The major stumbling blocks in the way of a truly articulated NQF

I was indeed honoured and privileged to be invited to the Second NQF Research Conference arranged by SAQA that took place from 4 to 6 March 2013 in Benoni. After all, Mentornet is just a tiny, insignificant private learning institution, so why should people listen to what we have to say? At the risk of never being invited to any SAQA conference again I will share with you what I regard as important challenges that need to be overcome before we can even dream of an articulated NQF.

Actually I like the term “articulated” even though it is probably not used correctly here. At least it is closer to what is achievable than “integrated” because an integrated NQF cannot be achieved as long as we have three separate sub-frameworks. Articulated implies “fit for purpose”, not “opening up learning pathways” which is what we are hoping to achieve. Then again, I am not a linguist, so let me rather escape from this one before I put my foot into it too far.

There are four major stumbling blocks in the way of a truly articulated NQF, namely the differences in curriculum format between the three sub-frameworks, lack of co-operation, the over-structured NQF and fear. The curriculum formats used by the CHE and Umalusi are sufficiently similar so that HE and VET learning programmes can be compared with relative ease. However, the QCTO format is so vastly different from the other two that comparison and determining overlap and equivalence would be almost impossible. The problem can be alleviated if only the CHE, Umalusi and the QCTO would communicate and co-operate, but this does not happen often enough. RPL is currently the flavour of the month, and success stories abound. But how can you realistically assess prior learning against an NQF that rests strongly on credits, notional hours, levels and very specific learning outcomes? Fourthly, we are sometimes so afraid of asking politically incorrect questions or making critical remarks that we actually miss the opportunity to make a constructive contribution. Progress is based on finding solutions and solutions can only be found if we face and acknowledge our deficiencies. Sadly people are more concerned with making the right noises than really tackling the challenges that we are facing, and as long as this is the case we will not achieve an articulated NQF.

In closing, if you really care about the future of the South African community and if you have any integrity you would also have the courage to speak out when you see that we are not on the right track, so let’s get serious about promoting and protecting the interests of our learners. Dr Hannes Nel, MD Mentornet