1 / 12

UMALUSI Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee 27 th March 2007

UMALUSI Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee 27 th March 2007. GENFETQA ACT Objectives. To give effect to the following: Ensuring continuous enhancement of quality in delivery and outcomes of the General and FET

anika
Download Presentation

UMALUSI Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee 27 th March 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UMALUSI Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee 27th March 2007

  2. GENFETQA ACT Objectives • To give effect to the following: • Ensuring continuous enhancement of quality in • delivery and outcomes of the General and FET • sectors of the national education and training system • Developing a quality assurance framework for GET • and FET • Regulating the relationship between DoE, SAQA, • other ETQAs, providers and the Council

  3. This means………………… • Development of a Quality Assurance Framework for the GET and FET bands • Focus is on a combination of three aspects that determine standards for certification in GFET: • Institutional accreditation and monitoring • Quality assurance of qualifications and curricula • Quality assurance of assessment

  4. This means……………… • Setting standards and monitoring provincial departments of education iro public schooling, FET colleges, ABET centres and public assessment bodies – and reporting to the Minister • Accreditation of private providers of education and training and assessment bodies to offer and/or assess specified approved qualifications and curricula • Evaluation and approval of qualifications and • curricula in GET and FET bands • Quality assurance of assessment both internal and • external (exams) at exit points • Certification of learner attainments

  5. Public Provider monitoring • Inherited and established quality assurance • processes: • Quality assurance of assessment and certification • Senior certificate (being replaced byNSC) • GETC: Adults • ASECA • National Technical Certificates ( N1 – N3) and the • NSC – being replaced by National Certificate • Vocational (NCV)

  6. Public Provider monitoring • New quality assurance processes: • Evaluation and Monitoring (against accreditation • criteria) public assessment bodies (9 PDEs and DoE) • Full evaluation completed 2005 – next evaluation • due 2008 • Areas of limited action: • Monitoring of provincial departments iro public • schools, FET colleges and ABET Centres

  7. Public Provider monitoring • 2005 – Colloquium ( Umalusi Council and DoE) • 2005 – Commissioned Dr Trevor Coombe to develop a • discussion paper • 2006 – On request from the Minister • submitted a proposal (15 July 06)

  8. Public Provider monitoring • Conceptual Challenges: • PDE’s are defined as the “provider” in GENFETQA Act - Problematic and not straight forward • PDE’s are “deemed accredited” by Umalusi - • Appropriateness of “accreditation” of a body that has a constitutional duty to provide quality education

  9. Public Provider monitoring • Practical challenges: • Evaluation overload – (Auditor general and Public • Service commission) • Duplication of mandate with DoE - collaboration is difficult to establish and maintain • Funding and resources are limited

  10. Public Provider monitoring • Umalusi’s role in examinations and private providers is clear, but not clear for public provision • Umalusi, by its mandate, is required to make judgments about the quality of public education • Restrictions on Umalusi are a function of resources and absence of resolution to allow Umalusi to carry out its mandate.

  11. What Umalusi would like to do: • Promotion of quality in Provincial departments: This would include the management of standards of learning, site management, curriculum, teaching and learning, assessments, learner support, and governance. • Educational outcomes: aims at assessing the extent to which schools are able to meet the educational outcomes that are considered to be important. Examples would be: learner attainment, successes, transitions, participation rates, philosophical and policy goals, values. • Capacity is stretched at Umalusi at this stage and Umalusi will require the financial and professional support and engagement of the department with these plans.

  12. Private Provider monitoring and accreditation • Processes with independent schools: • 2006: site visits to 100 schools (Half of which were • “poorly” performing in 2005 matric exams) • 2007 / 2008: Site visits to all schools provisionally • accredited with Umalusi • Use findings to inform possible future initiatives in the • public system

More Related