NN40, May 2008
Education for Sustainable Development? Or The Sustainability of Education Investment? A Special Issue
Private Vocational Education and Training for Sustainable Individual and National Development - Evidence from South Africa
By Salim Akoojee[a] and Simon McGrath[b], a- Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services Sector Education and Training Authority, Johannesburg; b- University of Nottingham
Emails: Simon.Mcgrath@nottingham.ac.uk, sakoojee@merseta.org.zaKeywords
South Africa, Private Vocational Education and Training, priVET
Summary
This article explores sustainability issues related to private vocational education and training in South Africa.
Recent years have seen a debate about private schooling in the South, which has examined its contribution to pro-poor access to education. However, there has not been a parallel development of new research on whether private vocational education and training (priVET) can play a similar role. In part, this may reflect the relative marginalisation of VET in education and development discourse until recently. Moreover, it may be informed by a view that VET is already the most market- and economy-oriented part of the education system and, thus, not a place to expect pro-equity developments.
However, just as part of the argument for a more nuanced view of private schooling arises out of the weaknesses of public provision; so scepticism about the pro-equity nature of priVET, understood as incorporating both the for-profit, non-profit and in-house (in company) education and training sectors, needs to be tempered by a widespread discourse about the limited pro-equity performance of public VET. Moreover, public provision internationally has become increasingly more like private in its concern for financial sustainability and its managerialist shift. Equally, private provision cannot be isolated from making some response to the national development context. Clearly, therefore, the gap between public and private is not that great and the sustainability of both is dependent in large part on their ability to align their offerings and programmes with the prevailing national development context.
There are clearly concerns in South Africa about the sustainability of public provision as the restructured colleges are still perceived as being of low status and relevance by employers and society more generally. There are concerns too that their constrained responsiveness may make them vulnerable to competition from private providers, particularly as the latter seem better positioned to access skills levy funds.
The sustainability of private providers may depend as much on their ability to engage with the regulatory system as on learner demand. Sustainability on both grounds seems relatively unproblematic for those successfully engaging with the national skills development architecture through a focus on training the already employed. For providers catering to more vulnerable unemployed and pre-employed learners, sustainability is less certain. These providers need to attract learners who may have difficulties in paying and, indeed, may need to attract poorer students for political reasons. They may find regulation costly and time-consuming and this may further threaten their sustainability. Nonetheless, there are some providers, who clearly are performing well and have every likelihood of continuing so to do.
South Africa?s overall development project requires that relevant skills are delivered effectively and efficiently. It appears that segments of private provision are best placed to support this. However, there is need for caution about how this relates to the delivery of medium- to long-term skills development needs. Both public and private providers also need to be receptive to broader development agendas. Our evidence suggests that the private sector often performs better than public provision on race and gender (although both sectors exhibit complex demographic dynamics when the data is disaggregated). Moreover, priVET is markedly better than the public system in catering to an older, employed learner type, typically enrolled in shorter-term courses. In comparison with their public counterparts, costs for less advantaged learners are not prohibitive. Furthermore, many private providers favour a programme structure that allows learners flexibility to weave in and out of the system that is far in advance of the public system. Greater flexibility over admission requirements means that priVET may also be delivering more of the promise of recognition of prior learning, although the quality implications of this are not straightforward.
However, it must be remembered that many of those providers who are targeting the poorest learners are also themselves the poorest and most vulnerable to market failure. It is in this segment, too that the real ?fly-by-nights?, those considered in official documentation to be most vulnerable to closure and considered to be exploiting poorer learners, are to be found.
The current emphasis on regulating all providers equally may not be the most efficient way of dealing with the sector. In light of the national development prerogative to protect those most vulnerable from the risk of market failure, there is need to provide support to, and exert effective regulation over, those providers most responsive to this group - in this instance, those ?full time? providers responding to the pre- and unemployed learner cohort. In contrast, providers responding to the employed and corporate client groups are adequately regulated by the market and do not need much policy attention. Thus, there is a need to focus policy attention primarily on the poverty reduction rather than growth supporting elements of private vocational provision.
Finally, the state needs a better understanding of the diverse nature of private provision from which to develop a policy approach that can strategically take advantage of where private provision can support growth and equity, whilst being able to limit the risks related to the more fragile and potentially exploitative segments and institutions. Such steps can support the sustainability of both public and private provision and of the overall South African development project.
Back to full contents of NORRAG NEWS 40.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 40 in pdf.