Student Performance Patterns

							Student performance patterns in South African Higher
Education between 2000 and 2005: implications for
thinking about the curriculum




  Presentation by Prof Jenny Clarence-Fincham, based on Scott,
  Yeld and Hendry (2007).
Purpose



To present some of the key findings from
the Scott report, to consider their
implications in the context of UJ and to
raise some curriculum-related issues for
further consideration in the Faculty
Outline

• Context for the Scott research
• The cohort study
• Evidence from performance patterns in the higher
  education sector
• UJ /Humanities student performance
• Implications of the performance patterns for the
  role and significance of extended curriculum
  programmes
• What is needed at UJ? In this Faculty?
• Where to from here?
Context for the research




1. Higher education in the developing world
2. Higher education in South Africa
The significance of higher
education in developing countries


• Increasing importance of graduate output – quality, numbers
  and national need

• The Lisbon Council (with reference to the EU)

   – ‘First and foremost, our universities … exist to educate and prepare people to
     be fully-functioning, well-developed members of our advanced, post-industrial
     society.’
   – ‘… seeking excellence in research should never be allowed to become an
     excuse for underperformance in the educational tasks [of higher education].’
  Significance of higher education
  in South Africa




• ‘Skills‟ shortages
  – key obstacle to economic and social development


• Special need for good graduates
  – HE’s unique responsibility
  – particular need for SET graduates

• Equity and social stability
   Aim of the research



• To make a case, based on analysis and interpretation of
  current student performance in the sector, for improving
  graduate output by increasing the effectiveness of the
  educational process in higher education

• To provide an analysis of major factors affecting graduate
  output with a view to identifying educational strategies that
  can improve student progression, and consider the
  implications for policy development and capacity building
   –
The cohort study



 A longitudinal study of all students entering higher
 education beginning with first time entry students
 in 2000.

 Data presented here is from the DoE HEMIS
 system and tracks the performance of the 2000 –
 2005 cohort
How well are we doing in higher
  education in South Africa ?
Graduated in regulation time:
General academic first B-degrees, excl Unisa




  04: Business/Management                      24%

  15: Life and Physical Sciences               21%

  22: Social Sciences                          29%

  12: Languages                                28%
Graduated in regulation time:
National Diplomas, excl distance ed (TSA)




  04: Business/Management                   18%

  06: Computer Science                      14%

  08: Engineering                           5%

  12: Soc Services/Pub Admin                13%
Graduated in regulation time, by race:
General academic first B-degrees, excl dist ed



  CESM (classification of educational subject   Black   White
  matter)

  04: Business/Management                       11%     43%

  15: Life and Phys Sciences                    11%     35%

  22: Social Sciences                           14%     43%

  12: Languages                                 13%     52%
Graduated within 5 years:
general academic first B-degrees, excl Unisa


  CESM                                Grad     Still in

  04: Business/Management             50%        7%

  15: Life and Phys Sciences          47%       13%

  22: Social Sciences                 53%        6%

  12: Languages                       47%        7%
Graduated within 5 years:
National Diplomas, excl distance ed



  CESM                                Grad   Still in

  04: Business/Management             33%      8%

  06: Computer Science                34%     11%

  08: Engineering                     17%     14%

  12: Soc Services/Pub Admin          29%      6%
Student performance after 5 years: Overall




  Graduated                              30%


  Still registered                       14%


  Left without graduating                56%


  Estimated completion rate              44%
Student performance after 5 years:
Contact university programmes




 Graduated                            50%


 Still registered                     12%


 Left original institution            38%


 Students ‘lost’                     ≈15,000
Student performance after 5 years:
Contact „technikon‟ programmes



   Graduated                          32%


   Still registered                   10%


   Left original institution          58%


   Students ‘lost’                   ≈25,000
 Participation rates*
and their significance




       • Overall:                 16%
       • White:                   60%
       • Indian:                  51%
       • Black:                   12%
       • Coloured:                12%
* Approximate gross enrolment rates derived from HEMIS 2005:
                       all participants as % of 20-24 age-group
Implications of the participation
rates




• The view that a large proportion of current students
  „do not belong‟ in higher education is not tenable

• Current intake has high potential
   –so what becomes of it?
Outcomes



• Among the CESMs and qualification types
  analysed:
  – in the contact university programmes, only two cases where loss may be
    under 40%
  – in the contact ‘technikon’ programmes, no cases where loss will be under 50%


• Students „lost‟ from 2000 intake: 65,000
  – implications for economic development
Equity of outcomes:the central challenge




 Under 5% of the black age-group are succeeding in
 higher education in South Africa
Equity of outcomes: Graduation within 5 years
in general academic first B-degrees, excl UNISA



   CESM                               Black       White

   04: Business/Management             33%        72%

   15: Life and Phys Sciences          31%        63%

   22: Social Sciences                 34%        68%

   12: Languages                       32%        68%
Equity of outcomes: Graduation within 5 years
in National Diplomas, excl distance ed



  CESM                               Black      White

  04: Business/Management             31%       44%

  06: Computer Science                33%       43%

  08: Engineering                     16%       28%

  12: Soc Services/Pub Admin          29%       23%
  Observations


• Among the CESMs and qualification types analysed in
 the contact university programmes:
  – in all cases the black completion rate is less than half the white completion rate, and
  – in all cases the number of black graduates is less than the number of white
    graduates
  – so lack of equity of outcomes is neutralising the gains made in access
How are we doing at UJ?
UJ Student performance: 2001
cohort: general first B degree


Faculty          Grad min time   Grad min + 1   Grad min + 2
FEFS                  33%             53%            62%
Health Science        32%             53%            60%
Humanities            34%             47%            53%
Management            24%             50%            59%
Science               38%             55%            63%
Total                 33%             51%            59%
Throughput rate by race




Race       Grad min time   Grad min + 1   Grad min + 2

African         13%             34%            45%

Coloured        15%             22%            36%

Indian          20%             43%            54%

White           41%             58%            64%
  Implications


• Output not matching national needs in respect of „economic
  growth … and social cohesion‟ (Pandor 2005)

• Current system not meeting the needs of the majority
   – pressing need to widen successful participation

• The equity and development agendas have converged
   – catering successfully for student diversity has become a
     necessary condition for economic development as well as
     social inclusion
• Substantially improving the performance of the majority is the
  central challenge
   – but current mainstream system is not succeeding
Whose responsibility?



• Factors beyond the higher education sector‟s
  control
  – ‘money and poor schooling’ (M&G 2006)

• Factors within the higher education sector‟s
  control
  – The educational process in higher education is itself
    a major variable affecting who succeeds and fails
Many students arrive like this . . .
How do we to improve
graduate output?


• The performance patterns are persistent
   – will not change spontaneously

• Limitations on increasing output by increasing the intake
   – growth will perpetuate or worsen existing performance
     patterns if the process does not change
Improving graduate output




• Improving output depends primarily on improving the
  performance patterns

• The groups from which growth in output must primarily
  come are those that are least well served by the current
  system
   – improving output depends on systemic change
  What can be done?



• Analysis and understanding of undergraduate teaching
  and learning and the choices that can be made about it

• Focus here on academic issues in the context of a
  holistic view of student development
The extended curriculum as the
        national norm?
The extended curriculum




It is not a temporary band-aid measure but
provides an informed, relevant and
sustainable curriculum structure which
meets the learning needs of the majority of
our students
The extended curriculum


• Is not be simply more of the same over a longer period
• Provides alternative flexible curriculum structures which
  allow both access and success for all students
• Balances depth and breadth
• There is no one-size-fits all model
• Needs to be developed in terms of Faculty needs
• Considers the implications of “learning-to-be” for the
  Humanities
• Caters for a diverse student population and different learning
  needs – traditional curriculum is clearly not serving the
  needs of the majority of our students
• Incorporates and integrates foundational provision
• Needs to be flexibly designed so as to ensure the possibility
  of accelerated progress for a minority of students
Thoughts from Humanities

    Simply stretching the curricula over a longer period is not enough.
    addition we need:
•   research focused on student profiling to inform interventions
•    planned avenues of support and system
•   training for academic interventions for students requiring different
    levels and kinds of support
•   enough trained staff in ADS
•   a functional well-funded tutorial
•   attention paid to overburdening
•   a functioning system of holding students accountable for their work
•   a functioning system of monitoring input of academic staff and
    accountability in their turn.
•   all interventions must be integrated into curricula, not separate,
    additional modules
•   flexible structure which accommodates both fast and slow movers