ESTRATEGIAS DE MARKETING

Since the ushering in of democracy in 1994, the TVET system in South Africa has been significantly reformed (Wedekind 2010:302). Furthermore, Wedekind (2010) indicates that the reforms have spanned all aspects of the system, from the design and the funding arrangements of the system through to the detail of the curriculum; and from the structural organization of institutions to the qualifications offered in them. Most significantly, the reforms have been strengthened by governance and management responsibility to achieve the objectives of the DHET and that of the country. According to the DHET (RSA 2015:20) strategic plan for 2015/16-2019/20 strategy on systemic capacity-building of colleges, the department aims to address the systemic weakness that have been identified which include the following;

 Poor management, governance and leadership  Weak financial management, and

 Unqualified human resource and management personnel.

According to the National Further Education and Training Plan, in the era of apartheid South Africa had 152 technical colleges, located in racially segregated education departments (Department of Education (DoE) 2008). The former 152 technical colleges were the subject of a number of policy processes, initiated by the new African National Congress (ANC) led government that emerged after the establishment of the National Commission on Further Education in 1996. The commission’s recommendations resulted in the release of the Green Paper and the White Paper on Further Education and Training and the passing of the Further Education and Training (FET) Act, all in 1998. According to Wedekind (2010), the FET Act of 1998 provided the framework for the FET system in South Africa. It provided for the establishment, governance and funding of public FET colleges and the registration of private FET colleges. What the FET Act of 1998 did make provision for was the establishment of governing councils at all FET colleges. The councils were intended to have strong stakeholder representation, with powers to develop strategic plans and mission statements, to set policy, and to select staff. This change in the governance model was a radical shift from the department-run technical colleges that had little or no independence.

42

To initiate the transformation of former technical colleges, the FET Act was promulgated, announcing a broad and long-term framework that would change curriculum programmes and qualifications, whilst introducing new funding and quality assurance mechanisms (RSA, Act 98 of 1998). In 2000, the Department of Education (DoE) established the National Landscape Task Team to develop a national strategy for the re-organization of the sector as well as the recapitalization of the aging physical infrastructure. The Task Team recommended merging the 152 colleges to create 50 multi-campus public FET colleges, a significant move from a large number of single- campus college models towards fewer, but larger and decentralized institutions (Mgijima 2014:393).

The South African parliament passed the 2006 FET College Act in 2006 which attempts to clarify the boundaries and uncertainties associated with the FET Act of 1998, specifically in the area of independence and accountability. The most recent legislation that has focused on the colleges was the CET Act of 2006 (RSA, 2006a) as amended which redefined the role of the DHET as the employer, and renamed Further Education and Training (FET) colleges to TVET colleges with new reporting and accountability structures. According to McGrath (2004:152), the DoE is broadly supportive of the international trend towards greater college autonomy, hence the designation of the new college rectors as CEOs is clearly symbolic of this. However, according to McGrath (2004), the Department sees autonomy as something to be developed over time; indeed to be earned through proof of capacity and responsibility. It is very aware of the fragility of the new management and governance structures in the colleges and the limited capacity of the provincial administrations to oversee colleges (McGrath 2004:152).

43

Table 2.2 provides a summary of the major college milestones achieved from 1998 to 2015.

Table 2.2: Major milestones and description of changes that occurred from 1998 until 2015 at South African TVET colleges

Period College milestone

1998 The new FET Act 98 of 1998 was passed by the South African Parliament, which renamed colleges from Technical Colleges to FET Colleges ( RSA,1998) 2001 The provincial Department started a process of merging different FET colleges and creating central administrative offices and multi-campuses. The merger process resulted in 50 colleges and 265 campuses.

2002 The Provincial Department appointed 50 principals to provide management and leadership of the newly formed colleges.

2006 The South African Parliament passed the new Further Education and Training College (FETC) Act 16 of 2006 which provided independence and the college and council became the employer. Transfer of staff from the employment of Provincial Education Department (PED) to Colleges (RSA,2006)

2009 The President of the Republic of South Africa established the new Department of Higher Education and Training.

2012 The South African parliament passed the FETC Amended Act 3 of 2012 which prepared the transfer of staff from colleges to the DHET as the new employer (RSA,2012)

2013 The Minister of the DHET renamed the colleges from FET colleges to TVET Colleges.

2014 The South African Parliament approved the renaming of FETC Act 16 of 2006 to Continuing Education and Training (CETA) Act 16 of 2006 (RSA,2006) 2015 The staff migrated from the employment of colleges and Provincial department

to DHET.

Source: Adapted from government legislations

According to the Joint Education Trust (JET) (2016), TVET colleges have been exposed to various forms of change over the past twenty years. Moreover, the changes have involved rationalization of college numbers and size, the introduction of new programmes and plans to phase out others, recapitalization of infrastructure, new

44

forms of college governance, shifts in line-function accountability of colleges, and shifts in staff employment regimes, interspersed with sporadic lecturer training. The major change between that described in the 2006 FETC Act and the 2006 CET Act was the transfer of staff to the DHET as the new employer. The responsibilities of the Minister of Executive Council (MEC) were also transferred to the Minister and those of the Head of Department (HOD) were transferred to the DG. The transfer had its own challenges relating to the status of employment. Principals were accountable for ensuring that monitoring and controls are in place to ensure a smooth transition.

I am of the opinion that a new dynamic landscape of TVET colleges requires principals to have sound of the sector and must poses capacity to achieve the strategic objectives of the DHET. Principals are required to think strategically with a visionary outlook to deal with challenges related to management and leadership. Another challenge is related to reporting and accountability. According to the 2006 CET Act (RSA, 2006a), management staff of colleges is appointed by the Minister and therefore report to him/her through the DG, however, they are also accountable to college council which provides an oversight role. This dual accountability role is problematic to many principals (Wedekind 2010:310).

2.6 THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF KEY PLAYERS IN TVET