South African 50 Public technical and vocational education and training (TVET) colleges are predominantly struggling institutions.
In many, throughput rates – how many students pass in the expected time – are Less. Some lecturers are less qualified and less resourced. Relations with employers, which are important for the type of training these colleges provide, are uneven.
Colleges are hard pressed to provide training to young people poor schooling There is no clear path of employment behind them and ahead. The youth unemployment rate is approximately 44%.
Reforms have been undertaken in response to problems in the sector: rename colleges, restructure them, give them new governance models, new qualification types, new funding arrangements. In 30 years of democracy, South Africa has done all these things over and over again. It hasn't worked.
And now there's another round Change Is being rolled out. There is little clearly documented explanation of what the new system is and how it will work in practice. But colleges have been instructed that most existing qualification offers will phased out And Replaced By new “professional” qualifications.
In 2024 I wrote a A paper tracing the history of the technical and vocational training sectorDrawing on published literature, my research on skills development and my own involvement in South African education and training policy processes. The paper explains why the sector is not working and what it needs to succeed.
In my view, based on the history of the sector, there is a serious risk that the latest reforms will make things worse.
30 years same mistake
South Africa's policy vision and funding model for TVET colleges, like many other countries, is to base funding on student enrollments for programs linked to employer demand. It assumes that colleges will respond to what employers want, and put young people into jobs.
It has a long and largely unsuccessful track record, with problems in many countries – most widely documents In Australia and this UKPromoter of comprehensive policy model.
The problem is structural. Funding institutions only through enrollment in specific programs does not provide any institutional stability. It provides no incentive to invest in equipment, lecturers, or long-term relationships with employers. It treats colleges as if they were competing as private training providers.
When the programs that attract funded enrollments change – as they frequently do – colleges are left with stranded staff, obsolete equipment, and no financial buffer. And when new funding is made available for new programs, they do not have lecturers who can teach them.
Private institutions do not offer manufacturing-related programs – they are expensive. They focus on business-related programs, which are cheaper.
Consider the National Diploma in Technical Education (NATED) qualifications, government-funded programs that colleges have provided for decades. First, they were to be phased out. Then, when the National Development Plan made TVET enrollment goalsColleges were asked to expand themselves. Colleges have prepared staff around them and enrolled students in them.
Now the Higher Education and Training Department has instructed colleges to eliminate them in a phased manner. What takes their place “professional qualification“.
Vocational Qualification Problem
Department defines as a business
A group of jobs that have a high degree of similarity (skill specialization) in their core tasks and duties.
The principle behind vocational qualifications is sound: link qualifications to specific occupations, make workplace experience part of the qualification, and graduates will have qualifications that employers recognize and value.
There are thousands of businesses in the framework.
The problem – and here lies ours new research (not yet published online) prompting an inconvenient search – are there many of these “businesses” new abilities The links between workplaces and labor markets do not actually exist. And there is very little information available publicly about them.
Some “occupations” have specialized skills that require special training, and others are really just jobs.
For example, in our research (not yet online) into 53 food and beverage manufacturing plants, we found that there are artisan occupations such as millwriting, fitting and turning, and electrical work that fit the idea of a business. But machine operators don't fit that description. Yet new qualifications being introduced also include machine operator. The employers we approached do not require those qualifications. They may want to hire someone they can train themselves to use the equipment in their plant.
Training in “knowledge modules” such as “personal mastery and interpersonal relationships” is not specific to the “occupation” of operating a machine.
You can't build a business by developing an aptitude for it. It works the other way: the business must exist before you can create the qualifications for you.
This is not a matter of abstract concern. Colleges are now being instructed to seek accreditation to offer these qualifications, hire staff to teach them, find workplace placements for students who do so – all on the assumption that there is finally a genuine vocational destination.
For artisans, the notion persists: there are real businesses that translate into opportunities in the workplace. But most of the new professional qualifications being developed require far more analysis.
What institutions really need
Not only can colleges become stronger institutions through enrollment-driven funding, but a school can become stronger by paying per student without any basic funding for teachers or classes. And calling qualifications “vocational” does not mean that they will lead to work where there is no meaningful occupation in labor markets or workplaces.
Institutions need a stable core – employed lecturers, maintained equipment, administrative capacity – that allows them to function as institutions rather than as a collection of projects cobbled together from different funding streams.
It may be better for some of them to offer second chance matriculation (secondary school leaving certificate) programs rather than narrowly focused programmes, where there are few real employment opportunities in the surrounding areas, and colleges cannot find work placements for their learners anyway.
There are areas of real excellence in the current system: colleges with good employer relationships and real employment outcomes for graduates. What they have in common is principled management, experienced staff and enough stability to build relationships over time. The system should attempt to replicate those conditions.
In my view, what should happen is this:
-
Colleges should be funded by core institutional grants, and be able to provide a mix of training that reflects their local economic contexts
-
Vocational qualifications should only be implemented where employers need them.
Otherwise the latest reforms risk repeating the mistakes of the last 30 years. Colleges and youth deserve better than this.
Stephanie Allis receives funding from the South African National Research Foundation. I have also recently worked on food and beverage manufacturing research funded by SETA.
By Stephanie Allais, Faculty Member, Center for Researching Education and Labour, University of the Witwatersrand