The national debate on community engagement in South African higher education: an interpretation Magda Fourie Vice-rector: Teaching 3 April 2008

Overview of presentation  National policy framework  Historical backdrop, in particular CHESP  Community Engagement in Higher Education Conference  Critical issues identified  What does this signify for Stellenbosch University?

National policy framework  White Paper on Higher Education (1997): identifies community engagement as integral and core part of higher education in SA  Specific reference to the role community engagement can play in transforming higher education  HEIs should demonstrate social responsibility… and their commitment to the common good by making available expertise and infrastructure for community service programmes

National policy framework (cont)  National Plan for Higher Education (2001): enhancing of responsiveness to regional and national needs, for academic programmes, research and community service

National policy framework (cont)  HEQC identified knowledge based community service as one of the three areas (together with teaching and learning, and research) for quality assurance of higher education  Criteria for Institutional Audits include criteria on both service-learning and community engagement  Criteria for Programme Accreditation include minimum requirements for service-learning

Historical backdrop  Examples of different forms of community engagement activities at many HEIs: voluntarism, internships, experiential education, service-learning, community outreach, research and development projects for communities or industry  Not necessarily planned and co-ordinated

Historical backdrop (cont):  JET Education Services: - since 1997 active in research and development to advance CE - survey of community service in SA HE in 1997/8 – two publications - Community-Higher Education-Service Partnerships (CHESP) initiative launched in 1999

Historical backdrop (cont): CHESP:  To support development of pilot programmes that explore potential of CE as integral part of core academic functions of HEIs  To monitor and evaluate these programmes  To use data generated to inform HE policy and practice

Historical backdrop (cont):  At national level several seminars, workshops, capacity building sessions by CHESP, HEQC and DOE  Development of Good Practice Guide for Service- learning  Increasing international contacts and exposure  At institutional level policy and strategy development, resource allocation, integration into academic programmes through service-learning

Conference on Community Engagement in Higher Education  Hosted by CHE/HEQC and JET/CHESP in September 2006  Largest and most important conference on this topic in SA  More than 200 delegates  Representatives from all public HEIs in SA and numerous others  Speakers included Minister of Education, Premier of WC, vice-chancellors, and scholars from SA and abroad

Critical issues  Conceptualisation  Strategic considerations  Planning and operational challenges  Partnerships  Building a scholarship of CE

Conceptualisation  Examples: broad social frame of reference for engagement through Mode 2 knowledge (Gibbons), engagement as form of scholarship (Fourie), engagement as mechanism to make university a knowledge-based instrument of social equity (De la Garza)

Conceptualisation (cont)  National level (enabling framework) - Setting broad parameters for CE - Place of community engagement in social development agenda  Institutional level (context-specific) - Establishing a relationship between CE and two other core functions - Possible models for community engagement

Strategic considerations  National level: - What additional policy, funding, monitoring and reporting levers are necessary to embed CE in HE? - How to embed/reconcile CE with policy implementation already under way?

Strategic considerations (cont)  Institutional level: - Governance and leadership - Institutional vision/mission - Roles of different stakeholders - Community voice

Planning and operational challenges - Resource allocation - Quality assurance and evaluation - Performance management - Staff incentives and development - Risk management - Organisation of research - Student learning

Partnerships  Shared vision  Clarification of roles and expectations  Power relations  Reciprocity and mutual benefits  Regional consortia

A scholarship of CE (theoretical work)  What are the bodies of knowledge that could inform CE?  What are the new epistemologies for establishing CE as a field of knowledge?  What are the new pedagogies for teaching and learning to give effect to CE?  What are the new research methodologies needed to give substance to CE?

What does this signify for Stellenbosch University?  Have we clearly conceptualised community interaction at SU?  Who are our communities?  What is our approach to community interaction: - the silo model - the intersecting model - the infusion (cross-cutting) model ?

Is community interaction at SU about realising a Pedagogy of Hope?

Thank you!