Download
1 / 11
110 likes | 128 Views
Explore the evolution, policy context, and typology of Public-Private Partnerships in higher education. Uncover the driving forces, purposes, and impacts of these collaborations in meeting market demands.
E N D
Public-Private Partnerships: Organisational Conformity of Private Providers to Meet Market Demands Mahlubi Mabizela Human Sciences Research Council Programme for Research on Private Higher Education (PROPHE)
Structure of Presentation • Background • PPPs in Historical Perspective • Policy Environment • Theoretical Framework for Analysis of the PPPs • A Typology of PPPs • What Underpins PPPs? • Conclusion
1. Background • Based on empirical study of PPPs in the provision of HE in SA. • The study sought to answer why PPPs? what shapes & forms they take? What purposes they serve? Their contribution to HE landscape. • The study involved total of 12 publics & 57 privates with 58 partnerships and covering 55 885 partnership students
2. PPPs in Historical Perspective • ‘Old generation’ Partnerships • Occurred prior late 1980s • PPPs that include Professional Institutes, some Comprehensive Correspondence Colleges and some religious colleges • ‘New generation’ Partnerships • Started in the 1990s • Largely comprise public sector franchised programmes offered face-to-face at the private partner institutions
3. Policy Environment of PPPs • A laissez faire - developed despite 1984 policy on PPPs. • This was due to a liberal constitution, but the 1997 HE legislation regulated PPPs. • National Plan on HE of 2001 that further tightened operations of PPPs in HE.
4. A Theoretical Framework for Analysis of PPPs • ‘Natural selection model’ as applied in socio-economic sciences
4. A Typology of Partnerships • Both a finding and a tool for analysis. • Set on the basis of: • nature of the relationship and • purpose of the partnership • type of business of private partners • focus of private partner’s services • other functions private partners perform
The Typology (continued) • Service Partnerships (9). • Professional Institutes Partnerships (1). • Tuition Partnerships. • Specialist Partnerships (24). • Comprehensives (11). • Capacity Development (3). • Access Partnerships (7).
(findings continued 1) • 85% private partner institutions for-profit. • 85% students in distance education private partner institutions. • 51% programmes in Business and Management Studies. • 64% students in Education
(findings continued 2) • Private partner institutions flexibly provide physical access to HE in areas where public institutions are unable to reach – in the cities and not rural areas. • Despite many programmes in Business and Management studies a huge demand is in teacher qualifications upgrading, hence education enrolls most students. • Paradoxically, there is a demand for face-to-face contact in distance education provision.
(Implications continued 2) • Existing tight government policy needs balancing with making facilities available to educators to upgrade their qualifications without leaving their workplaces. • No nurturing of private partner institutions – except in very few partnerships • No set goals and objectives for partnerships.
