1. 1 Addressing student and institutional inequalities through curriculum reform: Re-thinking the 'mainstream' Keynote presentation: North West University Ian Scott, University of Cape Town October 2011

2. 2 Outline What is higher education delivering? The persistence of low and unequal student performance External factors and prospects of their improvement ‘Poverty and poor schooling’ Threats to the sector arising from responses to current performance patterns Exacerbating the tension between access and success? What can higher education do to facilitate improvement and equity in student performance? The role of curriculum ‘fundamentals’ Inequalities between institutions What could make institutional differentiation benefit all?

3. 3 What does the country most need from higher education? More good research though universities are no longer the only source More good graduates quantity, quality, relevance and mix sole responsibility of the higher education sector the importance of fair distribution of the asset So what are we getting? understanding the national picture

4. 4 Participation rates* and their significance Overall:16% White:56% Indian:45% Black:13% Coloured: 13% * Approximate gross enrolment ratios derived from HEMIS 2008: all participants as % of 20-24 age-group

5. 5 Significance of the participation rates GER in W Europe and N America averages 70% (UNESCO 2007) If ‘intelligence’ is randomly distributed across populations, current intake (esp. under-represented groups) must be assumed to have good potential to succeed The view that a large proportion of SA’s current students ‘do not belong’ in higher education is not tenable Growth must come mainly from under-represented groups ‘race’ still a major access and redress issue

6. 6 Performance patterns Undergraduate cohort graduation rates after 5 years 30% overall (est. final graduation rate 44%) 50% in contact university programmes 32% in contact ‘technikon’ programmes patterns similar in a range of qualification types and subject areas Derived from 2000/2001 cohorts. Source: DoE; Scott, Yeld and Hendry 2007 Effects on pipeline to postgraduate study only a tenth of the PhDs per million of population produced by developed countries

7. 7 Graduation within 5 years by CESM: General academic first B-degrees, excl Unisa CESMGradStill in 04: Business/Management50% 7% 15: Life and Phys Sciences47%13% 22: Social Sciences53% 6% 12: Languages47% 7%

8. 8 Graduation within 5 years: Professional first B-degrees, excl UNISA CESMGradStill in 04: Business/Management60% 7% 08: Engineering54%19% 12: Languages42%13% 13: Law31%15%

9. 9 Graduation within 5 years: National Diplomas, excl distance education CESMGradStill in 04: Business/Management33% 8% 06: Computer Science34%11% 08: Engineering17%14% 12: Soc Services/Pub Admin29% 6%

10. 10 Equity of outcomes Graduation within 5 years in general academic first B-degrees, excl UNISA In degree programmes, black completion rate generally less than half the white completion rate neutralising access gains <5% of black age-group succeeding in any form of higher education Source: Scott, Yeld and Hendry 2007 CESMBlackWhite 04: Business/Management33%72% 15: Life and Phys Sciences31%63% 22: Social Sciences34%68% 12: Languages32%68%

11. 11 Graduated in regulation time by “race”: General academic first B-degrees, excl dist ed CESMBlackWhite 04: Business/Management11%43% 15: Life and Phys Sciences11%35% 22: Social Sciences14%43% 12: Languages13%52%

12. 12 Graduation in regulation time In contact degree programmes, predominantly <30% for black students, predominantly <15% only 36% graduating within 4 years Small minority follow curricula as designed effects on learning of curricula and teaching approaches that do not work for the majority the teaching is hard, the learning is fragile Who benefits from the status quo?

13. 13 Some implications of the performance patterns Graduate output not meeting national needs in terms of ‘economic development or social cohesion’ (Pandor) Status quo is failing the majority failing to address educational inequalities implications for all forms of development Diversity of educational background a central challenge The equity and development agendas have converged catering successfully for student diversity now a necessary condition for economic development as well as social inclusion The problem is primarily systemic what parts of the system should address it?

14. 14 External solutions? Alleviating poverty Improving schooling Interposing a college sector (FE or wider?)

15. 15 Access via FET or community colleges? The current state of development of FET colleges capacity to meet their primary mandate? what prospect of extending the mandate to preparing substantial numbers of students for first-year university – vocational and general academic? policy rationale: doing what the schools should be doing? what prospect of extending the mandate to offering sub-degree higher education qualifications or community college-style ‘associate’ degrees ? Quantity and quality issues of staffing, plant and resources capacity to deliver 200,000 well-prepared candidates a year?

16. 16 External solutions? Alleviating poverty Improving schooling Interposing a college sector (FE or wider?) None of the above therefore critical for higher education to address contributory factors that are within its control

17. 17 Threats to higher education performance Critical importance of focusing on outputs, not inputs it is graduate output and outcomes that count Minister’s KPAs focus on increasing output but increasing enrolment seen as the way to achieve this? Consequences of increasing access without improving the performance patterns higher attrition or downward pressure on standards, or both the least effective and cost-efficient means of achieving graduate growth Socio-political significance of increasing access but consequences can totally defeat the goals of equity and efficiency

18. 18 What can higher education do to address these issues convincingly? Prioritise widening successful participation Contribute to improving viable pathways to HE without unrealistic expectations of increasing preparedness Commit to successful inclusiveness in all HEIs towards equity of outcomes as well as access recognise ‘merit’ based on potential as well as NSC scores understand and fully address the effects of educational inequality institutional differentiation won’t remove this responsibility from research-orientated universities How can we do this without undermining our mission?

19. 19 Major internal factors affecting student success Curriculum structure Educational effort and expertise Holistic approaches to fostering student success addressing affective and material as well as learning needs - Which of these are realistically under our control? - Timeframes for substantial change? - Focusing here on curriculum

20. 20 Importance of structural curriculum reform Curriculum as enabling or constraining framework major determinant of effectiveness of teaching-and-learning in any given context SA’s inherited core framework not changed for many decades Systemic problems requiring systemic responses mainstream curriculum clearly not working for the majority in low participation environment, such widespread failure not attributable just to ‘poor teaching’ Significance of the ‘articulation gap’ as systemic fault a complex phenomenon simplistic understandings over the years evidence from 25 years of foundation/extended programmes

21. 21 Indicators of the articulation gap as systemic fault Shortage of qualified candidates, especially in key subject areas not a reflection of potential First-year attrition about 30% across the sector importance of understanding the relationship between academic performance and ‘voluntary’ drop-out Poor rates of graduation in regulation time ongoing effects of invalid assumptions at entry level

22. 22 The significance of extended programmes Designed to be a systemic response to the systemic faultlines directly addressing the articulation gap providing examples of what can be achieved with an alternative curriculum framework But serious constraints having to work around a rigid and inappropriate ‘mainstream’ curriculum effects of marginalisation systemic faults going beyond the articulation gap

23. 23 Whose interests can alternative curriculum structures serve nationally? Extended curricula would benefit: mainstream students who are now failing to graduate or are dropping out for learning-related reasons students who are graduating with only marginal passes Extended curricula would at worst not hinder : the majority of mainstream students who are now not graduating in regulation time i.e. the majority of the current and future intake But extended programmes are currently reaching <15% of the intake so how can we justify the status quo?

24. 24 The need to re-conceptualise the ‘mainstream’ Importance of successfully accommodating diversity through mainstream course design and teaching Unitary programme structures cannot be effective in dealing productively with diversity of ‘educational capital’ The way we (choose to) do things makes a material difference to outcomes and to who succeeds The mainstream must accommodate the interests of the majority of the (needed) student intake

25. 25 What can be done? Greatly extend the reach of EPs in their present form, accepting their limitations or: move to a flexible curriculum framework with a 4-year degree as the core Proposition: In the SA context of high levels of diversity and inequality, it is not feasible to responsibly address equity, development or curriculum enhancement without extending the ‘formal time’ of core first degrees and diplomas for the majority of the current and future intake.

26. 26 Proposal to the sector: that a new undergraduate curriculum framework be established that will, inter alia: Retain the exit standards of current first degrees and diplomas Provide formal time of 4 years as the norm for core first degrees, to allow for (a) an entry level that makes realistic assumptions about the prior learning of the majority of the intake (b) curriculum space for developing sound academic foundations thus meeting the needs of the majority of the intake Allow for shorter completion periods for students who can manage this Provide the kind of structural flexibility that is needed for the diversity that will characterise the student intake

27. 27 Caveats in considering the “4-year degree” A 4-year degree structure as core: should not just incorporate the Hons year which would further impede efficiency and equity of outcomes should allow for breadth in knowledge and contemporary ‘skills’ as well as depth without falling into the overload trap should not result in another inflexible ‘unitary’ framework we should ideally move away from any rigid duration, which is increasingly unrealistic for contemporary life conditions

28. 28 Flexibility the key Flexibility in curriculum structure is the key to dealing effectively with educational diversity moving from one rigid structure to another would serve the interests of the majority but not address diversity What does flexibility consist in? differentials in entry levels differentials in pace of progress What would a flexible curriculum look like? the design challenge: * creative use of curriculum space for foundational provision * allowing for various combinations of the main building blocks – the senior undergraduate modules

29. 29 Institutional differentiation Will differentiation lead to further polarisation of the student intake in terms of educational achievement? pressure to remove extended programmes from research universities? concentration and major growth of extended programmes in HDIs, Comprehensives and UoTs? In other words, will HDIs be expected to carry an even larger share of the responsibility for developing disadvantaged and underprepared students? and thus for addressing the key dysfunction of the sector?

30. 30 Inequities of current one-size-fits-all policy Current dispensation effectively ignores institutional disparities e.g. the HEQF and the funding framework Given the major disparities in resources and the preparedness of the student intake, how can HDIs be expected to produce the same graduate outcomes, in the same time, as established research universities? what are the implications for quality and efficiency? What would be a viable basis for differentiation that would enable all HEIs to make a full contribution to development?

31. 31 Role of the curriculum and funding frameworks in enabling productive differentiation Should we formally recognise differentials in the quality and academic levels of the graduate outcomes across institutions? Or can we enable all HEIs to achieve comparable (not uniform) graduate outcomes? Sector-wide curriculum reform as a fair and efficient means to this end? In funding additional curriculum space for those who need it, a flexible curriculum framework would allow all graduates to reach comparable academic standards A key element of differentiation would lie in the extent to which additional funded provision would be utilised

32. 32 What role can alternative curricula play in enabling selective universities to be responsive? Dual role: allowing for responsible widening of participation, to include disadvantaged students with real potential providing such students with the academic foundations for success in high-quality programmes Evidence in selective universities that the theory is valid central strategy for equity higher attrition but greater contribution to black graduate numbers than mainstream many students demonstrate their top-decile capability

33. 33 What role can alternative curricula play in enabling recruiting universities to be effective? Current one-size-fits-all curriculum structures are a millstone for recruiting institutions prevent institutions from designing curricula that can build positively on the realities of the students’ prior learning chronic shortage of sufficient curriculum space to reach sound exit standards hinder the adoption of productive niches Evidence in recruiting universities that the theory is valid many extended programme students outperforming mainstream, especially in UoTs indications that structural change can in itself make a positive difference

34. 34 Quotes Kevin Carey (with reference to North America) ‘If there is a single factor that seems to distinguish colleges and universities that have truly made a difference on behalf of minority students, it is attention.’ (Carey 2008: 8) The Lisbon Council (with reference to the EU) ‘First and foremost, our universities … exist to educate and prepare people to be fully-functioning, well-developed members of our advanced, post-industrial society.’ ‘… seeking excellence in research should never be allowed to become an excuse for underperformance in the educational tasks [of higher education].’

35. 35 References Carey, K. 2008. Graduation Rate Watch: Making Minority Student Success a Priority. Washington DC: Education Sector. http://www.educationsector.org/usr_doc/Graduation_Rate_Watch.pdf http://www.educationsector.org/usr_doc/Graduation_Rate_Watch.pdf Ederer, P., Schuller, P. and Willms, S. 2008. University Systems Ranking: Citizens and Society in the Age of Knowledge. Brussels: The Lisbon Council. Scott, I., Yeld, N. and Hendry, J. 2007. A case for improving teaching and learning in South African higher education. Higher Education Monitor No. 6. Pretoria: Council on Higher Education. http://www.che.ac.za/documents/d000155/index.php http://www.che.ac.za/documents/d000155/index.php UNESCO (2007). Education For All Report 2008. Paris: UNESCO.