Research activities on interventions to influence evidence-based decision making on improvement; Lecturer-directed programmes centred around professional development including induction programmes, courses and workshops, and research support.

Improvements Policy-related improvements: Differentiation- paying attention to all institutions and different missions. Institutional Collaboration- finding ways of working across institutions. Implementation concerns – good policy does not always translate into good practice. National focus on teaching and learning and capacity Curriculum-related improvements: New curriculum structures Curriculum review and development capacity Technology to support teaching – digital capacity Infrastructure improvements and innovation

Improvements Institutional policy and structure: Staffing and capacity Leadership, supporting teaching improvement, intentionality. Collaboration across departments- planning, student affairs, academic development. Data and Research Capacity: Cohort studies Staffing and skills – across the system Improved data and harmonisation Evidence-based decision-making, monitoring and evaluation, impact.

Improvements The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Reward and recognition Monitoring and debating changing practice Employment and graduate attributes Developing theoretical approaches and improving theoretical rigour Teaching practice and the status of teaching: Fellowships and awards Lecturer attitudes – disciplinary expertise vs teaching expertise Professional development of academic staff New generation of academics with a focus on teaching

Environmental Shifts Three key “events” in 2013 that could shift the national picture: Quality Enhancement Project of the Council on Higher Education “Framework for Institutional Quality Enhancement in the Second Period of Quality Assurance” Defines student success as: “The enhancement of student learning with a view to producing an increased number of graduates with attributes that are personally, professionally and socially valuable” Goals: – Improving the quality of undergraduate educational provision – Improving the number of quality graduates – Developing a higher education system that is improving continuously as members of the higher education community collaborate to share good practices and solve shared problems (CHE, October 2013)

Environmental Shifts New draft policy on the Teaching Development Grant: “…to enhance student learning in ways that lead to improved learning outcomes through a sustained focus on improving the quality and impact of university teachers, teaching and teaching resources” (DHET, 2013) – Ensuring a greater chance of learning success for students from previously marginalised groups; – Promoting a scholarship of teaching and learning; – Enhancing the status and importance of teaching at universities – Enabling the development of a stronger academic pipeline. CHE Task Team proposal on undergraduate curriculum reform

Conclusions Profound structural and discursive changes necessary The Status of teaching and learning – leadership and policy and institutional development. Discursive shifts – “psychological ownership of the student intake” (Scott) Holistic understanding of students and their needs – package of responses. Address teaching and learning staffing and related issues – changing attitudes, professional development. Improved skills and capacity in range of areas across the system. Data-driven decision-making. Scholarship of teaching and learning- theoretical foundations Curriculum reform Collaboration across the system Next generation of academic staff and opportunity for shift of teaching practice.