Institutional Trial Quality Audit of the University of South Africa (UNISA)

August 2007

 

1.0 Executive Summary

What follows is a report on the findings of the Trial Audit Panel (TAP) after studying a range of documentation before and during the audit and discussing issues with a wide range of Unisa staff during our visit to the University in June 2007. We have had some difficulty with terminology and with the conceptual nature of the report. Originally, we set out to try to replicate the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) audit procedures and this was successful to some extent. However, we were also asked, because of the significant number of panel members with open and distance learning (ODL) experience, to provide some advice and suggestions to Unisa.

Our original intention was to produce two reports; one in the format and language of HEQC executive summary reports and one providing more specific advice and suggestions. In the end, it proved difficult to disentangle the two approaches, so what follows is a report comprising both aspects. This led to some terminology problems especially with the use of the word 'commendation'. We wish to make it clear that when we highlight commendations we are reflecting on areas where Unisa meets the HEQC expected outputs and not necessarily commendations for significant strengths and innovations. Where we do feel there are such strengths and innovations we have starred the commendation.

There are 29 Commendations and some 53 Recommendations. We are aware that there is a significant variation in the detail of Recommendations, with some being very specific, e.g., the recommendation that all students should have a Unisa e-mail address, and others much broader, e.g., the use of myUnisa system for significant pedagogical input. Therefore, in this summary, we have clustered together some of the main issues we identified.

Our clusters are as follows:

• Mission, planning and management
• Transformation
• ODL and ICT issues
• Communication between teachers and learners
• Human Resource issues
• Quality Assurance

1.1 Mission, Planning and management

The vision of Unisa is undoubtedly inspiring and we believe that the University should become one of the great ODL institutions of the 21st century.

The vision is clearly set out by the Vice Chancellor and his senior staff and by Council members. Strategic and operational planning is thorough and comprehensive. However we did note, time and time again, that operational targets, especially in relation to significant change, were missed. We know that Unisa management is aware of this and is trying to rectify the situation, in part by developing performance contracts. Nevertheless, we have concerns that the University is trying to do too much too quickly. We understand, in part, the pressures that the University is under from the Government to offer courses outside the Republic of South Africa (RSA) and to be a comprehensive university with all that implies in terms of those programmes which are not easily offered in an ODL mode; for example, Work Integrated Learning. We also know that the University is trying to explain to the HEQC and others the nature of a major ODL institution and the constraints the financial and staffing structures of such an institution place on some types of development. In our view, and in the view of the Senior Management Team, the core business of the University is teaching its undergraduate and post-graduate students and securing effective services for these students to raise throughput in RSA and elsewhere.

 1.2 Transformation

As with the other universities in the RSA, there are significant issues here which will take many years to be resolved. Clearly, there is some unrest amongst groups of staff and students in terms of a belief that they are still treated as second class. Our report provides some examples. ODL has a great potential to open up access and promote social justice and, as such, it is key that the programme to ensure that all understand the principles and practices of this mode of teaching and learning is extensive and comprehensive.

1.3 ODL and ICT issues

We note and applaud the programme established by the University to raise awareness of the key characteristics of open and distance learning.

Nipper (1989)¹ first developed a taxonomy of the stages in the evolution of distance education and drew to the attention of the distance teaching world the issues of the use of information and communications technologies (ICT). He describes three generations of distance education institutions. In our view, Unisa is still primarily a second generation distance education institution using mainly printed materials, satellite broadcasting and other media and which has not yet fully embraced the opportunities and potential of computermediated communication. 

We noted that large numbers of Unisa students have access to the Web and are using it in a range of ways. Although we are acutely aware of the implications for access of moving a substantial amount of communication with Unisa students to Web or through e-mail/SMS, we do not think that the University can delay any longer the further development of its webbased provision. This needs to be phased in with existing approaches operating alongside for some time.

Although we have no evidence, given the geographical spread of Unisa students in the RSA and in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) region, we wonder how many students are able to attend face-to-face tutorial sessions on a regular basis. We suspect more might have access to the email, SMS or the Web.

Therefore, we strongly believe that many of Unisa's current operational problems relating to providing a good service to students could be alleviated if there was a whole-hearted commitment by staff (and perhaps academic staff in particular) to working through the Web.

We are not necessarily referring to the delivery of course materials through the Web because we are aware of the additional cost of developing web-based teaching materials. Nor are we advocating the transmission by the Web of core teaching materials as this can lead to the transfer of costs from the institution to the student. Rather, we see that myUnisa or an associated system could be used more systematically and more universally in the institution for academics to contact students and run discussion groups, for the submission of assignments, for student self-help groups, for the provision of advice and guidance, and for further development of administrative services. 

1.4 Communications between teachers and learners

A significant proportion of this report is devoted to the core activity of teaching and learning. The process of communication between teachers and learners is critical in any educational institution but in an ODL university it takes on a different dimension. In order to ensure the best circumstances for effective learning, ODL institutions have to ensure close co-operation among academics, planning and operational staff.

The most excellent teaching materials are of little use to the student unless they arrive safely and on time to enable study to take place calmly and at the right pace. Similarly, students need to be able to contact the institution easily and receive speedy and accurate information, advice and guidance on a range of issues. In particular, it is critical that students should receive timely personal feedback on their work. The systems, both management and operational, to ensure that this happens are a core element of any ODL institution.

In a large institution such as Unisa, operating across a wide geographical area and across national boundaries, securing the processes to ensure effective communication among teachers, counsellors/advisers and learners, assumes an even greater importance.

1.5 Human resource issues

Almost everyone we spoke to in the University suggested that the issue of the harmonisation of terms and conditions of service and the position regarding the future of the Florida campus were major factors in the slow pace of change, which is evident in many parts of the institution.

Our report does not address these issues directly, as we are aware of the complexities and we are simply not qualified to advise. However, we do report on the serious impact on morale across the institution - and we know that the senior staff are well aware of these matters. We do, however, comment on more detailed matters. We believe that all interview panels should be chaired by persons who have undertaken a fair selection programme and that all interview panels should ask questions designed to explore whether the interviewee has a thorough understanding of ODL and of equity issues.

We also noted that there was some concern amongst Black staff regarding the implementation of promotions policy. In another area, we had some concerns about the hiring of contract staff and, although we tried, we could not find any statement or procedure about the processes involved here.

We were uneasy about the re-hiring of those who had retired without a formal competitive process and reflected on how this might impact on equity targets.

1.6 Quality Assurance (QA)

The QA structure set up by the University has already helped to raise awareness of the importance of a culture of continuous improvement and monitoring. To date, it has focussed mainly on the preparation for the trial audit. The TAP is confident that the system for QA will serve Unisa well once it has become embedded in the normal processes of the University and when the relationship between the QA committees and other key committees responsible for the quality of service, e.g., the Senate Tuition Committee, has been clarified.

We feel enormously privileged to have been asked by COL and Unisa to undertake this trial audit and we do hope that what follows is of use to the University as it prepares for the real thing in 2008. We are aware that we may have misunderstood some issues in some areas (indeed it would be very surprising if we had not) and we apologise if that is the case. Furthermore, the Trial Audit Panel acknowledges that the Recommendations in this report may take some time to implement if accepted and we realise and fully accept that Unisa may not agree with some of our thoughts and conclusions.

Finally, all of us wish the University the very best for the future and look forward to seeing it develop into one of the great distance teaching institutions in the world.

The Trial Audit Panel
August 2007