Higher Education institutions in South Africa are obliged, in accordance with the South African Higher Education Qualifications Framework (HEQF), Department of Education Government Notice No 928, gazetted (No. 30353) 5 October 2007 as policy in terms of the Higher Education Act, to place students for prerequisite work-integrated learning:
"It is the responsibility of institutions, which offer programmes requiring WIL credits to place students into WIL programmes. Such programmes must be appropriately structured, properly supervised and assessed."
Two publications of the South Africa Council for Higher Education (CHE), Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC), both the (a) Criteria for Institutional Audits and the (b) Criteria for Programme Accreditation specify criteria with regard to work-based learning. These criteria can be summarised as follow:
- Effective management and coordination, with responsibilities and lines of accountability clearly allocated.
- Adequate infrastructure provided.
- Learning contracts or agreements, clarifying the objectives and outcomes of the learning process, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the institution, students, mentors and employers involved.
- Regular and effective communication between the various parties involved.
- Regular and systematic recording and monitoring of progress of the student’s learning experience.
- Mentoring that enables the student to recognise strengths and weaknesses; to develop existing and new abilities; and to gain knowledge of work practices.
Academic as well as workplace based assessment.
A technical team comprising representatives from the former South African Universities Vice-Chancellors Association (SUVA), the former Committee of Technician Principals (TCP) and the Department of Education (DOE) was formed in August 2003 to undertake an investigation into the state funding of experiential learning at higher education institutions in South Africa. The report (DOE, 2004, par. 20) states that the new dispensation as it relates to funding focuses on delivery, rather than costs incurred. The report presents a synopsis, under six headings (par. 20 - see my Best Practices blog post: http://psychsoma.co.za/learning_in_vivo/2008/08/best-practices.html), of best practice in respect of required institutional services pertaining to experiential learning.
I have made a bullet-point summary of the statutory imperatives mentioned above: Download a_synopsis_of_doeheqc_workintegrated_learning_imperatives.doc For self-evaluation purposes, I transformed the summary into a list of questions:
- Are students prepared for work-integrated learning (WIL) placements?
- How is the acquisition of job seeking skills facilitated?
- How is the development of life skills, e.g. time management, team building and communication, facilitated?
- How does WIL contribute to the student’s understanding of the specific occupation?
- Is the curriculum balanced regarding theoretical and practical/applied knowledge?
- Does WIL form an integral part of the curriculum?
- Are the learning outcomes documented to guide students and work place mentors?
- Are there clear directives about how to record and integrate learning experiences?
- Are the assessment criteria and evaluation timeframes specified?
- Is the feedback by students and employers structured, recorded and used for the review and improvement of the programme?
- Is placement of students for WIL regarded as an essential component of the programme and undertaken?
- Is the institution marketing the notion of co operative education and is it actively securing workstation placement opportunities?
- Does the institution introduce students to employers with available placement opportunities?
- Does the institution facilitate the selection of available students by employers?
- Are there learning contracts/agreements by which to negotiate, approve and assess the objectives and outcomes of WIL?
- Are the roles and obligations of students, the institution, the mentor and the “employer” clarified through such contracts?
- Is there regular and efficient communication between the four parties mentioned?
- Is there a system in place at both the institution and at the workplaces to regularly and systematically record the WIL content and progress of students?
- Is the mentoring system enabling the student to recognise her/his strengths and weaknesses, developing her/his abilities and gaining knowledge of work practices?
- Is staff from the institution visiting students in the workplace to ensure that WIL meets the expectations?
- Do the students, mentors and staff from the institution meeting to discuss progress?
- Is the progress of student assessed through, for example, logbook entries, presentations, portfolios or artefacts?
- Are regular and systematic monitoring visits planned and by appointment? (Frequency dependent on factors such as geographical location.)
- Do both interimand continuous assessment occur throughout WIL?
- Do academic or external examiners, as well as workplace-based assessors (e.g. mentors and/or supervisors), provide assessment input?
- Are, for example, logbooks, assignment reports, projects, presentations, portfolios or artefacts used to assess and evaluate the learning of students?
- Are, for example, marks, credits or records of OBE competence used to reflect the success of learning outcomes?
- Is there a dedicated database of participating companies?
- Is there a record of student placements?
- Is there a system to record the WIL progress of individual students?
- Is there a record of correspondence, communication and marketing material?
References
South Africa. (2005). Council for Higher Education, Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Accreditation of Programmes offered through Distance Education — Draft 4 February 2005. Pretoria.
South Africa. (2004).Council for Higher Education, Higher Education Quality Committee. Criteria for Institutional Audits. Pretoria: Compress. Electronically available from: http://www.che.ac.za/documents/d000061/CHE_Institutional-Audit-Criteria_June2004.pdf
South Africa. (2007). Department of Education Government Notice No 928, gazetted (No. 30353) 5 October 2007 as policy in terms of the Higher Education Act
South Africa. (2004). Department of Education. Report of a technical team. Investigation into the State funding of experiential learning at Higher Education institutions. Unpublished.
I am in total agreement with most of the requirements, but cannot help but wonder if it will be possible for students to take legal action against a university if they are not placed as it is a statutory requirement.
Regarding our own unique situation as a ODL university:
How will I truely know if students are adequately prepared?
How do I know that the regional offices are visiting students or for that matter truely involved?
Just some point to ponder!
Posted by: Natasja | 10 September 2008 at 12:17