First-year Experience as Terrain of Failure or Platform for Development?

Abstract

The traditional image of the first year at university is one of exciting intellectual and personal discoveries, independence in growth in confidence. This is close to reality for some students, but for many others - in fact, perhaps the majority in South Africa – the experience is marred by failure, loss of confidence, and perhaps disillusionment This has far-reaching consequences for the individual, for the development of South Africa’s talent, and thus for social, economic and political well-being. If this situation is avoidable, surely all reasonable efforts should be made to avoid it. Conditions in higher education in South Africa since the political transition are in some respects reminiscent of the post-World War II period of what was then unparalleled expansion of universities, taking place in the context of extensive social change. Many new universities were built in developed countries, particularly in the 1960s, in response to increasing demand for participation. (This was also a period of new universities in South Africa, but for a rather different reason: the grand-apartheid-driven need to establish separate facilities for each of the main ethnic or language groups.) The sixties' inclusionary optimism was tempered relatively soon, however, when it became evident that university failure and drop-out rates were rising along with rising enrolments. It was in the 1970s, then, that specialised units dedicated to researching and addressing this problem were established in many higher education institutions, in the form of, for example, 'bureaux for university teaching' and 'teaching methods’ units. There was a special concern about particularly high attrition rates in the first year. This led in time to the establishment and international growth of the Experience' (FYE) movement, as well as a research industry on student learning and factors affecting performance and persistence. The last two decades have seen another surge in demand for participation in higher education around the world, often government-driven and associated with rapid economic and social change. The demand has been accommodated not only by some building of new institutions (particularly in developing countries and through growth in private higher education), but also by the restructuring of higher education systems and the conversion of many non-university institutions - such as polytechnics and colleges - into universities or universities of technology. In South Africa, after some false starts, higher education enrolment has almost doubled since the early 1990s (Council on Higher Education [CHE], 2004:65), and the institutional 'landscape' has been substantially reconfigured through mergers and the establishment of universities of technology and 'comprehensive' universities. While there has been concern about student attrition in South Africa for decades, this has sharpened in recent years with the identification of high-level skills shortages as a key obstacle to development and with the production of the first system-wide longitudinal (cohort) studies of the undergraduate intake by the Department of Education (DoE). As is discussed later, there is unfortunately ample justification for the concern, not least in relation to the longstanding issue of first-year performance. In view of the importance of success in higher education, for development as well as the individual, this must raise the question of what has been achieved since the 1970s. How much have we learnt and what have we done about improving student learning and reducing attrition? A key underlying question is, given the exponential growth in research on teaching and learning and knowledge over the last thirty years, why does it seem so hard to bring about positive change? Prima facie, there are some clear reasons for the difficulty of advancing the educational agenda in higher education. In the contemporary world, there is strong and increasing competition for academics' time, energy and creativity. While it is commonly asserted that teaching and research are integrally linked, many academics experience a direct tension between these core scholarly functions in their day-to-day lives. The forms of research that most readily bring reputational and material reward - that is, work leading to countable outputs such as short articles in specialised journals - often have little bearing on effective undergraduate teaching. Moreover, in the last century or two, valorising research over teaching has become embedded in academic culture and identity. At the same time, 'teaching' in all its facets has become more difficult, with major changes in student intakes and contestation over the purposes of higher education. Teaching itself, therefore, requires more knowledge and effort. The regrettable dichotomising of teaching and research has the effect of forcing academics to make choices about what they give their time and scholarly effort to. In these circumstances, in view of the prevailing academic culture and reward system, it should not be surprising that it is hard to substantially improve the effectiveness of the educational process. In fact, it must be asked whether it is not unrealistic or naïve to expect any greater educational focus unless there is a compelling vision or need for change. In South Africa and other developing countries, this question does not necessarily suggest defeatism, since there is a compelling need for change. In this sense, the severity of the problems in higher education may serve to focus attention on the challenges. If an alternative vision is to be developed, however, there is clearly a need for the big issues confronting the sector to be delineated as sharply as possible – for the state and the public as well as the academic community – and for the tensions to be faced. This chapter is based on the contention that choices are continually being made within the sector that have critical implications for the nature and outcomes of the learning experience of the great majority of South African students. However, the choices are often implicit or unconscious, or based on a narrow view of what is at stake. To contribute to the debate, the chapter outlines an argument for the importance of improving the educational process in higher education , with particular reference to the first-year experience, as a basis for identifying and understanding the significance of some high-level choices that affect the role and contribution of the sector. It should be noted here that arguing for the importance of improving teaching and learning is not intended to imply that the universities’ responsibilities for knowledge production are somehow less significant – which is patently not eh case, particularly in emerging economies – but rather that it is in the country’s vital interest that a productive balance should be found.