2 4 are we making progress with systemic transformation?

NOVEMBER 2015 5NOVEMBER 20154

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHEREDUCATION AND TRAINING

IN the run-up to lastmonth’s National HigherEducationTransformation Summit,the Department of Higher

Education and Trainingproduced (DHET) a highlydetailed, data-based studythat, like the summit itself,identified indicators that canbe used to measure the extentand pace of transformation

This particular extractfocuses only on research – butthe study as a whole (whichcan be found atwww.dhet.gov.za/summit,where it is “Annexure 3”)ranges over eight areas thatinclude funding,undergraduate andpostgraduate student success,staffing and student access.

BackgroundIn 2003, the then Department ofEducation published the “Policyand Procedures for theMeasurement of ResearchOutput of Public HigherEducation Institutions”.

The DHET allocates researchsubsidy based on unitcalculations for approvedpublications.

The policy recognises themajor types of research output inthe form of journals, books andconference proceedings whichmeet the specified criteriaoutlined in this policy.

This narrative contains ananalysis of the number of unitsawarded to institutions forsubsidy-earning research outputsin accredited journals, books, andpublished conferenceproceedings published from 2004to 2013.

This is to demonstrate theimpact of the policy and the

investment made by governmenttowards funding research in thehigher education sector.

While the Department’sResearch Output Policy hascontributed greatly to theincrease in research productivityover the 10 years, growth mustalso be attributed to thecontributions of a number ofother role players such as theDepartment of Science andTechnology and the NationalResearch Foundation, theNational Institute of Health,European Union FrameworkProgrammes, the Centre forDisease Control, among others.

Through their provision ofresearch grants to researchersand/or institutions, it is thismulti-stakeholder contributionthat has resulted in improvedresearch productivity andimproved quality of researchemanating from South Africa ingeneral and universities inparticular.

JournalpublicationsPublications in approvedjournals showed a steadygrowth over the years 2004-2013. Journal publicationoutput units increased from5 790.3 to 11 997.38, a 107%growth; thus an averageannual growth of 10.7%.

Publications in journalslisted on the approvedinternational indices, whichare the Thomson Reuters ISIWeb of Science Indices and theProQuestIBSS index, remainrelatively high, at around 60%and 10%, respectively(approximately 70%combined).

The overall proportion ofpublications in journals listedon the two internationalindices can be taken as ameasure of quality and impactof the South African research.

Book publicationsThere was a significant increasein book publications between 2004and 2013. Research publications inscholarly books for 2013 amountedto 774.37 units, up from 196 units in2004, representing a 295% growth.

This equates to approximatelya 30% average annual growth.Although this is massive growth,book publications continue toconstitute the least producedresearch output, accounting forapproximately 6% of the overallannual output units.

This lower productivity inbooks could be mainly due to thefact that it takes longer to producebook publications compared to theother types of outputs recognisedby the policy.

ConferenceProceedingsPublications in conferenceproceedings accounted for 8% of

LIS LANGE

MY focus here is the curriculum as asite of struggle that affects the verynature of the university, andacademic and students in particular.

To do this, my point of departureis the experience of curriculumreview at the University of the FreeState (UFS), which we started in 2012,and the reference to the curriculumthat the student movement, startingwith #RhodesMustFall, has beenmaking this year.

There is something that ourattempt at reviewing the UFS’scurriculum and student protest havein common: they bring to the foreissues of identity, recognition and

misrecognition in relation to staff,students, knowledge per se and, in thelast instance, the university asinstitution.

I would like to draw some lessonsfrom the work at UFS and myunderstanding of what students aresaying:

1At each university reviewing thecurriculum entails something

different and specific. The point of departure is always

the interrogation of the existingcurriculum from the point of view ofthe concepts, values, discourses andassumptions that constitute theundergraduate curriculum and itspedagogic manifestations.

At some universities the first stage

of the curricular review might be toexamine to what extent ourdisciplinary discourses are self-critical and part of current debates.

At others, it might be possible toenter directly into a deconstruction ofthe curriculum with a notion ofepistemological justice in mind.

2 However one approachescurricular review, it has to be

understood that nothing defines moredeeply the sense of self and identityof an academic that what we teach,research and read.

The pedagogic approaches to thecurriculum taken by academicsdefine their notion of knowledge,their notion of themselves and oftheir students. Thus at some

universities curriculum is about thetransmission of an intellectualtradition, a certain order of the worldthat students are expected to know inorder to answer questions at the timeof the exam.

At other universities, it might bethe introduction of students toproblems and critique.

What matters is that throwing thecurriculum open is an exercise in theexamination of who we think we areas academics; and this is not just an

exercise in reason, it is also anemotional exercise.

3 If something emerges loud andclear from the black students’

articulation of their concerns is thatthey do not feel recognised.

The constancy with whichvariations of the expression “Look atme – I am here” repeats itself amongdifferent sites of student protestsuggests that our students feelmisrecognised at their institutionsand in the context of the classroom.

At parallel-medium universitiessuch as the UFS, there is an issue ofmisrecognition through the languageof instruction.

This consists, among other things,of the identification of black studentsstudying in English as “my Englishclass”.

Yet at most universities thereseems to be a misrecognition aboutthe signifier of being African.

As Achille Mbembe says in On the

Postcolony: “The African human

experience constantly appears in thediscourse of our times as anexperience that can only beunderstood through negativeinterpretation.

It is this elementariness andprimitiveness that makes Africa theworld par excellence of all that isincomplete, mutilated, andunfinished, its history reduced to aseries of setbacks of nature in itsquest for humankind.”

It is with the eyes of this

incompleteness and “second-classness” that our students are oftenlooked at. The more the schoolingsystem fails, the more all thesefeatures are confirmed.

This has two manifestations ateach end and many variations inbetween: a sense of obligation thatis friendly, if patronising, and thatwill condone mediocrity as theonly possible baseline; and at theother end is the plain racistapproach that will unashamedlyreject the possibility, never mindthe right, of black students beingat this university.

4 Finally, one of the effects ofcurricular review is that

academics cannot do any longer what

they have been doing. They do not feel at home.

Students, on the other hand, are alsoasking to feel at home at theuniversity.

We need to respond to thesefeelings carefully. Students and staffneed to feel at home at the universityin the sense of knowing that theirpresence is welcome and recognisedin terms of who they are and whatthey bring to the university.

But if a university is a universityneither academics nor studentsshould be at home – in the sense ofbeing comfortable. Universities haveto be spaces for discomfort anddisplacement both intellectually andaffectively.

The only way of doing this is tolearn to be discomforted anduncomfortable together, whichmeans to accept vulnerability as acommon human trait in academicsand students.

Specifically in the case ofacademics the process of overcomingthe misrecognition of knowledge andof students should be accepted asconstitutive part of our academicidentity.

Dr Lis Lange is

vice-rector: academic at the

University of the Free State.

This is an edited version of her

presentation at last month’s Higher

Education Transformation Summit

While theDepartment’sResearchOutput Policyhascontributedgreatly to theincrease inresearchproductivityover the 10years, growthmust also beattributed tothecontributionsof a number ofother roleplayers.

‘

What is a ‘curriculum’?

Are we making progress with systemic transformation?

the overall annual researchpublications outputs. Between2004 and 2013, conferenceproceedings increased from 287.4to 1236.92, respectively.

This is a staggering 330%growth, thus equating to anaverage annual growth of 33%.

However, while conferenceproceeding play an essential andimportant role in some fields,such as engineering, questionshave been raised as to the impactof conference proceedings in theoverall research sphere.

Nonetheless, this type ofproductivity as recognised by thepolicy, has shown a dramaticincrease over the years.

Publication OutputsMore than half (53.4%) of alloutput units are produced byresearchers in the Science,Engineering and Technology(SET) fields, followed byHumanities (32.6%), Business

and Commerce (8%), andEducation 6%.

This distribution is notsignificantly different in yearsprior to 2013.

In per capita terms, the totalpublication output units perpermanent academic staffmember for all institutions for2013 was 0.79 units, a slightincrease from 0.71 units in 2012,and 0.66 units in 2011.

Generally, the per capitaoutput across institutions hasbeen on the increase since 2004,albeit at a slow pace for someinstitutions.

This could be due to the veryfew numbers of activeresearchers out of total academicstaff. Nonetheless, this howeverdoes reflect a slight improvementin research publicationproductivity rate across thesystem.

The per capita output unitshave shown a 107% increasebetween 2004 and 2013. This

reflects an average annualgrowth of 10.7%.

It must also be recognised thatnot all higher educationinstitutions in SA are researchintensive and hence the growthfor the sector seem to be slow, butwhen comparing institutionaldata there are huge differences inperformance among institutions.

In institutional terms, five ofthe (then) 24 universitiesreceived approximately 55% ofthe total subsidy – theuniversities of KwaZulu-Natal,Pretoria, Cape Town,Stellenbosch and Wits – while therest shared the remaining 45%.

A direct correlation betweeninstitutional productivity andnumber of academics withdoctoral degrees has been noted.

Not surprisingly, institutionswith a higher number of staffwith doctoral degrees are moreresearch active and generallyshow a higher weighted percapita output.

Overall, the researchperformance of the SouthAfrican Higher Educationsector is among the top in theworld, considering its size andfinancial resources.

If anything, South Africa ispunching above its weight.

The Department will beimplementing a revised policyto ensure further improvementin the quality of publications.

The quality of publicationswill be of great focus as we needto gear towards research thatcan be translated to products,practices, policy that have socialand/or commercial benefits.

The DHET does notcurrently collect data thatprovides race, gender andnationality profiles in respect ofresearch output.

This is under discussion andit may be something that shouldbe considered if targetedstrategies to address equityissues with respect to research

output and knowledgegeneration are to beimplemented.

Issues to grapple with couldinclude who is doing theresearch in South Africa, whatchoices are being made aboutresearch that is conducted, whatknowledge is being generated,and what knowledge is not.

This is an edited extract

focusing on only one of eight

areas analysed in the Department

of Higher Education and

Training’s data-based study,

titled “Are we making progress

with systemic structural

transformation of resourcing,

access, success, staffing and

researching in higher education:

What do the data say?”.

The study uses the latest

audited data, and the full version

can be found at

www.dhet.gov.za/summit, where

it is labelled “Annexure 3”

Overall, theresearch

performanceof the South

African HigherEducation

sector isamong the top

in the world,considering its

size andfinancial

resources. If anything,

South Africa ispunchingabove its

weight.

‘

Between 2004 and2013, five of the (then)24 universitiesreceivedapproximately 55%of the state’s totalresearch subsidy –the universities ofKwaZulu-Natal,Pretoria, Cape Town,Stellenbosch andWits – while the restshared the remaining45%.