PRIVATE HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR SKILLS PLAN 2013-2014 … · 1.2 Research design 8 1.2.1 Data sources 8 1.2.2 Documentary/policy analyses in respect of national priorities impacting

ETDP SETA

PRIVATE HIGHER EDUCATION

SECTOR SKILLS PLAN

2013-2014 UPDATE

Final Submission Date: 26/11/ 2012

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Dr. Ronel Blom was appointed by the ETDP SETA to conduct the Private Higher Education Skills Plan

external research. The ETDP SETA would like to extend sincere gratitude to the researchers for

compiling this report.

The full version of this report will be available on the ETDP SETA Website: www.etdpseta.org.za

ACRONYMS

ATR Annual Training Report CHE Council on Higher Education DHET Department of Higher Education and Training ETD Education and Training Development ETDP SETA Education and Training Development Practices SETA ETQA Education and Training Quality Assurance body GP Green Paper HEQC Higher Education Quality Committee HRDS Human Resources Development Strategy HRDSA Human Resources Development Strategy of South Africa IPAP Industrial Policy Action Plan NGP New Growth Path NLRD National Learners’ Records Database NSDS National Skills Development Strategy PHE/PHEI Private Higher Education/Private Higher Education Institution PSETA Public Sector Education and Training Authority RPL Recognition of Prior Learning QCTO Quality Council for Trades and Occupations SAQA South African Qualifications Authority SETA Sector Education and Training Authority SIC Standard Industrial Classification SIPs Strategic Infrastructure Programmes SSP Sector Skills Plan StatsSA Statistics South Africa VEOP Vocational Education Orientation Programme WIL Work Integrated Learning WSP Workplace Skills Plan

http://www.etdpseta.org.za/

3

FIGURES

1.1 Organisations per SIC Code Category – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 12 1.2 Organisations per SIC Code Category – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012 15 1.3 Sub-sectors of ETDP SETA Constituencies – (Phase 2)ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey,

2012 16

2.1 Number of Employees – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 18 2.2 Number of Employees – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012 19 2.3 Provincial Spread – Private Institutions – ETQA Data (Blom, for DHET, 2011) 20 2.4 Provincial Spread of Companies – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 20 2.5 Provincial Spread – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012 21 3.1 Ownership as an Economic Indicator – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 27 3.2 Number of Employees per Occupational Category – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR

2011 -2012 31

3.3 Employment Status per Population Group – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012

32

3.4 Employment Status – Disabled Persons – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 33 3.5 Age Ranges – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 33 3.6 Managers per Population Group – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 34 3.7 Elementary Occupations per Population Group – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR

2011 -2012 34

3.8 Staff Qualifications – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012 35 3.9 Supply of Qualifications by ETDP SETA Accredited Institutions – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA

WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 38

3.10 Most Popular Fields of Learning – Certificates and Higher Certificates (Blom, for DHET, 2011)

39

3.11 Most popular fields of learning – Diplomas, Advanced Diplomas and Higher Diplomas (Blom, for DHET, 2011)

39

3.12 Nature of Skills Supply – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012 40 3.13 Reasons for Scarce and Critical Skills – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 42 3.14 Learning Interventions Suggested by Organisations – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR

2011 -2012 49

3.15 Interventions Required in Descending Order of Importance – (Phase 2) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

51

TABLES

1.1 Databases Requested and Collected for the ETDP SETA SSP PHE study (phase 1 & 2) 9 1.2 ETDP SETA Categories Included for Analyses, According to SIC Codes – (Phase 1)

ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012 11

1.3 SIC Code Selections Included for Analyses – (Phase 2) ) ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

14

3.1 SAQA Data – Number of Institutions Compared with ETQA Data (Blom, for DHET, 2011)

26

3.2 Expenditure – Skills Levies versus Training 27 3.3 Expenditure on Training versus Levies Paid and Grants Received 28 3.4 List of Qualifications Offered by ETDP SETA Accredited Institutions – (Phase 1) ETDP

SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 37

3.5 ETDP SETA Suggested Phrases for Description of Reasons for Scarce and Critical Skills – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012

41

3.6 Reasons for Scarcity of Skills – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 42

4

3.7 Scarce Skills – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 -2012 45 3.8 Learning Interventions Suggested by Organisations – (Phase 1) ETDP SETA

WSP/ATR 2011 -2012

48

DATABASES

1 Employment Summary B1 – WSP-ATR 2011 – PHEI 2 Scarce Skills C – WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 3 Critical Skills D - WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 4 Planned Beneficiaries E1 - WSP-ATR 2011 – PHEI 5 Planned Employed E2 - WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 6 Expenditure F1 - WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 7 Actual Beneficiaries F2 - WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 8 Actual Employed F3 - WSP-ATR 2011 – PHEI 9 Supply Quals - WSP-ATR 2011 - PHEI 10 Final Questionnaire Capture File – 13 Sept 2012

5

CONTENTS

Page ACRONYMS 2 FIGURES 3 TABLES 3 DATABASES 4 CHAPTER 1 OVERVIEW OF THE PRIVATE HIGHER EDUCATION (PHE)SECTOR 1.1 Introduction 7 1.1.1 The Private Higher Education sector 7 1.2 Research design 8 1.2.1 Data sources 8 1.2.2 Documentary/policy analyses in respect of national priorities impacting on

the work of the ETDP SETA SETA 10

1.2.3 Analyses – phase 1 10 1.2.4 Analyses – phase 2 13 1.3 Research limitations 16 CHAPTER 2 SECTOR PROFILE 2.1 Sector and institutional profiles 18 2.2 Institutional profile 18 2.3 Provincial spread 19 CHAPTER 3 ETD SKILLS SUPPLY AND DEMAND 3.1 Drivers of Change 22 3.1.1 Policy framework 22 3.1.2 Socio-economic profile 25 3.2 Overview of Current Challenges of the PHE sector 28 3.3 Employment Profile 31 3.3.1 Employee demographic profile 31 3.3.2 Employee qualifications profile 34 3.3.3 Employment patterns and trends 35 3.4 Skills Supply 36 3.4.1 Occupational routes into the specific sector labour market 36 3.4.2 Availability of training providers and gap areas 40 3.4.3 Skills supply analysis 41 3.5 Skills Demand 41 3.5.1 Factors impacting on demand 41 3.5.2 Scarce and critical skills priorities 44 3.5.3 Demand and supply analysis 48 3.5.4 Priorities and projections – short, medium and long-term 48 3.5.5 Implications 51 CHAPTER 4 SECTOR STRATEGY 4.1 Priority areas and alignment with national strategies 53 4.2 New/emerging sector challenges regarding skills development 55 4.3 Proposed ETDP SETA SETA interventions 56

6

4.3.1 Programme 1: Development of a credible SSP 56

4.3.2 Programme 2: Supporting FET institutions to be responsive to the ETD sector and national priorities

56

4.3.3 Programme 3: Teacher development in support of the ISPFTED-SA 56 4.3.4 Programme 4: Increase student access and graduate output to both FETIs

and HETIs 56

4.3.5 Programme 5: Customised interventions 57 CHAPTER 5 WAY FORWARD REGARDING SSP RESEARCH 5.1 Challenges regarding research process 58 5.2 Gaps regarding research update 58 5.3 Recommendations 59 REFERENCES 60 Annexure 1 Customised questionnaire for phase 2 of the study Annexure 2 ETDP SETA WSP and ATR templates Annexure 3 List of respondents – phase 2 of the study

7

CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THE PRIVATE HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR

1.1 Introduction

This report reflects the findings of research undertaken on behalf of the Education and Training Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA) for the annual update of their Sector Skills Plan (SSP) for the 2012/13 period. The particular focus was on gathering skills demand and supply data from active and participating ETDP SETA constituency members. This report deals with one of the constituency sectors, namely Private Higher Education (PHE). The research is in part, in accordance to the National Skills Development Strategy III (NSDS III), Goal 4.1, intended to ‘establish credible institutional mechanisms for skills planning’, through professionally researched sector skills plans that provide sound analyses of the sector, its skills demand and skills supply, and to articulate agreed sector strategies to address skills needs. Furthermore, the ETDP SETA plans to utilise evidence based intelligence about skills demand and supply and shortages for use by the SETA, and to utilise constituent-based reports for inputs to its SSP, as well as produce a document that can be used by its stakeholders and constituencies as a reference for their own planning. This is the first step in becoming a centre of excellence in respect of data relevant to planning for the sector. Beyond compliance in respect of the annual reporting regarding the SSP, a secondary outcome of the research is to begin to determine the gaps, both in terms of an improved understanding of the sector, but also in terms of data and data sources. 1.1.1 The Private Higher Education Sector Private higher education is a hugely diverse and differentiated sector, ranging from traditional institutions such as universities, colleges and institutes, offering programmes in the higher education band across a range of learning fields, to small one-person organisations that work primarily in workplace and corporate settings. Likewise, the target markets of these institutions vary. The more traditional institutions offer programmes to young school-leavers, while many of the small single-purpose organisations deal with working adults at both a basic, as well as advanced levels. Furthermore, the type of offerings differs vastly. The more traditional institutions offer mostly what is known as curriculum-based qualifications (or ELOAC qualifications1) while the smaller, single-purpose organisations often offer unit-standards based qualifications. Other institutions, which straddle private FET and HET, are also increasingly emerging, enhancing access to further and higher education in the private education sector. However, private higher education is also divided. On the one hand the more traditional institutions are recognised by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) by virtue of their programmes being accredited by the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) and being registered by the DHET. They are regulated by the Higher Education Act (1997, as amended) and its Regulations. On the other hand, there are the thousands of small occupationally-directed organisations offering

1 ELOAC is an acronym for exit level outcomes and assessment criteria, a term used by SAQA to differentiate

between curriculum-based and unit standard-based qualifications

8

workplace-based programmes. These organisations are not recognised by the CHE, and are not eligible for registration with the DHET. They are subject to the Skills Development Act (1997, as amended). One result of this divide, for the purposes of data collection for this study, is that it is relatively easy to access information on the traditional institutions through the DHET register and the CHE accreditation processes, but in terms of the single-purpose occupationally-directed organisations the picture is very different. The data in respect of such organisations are held at the different Education and Training Quality Assurance bodies (ETQAs) and unless a systemic evaluation of all of the occupationally-directed sub-sector is undertaken, it is difficult to form a full picture of the private higher education sub-sector. One of the dangers of this divide is that disparities of esteem between so called academic institutions and vocationally/occupationally-directed organisations are being entrenched, thus preventing articulation between sub-sectors. Nevertheless, while PHE is considered a small sector if only the student enrolments of the traditional institutions are considered (approximately 70 000 according to 2009 figures), the number of enrolments of students in terms of unit-standard based qualifications and unit standards and/or skills programmes quality assured by the different ETQAs, is difficult to determine (more about this in Chapter 3) and consequently it is difficult to determine which organisations may need support in relation to skills development. In future research projects of this nature, a more systemic approach may be needed. 1.2 Research design The study on the PHE constituency was undertaken in two phases: (1) the first phase dealt with the analyses of the 2011 Workplace Skills Plan (WSP) data as captured by ETDP SETA staff for the purposes of the annual SSP process; and (2) the second phase involved further data collection through a customised questionnaire (Annexure 1)to delve deeper into the skills supply and demand issues relevant to the PHE sector. The findings of the first phase of the study were reported on in a report submitted to the ETDP SETA

at the end of August 2012. This report builds on the first report, and adds the data collected through

the customised questionnaire developed for phase 2 of the study. Nevertheless, while there are two

distinct phases to the study, much of the preparation for the second phase took place concurrently

with the first phase.

1.2.1 Data sources

The first phase of the study chiefly consisted of the following:

The request for, collection, evaluation (in terms of their usefulness) and analyses, of various

databases:

the ETDP SETA provided 10 databases of the 2011 WSP submissions of all its constituencies,

including the PHE sector;

a list of organisations that submitted their WSPs to the ETDP SETA, with contact details;

a database of the ETDP SETA’s training providers offering HE level qualifications at levels 5 & 6

In addition, a number of other databases were requested to form the basis of analyses for phase 2 of

the study, namely:

9

the register in respect of PHE institutions (PHEIs) from the Department of Higher Education and

Training (DHET) from the Registrar;

the list of accredited PHEIs from the Council on Higher Education’s (CHE’s) Higher Education

Quality Committee (HEQC);

a database of accredited PHEIs captured on the South African Qualifications Authority’s (SAQA’s)

National Learners’ Records Database;

any relevant database from Statistics South Africa (StatsSA);

any relevant database from other sources (for example, Treasury database in respect of

institutions accredited by the Public Sector Education and Training Authority (PSETA);

other sources (radio, advertisements, TV, etc.).

The databases used for phase 1 of the study are highlighted in grey. These databases, as well as the

remainder of the databases were used to contact potential respondents for phase 2 of the study:

Table 1.1: Databases Requested and Collected for the ETDP SETA SSP PHE Study (Phase 1 & 2)

No Source document - Database

No of Providers

No of Providers with contact details

Total Providers contacted

Total Failure reports

Total Providers reached

Total questionnaires returned (phase 2)

Total returned after follow-up

1 ETDP SETA – with qualifications

312 285 285 84 198 7 14

2 ETDP SETA – WSPs submitted

190 125 125 6 119 13 23

3 ETDP SETA – 2011 WSP data

1392 May

overlap with the above

May overlap with the above

- - -

4 DHET Register

89 New, not on ETDP SETA database

76 2 74 9 13

5 DHET Register updated

1 As above 1 0 1 1 1

6 DHET with contact details

24 As above 24

24 6 18 2 3

7 Treasury’s Provider Contacts

43 43 43 2 41 4 4

8 Radio, adverts, TV, etc.

8 0 8 0 8 0 0

9 SAQA No response from SAQA

0 0 0 0 0 0

2 See exclusions from the database according to the SIC codes (see 1.2.3 below)

10

Table 1.1 (continued)

No Source document - Database

No of Providers

No of Providers with contact details

Total Providers contacted

Total Failure reports

Total Providers reached

Total questionnaires returned (phase 2)

Total returned after follow-up

10 StatsSA No database of this nature held

0 0 0 0 0 0

Total providers contacted 562 Total returned 58

Phase 1 of the study thus dealt with only two sets of databases (see above) with data already

captured in respect of this constituency’s 2011 WSP submissions and the accredited providers and

qualifications offered, while Phase 2 analysed the responses to the customised questionnaire (no’s 1

and 2, and 4 – 8 – see Table 1.1).

For phase 1 a number of the current ETDP SETA WSP databases were excluded as (1) it was not clear

from the WSP/ATR template where the data was captured from (entitled ‘Planned unemployed – F3’

and ‘Actual unemployed – F4’) and (2) the SSP report template did not make provision for discussion

on the following: E1 – Planned beneficiaries; E2 – Planned employed; and F3 – Actual employed.(Also

refer to discussion about other exclusions below.)

1.2.2 Documentary/policy analyses in respect of national priorities impacting on the work of the

ETDP SETA

In addition to data analyses, documentary and/or policy analyses supplemented the research.

Analyses were undertaken of the following:

the Human Resources Development Strategy (HRDS);

the National Skills Development Strategy (NSDS) III;

the Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP);

the New Growth Path (NGP);

the National Skills Accord;

the Green Paper for Post-school Education and Training (GP);

the Strategic Infrastructure Projects (SIPS).

A brief discussion, in relation to the contribution Private Higher Education Institutions (PHEIs) could

make to these policies, will be undertaken in Chapter 3.

1.2.3 Analyses – phase 1

Before analyses of the relevant databases could be undertaken (see above), it was necessary to

identify exclusions (see ‘current challenges’ discussed in Chapter 2). This is because the ETDP SETA

database use a blanket ‘Private Providers of Education and Training’, which include the codes -

11

‘92001 Pre-Primary Education and Activities of After School Centres’; and, ‘92002 Primary and

Secondary Education’, which clearly are not higher education institutions; ‘95200 Activities of Trade

Unions’, which may or may not be higher education institutions, but would have been better placed

under another ETDP SETA constituency; ‘92010 Examination and Assessment Bodies’, which again is

clearly not higher education; and finally, ‘9200A NGOs involved in Education’, which may or may not

be involved in higher education provision.

Furthermore, because of these ETDP SETA classifications, as well as the seemingly limiting Standard

Industry Classification (SIC) codes, a number of organisations were included which may not

necessarily be offering HE qualifications. This may skew the analysis. The number of items included

for analysis was thus reduced from a total of approximately 847 lines, (incorporating a number of

EXCEL spreadsheet lines per organisation) to a total number of 136 organisations.

Taking the above into account, and recognising that some of the organisations may not be higher

education institutions (but which could be ‘post-school’ organisations), the following categories, as

indicated in the ETDP SETA databases, were included for the phase 1 analysis (see Table 1.2 below):

Table1.2: ETDP SETA Categories Included for Analyses, According to SIC Codes – (Phase 1)

Category per SIC Code Rationale for inclusion

92006 Education by Teacher Training Colleges or Education for Further Training

It is assumed that Teacher Training Colleges function at post-school level

92009 Other Educational Services - own account teachers, motor vehicle driving schools / tutors and music, dancing and other art schools, etc.

It is assumed that ‘other educational services’ could include short courses (non- and credit-bearing courses)

92008 Education by Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges

It is not clear whether ‘correspondence’ and ‘vocational’ colleges relate to HE or not. This may lead to a duplication with the analysis of private FET institutions

87132 Research and Development It is assumed that ‘research and development’ would function at HE level, but not necessarily that programmes are offered. This may lead to a duplication with the analyses of research organisations

92004 Education by Technical Colleges and Technical Institutions

It is assumed that these colleges and institutions are functioning at a post-school (but not necessarily HE) level. This may lead to a duplication with the analysis of private FET institutions

95121 Professional Organisations in Education These organisations may or may not be offering HE programmes, but they were nevertheless classified as ‘Private Providers of Education and Training’.

92007 Education by Universities This is the only clear-cut category Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012

As noted above (Table 1.2), much of the rationale for inclusion in the first phase analyses of the

study is based on assumption. The ETDP SETA databases of captured WSP data do not provide the

finer grain of classification to enable a true picture of the PHE constituency. Nevertheless, these

companies are paying their skills levies to the ETDP SETA and for now, the categories will have to

stand. The different categories have the following share of this section of the sector (Figure 1):

12

Figure 1.1: Organisations per SIC Code Category – (Phase 1)

Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011/2012

Key:

1. 92006 - Education by Teacher Training Colleges or Education for Further Training;

2. 92009 - Other Educational Services - own account teachers, motor vehicle driving schools / tutors and

music, dancing and other art schools, etc.;

3. 92008 - Education by Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges;

4. 87132 - Research and Development;

5. 92004 - Education by Technical Colleges and Technical Institutions;

6. 95121 - Professional Organisations in Education;

7. 92007 - Education by Universities

Almost a third of the companies (28%) classify themselves as Professional Organisations in Education

(see Rationale in Table 1.2). It appears that this SIC code category is used as a catch-all for

companies that are finding it difficult to describe their core activities in relation to the available SIC

codes.

A quarter (25%) selected Education by Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges, which as

noted above, may or may not be offering higher education programmes. The ETDP SETA needs to

take cognisance of the shift from a purely ‘band’ classification (as in GET, FET and HET bands), to the

newer, and more appropriate description of a ‘post-school sector’, which will include higher

education provision, but which may not necessarily be university-type provision.

16% chose ‘92006 Education by Teacher Training Colleges or Education for Further Training’ as the

best way to describe their core activities, and 14% categorised themselves as ‘92009 Other

Educational Services - own account teachers, motor vehicle driving schools / tutors and music,

dancing and other art schools, etc.’. The latter category (92009) may be another of those catch-all

categories where companies offering short courses may find the closest fit.

16%

14%

25%

5%

10%

28%

2%

Organisations per SIC code category - phase 1 - n 136

1. 92006

2. 92009

3. 92008

4. 87132

5. 92004

6. 95121

7. 92007

13

Important to note, only 2% selected 92007 Education by Universities as their category suggesting

that very few of the companies in this section of the sector see themselves as offering university-

type programmes (see above).

Nevertheless, for phase 1 of this study, the analyses were mostly of a quantitative nature, informed

by the nature of the WSP and Annual Training Report (ATR) template (see Annexure 2).

1.2.4 Analyses – phase 2

Phase 2 of the study was intended to deepen the understanding of the PHE sector by using a

questionnaire based on the annual WSP and ATR, but by adding additional questions (see Annexure

1). For this phase of the study, 562 institutions were contacted, of which slightly more than 10%

returned the questionnaires (58 organisations). While there were therefore potentially more

institutions available for analyses than those available from the ETDP SETA databases provided for

phase 1 of the study, the response rate, despite many follow-ups, was relatively poor. Nevertheless,

in research terms, a 10% response rate is considered adequate, making it possible to generalise

across the whole population.

However, it should be noted that the 562 organisations by no means represent the whole PHEI

population as the databases used clearly do not include all possible permutations of private higher

education institutions accredited by the different Sector Education and Training Authorities

(SETAs)(see discussion in Chapter 3).

Furthermore, as in phase 1 of the study, the SIC Codes proved to be problematic in respect of how

organisations classify themselves. Nevertheless, in terms of the SIC Codes selected by the 58

respondents for phase 2 of the study, none of the Codes were excluded even though these

respondents added a few additional SIC Codes, namely: 87110 – General Research (1/58); 92001 –

Pre-primary Education and Activities of After School Centres (2/58); 92002 – Primary and Secondary

Education (1/58); 92005 – Education by Universities of Technology (1/58); 9200A – NGOs involved in

Education (8/58); and 92010 – Examination and Assessment Bodies (1/58).

There are two reasons for retaining all the Codes:

In a few cases respondents indicated that they had already completed questionnaire surveys for

one of the other ETDP SETA research teams, but it became evident that such respondents are

offering both FET and HET programmes. In such cases, the respondents were asked to respond

in terms of their HE focus. While there may therefore be a minor duplication in data gathering,

the Private HE research team nevertheless felt that the data would be useful in respect of a

private HE perspective. Furthermore, this confirms the findings of the 2011 ETDP SETA SSP

private higher education report, namely that PHEIs often straddle FET and HET;

For the remainder of the ‘new’ SIC Codes which were previously excluded when the ETDP SETA

databases were analysed, a decision was made to retain all of the new Codes for the phase 2

analyses. It was felt that if they had not been contacted by any of the other teams their

particular skills needs would not become known if their responses are excluded. The research

team therefore felt obliged to include their responses.

14

From the above, the finding that the SIC Codes do not seem to adequately reflect the various shapes

in which PHEIs may occur, is confirmed. The Code selections for phase 2 are indicated in Table 1.3

(overleaf):

Table1.3: SIC Code Selections Included for Analyses – (Phase 2)

Code Category per SIC Code

87110 General Research, e.g. CSIR

87132 Research and Development

92001 Pre-primary Education and Activities of After School Centres

92002 Primary and Secondary Education

92004 Education by Technical Colleges and Technical Institutions

92005 Education by Universities of Technology

92006 Education by Teacher Training Colleges or Education for Further Training

92007 Education by Universities

92008 Education by Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges

92009 Other Educational Services - own account teachers, motor vehicle driving schools / tutors and music, dancing and other art schools, etc.

9200A NGOs involved in Education

92010 Examination and Assessment Bodies

95121 Professional Organisations in Education Source: ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

A number of respondents provided their own new ‘categories’ for which no SIC Codes exist,

including: Education by Private Higher Education Institutions (3/58); Capacity Building (1/58); Private

Higher Education Institution – Beauty Therapy (1/58); Provision of training leading to qualifications

of healthcare professionals and short courses to up-skill current professionals (1/58); Hairdressing

Training/Further Education and Training (1/58);Private education and training academy (1/58);

(99090) Private providers (1/58); HR and workplace training of trainers (1/58); and, Theological

College (1/58).

Others do not seem to fit in with the ETDP SETA constituencies, but for the reasons provided above,

are nevertheless included, namely: Construction Plumbing Training and Plumbing sec 28 Trade

testing CETA accredited (1/58); Advertising – (MICT SETA) (1/58).

These ‘new’ categories confirm that the current SIC Code list may be inadequate and needs revision.

A SIC Code reflecting ‘Private Higher Education’ or ‘Private Post-School Education’, in particular, may

be a useful inclusion in the set of revised Codes.

Nevertheless, the different categories (excluding the ‘new’ categories identified by respondents

themselves) have the following share of this section of the sector (Figure 1.2):

15

Figure 1.2: Organisations per SIC Code Category - (Phase 2)

Source: ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

Key:

1. 87110 - General Research, e.g. CSIR;

2. 87132 – Research and Development;

3. 92001 – Pre-primary Education and Activities of After School Centres;

4. 92002 – Primary and Secondary Education;

5. 92004 – Education by Technical Colleges and Technical Institutions;

6. 92005 – Education by Universities of Technology;

7. 92006 – Education by Teacher Training Colleges of Education for Further Training;

8. 92007 – Education by Universities;

9. 92008 – Education by Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges tutors and music, dancing and

other art schools, etc.;

10. 92009 – Other Educational Services – own account teachers, motor vehicle driving;

11. 9200A – NGOs involved in Education; 92010 – Examination and Assessment Bodies;

12. 92010 - Examination and Assessment Bodies

13. 95121 – Professional Organisations in Education;

14. New SIC Code – Private Higher Education.

(Please note that only 56 out of the 58 respondents indicated their SIC Codes. For this figure the population is

thus 56.)

18% of the organisations responding to the customised questionnaire for phase 2 of the study, have

categorised themselves as ‘Professional Organisations in Education’; while 14% chose ‘Education by

Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges’; 13% consider themselves to be ‘NGOs involved in

Education’; and, a further 10% see themselves as offering ‘Education by Universities’. A further two

sets of organisations (8% each), have categorised themselves as ‘Education by Technical Colleges and

Technical Institutions’ and ‘Education by Teacher Training Colleges of Education for Further Training’

1%

6% 3%

2%

8%

2%

8%

10%

14%

3%

13%

2%

18%

10%

Organisations per SIC code category - phase 2 - n56 1. 87110

2. 87132

3. 92001

4. 92002

5. 92004

6. 92005

7. 92006

8. 92007

9. 92008

10. 92009

11. 9200A

12. 92010

13. 95121

14. New

16

respectively. If a new SIC Code titled ‘Private Higher Education’ is included in the analysis, this

category reflects 10% of the total.

From this small (additional) sample, the data seems to signify that there may be many private

institutions that are not currently registered with the ETDP SETA as levy payers, but which seem to

be possible constituents of the ETDP SETA as many of these organisations seem not to have been on

any register of the ETDP SETA. Given that only 58 of the organisations submitted completed

questionnaires, out of a total of 562 approached, it seems that there are many more education and

training organisations which may have registered as employers with a SETA other than the ETDP

SETA.

This may be true for other ETDP SETA constituent categories as well. In response to the question

‘Please tick *√+ the Sub-Sector or Constituency in which your organisation falls’, the 58 organisations

responded as follows:

Figure 1.3: Sub-Sectors of ETDP SETA Constituencies – (Phase 2)


As noted before, only a few of the 58 respondents had been contacted by one of the other ETDP

SETA research teams, suggesting that a true picture of private education in South Africa is still

emerging. From the above it is clear that not all of the 58 respondents are true ‘higher education’

institutions (for a list of the respondents for phase 2 of the study, please refer to Annexure 3.)

1.3 Research Limitations

The key research limitations result from the nature of the data sources.

From within the ETDP SETA itself, two sets of databases were provided – the first set relates

to WSPs and ATRs, and the second set were received from the ETQA division in respect of

accredited institutions. It was expected that the accredited institutions’ details would be

subsumed in the WSP data, but this was not the case.

Furthermore, the ETQA data was unverified, and even at the time of writing this report, was

unavailable for analysis.

While the formulation of SIC Codes cannot be seen to be the ETDP SETA’s responsibility, the

broad nature of the Codes do not allow for determining the finer grain of the PHE sector.

3

13

1

18

33

3

7

ECD Adult E&T Schooling FET Coll HE DHET NGO/CBOs

Sub-sectors - PHEIs - n 58

17

The sector does not only consist of universities, colleges and institutes, but clearly include

many small single-purpose providers who may primarily be working within workplaces. The

current set of SIC Codes therefore do not make it possible for the different ‘types’ of

organisations to identify themselves, which ultimately skews the analyses.

In terms of the external databases, e.g. from the Department of Higher Education and

Training (DHET); Treasury and so forth, note that no single database of PHEIs is held at any

organisation. Even the SETA section within the DHET could not provide a single set of

databases that include accredited institutions from across sector ETQAs. This is a serious

constraint in terms of a study of this nature (see ‘current challenges’ discussed in Chapter 3).

Furthermore, while organisations such as the DHET hold data in respect of students, none of

them also hold data about staff, which is the basis for the submission of WSPs and the basis

for the SSP study.

It may be for this reason that the South African Qualifications Authority’s (SAQAs) National

Learners’ Records Database (NLRD) officials have not responded to a request for data. The

NLRD holds student data, but not staff data.

The confusion (in the minds of the providers) in respect of which ETQA they belong to as

accredited providers versus registered employers with a particular SETA means that there is

no sense of the total population in terms of the PHE constituency. This study can therefore,

at most, only be seen to be a partial picture of the sector (more about this in Chapter 3).

Given the issues identified above, it did not seem meaningful to follow the questionnaire with

targeted interviews and/or focus groups. Apart from the comments provided as part of the

responses to the questionnaire, the study therefore lacks a qualitative perspective.

18

CHAPTER 2: SECTOR PROFILE

2.1 Private Higher Education and Training

The Private Higher Education (PHE) sector consists of mostly Small, Medium and Micro Enterprises

(SMMEs), which augers well for the economy of the country if economists are to be believed. If each

of the institutions in the two samples is considered to be an employer, then it can be assumed that

at least 136 employers are reflected in the first phase of the study, and an additional 58 employers

are added in phase 2 of the study. However, it is when we view these two samples against the

background of the whole population that it becomes evident what the contribution of small

businesses in the PHE sector is making. As noted earlier, the complete size of the whole population

is not fully understood, but for this study we have identified at least 562 employers in addition to

the 136 employers identified through the ETDP SETA databases.

2.2 Institutional profile

For phase 1 of the study, Section A: Administrative Details, of the 2012/2013 WSP and the

2011/2012 ATR Template for the Private Sector requested information about the size of the

institution in terms of the number of employees working at the organisation. This is reflected in

Figure 2.1:

Figure 2.1: Number of Employees – (Phase 1)

Source: WSP/ATR 2011 - 2012

From the above it is clear that most of the organisations are small (79%), while only 6% of the

organisations employ more than 150 members of staff.

Using a finer scale in phase 2 of the study, namely 1 employee; 2 – 5 employees; 6 – 9 employees, 10

– 49 employees; 50 – 149 employees; 150 – 300 employees; and more than 300 employees, the

following pattern emerges (see Figure 2.2):

79%

15%

6%

Size of institutions - number of employees - n136

1 - 49 50 - 149 150+

19

Figure 2.2: Number of Employees – (Phase 2)

Source: EDTP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

This confirms the previous finding emanating from the phase 1 analysis. Most of the private

education organisations are small to very small, for example 42% (21% each respectively) are

between 2 and 10 members of staff, with 31% below 50 members of staff and 19% between 50 and

149 members of staff. Only 3 % of the organisations have more than 150 members of staff and 3%

have more than 300 members of staff. This may explain why these organisations do not seem to be

registered as employers with the ETDP SETA as their annual turnover may be too low.

2.3 Provincial spread

PHEIs are often found in areas where public institutions do not have a presence. Typically, PHEIs

recognise opportunities, and act on these, which is not always possible for public institutions. In her

report to the DHET, Blom (2011, p. 29) reflected the provincial spread of private post-school

institutions across all ETQAs (inclusive of ABET, FET and HET institutions), which bears out the view

that PHEIs are widely spread in addition to the fact that most of the organisations have a presence in

the more populous provinces such as Gauteng, the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal (see Figure 2.3

overleaf):

2%

21%

21%

31%

19%

3% 3%

Number of employees - phase 2 - n 58

1 employee 2 to 5 6 to 9 10 - 49 50 - 149 150 - 300 Over 300

20

Figure 2.3: Provincial Spread – Private Institutions – ETQA data

Source: Blom, for DHET, 2011

From the above it is clear that the provincial spread is substantial, especially in areas where few (or

no) public higher institutions are found. Notable examples are the 422 institutions (ABET, FET and

HET) in Mpumalanga and the 114 institutions (ABET, FET and HET) in the Northern Cape.

For the ETDP SETA study, in terms of the reach of PHEIs, the following emerged from the phase 1

analysis (Figure 2.4):

Figure 2.4: Provincial Spread of Companies – (Phase 1)

Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 - 2012

A similar pattern emerges when the data from the 58 respondents for phase 2 of the study is

analysed. 39 institutions indicated that they have a physical presence in Gauteng, as well as in the

Western Cape (22); in KwaZulu-Natal (18); and in the Eastern Cape (10). Most of the organisations’

5309

768 422

1759

535 114 298

886

1788

657

GP LP MP KZN FS NC NW EC WC OTHER

Provincial spread - private institutions - ETQA data

68

30

17 12

3 3 2 1 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

GP WC KZN EC MP FS NW LP

Provincial spread - private providers of education and training - n 136

21

head offices are in Gauteng (32) followed by the Western Cape with 13, with only 4 in KwaZulu-

Natal,2 each in the Eastern Cape and Limpopo and 1 each in the Free State, Mpumalanga and the

North West provinces. No head offices are located in the Northern Cape (see Figure 2.5):

Figure 2.5: Provincial Spread – (Phase 2)


From the above it is clear that the highest concentration of private higher institutions is still to be

found in urban areas. This is not a surprising finding, but it is clear that some private institutions

have identified a niche market in more rural provinces such as Mpumalanga, the Northern Cape,

Limpopo and the North-West Provinces. The ETDP SETA may consider how the presence of these

PHEIs could be utilised with the greatest effect.

8

39

18

5

10

3

7 4

22

1

32

4 1 2

0 2 1

13

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

FS GP KZN MP EC NC LP NW WC

Provincial spread - phase 2 - n58

Prov Spread

Head offices

22

CHAPTER 3: EDUCATION, TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT SKILLS SUPPLY AND DEMAND

3.1 Drivers of change

3.1.1 Policy framework

The discussion below is an attempt to further conceptualise the work of the ETDP SETA within the

macro-policy environment which provide the impetus for the SETA activities to be undertaken. In

addition, where appropriate, comments are made in respect of the specific role that private higher

education could play in achieving the ETDP SETAs objectives for the sector.

a. Human Resource Development of South Africa (HRDSA)

The work of the ETDP SETA, as well as the other sub-sectors in the education and training and skills development sector, is framed by the Human Resource Development Strategy for South Africa (HRDSA). This strategy focuses on those elements of HRD that (HRDSA, 2010 – 2030, p. 10):

...significantly and positively impact on our economic performance such as (i) educational attainment, (ii) skills development, (iii) science and innovation, and (iv) labour market/employment policies. Consequently, this HRD Strategy needs to be situated within the realities of increasing competition and the spread of global production systems, and the need to attain equity and reduce poverty and inequality.

The HRDSA’s central concern is to match supply and demand for human resources. The HRD therefore promotes an approach that is (p. 10):

...multi-pronged, comprising of a high- and intermediate-level skills strategy on the supply side, underpinned by a demand strategy that stimulates large-scale labour-absorbing employment growth supported by appropriate inputs of low-level skills training.

Therefore, all sub-sectors (SETAs) should aim to align their priorities with that of the HRDSA in terms of the issues impacting on emerging local and sectoral conditions.

b. National Skills Development Strategy III (NSDS III)

The HRDSA also frames the National Skills Development Strategy III (NSDS III). The Minister of Higher Education and Training, Dr Nzimande noted, in the Foreword to the NSDS that (2011, p. 3):

NSDS III must ensure increased access to training and skills development opportunities and achieve the fundamental transformation of inequities linked to class, race, gender, age and disability in our society. We must also address the challenges - of skills shortages and mismatches - we face as a country and improve productivity in the economy.

Furthermore, the NSDS III indicates that in addition to the above, two key objectives of the strategy relate to the placement of students and graduates in workplaces to gain work experience; and rural development. To this end, PIVOTAL programmes have been identified as one of the pillars of the NSDS. SETAs have a central role to play in implementing these programmes (NSDS, 2011, p. 9):

23

Fundamental to the successful implementation of PIVOTAL programmes will be a model of cooperation between a SETA, a higher or further education and training institution and an employer.

Through strategic public and private partnerships, NSDS III focuses particularly on the youth and new entrants to the labour market, including substantial growth in the availability of artisanal skills in the economy. SETAs are also encouraged to work with the public FET colleges to strengthen these colleges and to prioritise equipping their lecturers to meet industry needs (NSDS, 2011, p. 16):

In the past, many college lecturers were qualified in the trades and occupations they were teaching but did not have appropriate teaching qualifications.

The ETDP SETA and its constituent private higher education institutions may have a particularly important role to play in this regard. Likewise, in terms of addressing the low level of youth and adult language and literacy skills, private providers should be encouraged to respond to these needs. Workplace-based learning for employed learners is another renewed focus of NSDS III, and both mandatory and discretionary grants are made available to address productivity issues, especially in relation to identified critical skills. Encouraging and supporting the development of small Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and Community-based Organisations (CBOs) continue to be a focus of NSDS III in order to enhance possibilities of self-employment and the building of small enterprises. A new focus emerging from NSDS III is that of capacity building of public sector departments to improve service delivery. SETAs have an important role to play in identifying and implementing learning projects for this niche market. The NSDS III has also recognised that without career and vocational guidance, much time and effort is wasted if inappropriate learning opportunities are selected. This may emerge as an important development area for the ETDP SETA. In terms of SETAs themselves, NSDS III is quite explicit (NSDS, 2011, p. 23):

SETAs should be the authority on labour market intelligence and ensure that skills needs and strategies to address these needs are set out clearly in sector skills plans.

c. National Growth Path (NGP) and Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP)

Other related policies impacting the work of the ETDP SETA include the New Growth Path (NGP) and

the Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP). While both these policies focus less on education and

training in general, and strongly on creation of decent work and artisanal development, the ETDP

SETAs most important contribution is in the development of teacher/training human resources.

Good teaching and training is central to the achievement of the ideals expressed in these policies

(NGP, p. 19):

Improvements in education and skill levels are a fundamental prerequisite for achieving many of the goals in this growth path. General education must equip all South Africans to participate in our democracy and economy, and higher education must do more to meet the

24

needs of broad-based development. The growth path also requires a radical review of the training system to address shortfalls in artisanal and technical skills.

In terms of IPAP, the ETDP SETA’s private higher education constituency may have a particularly important role to play as private institutions are usually quicker to respond to market needs than public institutions, especially in supporting the ‘building *of+ lecturer capacity’ (IPAP, 2010, p. 42), perhaps in partnership with public institutions. d. Green paper

In keeping with PHEIs capacity to respond quickly to market needs, another policy framework that

must influence the way in which the ETDP SETA conceives its work include the Green Paper (GP) for

Post-school Education and Training. The GP is quite explicit about the contribution private higher

education could make (2011, p. 50):

The role of the private higher education sector, especially in terms of their specific contributions to increasing the participation rate and developing scarce skills, needs to be better understood by government and supported as far as possible.

The GP also talks about and supports the notion of partnerships between the public and private sector (GP, 2011). e. National Skills Accord

While the National Skills Accord is not a policy or draft policy framework, a few important points

once again point to the contribution the ETDP SETA should make in respect of skills development.

Under ‘Commitment Two’ (p. 6), for example, the Accord notes that ‘opportunities for training

exposure in a work environment for at least 16 000 lecturers at FET Colleges’ is essential. Likewise,

under ‘Commitment Seven’, the question should be asked what the ETDP SETA could do to

strengthen the basic education system (p. 13), as well as under ‘Commitment Eight’, in respect of

capacity building through improving the quality of provision and enhancing the responsiveness of

programmes to labour market needs (p. 15).

f. Strategic Infrastructure Programmes (SIPS)

The ETDP SETAs contribution to the Strategic Infrastructure Programme (SIP) may be on the fringes

only, but again, its main input could be in ensuring that there are sufficiently trained teachers,

trainers and so forth, to support the implementation of the programme.

g. Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF)

Finally, in terms of the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF), Government commits to:

‘investment in quality education and skills-development’ (p. 2), especially in relation to improved

access to quality education and to strengthening the skills and human resource base (p. 7). The

MTSF notes that (2009, p. 9):

Critically, investment in quality education for all young people and in skills development should form the bedrock of the government’s approach. Indeed, success in reducing poverty, in eliminating structural unemployment, in implementing a comprehensive social security system, in building social cohesion and in reducing crime will depend to a large extent on the progress made in growing the economy in an equitable manner, underpinned by a growing skills base.

25

This policy framework is also explicit in terms of early childhood development and adult basic education and training – two areas that fall squarely within the remit of the ETDP SETA, for example (2009, p. 23):

Increase participation in and improved quality of early childhood development services, with universal access to Grade R and double the number of 0-4 year-old ECD learners by 2014. Government will:

ensure that the institutional framework governing and facilitating the delivery of ECD services is improved and monitoring systems are introduced by establishing an improved system of registering and monitoring ECD centres;

establishing norms and standards relating to early childhood education; providing guidelines in all official languages for caregivers on the management of centres and providing curriculum support

strengthen adult learning opportunities, encouraging co-operation and collaboration between ECD & ABET centres, parent support and development programmes, health and social services

provide flexible training programmes for ECD teachers – including but not limited to distance learning options for teacher education

introduce the professional registration requirements, for all teachers in teacher-led ECD services

provide scholarships and other support to attract people into ECD Linked to the above is support to the teaching profession – another area where the ETDP SETA can make an important contribution. Finally, in terms of the current (and future) private higher education constituents, the ETDP SETA can assist in establishing ‘a diverse mix of sites of learning and types of training providers ... to deliver post-secondary education’ (MTSF, 2009, p. 26). In discussing the above policies and frameworks, it is becoming increasingly important to recognise the potential of private education, and private higher education in particular, to contribute to the massive demands in respect of education and training in South Africa. While there are many problems relating to private education, it should no longer be seen as a phenomenon that sits on the fringes of the system (Blom, 2011, p. 9):

… in thinking about a post-school system, the growing private system has largely been excluded. While the private system is being regulated through accreditation and registration processes, the overall size and shape of the sector has not been established. The DHET now acknowledges that to exclude the private system will skew it plans for coordinating and building a vibrant and diverse post-school system, capable of addressing the needs of a varied and differentiated student population. Partnerships between public and private entities, and between the State and private institutions, have been very successful in developing countries, most notable examples include India and Korea. If the needs of the burgeoning post-school youth and adults are to be met in South Africa, policy makers have to seriously consider the contribution a dynamic and responsive private sector can make.

3.1.2 Socio-economic profile

The socio-economic profile of the ETDP SETAs private higher education institutions should be seen

against the background of the larger pool of private institutions, very few of which are actually

26

paying skills levies to the ETDP SETA in line with their core activities as education and training

providers.

Nevertheless, the private education sector (post-school, as opposed to private higher) is vibrant,

diverse and growing. In a study undertaken on behalf of the DHET in 2011, it became evident that

despite many possible duplications across the system (double-counting of institutions), the private

education sector is substantial. In the table below, taken from the DHET study mentioned earlier, the

extent of private provisioning is evident (Blom, 2011, p. 26):

Table 3.1: SAQA Data – Number of Institutions, Compared with ETQA Data

No ETQA name ETQA data

SAQA data

Comments

1 AgriSETA 292 31

2 BankSETA 38 17

3 CETA 238 79

4 CHE 87 148 87institutions according to the DHET (HET) Register

5 CHIETA 121 37

6 CTFL -

7 ETDP SETA 983 443 All providers categorized as ‘unknown’ on SAQA database

8 E(W)SETA 182 76

9 FASSET 50 223

10 FIETA - 33 Part of newly established FPMSETA

11 FOODBEV 101 29 All providers categorized as ‘unknown’ on SAQA database

12 HWSETA 376 94

13 INSETA 138 1 Only 1 institutions categorized as ‘unknown’

14 ISETT - 214 Part of newly established MICT SETA

15 LGSETA 462 201

16 MAPPP - 154 Part of newly established FPMSETA

17 MERSETA 3412 266

18 MQA 58 100

19 PAB 36 31

20 PSETA 43 2

21 SAICA 797 0

22 SANC 366 1

24 SASSETA 868 338 All providers categorized as ‘unknown’ on SAQA database

25 SERVICE 1226 279

26 TETA - 2 Search engine disabled on website

27 UMALUSI 1719 1 Umalusi data incorporates both AET and FET institutions

28 W&R SETA 220 16

TOTAL 11 813 2 816 Source: Blom, for DHET, 2011

As an economic sector, private education is therefore a sizable sector. However, while it is not

possible at this stage to give a numerical value to the economic contribution made by private

education and training, the size of the sector is an indication, not only of the economical value of the

sector, but also of its current and potential contribution to employment opportunities.

Two further indicators, in the absence of data of this nature from the WSP submissions, can be used.

The first relates to employer patterns. The WSP template requested information about ‘ownership’

of private higher education institutions – see below:

27

Figure 3.1: Ownership as an Economic Indicator

Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012

Key: BE – Black Enterprise; BEE – Black Empowered Enterprise; BWOE – Black Woman-owned Enterprise;

CBBE – Community or Broad-based Enterprise; CCE – Cooperative or Collective Enterprise; N/A – Not

applicable

If all the categories, except N/A are counted together, it is clear that black ownership of private

higher education organisations are growing (63 out of 136 or 46% of organisations appear to be

black-owned).

A further indicator in terms of the economic outlook of the private higher education sector, which

can also only be seen to be an inferred indication of the state of this sector, is the expenditure by

these companies on skills levies and training (77 companies – some companies are obviously too

small and are exempt from having to pay levies). Refer to the table below:

Table 3.2: Expenditure – Skills Levies versus Training

Total levies paid – n77 Total training budget Internal cost External cost

R 5 823 411 R 8 080 775 R 3 377 305 R 3 842 920 Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012

This means that these companies have, on average paid R75 628 in skills levies per company, and

have spent approximately R104 945 per organisation on training in 2011.

For phase 2 of the study, the expenditure versus skills levies is even more marked. It is evident that

the sample of 58 respondents spends a substantial amount annually on staff training. For example,

there is a more than R2 million difference between the levies paid and expenditure on staff training.

Grants (mandatory and discretionary) only amount to just under R 3 million:

2

41

7 7 6

73

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

BE BEE BWOE CBBE CCE N/A

'Ownership' as an economic indicator - n 136

28

Table 3.3: Expenditure on Training versus Levies Paid and Grants Received – (Phase 2)

Description Amounts

Levies paid - ETDP SETA financial year: 1/4/2011 – 31/03/2012 R 3 942 641

Levies paid - Institutional financial year: 1/1/2011 – 31/12/2011 R3 509 539

Levies Total: R7 452 180

Grants; Mandatory: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R2 004 886

Grants; Discretionary: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R197 350

Grants Total: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R2 911 997

Spend; Externally contracted: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R7 576 553

Spend; Internally contracted training staff: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R5 018 640

Total budgeted: 1/1/2011 - 31/12/2011 R9 546 271 Source: ETDP SETA SSP PHE Survey, 2012

Given that many of the SMMEs in this sample will not be required to pay skills levies due to their low

annual turnover, the PHE sector nevertheless seems to be making a substantial contribution to the

economy.

3.2 Overview of current challenges in the Private Higher Education sector

The key challenge in terms of the Private Higher Education (PHE) sector, as Blom noted in her report

to the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) on The Size and Shape of Private, Post-

School Education and Training Provision in South Africa (June 2011), is ‘the dispersed nature of data

regarding the private post-school sector, which made it difficult to eliminate duplications and

overlaps, and to verify information across sectors’ (p. 6).

In this study, as in the 2011 DHET study, ‘at most, the report is able to indicate where likely overlaps

exist or where gaps seem to be’ (Blom, 2011, p. 6). Unfortunately, the situation in respect of the

broader private post-school sector hasn’t improved much in the year since the DHET report, but

importantly, this problem occurs even within the ETDP SETA sector – refer to the possible overlaps

noted in Table 2. This is a problem that has been identified throughout the system, and is not unique

to the EDTP per se. However, the poor data management, at all levels of the system should urgently

be addressed. Unless this is done, the ideal of establishing credible institutional mechanisms for

skills planning will not be achieved.

A further complication, in terms of specifically the ETDP SETA Sector Skills Plan, which is directly

associated with the workforce of levy-paying organisations. This is with regards to the confusion that

seems to exist about, and the conflation of, two distinct functions in the education and training

systems, namely a quality assurance function (accreditation of institutions with a particular Sector

Education and Training Authority (SETA) for the delivery of qualifications and skills programmes) and

a skills levy management function (the payment by employers of their skills levies to their

constituent SETA, in respect of their own staff). In an email discussion, worth repeating here, this

issue was described as follows3:

What seems to have happened is that education and training providers (or is it SARS?) have

conflated the two distinct issues of accreditation and skills levies.

3 Email discussion between Dr Ronél Blom and Ms Josie Singaram.

29

Training providers are accredited to offer certain qualifications to students in a particular

sector. Therefore, an institution will be with MQA, MERSETA, etc. as an accredited provider.

However, as employers these providers (also read ‘companies’), need to be with the sector

that represent their core business activity – namely, education and training. In other words,

as employers, their skills levies should be paid to the ETDP SETA, not to the sector where they

are training in, e.g. MQA. This is because the skills levies are intended for training of their

own staff – not the students.

However, currently this is not the case, except for those companies that offer education and

training in ETD related programmes. In fact, such companies should be the only

organisations that are both accredited by the ETDP SETA ETQA, and are also paying their

skills levies to the same SETA.

In my view, all providers should be paying their skills levies to the ETDP SETA. In the same

way, a mining company will pay their skills levies to MQA and an auto manufacturing

company will pay their skills levies to MERSETA, because they are employers in those sectors.

Importantly, if this situation is rectified, i.e. that education and training companies, as

employers, pay their skills levies to the ETDP SETA, it may have a massive impact on the size

of the ETDP SETA’s constituency and it will also make it possible to get a (better) sense of the

size and shape of the education and training sector active across all economic sectors –

currently, this is almost impossible to determine.

This situation was confirmed by another email conversation with the DHET4:

I fully agree in regards to the confusion of levy income versus core business. In fact, this is

part of the advocacy role that SETAs, SARS and DHET are working on to “clean” the levy

system. The reality is that this may take some time, as Employers (including providers) are

required to notify SARS and register at a SETA on paying their relevant taxes and within

Employer organisation the Finance person may or may not be aware of the HR Persons

intention to submit to a specific SETA.

DHET has put in place an INTERSETA Transfer process to support SETAs in ensuring their levy

payers are reflective of their sector.

This is a positive move, and the ETDP SETA should certainly participate in the ‘clean-up’, which will

ensure that not only the levy-system is simplified, but that a better understanding of the private

education and training system is achieved.

In terms of the current study, the ETDP SETA 2011 Workplace Skills Plan (WSP) data also presented

some difficulties, chiefly resulting from the seemingly incorrect selection of the Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) Codes, by organisations submitting their WSPs.

4 Email communication between Dr Ronél Blom and Ms Melissa Erra from the Skills Development unit in the

DHET.

30

When the WSPs are prepared, organisations are asked to choose a SIC code that best describe their

main/core business activity. It is clear that some of these organisations did not find a good ‘fit’ with

their own activities. As a private independent school, which is also an organisation providing learning

material and curricula for delivery through computer-assisted learning, Accelerated Christian

Education (ACE), for example, found the best way to describe their activity as ‘92008 Education by

Correspondence and Private Vocational Colleges’, neither of which are correct in relation to this

organisation: ACE should first be seen to be an independent school, not a ‘private vocational

college’; and second, be requested to describe its mode of delivery (in this case through computer

assisted learning, suggesting that the relationship between the child and the teacher is

asynchronous, understood by ACE as to be the closest to ‘correspondence’).

While this is perhaps an exception to the rule, the incorrect selection of a SIC code also affect other

organisations. Sandy Roy Beauty Therapy, for example, selected the SIC code ‘9200A NGOs involved

in Education’, which does not seem appropriate. Likewise, other organisations were forced to select

codes which may not fully reflect their activities, for example where an institution is offering both

Further Education and Training (FET) programmes, as well as Higher Education (HE) programmes. In

this case, many organisations selected the code ‘92004 Education by Technical Colleges and

Technical Institutions’. The extent to which these selections have been influenced by past regulatory

requirements, including the DHET’s registration requirements (i.e. that a provider may offer only FET

or only HE), is unclear. The single- purpose, multi-purpose, as well as the ‘one provider, one ETQA’

conundrum may also have influenced the way in which organisations have selected SIC codes.

The extent to which the ETDP SETA has any influence on how the SIC codes are formulated is

unknown. However, in order to gain a real understanding of the sector and its activities, adjustments

to the codes in line with what has been described above, must be recommended. Such

recommendations must be informed by a ‘no-penalty’ requirement of the ETDP SETA’s constituents

to provide a real (and full) description of what the organisations’ actual activities entail.

A final difficulty experienced in respect of the ETDP SETA WSP data is the second classification

(following a selection of a SIC code) as ‘Private Providers of Education and Training’ which once

again, may force organisations to select a particular classification that does not reflect more than

one ‘type’ of activity, for example being an education and training provider, but also being an ‘NGO,

NLP, CBO and CBC in ETD’.

A classification which does not seem to exist, which may very well assist in providing a more

nuanced understanding of the sector is ‘Consultancy in Education’ or suchlike. The ETDP SETA thus

needs to review its own classifications, again based on an analysis of the actual activities of

organisation that believe they are part of the ETDP SETA’s constituency.

The sector itself is also experiencing challenges. Firstly, it is subject to many different and sometimes

contradictory regulatory requirements. As noted in the introduction, one sub-sector (the traditional

institutions) is subject to the Higher Education Act and its Regulations, while the other sub-sector

(the occupationally-directed providers) is subject to the Skills Development Act (1997, as amended in

2011) and the Skills Development Levies Act (1999). While this causes confusion, more importantly,

it results in a disparate, incoherent system. Further, the fact that the Quality Council for Trades and

31

Occupations (QCTO) is not yet ready to take on its responsibilities in respect of economic sector

providers and their SETAs, unsettles the sector, resulting in change fatigue in the PHEIs.

Finally, on the face of it, the PHE sector is still seen to be the step-child of the system. This leads to

poor articulation between the private and public sectors despite the fact that many PHEIs are

opening up access to many prospective students, a great many from the disadvantaged

communities, who otherwise would not have had viable options for further and higher learning.

3.3 Employment Profile

3.3.1 Employee demographic profile

In the first phase of the study occupational categories were used to determine the employment

profile of the PHE sector. According to the occupational categories, the total number of permanent

staff employed at the 136 organisations identified as ‘private higher education’ as described in

Chapter 1, is 10,273 individuals, of which 10% are Managers, 30% are Professionals, 7% are

Technicians and associated professionals, 17% are Clerical support workers, 9% are Service and Sales

workers, 6% are Skilled agricultural, forestry, fishery, craft and related trades workers, 6% are Plant

and machinery operators and assemblers, and 15% of these individuals occupy Elementary

occupations. None of the 136 organisations indicated that they have ‘Learners’ on their payrolls –

see below:

Figure 3.2: Number of Employees per Occupational Category – (Phase 1)

Source: – ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012

While the large number of professionals, clerical and support workers and managers are expected in

organisations where the core activity is education and training, the relatively large number of skilled

agricultural, forestry, fishery, craft and related trades workers, as well as the plant and machinery

operators and assemblers do not seem to fit in with the sector. The Blue Nightingale Trading

company, for example, has classified themselves according to the SIC code as a ‘95121 Professional

Organisation in Education’, but they have 349 Plant and machinery operators and assemblers and

630 Elementary occupation workers on their payroll. It is not clear why this company has classified

986

3087

760

1705

916 624 644

1551

0

Occupational categories - no of employees per category - n 136 companies

32

itself as a professional organisation in education. These numbers skew the overall picture of this

section of the sector.

The ‘Learners’ occupational category presents an interesting gap. This suggests that none of these

136 companies are offering some or other kind of in-service education and training such as

learnerships or internships.

The employment status per population group is as follows (Figure3.3):

Figure 3.3: Employment Status per Population Group – (Phase 1)

Source: – ETDP SETA WSP/ATR, 2011 - 2012

White females occupy most of the positions in this section of the sector (2903), followed by African

males (2748) and African females (1890). This is encouraging, but the same cannot be said for the

number of disabled persons employed in this section of the sector (see Figure 12). Less than 0, 5% of

people employed in this section of the sector are disabled, and of those who are, the most are

white:

2748

1890

349 459 273 416

1252

2902

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

African Male

African Female

Coloured Male

Coloured Female

Indian Male Indian Female

White Male White Female

Employment status per population group- n 10,273

33

Figure 3.4: Employment Status – Disabled Persons – (Phase 1)


In terms of age ranges, there is an almost equal number of young (under 35) and more experienced

(35 – 55 years of age) individuals employed in this section of the sector (Figure 3.5):

Figure 3.5: Age Ranges – (Phase 1)


However, when occupation categories are teased out, the following emerge in relation to Managers

(Figure 3.6 see below):

3 3

1

17

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Disabled African Disabled Coloured Disabled Indian Disabled White

Employment status - disabled - n 10,273

Less than 35 46%

35 - 55 45%

Over 55 9%

Age ranges - n 10,273

34

Figure 3.6: Managers per Population Group – (Phase 1)


Key:

AM - African Male; AF - African Female; CM – Coloured Male; CF – Coloured Female; IM – Indian Male;

IF – Indian Female; WM – White Male; WF – White Female.

This section of the sector is dominated by white female managers, followed by white male

managers, with coloured males having the lowest representation.

Furthermore, when Elementary occupations are examined, then it is clear that elementary positions

are still mostly filled by African men and women, explaining the high numbers of African Male

employment. Even if we assume that the Nightingale Trading company are wrongly placed (refer to

the earlier discussion) within the ETDP SETA, and their data is removed, this situation remains the

same (Figure 3.7 below):

Figure 3.7: Elementary Occupations per Population Group


61 73 24 41 48 50

304

392

0 50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

AM AF CM CF IM IF WM WF

Managers

Managers per population group - n 986

1181

239

97 20 12 0 14 7

605

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

AM AF CM CF IM IF WM WF

Elementary occupations

Elementary occupations per population group - n 1551 with Blue Nightingale; n 975 without Blue Nightingale

35

Please note that data in respect of staff qualifications is not available from ETDP SETA WSP

databases – (see Chapter 1 for a list of databases used). However, in phase 2 of the study,

respondents were requested to indicate staff qualifications profiles.

3.3.2 Employee qualifications profile

In response to the question - ‘Please provide the current skills levels of permanently appointed

staff’, the 58 respondents to the questionnaire used for phase 2 of the study, the following emerged:

Figure 3.8: Staff Qualifications – (Phase 2)


Most of the professional (teaching) staff has a first degree (36.42 %) or a diploma/certificate

(35.36%), with only 4.28% of staff with PhDs and 15.87% with Masters’ degrees. Most of the support

staff (68.14%) has diplomas or certificates, with only 12.95% with degrees, and only 2.96% with

Master’s degrees. Less than 1% has PhDs and 13.62% of staff has no qualifications at all. Compared

to other sectors, this state of affairs is not too discouraging. However, as will be seen in the

discussion later, one of the key interventions required by PHEIs is the upgrading of qualifications of

current staff.

3.3.3 Employment patterns and trends

In response to the question regarding employment trends and patterns and the forces or factors

driving these trends/patterns, the sample of 58 respondents for phase 2 of the study, gave varied

and diverse answers.

Some trends include ‘loss of experienced academic staff to industry or other sectors’ and relocation of staff due to more competitive salaries in those sectors. The economic downturn has also influenced staff retention, suggesting that due to decreased business, companies cannot retain staff and are consequently retrenched. Some staff losses are attributed to a ‘perceived ceiling on earning potential’ in the ETD sector and emigration due to ‘safety and career (and study) opportunities’. Furthermore, there seems to be a ‘scarcity of qualified and experienced staff’, which is leading to ‘attracting academic staff from other African countries’ and dismissals due to incompetence. Also, experienced black staff in particular is lost to other sectors due to more attractive salaries. The inability to recruit qualified BEE staff is

4.28

15.87

36.42 35.36

6.64 0.94 2.96

12.95

68.14

13.62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

%PhD %Masters %Degrees %Dipl/Cert %None

Staff qualifications - phase 2 - n58

Prof staff

Support staff

36

given as another reason for skills gaps, giving rise to ‘poaching’ of skilled staff by other providers once they have been trained. Larger urban areas also seem to attract staff away from smaller towns. A growing ‘consulting’ sector is another trend attracting people away from their current companies. Furthermore, it seems there is some frustration with the uncertainties in the sector, resulting in staff ‘moving out of ETD’. On the other hand, a number of companies indicated that their staff retention is good and that turnover is low. A strong trend is the increasing use of contract staff due to ‘low enrolment’, ‘finances’, financial implications of permanent employment’, ‘limited internal capacity’ and due to the nature of programmes and assessments and moderation where full-time staff are not required:

...we conduct industry specific training e.g. Production Management and we find that training is best conducted by someone who works in the field.

However, this can result in high turnover as staff’s availability is not guaranteed since they have full-time employment elsewhere. In some cases companies have no full-time employees. 3.4 Skills supply

The Human Resources Development Strategy (HRDS) 2010 – 2030 document (p. 8) notes that

There is both anecdotal and empirical evidence of skills shortages in a number of occupations and economic sectors within South Africa. Importantly, this fact co-exists with a relatively high level of unemployment. It also contributes to individuals’ low levels of success in finding employment after successful completion of education and training. It is clear that there is a tangible problem arising from the mismatch between the supply of and demand for skills in the South African labour market (emphasis added).

The ETDP SETA SSP intends to identify, and where possible, address this skills mismatch by analysing

the current skills supply, and matching the supply with demand arising from scarce and critical skills

noted by companies submitting their WSPs.

This is a positive step as to date the system has been struggling to determine the demand-side of

labour (HRDS, 2010 – 2030, p. 15):

We needed a more sophisticated tracking mechanism to monitor the movement and scarcity of a skilled workforce, given that the 2001 HRD Strategy struggled to interpret and anticipate the demand side of labour.

3.4.1 Occupational routes into the specific sector labour market

The sections below reflect an analysis of an ETDP SETA database containing information about

accredited institutions and the qualifications and/or programmes that they are offering as the

‘supply-side’ of skills in respect of the sector.

Importantly, please note that this database (numbered 9, see attached) is different from the other

ETDP SETA databases numbered 1 – 8, which include data in respect of WSPs and ATRs, and not

about qualifications and programmes offered. Database 9 does not seem to correspond with

databases 1 – 8. The ETDP SETA will have to investigate why their own information, sent from

different sections within the organisation to the research team, differ. Nevertheless, database 9 is an

37

important source in respect of pipeline skills supply, i.e. the skills that will become available once

learners have completed their qualifications at these private education and training institutions.

The ETDP SETA has accredited 308 private higher education institutions, some of which seem to be

very small (e.g. consultancies) and some of which do not seem to be true PHEIs (e.g. Heinemann

Publisher, Pty. Ltd). Nevertheless, the PHEIs, according to the ETDP SETA database, offer at least 14

different types of education and training related qualifications (in the capturing, the names of the

qualifications were not always written out in full – some qualifications have therefore been counted

together as it seems likely that they would be the same qualification5). Table 3.4 lists the 14 different

qualifications.

Table 3.4: List of Qualifications Offered by ETDP SETA Accredited Institutions – (Phase 1)

No. Qualification Name

1 Certificate: Education

2 Certificate: Occupation-directed Education, Training and Development Practice

Higher Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices

National Certificate: Occupationally Directed Education Training and Development Practices

3 Diploma: Occupation-directed Education, Training and Development Practice

National Diploma: Occupationally Directed Education Training

National Diploma: Occupationally Directed Education, Training and Development Practices


No. Qualification Name

4 ECD Practitioners Levels 5

Higher Certificate: Early Childhood Development

Higher Certificate: Early Childhood Development, NQF 5

5 Higher Education and Training Certificate: Development Practice

6 Level 5 Learnership for Educators in Schooling (NPDE)

7 Level 5 Occupationally Directed Practitioners Learnership

8 National Certificate: Environmental Education, Training and Development Practice

National Certificate: Environmental Education, Training and Development Practice Level 5

9 National Diploma: ABET Practice Learnership

10 National Diploma: Early Childhood Development

11 National Diploma: Environmental Education, Training and Development Practice

12 National First Degree: ABET Practice

13 National Higher Certificate: ABET Practice

14 National Professional Diploma in Education

Note: Those grouped together are assumed to be the same qualification.


5 The ETDP SETA should specify data capturing protocols. Currently, it is difficult to determine where there may

be overlaps.

38

Some of the above qualifications are quite common in the sector and are offered more often than

others. See Figure 3.9 below:

Figure 3.9: Supply of Qualifications by ETDP SETA Accredited Institutions – (Phase 1)


The Occupation-directed Education, Training and Development Practice qualification is offered the

most (see 2) in the graph). This is followed by the Certificate: Early Childhood Development (no 4

above), National Diploma: Early Childhood Development (no 10), Higher Education and Training

Certificate: Development Practice (no 5), the National Diploma: Occupationally Directed Education,

Training and Development Practices (no 3) and National Diploma: ABET Practice Learnership (no 9

above).

The Occupation-directed ETD Practice, the ECD and ABET qualifications seem to be somewhat of a

niche area for institutions accredited by the ETDP SETA. While there are no student enrolment

numbers available for these qualifications, it is clear that, by and large, other private higher

education institutions, for example those accredited by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) do

not generally offer these, or similar, qualifications (the qualifications offered by ETDP SETA

accredited institutions are unit-standards based qualifications, while the qualifications offered at

CHE accredited institutions are curriculum-based qualifications). In an excerpt from the 2010 DHET

study(below), an analysis of the most popular qualifications offered by CHE accredited institutions

are shown (Blom, 2010, p. 45, 46):

The most popular types of qualifications offered by private HE institutions [accredited by the

CHE] are Certificates and Higher Certificates (99), Diplomas (175) and Bachelor Degrees

(122).

The most popular fields of learning at the Certificate and Higher Certificate level are in

descending order:

Field 3: Business, Commerce and Management Studies,

9

79

30

60

31

8 5

9

26

44

1 1 6

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14)

Supply of qualifications and programmes

39

Field 10: Physical, Mathematical, Computer and Life Sciences,

Field 7: Human and Social Studies (Theology and Ministry), and

Field 2: Culture and Arts (Design studies). See Figure below:

Figure 3.10: Most Popular Fields of Learning – Certificates and Higher Certificates

Source: (Blom, for DHET, 2011)

When interrogating the range of offerings at the Diploma, Advanced Diploma and Higher Diploma

level, a similar trend emerges in terms of the most popular fields, except for the emergence of Field

9: Health Sciences and Social Services, which include qualifications for the beauty industry and

alternative therapies sector (see overleaf):

Figure 3.11: Most Popular Fields of Learning – Diplomas, Advanced Diplomas and Higher Diplomas

Source: (Blom, for DHET, 2011)

It is clear that those institutions accredited by the ETDP SETA focus on education and training related

qualifications and, in general, this is in line with the demand of the sector. However, as noted earlier,

the ETDP SETA accredited providers represent a relatively small sample of all the private higher

education institutions in the country. As indicated in Chapter 2, many private higher education

institutions do not submit their WSPs to the ETDP SETA, most notably the institutions accredited by

Field 2 Field 3

Field 7 Field 10

8

50

13 16

Most popular fields of learning - Cert& HCert

Field 2 Field 3

Field 7 Field 9

Field 10

36

71

13 17 24

Most popular fields of learning - Diplomas

40

the CHE and registered by the DHET. Those institutions accredited by other SETA ETQAs due to the

conflation of ‘accreditation’ and ‘skills levy’ responsibilities also do not submit their WSPs to the

ETDP SETA. Apart from the fact that the revenue, in terms of skills levies, should by rights be paid to

the ETDP SETA, this also results in an uncoordinated approach to skills planning as there is no real

sense of the size and shape of the private higher education sector and the contribution the sector

can make to alleviating the shortages of scarce and critical skills.

Respondents to the survey were asked to indicate the nature of the skills supply (see Figure 3.12):

Figure 3.12: Nature of Skills Supply – (Phase 2)


Key:

1) We offer only credit-bearing skills programmes;

2) We offer a combination of non-credit bearing and credit-bearing short courses and skills programmes;

3) We offer mostly full qualifications with some credit-bearing and non-credit bearing short courses and skills

programmes;

4) We offer only full qualifications (and accredited skills programmes);

5) Assessor and Moderation Programmes

From the above it is clear that most (37 out of 58) of the organisations offer full qualifications with

some credit-bearing and non-credit bearing short courses and skills programmes; followed by 13/58

of organisations that mostly offer credit-bearing and/or non-credit bearing short courses and skills

programmes. Eight of the respondents offer only full qualifications, one of which also offers

‘accredited skills programmes’.

3.4.2 Availability of training providers and gap areas

It is difficult to determine whether there are enough (or too many) training providers to meet the

demand. Based only on the number of providers for both samples (phase 1 and phase 2), and taking

into account that the second sample is only just over 10% of the whole population of 562, it would

seem that there are enough. However, the mere fact that there are so many would indicate that

2

13

37

8

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

Nature of skills supply - phase 2 - n58

41

there is a high demand for education and training. This should be investigated more fully in future

studies, especially in relation to the size of organisations and their student numbers.

3.4.3 Skills supply analysis

The phase 1 analysis indicates that the Occupation-directed Education, Training and Development

Practice qualification is offered by 79 out of the 136 training providers, making it the most popular

type of qualification of the sector. The next most popular qualification is the Certificate: Early

Childhood Development, offered by 60 out of the 136 providers, while the National Diploma: Early

Childhood Development, is offered by 44/136. The Higher Education and Training Certificate:

Development Practice, is offered by 31/136 provider and the National Diploma: Occupationally

Directed Education, Training and Development Practices, is offered by 30/136.The National Diploma:

ABET Practice Learnership, is offered by 26/136 while the rest of the ETDP SETA qualifications are

offered by small numbers of providers.

Based on the survey (phase 2 of the study), respondents were not requested to indicate which

qualifications they offer, only what the nature of their delivery is. Most of the 58 respondents

indicated that they offer full qualifications with some shorter courses and skills programmes.

However, in terms of ETDP SETA qualifications, it is not clear how many (if at all) are offering these

qualifications.

3.5 Skills demand

3.5.1 Factors impacting on demand

As part of the WSP template, organisations were requested to indicate what factors lead to scarcity

of skills. The ETDP SETA suggested phrases from which providers could select reasons for scarcity

which was analysed for phase 1 of the study. These reasons included:

Table 3.5: ETDP SETA Suggested Phrases for Description of Reasons for Scarce and Critical Skills – (Phase 1)

a There are no people with the necessary skills in this occupation

b There are people with the required skills in this occupation but they do not fulfil our equity requirements

c There are people currently in training but they are not available in the short term

d There are people with the required skills in this occupation but they do not reside in our geographic location

e This is a new and emerging occupation and therefore no people are trained in this occupation as yet

Other Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 – 2012

The reasons given for shortages of both scarce and critical skills by the 136 providers of phase 1 of

the study do not differ substantially, and interventions suggested by organisations are of an equally

generic nature. Likewise, the ‘other’ category (see Table 3.5 above) also generated similar responses.

For the purposes of this analysis, the factors impacting on demand for scarce and critical skills are

collapsed into one set of figures and tables.

The reasons for the lack of scarce and critical skills are given as follows (Figure 3.13):

42

Figure 3.13: Reasons for Scarce and Critical Skills – (Phase 1)


Key:

a. There are no people with the necessary skills in this occupation

b. There are people with the required skills in this occupation but they do not fulfil our equity requirements

c. There are people currently in training but they are not available in the short term

d. There are people with the required skills in this occupation but they do not reside in our geographic

location

e. This is a new and emerging occupation and therefore no people are trained in this occupation as yet

f. Other

Respondents were of the opinion that the most important reason for scarcity of skills is that ‘there

are no people with the necessary skills in this occupation’, followed by ‘there are people with the

required skills in this occupation but they do not fulfil our equity requirements’. However, the

greatest number of reasons was placed under the ‘other’ category (see Table 3.6 below), not all of

which could be seen to be the responsibility of the ETDP SETA:

Table 3.6: Reasons for Scarcity of Skills – (Phase 1) – ETDP SETA SETA WSP/ATR 2011 - 2012

Reasons for shortage in scarce skills

Limited candidates with the relevant experience and skills equity requirements

Lack of subject expertise in the field

Experienced people are scarce and demand is high

Salaries

IT Professionals are sought after by other sectors and few consider teaching as a career

Very few teachers available in the job market to teach Zulu

Not yet done an SDF course

48

24

2

13

5

85

22

11

2 4 1

33

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

a b c d e Other

Reasons for shortages in scarce and critical skills

SS

CS

43

There are these skills that are being contracted outside of the organisation, but none within the organisation.

Under-qualified people

There are people with the skills in this occupation, but they need to be applied within the context of the relevant programme

New technology with a skills shortage in the occupation

Having difficulty getting the moderators registered

Specialist academia as lecturers; Specialist academia in the biological disciplines(health); Specialist academia for ICT teaching

Public Sector Courses especially Finance & SCM - No practical background - NQF 3 – 6

Focus on ETQA requirements not commonly found in general administration

Due to area of specialisation of business focus on casino & hospitality industry

Replacement demand

Over qualified for our level of training, therefore too expensive

Limited skills in the market to support our business for qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

Have them trained and registered as facilitators and assessors; have two of our registered assessors registered as moderators

Trainers do not have the right qualifications – we do not want teachers with College qualifications

Few qualified artisans with a passion for training in the vocational skills field available.

High staff turnover in our industry makes it difficult to retain employees with the necessary skills


Reasons for shortage in critical skills

There are people in this occupation but they need further training

New outcomes-based education

SETA never assists with grants

Insufficient assessors within the organisation

It is a challenge to find candidates with sound problem-solving, analytical and administrative skills, as well as an individual who can relate well with people

Succession planning

Cost of training is unaffordable

Lack of language and presentation skills

44

Facilitators, assessors and moderators needed for Public Sector courses

Appointed members of staff must still be trained

High staff turnover in our industry makes it difficult to retain employees with the necessary skills


In phase 2 of the study, respondents were requested to indicate what the main factors are which are

impacting on current and future skills demands. The responses were varied, but many agreed with

some of the factors identified above.

A key factor relates to providers’ capacity to train, which was variously expressed as ‘training and

development capacity’; ‘expertise and knowledge’; ‘experience in the field’ and ‘facilitation and

training skills’. Likewise, equity candidates were difficult to come by, for example ‘availability of

suitable equity candidates led to the development of an in house higher education development

programme’. Another factor is ‘the lack of appropriate skills training for lecturers’.

The regulatory requirements and their associated bureaucratic processes were also often mentioned

as factors impacting on demand, for example ‘expectations of the Council on Higher Education (and

their requirements for academic and support staff; learner information and management systems)’

and ‘delayed accredited programmes due to Seta processes’.

The economic downturn is also impacting on the operations of organisations, leading to adjustments

in offerings – from qualifications to shorter programmes due to ‘the financial impact’ and the ‘state

of the economy’.

In both phase 1 and phase 2 of the study therefore, a common thread is emerging, which will be

discussed under 3.5.2.

3.5.2 Scarce and critical skills priorities

Based on the WSP/ATR submissions for 2011/2012 (phase 1), constituent companies’ responses to

what they consider to be scarce and critical skills in the sector were analysed.

However, it seems that some organisations have misunderstood the request to indicate what they

consider to be scarce and critical skills, as some scarce skills identified do not seem to relate to

education and training per se. The Academy for Continuous Professional Development, for example,

noted that they believe that there is a shortage of ‘Agriculture and Forestry Quality Controllers’, with

job specification such as ‘Production Manager for Abattoirs’ and ‘Meat Inspector’. While these skills

may very well be scarce in the agricultural sector, it has little to do with education and training.

Therefore, where these types of scarce skills have been identified by organisations, they were

excluded from this analysis.

In terms of education and training related scarce skills, organisations identified mainly the following:

45

Table 3.7: Scarce Skills – (Phase 1)

OFO Description OFO Description

242401 Training and development practitioner 242401 Mentoring and coaching

315304 (Flying) instructor 242302 Facilitator of learning programmes

231101 University lecturer 235101 Academic manager

231101 College of education lecturer 134506 Registrar

643101 (Painting) instructor 235101 Teaching and learning manager

242402 (Welding) instructor 234201 Early childhood development practitioner

441903 Course coordinator 233102 Natural sciences teacher

122301 Research and development manager 242301 Career counsellor/student advisor

242302 Skills development facilitator 263505 Student counsellor

134503 Faculty head Student relations manager

242404 Student accommodation manager 263507 Social worker/student support manager

235301 Teacher of English to speakers of other languages

235101 Education or training advisor

143901 Campus coordinator 235101 Academic development coordinator

134503 Head of college faculty 262201 Librarian

2321 Vocational education teachers 232126 Physical science teacher

235102 Moderator 232123 Mathematics teacher

231101 Assessment advisor and/or internal moderator

232118 Information technology teacher

231102 University tutor 232119 Language teacher

242403 Assessor of outcomes-based assessment

242401 Training officer

242401 Learning material designer/developer 235601 Technical trainers

242401 Course writing 122301 Research

242402 Occupational instructors 235601 Technical college trainer

134502 FET college principals Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 - 2012

From Table 3.7 it seems that qualified trainers, in various disciplines, (especially in vocational and/or

occupational education) are in short supply. Also, university lecturers (also in different disciplines)

seem to be scarce in private higher education. Linked to university lecturers are the number of times

that ‘Faculty Head’ appeared as a scarce skill. Other university/college type of scarcity include

‘Registrar’, ‘Teaching and learning manager’, ‘Academic manager’, ‘Librarian’, ‘Research’ and such

like, not all of which the ETDP SETA could take responsibility for.

There is an urgent demand for vocational/occupational/technical teachers in line with the renewed

focus on Further Education and Training colleges to help address the skills demands in the country

and to deal with the large number of youth that needs post-school education opportunities.

The most salient points emerging from the demand-side are:

There is a shortage of training, instruction, facilitation, tutoring, teaching, assessment and

moderation skills;

There is a shortage of vocational/occupational/technical teachers and trainers;

There is a strong focus on student care skills;

There is a strong focus on education and training institutional management skills such as

college principal, campus coordinator, academic planner, etc.

46

There is a strong focus on specialised skills in respect of learning material development,

course writing and library skills.

In response to the question ‘indicate the top five SCARCE skills needs of your PHEI and the reasons

for these needs’, for phase 2 of the study, 31 of the 58 respondents indicated that they are

experiencing some form of scarcity.

Reasons for scarcity in the ‘Manager’ category included:

there are people available, but they do not meet the employment criteria;

limited qualified and experienced people available;

non-competitive pay;

position requires advanced post-graduate qualifications;

equity candidates are not available;

people are nearing retirement age;

difficult to fill positions for a niche market;

staff lack people management skills.

The scarcity of ‘Managers’ include Programme managers, Academic managers or Academic heads,

Campus Principal, Heads of Department or Faculty heads, Research and Development managers,

Directors, Financial managers, General managers, Training managers, Chief executive officers,

Project managers, Quality assurance managers and Key account managers.

In terms of the ‘Professionals’ category of the OFO, similar reasons for scarcity emerge. Such

professionals include by and large lecturers of various subjects and subject matter experts with post-

graduate degrees (Masters and PhDs)and researchers. The PHEIs find it difficult to compete with

salaries offered in industry, especially in the ICT and the economic sectors. Furthermore, these

professionals often do not have the requisite teaching expertise or experience.

Other scarce skills include ‘accreditation specialists (support), curriculum developers, learning

material developers’ and ‘education and training advisors and reviewers, skills development

facilitators/practitioners, training and development professionals and occupational

instructors/trainers’. Equity candidates for lecturing and/or training positions are also in short

supply. Where people are qualified, such as assessors and moderators, they seem to lack experience.

The ‘Technicians and associated professional’ OFO category also presents similar reasons for scarcity

of staff. ICT technicians and developers are in particular short supply and expectations in terms of

remuneration seem to be high. The emerging distance education mode of delivery is highly

dependent on information technology skills.

ETD providers have also identified scarcity in the category ‘Services and sales workers’. Here, course

co-ordinators, sales consultants, marketing consultants, managers and officers, fundraisers, business

development consultants and sales professionals have been identified. A common complaint is that

it is difficult to find sales people who are familiar with the education and training environment.

47

For the category ‘Clerical support workers’, ‘administrators, office managers, accounts clerks,

receptionists, applications and registration administrators’ were identified as scarce. Financial

constraints, the lack of equity candidates and poor computer literacy were cited as reasons for

scarcity.

In terms of the OFO category of ‘Elementary workers’, ‘drivers and messengers, security guards,

class assistants and ECD practitioners’ were identified as scarce. The difficulty to find elementary

workers to be represented of population groups other than African males and females was noted.

As noted before, not all of the above shortages could be seen as the responsibility of the ETDP SETA

to address.

However, in response to a question on the skills gaps in terms of the top five critical skills of

ACADEMIC staff, respondents were much more explicit in terms of their skills needs. Respondents to

the survey (phase 2) questionnaire, 38 out of 58 indicated that they are experiencing skills shortages

of some kind.

The most commonly indicated skills gap relates to teaching skills as ‘most lecturers *do not have+

appropriate teaching qualifications’. Respondents indicated that while ‘academic staff are subject

specialists’, they have not been trained ‘on the methodology of teaching’ and that they ‘are talented

industry specialists, but not teachers’. These skills gaps are variously indicated as ‘teaching skills’,

‘facilitation skills’ and ‘presentation skills’, suggesting that skills shortages are experienced at all

levels of the teaching spectrum.

Related to the above are the skills gaps in relation to assessment (assessor training), moderation

(moderator training) and advisory skills (education advisors). Further, in terms of the emerging

distance education sector, respondents also indicated shortages in e-learning and e-facilitation skills,

as well as related skills such as learning material development for distance learning.

In keeping with the need for PHEIs to undertake research, research skills are often mentioned as a

scarce skill.

Management skills are also in short supply: according to one respondent ‘finding suitably qualified

and experienced candidates at the appropriate level [is] always a scarcity’.

The many regulatory requirements in terms of quality management, accreditation and registration

are also indicated as scarce skills – ‘continuous updating in respect of SAQA

developments/government requirements and community development’ present many challenges to

providers.

Another common scarcity relates to ICT/software skills.

Surprisingly, a number of respondents indicated that their academic staff members need

communication, literacy and numeracy skills.

48

In terms of SUPPORT staff, the most common skills shortages indicated include ‘communication,

problem solving, language/literacy and computer (ICT) skills’ and ‘administration skills’ relating to for

example, enrolment registration and examinations and regulatory requirements such as

accreditation processes and the uploading of student data on the National Learners’ Records

Database (NLRD). Other skills noted include ‘marketing skills’, ‘customer relations’, ‘reception skills’,

‘accounting/financial skills’, ‘project management’ and ‘client liaison skills’. As in phase 1 of the

study, these skills shortages are not necessarily shortages to be addressed by the ETDP SETA. One

respondent indicated for example that training is not offered by the SETA for ‘non-ETD staff’.

Taking both the phase 1 and phase 2 analyses into account, and distilling these shortages into those

shortages that could be addressed by the ETDP SETA, the following main skills shortages emerge:

Teaching skills (vocational, occupational, technical);

Subject matter experts with advanced qualifications, combined with teaching skills;

Related to the above, facilitation and presentation skills;

Curriculum developers, learning material developers;

Assessors, moderators and educational advisors; and

Research skills.

3.5.3 Demand and Supply Analysis

From this brief overview of the skills needs of the phase 1 and phase 2 respondents, it seems that

the ETDP SETA is well placed to meet some of the critical needs. On the face of it, the Occupation-

directed Education, Training and Development Practice qualifications in particular, may meet the

need to improve teaching and/or training practice.

3.5.4 Priorities and projections – short, medium and long-term

Priorities should be conceptualised in relation to the most critical needs, which have been identified

earlier. To establish these priorities, organisations were asked to indicate which learning

interventions could assist with alleviating the shortage of scarce skills. For phase 1 of the study,

some organisation highlighted some interventions, not all of which is necessarily the ETDP SETA’s

responsibility, e.g. ‘apprenticeships’ and ‘licensing requirements’ and ‘technical programmes’.

Unfortunately, as with other data captured from the WSPs, the WSP template does not allow

organisations to be more specific about what it is they need. Nevertheless, the table below gives an

indication that there seems to be an under-supply of education and training skills along the lines

indicated before:

Table 3.8: Learning Interventions Suggested by Organisations – (Phase 1)

Learning intervention NQF Level No of responses

Apprenticeships (Section 13) 4 1

Certificates 4 2

Certificates 5 6

Certificates 6 12

Certificates 7 4

Certificates 8 23

Continuing Professional Development 5 3

Degrees 7 23

Degrees 8 23

49

Generic Diplomas 5 8




Internship 6 4

Learnerships 4 4

Licensing requirements 5 1

Short Courses 4 6

Short Courses 5 4

Short Courses 6 2

Short Courses 8 2

Skills Programmes 2 1





Technical Programmes 5 1

Technical Qualifications 4 1



Work experience for unemployed graduates (in scarce skills) 5 2 Source: ETDP SETA WSP/ATR 2011 - 2012

Certificates (47 requests), generic diplomas and degrees (46 requests each) seem to be the

interventions mostly preferred, but short courses and skills programmes, if counted together as

short interventions (36 requests), also seem feasible and appropriate interventions – see Figure 3.14

overleaf:

Figure 3.14: Learning Interventions Suggested by Organisations – (Phase 1)


The above analysis (Figure 3.14) seems to suggest that generic education and training skills are

required, but also increasingly, that teachers and trainers with specialised vocational skills/technical

skills, are in short supply. This may mean that the ETDP SETA could, in partnership with other SETAs,

47 46 46

4 4 3

14

22

5 2

0 5

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Types of learning interventions requested

50

develop (or adjust) a generic qualification and/or programme which could be customised to fit in

with a particular vocational/occupational niche.

It may also be worth investigating the extent to which the DHET’s draft framework for vocational

educators could be adjusted/customised to meet this need, especially in respect of the ‘Vocational

Education Orientation Programme (VEOP)’ component. Some public higher education institutions

are already offering this (part) qualification.

From the responses to the phase 2 questionnaire, the most common training needs that seem to be

required for academic staff members are formal teaching or other relevant FET and HE

qualifications, followed by credit-bearing skills programmes (24/38); coaching and mentoring

(22/38); work-based learning interventions (20/38) and non-credit bearing skills programmes

(12/38).

While the skills gaps seem less severe, in terms of support staff, 2/38 respondents indicated that

formal relevant qualifications are required, followed by credit-bearing skills programmes (17/38) and

work-based learning interventions (17/38); coaching and mentoring (16/38); and, non-credit bearing

skills programmes (14/38).

The customised questionnaire for phase 2 of the study asked respondents to rate a number of

proposed interventions to be undertaken by the ETDP SETA with 1 being of the highest importance

and 4 of the lowest importance. The main categories included ‘learning programmes development

and implementation’, ‘funding’ as well as some general statements. Based on these responses, the

ETDP SETA will be able to determine how best to use their resources.

The intervention rated highest (48/58 rated as highest importance or high importance6) relates to

‘funding for existing staff to engage in training to improve their qualification levels’. This was

followed by 41/58 saying that ‘funding for staff to be trained in specific skills gaps (critical skills) is of

highest or high importance. Of lowest importance are interventions through ‘non-credit bearing

short courses and workshops’ with 21/58 respondents indicating that they believe other

interventions may have a greater effect.

6 Please note that the totals will not tally – not all respondents rated all the statements for importance

51

The graph below indicates preferred interventions in descending order:

Figure 3.15: Interventions Required in Descending Order of Importance – (Phase 2)


Key:

a. Funding for existing staff to improve their qualification levels

b. Funding for staff to be trained in critical skills

c. Working with private sector-based providers on programmes to improve training relevance and quality

d. Working with FET colleges on programmes to improve work readiness of FET graduates

e. Specific initiatives for the training of tutors/teaching assistants

f. Specific initiatives for training of persons with disabilities

g. Learnerships for core occupations of HEIs

h. Workplace learning support (training of mentors and workplace assessors, etc.)

i. Internships and other experiential workplace learning interventions

j. Qualifications for emerging/new field identified by HEIs

k. Working with universities on programmes to improve work readiness of HEI graduates

l. Internships or work experience opportunities for graduates to work in the PHEI

m. Credit-bearing skills programmes for core occupations of HEIs

n. Research, monitoring and evaluation to build labour market intelligence capability of the ETDP SETA

o. Bursaries for university students intending to work at the PHEI

p. Non-credit bearing short courses and workshops

It is also clear that as a constituency, PHEIs feel that they need support to improve the relevance and

quality of their offerings – refer to c. The graph also confirms the need for training of teachers and

tutors (e) and clearly, PHEIs views support for training of persons with disabilities as a challenge (f).

Likewise, (g) (learnerships for core occupations) and (h) (workplace learning support for training of

mentors and workplace assessors) are seen to be of high importance.

3.5.5 Implications

Despite the limitations in terms of the data, some strong trends are emerging which is worth

repeating here:

48

41 41 39 36 36 34 34 33 32 31 31 31

28 27 24

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p.

Interventions in descending order of importance - phase 2 - n58

52

PHEIs most urgent need is for funding for training of their own staff, particularly in relation

to teaching methodology for different types of programmes. This coincides with some of the

national priorities identified in the various policy documents discussed earlier.

Related to the above is the need for shorter, credit-bearing programmes focussing on

particular critical skills such as coaching and mentoring and work-based learning

interventions.

Furthermore, PHEIs seem to feel that they need assistance with improving the quality and

relevance of their programmes.

Management skills in general also seem to be a critical skill required by PHEIs, particularly

management of education and training related processes such as principals, directors,

campus coordinator, head of departments, academic planner, etc.

There is a strong call for various specialised skills in respect of learning material

development, course writing, library skills and research skills.

Many of these key issues can be (and should be) addressed in the short term, or could be initiated

concurrently with some aspects stretching into the medium- to longer-term. Upgrading of

qualifications, for example, will be a medium-term action, but shorter credit-bearing programmes

focussing on critical skills could be introduced, and concluded, in the short term.

Likewise, improving the quality and relevance of programmes, particularly in the light of the call for

appropriate training programmes for lecturers and trainers, would be a medium term action when

taking into account that a review and update of qualifications will require extended effort.

53

CHAPTER 4: SECTOR STRATEGY

4.1 Priority areas and alignment with national strategies/imperatives

In chapter 3 it became evident that private higher education is a substantial sub-sector of the ETDP

SETA even though it is difficult at this stage to pinpoint the exact size of the sector. Using the

WSP/ATR data, it is clear that at least 46% of the companies are black-owned, and that the sub-

sector makes a substantial contribution in terms of skills levies.

Counting only the reduced sample (136 institutions – see exclusions discussed earlier in the report),

at least 10 273 people are employed in the sub-sector (an average of 76 people per organisation).

The sector is dominated by white females, confirming the findings in terms of scarce skills, namely

that ‘equity candidates’ are hard to find and retain. Employment disparities are still quite evident.

Nevertheless, the qualification profile of the sub-sector is encouraging – 36% and 35% respectively,

of staff have degrees, or diplomas and certificates. Only a small percentage of academic and/or

support staff have Masters’ degrees or PhDs.

However, scarcity of staff and skills are mostly ascribed to ‘there are no people with the necessary

skills’, especially teaching skills. The other critical skill which is lacking relates to education and

training managerial positions.

The most common request for support is ‘funding for existing staff to engage in training to improve

their qualification levels’.

The discussion below attempts to align the skills needs identified through the study with the

priorities identified in the various policies relevant to the ETDP SETA’s work.

Priorities identified in the HRD Strategy, include ‘matching supply and demand’ in education and

training; and, addressing ‘equity, poverty alleviation and inequality’. Some of these priorities have

also been identified through the analyses earlier, for example addressing the shortage of equity

candidates with the requisite skills and experience in respect of teaching, training, assessment and

moderation.

In terms of matching supply and demand, it seems that the ETDP SETA is in a good position, with its

occupationally-directed education and training practices qualifications to meet this demand, even

though the learning programmes may have to be tweaked to reflect a vocational/technical or

general focus. Furthermore, the ETDP SETA could place more emphasis on the quality of

programmes, which will enhance recognition for their graduates, and enable greater articulation

between the private and public education sectors.

In terms of the NSDS III, which is the main impetus for the ETDP SETA’s work, the key priorities

identified include (in no particular order of importance) ‘improved access to training’; ‘placement of

graduates to obtain work experience’; ‘rural development’; ‘public/private partnerships’; ‘focus on

54

youth and new entrants to the labour market’; ‘working with the public FET colleges to improve

lecturer capacity’; ‘workplace-based learning, especially in terms of critical skills’; ‘stimulating the

growth of small enterprises’; ‘public sector capacity building for improved service delivery’; ‘skills

needs intelligence’. The PHE sector is well-placed to enhance access (see discussions later) and

through public/private partnerships could assist with up-skilling lecturers for both these sectors.

The two SIP priorities of particular interest to the ETDP SETA are SIP 13 – ‘National school building

programme’ and SIP 14 – ‘Higher Education Infrastructure’ the latter of which is relevant to the

study, namely (Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission, 2012, p. 17):

Infrastructure development for higher education focusing on lecture rooms, student

accommodation, libraries and laboratories as well as ICT connectivity. Development of

university towns with combination of facilities from residence, retail and recreation & transport.

Potential to ensure shared infrastructure such as libraries by universities, FETs & other

educational institutions.

This infrastructure plan has most likely been conceived with public higher education in mind. While

‘infrastructure’, as described above refers specifically to ‘physical’ infrastructure, availability of

training places should also be seen to be part of the overall expansion of the sector (with the

requisite physical infrastructural requirements). If South Africa is to deal with the massification of

higher education, then private education must be encouraged to play a key role in expanding the

system. In Asia, private higher education has been shown to open up access to people who

otherwise would not have been able to enter post-school education (Umakoshi, in Altman and

Umakoshi (Eds.), 2004, pp. 24 and 25):

Another central reality of massification is increased reliance on private higher education

institutions (Altbach, 2000). Private higher education is the fastest growing segment of

postsecondary education worldwide (my emphasis). In Asia, private institutions have long

been a central part of higher education provision. In such major countries as Japan, South

Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Indonesia, private universities enrol the majority of

students – in some cases upwards of 80 percent. The large majority of Indian students

attend private colleges, although these are heavily subsidized by government funds...the

private sector plays a central role by providing access to students who would otherwise be

unable to obtain academic degrees.

Therefore, the ETDP SETA could consider how its considerable reach into the PHE system could be

leveraged to support private institutions to improve their quality of programmes and delivery,

perhaps in partnership with public universities (which may feel relief about the easing of pressure

for access to an already over-subscribed public sector).

Not all of these priorities would necessarily be relevant to the PHE sector, but some priorities that

are worth considering in relation to this sector are:

PHE has the potential to massively expand access to education and training. Targeted

initiatives in this regard should be considered.

Very few of the PHE respondents have established public/private partnerships. Due to the

nimbleness and quick response to skills needs of PHEIs, these institutions could be

55

encouraged to partner with public entities and/or institutions to develop quick, short

solutions, for example to develop short programmes for capacity building of FET college

lecturers.

As noted earlier in the report, many of the more traditional institutions cater primarily for

young people. This target population could be exploited more fully.

The PHE sector largely consists of SMMEs. However, it is also clear that these small

organisations need support to continue operating and to improve their quality and

relevance.

The National Growth Path (NGP), the Industrial Policy Action Plan (IPAP) and the Strategic

Infrastructure Programmes (SIPs) all make mention of the need to focus on teacher/trainer

development and the building of lecturer capacity. This is clearly a priority area that the ETDP SETA

should focus on, perhaps by making use of PHEIs as noted above.

Likewise, the Green Paper (GP) focuses strongly on increased access for the youth and the role PHEIs

could play in this regard. Some comments in this regard were noted above.

Finally, the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) strongly supports development in relation to

Early Childhood Development (ECD) and Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET). These areas are

clearly in the remit of the ETDP SETA and the PHE sector, as was noted earlier in the report, is

already offering programmes in these fields. The ETDP SETA’s support to these institutions will go a

long way in improving the quality of provision and the expansion of diversity of sites and modes of

delivery, especially through the emerging distance education sector.

4.2 New/emerging sector challenges regarding skills development

While PHE sector could make serious inroads into some of the priorities listed above, the sector is

hamstrung by a number of on-going systemic problems which should be addressed before the sector

can make its contribution to the education and training system.

The first of these relate to the division of the system, not only along the lines of academic and

vocational/occupational learning, but also along the lines of the types of qualifications (e.g. non-unit

standards based; unit-standards based qualifications) being offered. These aspects constrain

articulation within the system even between public and private institutions.

The second systemic problem is about the lack of alignment between the Acts governing education

and training. As noted in Chapter 2, PHEIs are regulated by different, and sometimes contradictory

Acts such as the Higher Education Act (1997, as amended) and the Skills Development Act (1997, as

amended). The differing regulatory requirements of these Acts lead to confusion and incoherence.

Quality assurance systems, at the introduction of the new education and training system, were

intended to build trust and parity of esteem of learning across the system. It is clear that the current

quality assurance regimes do not engender trust, and do not assist sufficiently in developing

meaningful communities of practice. Furthermore, quality assurance has not fully lived up to the

promise to improve the quality of education and training. Instead, it has led to the development of

cumbersome bureaucracies which stifle, rather than build best practice.

56

These systemic problems are not only problems to be faced by the ETDP SETA, but by the education

and training sector as a whole. Unless high-level conversations are held, coupled with strategic

plans, our ‘skills revolution’ will not be realised.

Finally, returning to the PHE sector – if the sector is seen to be a valuable partner, and not the step-

child of the system, then it will be possible to address many of the priorities listed above. The

regulation of the sector must be balanced with support to improve delivery.

4.3 Proposed ETDP SETA interventions

The ETDP SETA has already taken the lead by commissioning research to better understand the skills

needs of its constituent institutions. While the ETDP SETA cannot take responsibility for many of the

systemic problems on its own, it can start the conversation in respect of these. In the short- to

medium-term it can rapidly turn around the dire situation experienced in both private and public

institutions in respect of the poor teaching/training practices. Some of the possible short, medium

and long term interventions in this regard were discussed under 3.5.5 and will not be repeated here.

4.3.1 Programme 1: Development of a credible SSP

In order for the ETDP SETA to develop a credible SSP, the data on which such decisions are based has

to be reliable. As noted earlier in the report, the data used for this report proved to be particularly

difficult to work with. This is not only a problem experienced by the ETDP SETA. In respect of PHE

(and post-school education, to expand the definition), the finding of the 2011 DHET study (Blom,

2011) stands, namely ‘the dispersed nature of data regarding the private post-school sector, ... made

it difficult to eliminate duplications and overlaps, and to verify information across sectors’ is

preventing researchers to gain a real understanding of the private education sector. For a credible

SSP to be developed, credible data should be available. The ETDP SETA would do the all of the

education and training sector a favour by sorting out the difficulties in respect of current and future

data.

4.3.2 Programme 2: Supporting FET institutions to be responsive to the ETD sector and national

priorities

As outlined earlier, the PHE sector could make an important contribution to the capacity building of

FET institutions, particularly in relation to making available short, targeted programmes to address

critical needs.

4.3.3 Programme 3: Teacher development in support of the ISPFTED-SA

Teacher and trainer development have been highlighted as a key priority earlier in the report. In

addition, the respondents to both phase 1 and phase 2 of this study have indicated that this is a

priority in relation to their own skills needs. Furthermore, most of the policies have indicated that

teacher/trainer development is a priority. The ETDP SETA is in a very good position to take on this

challenge.

4.3.4 Programme 4: Increase student access and graduate output to both FETIs and HETIs

The PHE sector has the potential to massively increase access to students in keeping with the

national priorities. It is worth repeating the comment from Blom (for DHET, 2011, p. 9):

57

The DHET now acknowledges that to exclude the private system will skew its plans for

coordinating and building a vibrant and diverse post-school system, capable of addressing

the needs of a varied and differentiated student population. Partnerships between public

and private entities, and between the State and private institutions, have been very

successful in developing countries, most notable examples include India and Korea. If the

needs of the burgeoning post-school youth and adults are to be met in South Africa, policy

makers have to seriously consider the contribution a dynamic and responsive private sector

can make.

4.3.5 Programme 5: Customised interventions for all ETDP SETA constituencies

ECD and ABET have been identified as national priorities in the policy documents discussed in this

report. In the past, NGOs have taken up the responsibility to train ECD and ABET practitioners.

However, as foreign funding dried up, many of these excellent initiatives struggled to survive. Yet,

the ETDP SETA is in a good position to strengthen the training of these practitioners, particularly as it

already has responsibility for the qualifications related to these fields of learning. In addition, many

of the PHEIs are offering these qualifications. Support to these organisations will enhance the quality

and relevance of the training.

58

CHAPTER 5: WAY FORWARD REGARDING SSP RESEARCH

5.1 Challenges regarding Research Process

Most of the challenges experienced in respect of the research process, have been highlighted in the

earlier sections of this report. In summary, the key challenge relates to the data itself. Not only is it

evident that not all the data is available due to the fact that not all PHEIs submit their skills levies

data to the ETDP SETA, but the SETA’s data also does not seem to correspond across the two

sections of the organisation (the skills development department and the quality assurance

department of the ETDP SETA).

Furthermore, the data capturing protocols of the ETDP SETA made it difficult to exclude overlaps and

duplications. The listed qualifications, for example, did not indicate by way of a SAQA registration

number which qualification it is, resulting in qualifications being counted together, which may not

necessarily be the same. Likewise, the limited nature of the description of SIC codes did not allow a

finer understanding of the main activities of the institutions which have submitted their skills levy

data.

Therefore, while the study could be seen to be indicative of the sub-sector, much ‘cleaning’ of data

sources will be required before the size, shape and nature of the sub-sector can be confirmed.

5.2 Gaps regarding Research Update

The current study did not pose questions relating to the extent to which Recognition of Prior

Learning (RPL) activities are undertaken in the sub-sector. This gap must be addressed in the 2013

update. Likewise, while PHEIs indicated their provincial spread (see chapter 3), questions dealing

specifically with a rural focus were not asked.

A noticeable gap in the emerging data, is data about learners. Neither the WSP/ATR, nor the 2012

SSP Survey raised questions about number of learners, learnerships, apprenticeships, internships

and such like. This is perhaps a theme for another study as the SSP study is understood to be

research in relation to employers and employees. Learners would not be seen to be employees

(except perhaps through learnerships, apprenticeships and internships). No data emerged on these

categories.

Work Integrated Learning (WIL) is another focus not addressed by the current study. As noted

above, WIL is concerned with learner data, not employer or employee data. The ETDP SETA should

commission a study with a specific focus on learners (within or outside of a learnership,

apprenticeship or internship agreement).

Furthermore, in terms of artisanal training, the ETDP SETA’s focus is clearly on education and

training related skills, and not on artisanal skills. A focus on such skills would rest with other SETAs

such as the MERSETA, or ENERGY SETA, for example.

59

5.3 Recommendations in terms of Gaps (Short-, Medium- and Long-Term)

The most important recommendation in terms of the PHE sub-sector relates directly to one of the

intended outcomes of the study, namely to:

‘establish credible institutional mechanisms for skills planning’, through professionally

researched sector skills plans that provide sound analyses of the sector, its skills demand and

skills supply, and to articulate agreed sector strategies to address skills needs.

It seems that the DHET intends to clean up the data in respect of the sub-sector. The ETDP SETA

would do well to support such a clean-up, not least because this would mean that the ETDP SETA

would receive the skills levies related to ETD practices currently being paid to other SETAs, but also

because this will enable the emergence of the full extent of private provisioning. If South Africa is to

follow the examples of other success stories relating to the large scale opening up of access, as seen

in Asia, then it is critical to develop a real understanding of the potential of the sub-sector.

The second recommendation relates to a study on the learners being served by the sub-sector. In

the 2011 DHET study (Blom, 2011), it became evident that the PHE sector often enables learners,

who would have been otherwise excluded, to access post-school education. Furthermore, far from

only being for the elite, previously disadvantaged population groups are very often served by the

sector. The potential in increasing access through a well-managed and regulated PHE system is

substantial.

While the size of the sector, according to the DHET study (Blom, 2011) is small compared to the

public higher education sector (approximately 88 000 versus 800 000 respectively), the many

exclusions necessary for the DHET study also, as in this study, indicate that the real size (and number

of learners) have not yet emerged. In general, the data for the DHET study focused on full-time

learners, but had to exclude the thousands of learners (youth and adult) that are busy improving

their qualifications while they are working and in workplace-based settings. All the SETA data had to

be excluded which results in a clear gap in our understanding of the PHE sector.

A third related recommendation deals with the SSP study itself. It seems that there is a conflation of

a focus on employers and employees, which relates to the skills levies system, and the learners in the

system, which relates to the skills development system. While these two aspects are related through

a skills supply and demand system, the skills supply issues are more likely to emerge by focusing on

learners separately before the two sets of data are brought together.

60

REFERENCES

Blom, R. 2011. The Size and Shape of Private Post-School Education and Training Provision of South

Africa. A study for the Department of Higher Education and Training. Centre for Education Policy

Development (CEPD).

Altman, PG and Umakoshi, T (Eds.), 2004. Asian Universities. Historical Perspectives and

Contemporary Challenges. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.

Documents

PRIVATE HIGHER EDUCATION SECTOR SKILLS PLAN 2013-2014 … · 1.2 Research design 8 1.2.1 Data sources 8 1.2.2 Documentary/policy analyses in respect of national priorities impacting