THE CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, FREE STATE’S RESPONSE TO THE CHE POLICY ADVICE REPORT TO THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION ON DISTANCE EDUCATION

THE CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, FREE STATE’S RESPONSE TO THE CHE POLICY ADVICE REPORT TO THE MINISTER OF EDUCATION ON DISTANCE EDUCATION IN SOUTH AFRICA 1. Introduction The Central University of Technology welcomes the perspectives and proposals made in the CHE’s advice report. The acknowledgment of blurring boarders between distance and contact education is in particular embraced as this is in line with global trends within open and distance learning. This proposed flexible model will indeed contribute towards the goals expressed by the National Plan for Higher Education (NPHE February 2001) and the White Paper on Higher Education (1997), namely to offer learning opportunities, including qualifications, to people in ways which are flexible, negotiated and suited to each person's needs. This could, for example, cover the time, place, style of learning and length of time of the learning programme. Stemming from the proposal CUT believes that all institutions and learners will benefit from the establishment of learning centres particularly in a time of declining government expenditure on higher education. However, given the needs of a developing country and continent it is our opinion that the contribution Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) could have on broader economic and social developments have not yet been explored to its full. 2. The notion of open/distance learning CUT in acknowledging the role traditional distance education has played in the South African higher education institution, welcomes the concept of open learning and supports the report’s conception of open learning as a broader term than distance teaching, and views the practices of open distance learning as more suitable for particularly adult learners in remote areas. We are in particular in favour of the proposal to abandon the practice of classifying institutions according to modes of delivery and that traditional residential/contact institutions be allowed to continue with open/distance learning within certain parameters. 3. The notion of learning centres and national office for the design of learning materials The notion of learning centres is indeed an innovative proposal to deal with hard realities such as limited finances, physical and human resources. However, a number of issues will have to be discussed in greater detail as is suggested below. The idea of a national office taking responsibility for the design of learning material is welcomed as one way of enhancing the quality of open and distance education offerings and materials. However, institutions should still have the following responsibilities: • recognition of excellence, or the lack thereof in the design of learning material; • development and delivery of open distance education courses; • systematic and relevant staff training; • development of appropriate learner support systems including study skills development and acquisition of appropriate learning technologies. With specific reference to learning centres it is proposed that a proactive intervention from the Department of Education is considered on issues such as the following: • How it should be managed; • Funding (subsidy) matters; • Incentives from government’s side on how institutions will be rewarded for taking initiative in this regard (at least for a beginning phase); • Legal matters; • How overhead costs will determined; • Maintenance of learning centres; • Marketing issues, etc. 4. Recommendations CUT wishes the committee to consider the establishment of a national policy on open and distance education which should aim to achieve, amongst others, the following: • explicit and detailed funding policies which would not be to the detriment of contact institutions; • spell out the role current programme and qualification mixes (PQMs) will play in deciding which programmes should be offered by who; • the niches of Universities of Technology and “traditional” universities have to play in regions need to be accounted for in all deliberations. • promote, encourage and support the orderly development of open distance learning and associated technologies in the country; • enhance the effectiveness of open distance learning education at minimal economic and social costs; • outline means of improving education and training facilities to overcome the scarcity of skilled personnel; • outline the application priorities in consonance with national development plans; • the establishment of special funding mechanisms for launching or upgrading current distance learning systems as appropriate; and that government • considers the provision of expanded capital and operating budgets for appropriate learning technologies. It is clear from these recommendations that the establishment of a quality open/distance learning system in South Africa will request the inputs and planning of a number of stakeholders in the country and a specific commitment from government’s side. 5. Conclusion CUT is of opinion that this innovative way of thinking about open/distance learning will indeed enhance access for particularly potential learners in remote areas, will enhance the quality of open/distance learning offerings and materials and will lead to economies of scale.