We can only stand together, support one another and share information. We all have concerns, battle with communication, getting answers……….. let’s assist and drive quality education!
The future of Setas beyond the 31 March 2018?
17th Nov 2016 at 9:43 am #25199
Dear Skills Universe Members. Various concerns and questions have been posed regarding the license expiry date of Setas which clearly indicates March 2018. Herewith a summary that I have compiled for you from the Proposed Landscape – NSLP 2015.
It is clear that the Setas are NOT going anywhere, however there will be major restructuring starting very soon. The Setas will change from Seta to SetaB! What does that mean? Why are there changes? Herewith the reasons:
Various issues have been unacceptable by DHET which includes:
- Problems with the day-to-day Operations of Setas persist
- Setas have failed to meet annual targets
- Setas have failed to disburse the levies collected, meaning that training which could have occurred, did NOT
- All Setas have developed their own application and disbursement procedures, which differ on issues such as: what is funded, length of process, timing and methods of advertising application opportunities, payment of tranches, monitoring and verification of reporting requirements
- Different administrative procedures – difficult to comply with all the Setas
- Malpractices which have continued to “dog” too many Setas since inception
- Staff and Boards which are highly uneven and in some cases have risen to levels which are unacceptably high
- Uneven efficiency of grant processing in many cases and the incidences of corruption and fraud that continued to plague certain SETAs
- Providers are finding it difficult to establish a coherent vehicle for securing workplace based learning opportunities for learners – Continues
- Capacity problems exist in the Setas (historical and even today still)
So what do we need and want?
- Confusion must come to an end.
- A single, streamlined system must be instituted for all Setas.
- Common application procedures,
- Common set of requirements for different categories of grants,
- Common set of timeframes and deadlines for all to easily understand.
- Standardisation must go beyond timeframes and procedures!
So what does this document tell us about Setas?
- The SETAs as we know them, will be replaced by SETABs (Sector Education and Training Advisory Boards) – no more Authorities
- Continue to build relationships developed by SETAs with employers in their sectors
- Better understand of training needs in and for workplaces
- Engage with DHET through the NSF to propose plans for their sectors in order for the NSF to allocate funds to the SETABs, ensuring education and training interventions and programmes take place to address scarce and critical skills
How will the SetaBs be clustered?
- SETAs will be replaced by SETABs (Sector Education and Training Advisory Boards)
- SETABs will become permanent structures (no more 5-year terms/licenses)
What other changes are going to happen?
- What is going to happen to the CEOs? Well, with the new SETABs to be established in April 2018, the CEO titles will be changed to Director.
- The SETABs will determine the skills needs of employers
- The SETABs will secure workplace-based learning opportunities for learners
- The SETABs will support institutional and workplace-based learning of the current workforce
- The SETABs will support education and training institutions to meet skills needs
- The SETABs will support, system support functions and manage the budgets linked to their mandate
- SETABs will be submitting information to DHET, whereby they will need to comply with templates and methodologies that are determined centrally by DHET.
- It is proposed that the QCTO will take over the Quality Assurance (the old ETQA functions) continue to monitor SETABs
- Standard procedures for the application of grants will be developed and Online applications will also be implemented!
- The current target date that the NSF will take control of the Levies is currently April 2018
- Pivotal Grants will be carefully designed to complement the allocation criteria of voted funds, which will primarily focus on theoretical and practical learning at public education and training providers
Yes, there are various questions regarding the changes, and some additional changes will occur, as the process is implemented and the re-structuring commence.
The importance of this document gives light to the proposed changes, and we need to make note, that there could be additional changes. The upcoming NSDS IV will also be a very interesting strategy with information that we are waiting for.
This gives a very good indication that Providers will continue with their training, they will fall under the SETABs. It is important that you continue in your quality training, get ready for the changes, as standardisation is going to be implemented, which we have been waiting for, for more than a decade! As and when additional information is publish, we wil share and keep each other informed.
Note: The QCTO is very important, and we need to continue building a good relationship with the QCTO team and the current Setas to ensure quality education! When addressing concerns and issues: this will just benefit everybody to ensure that possible future issues can be avoided!
17th Nov 2016 at 10:44 am #25241
17th Nov 2016 at 10:48 am #25240
17th Nov 2016 at 10:49 am #25239
Xolani, you are so welcome and I am glad that this makes more sense. I also read it a couple of times, until I took every highlighter in my house, and started colouring the picture – and there was light for me. I understood it. And so my understanding had to be shared! This is going to be so interesting as the implementation starts running! Oh, I won’t run for presidency ever, but thank you for your vote!
17th Nov 2016 at 10:51 am #25238
17th Nov 2016 at 11:32 am #25237
Very good research, Lynel. However, I don’t think the new system will work. The major flaws in the current system are not addressed at all, such as corruption, inability to provide a professional service, lack of efficiency, lack of open communication and way too little capacity. The only system that can work would be if we scrap the levy obligation entirely and replace it with a tax incentive for employers who invest money in the development of their staff.
17th Nov 2016 at 12:03 pm #25236
Hi Dr Nel, nice to see you back on skills universe, we miss your discussions! May I agree to disagree with you? But before I do that, thank you so much for your kind words, I am going to frame it! The major flaws in the current system are actually addressed and acknowledged by DHET in this proposal. The information pointing out why the structure is going to change, is given in black and white. DHET is in the process of getting all the Setas standardised, to stop all the historical inabilities, poor performance, corruption, fraud ect. Instead of each Seta doing their own thing, making up stipulations and creating a complete administration nightmare for Providers, Employers and Learners and in the same breath delaying the process of achieved qualifications and skills programmes with their lack of capacity and inconsistancies – this is coming to an end. One of the big problems seen in this document is the Levies!
To stop corruption and fraud, the levies will change and the NSF will take control of the levies – the current target date for implementation is April 2018. The Setas will not be in control of these massive funds anymore. What makes this very significant, is the fact that it is proposed that Employers will not be restricted to claiming grants linked to their levy contribution post 2018! As a matter of fact, if they contribute to national targets they will be entitled to claim more than what they contributed! I think this will motivate Employers to prioritise training for sure!
I am not sure if you are going to respond to my comments now, however, I always enjoy reading your comments and discussions. Thank you for all your contributions thus far Dr Nel, it is always great to see experts like you “popping” in and gving us feedback!
17th Nov 2016 at 12:45 pm #25235
17th Nov 2016 at 12:52 pm #25234
You are most welcome Petra! I understand what you are saying, and know that many other providers are worried, the same as you. What I do recommend is that we all keep current with the changes, and share with each other as we notice them being implemented. Change is not always accepted or liked, however it seems that the proposed changes are really there for the better. We need to embrace this, learn new things as we go along, engage with the Setas (soon to be SetaBs), work with the QCTO and continue building a skilled nation. We have to make sure that our quality in service delivery continue to be of “best practice” standards and that we adhere to the new stipulations, rules and regulations to secure our future.
17th Nov 2016 at 1:27 pm #25233
Can’t help to share Hannes’ concerns. I will be convinced of improvement possibilities once I see the fruits of healthy governance implemented. I have seen too much going downhill for too long now.
I read the recommendations of the LMIP Skills Supply and Demand Report by HSRC today and I am seriously concerned that so much responsibility is put on SETAs to correct the imbalances.
Let me state for the record that I am in general optimistic and innovative and by no means negative about progress of the state of the nation, so please don’t label me as such. On the contrary, I am practical, realistic and always ready to go to plan B.
I stick to my concerns about the SETAs.
17th Nov 2016 at 1:41 pm #25232
17th Nov 2016 at 1:43 pm #25231
Hi Zerelde, yes Dr Nel has a point indeed. You have every right to be, and yes it has been going down hill with speed (if I may add). I will also be reading the LMIP Skills Supply and Demand Report by HSRC – but before I do, I will collect all the highlighters in my house again, and do the colouring bit to understand the report better.
The Setas are not going to sit and do nothing, that is very clear. But before the changes that will be implemented, the report indicates that the individuals will be trained accordingly (nice – because we have been discussing this for years, that the SETA staff needs to be up-skilled accordingly), and with the re-structuring and clusters, the capacity to deliver will be monitored by the QCTO and by DHET. This gives me the understanding that the manner in which the Setas have been running, is not acceptable. DHET and the QCTO will have such a big role to ensure that the new landscape and proposed way forward will not fail again.
No one will label you (not sure if I have been labelled – but I welcome it with open arms. I am always open for self-improvement! Note to self: What label will I be linked to?
You may stick to your concerns for sure, and what is great, is that you are practical, realistic and ready! It is going to be a very interesting journey that we will be part of, and hopefully the changes that will be implemented will start giving everybody hope!
17th Nov 2016 at 1:52 pm #25230
Petra, don’t worry! We are all here to share information, you will not be left behind. Whether you are a newbie or not, we learn and share information everyday. You are in the right place to get information! We are all here for the same reason, share, share, share! We will look after you Petra!
17th Nov 2016 at 2:03 pm #25229
17th Nov 2016 at 2:11 pm #25228
Hey Petra, I can confirm with you, that this is why I signed up too! (Don’t tell anyone), but if it wasn’t for skills universe and the members that contribute on important issues, I would have been left behind long ago! I am greatful for this portal and for the special individuals that have taken time to make this work.
17th Nov 2016 at 2:13 pm #25227
A nice report Lynel and well set out.
Much of what you are saying was contained in the proposals related to the future of the SETA’s, my question would be – how much is now fact?
I cannot see these changes making any difference as it is just another way of extending the life of something that has failed miserably – with a few exceptions.
Will employers be happy with a change to the levy structure? – I think not. Like Zelda I am not against change or am I afraid of change but change must be realistic and practical. I too am trying to be practical, realistic and ready to go to anything that works for the good of the beneficiaries – the historically disadvantaged learners.
17th Nov 2016 at 2:18 pm #25226
At the dawn of democracy many naysayers packed their bags and went overseas as they assumed the worst about this country in general. Many of them came back with their tails between their legs during the financial crisis of 2008. The Western countries are no better than us here as far as governance is concerned. They are just as corrupt! I don’t support our corruption which is no doubt a scourge but I am generally positive about this country and its systems.
There are men and women who are about upholding the law – Thuli Madonsela comes to mind as well as many others. The recent report about improvements on the financial management of many provinces, state department’s and SOE gives me hope. Yes the SETA’s are a disgrace but not all of them! The press is free in this country so is the judiciary which is strong and independent. This gives me hope. The fact that Americans elected a well known misogynist, a bigot and a racist last week and the Brits chose to leave the European Union gives me hope that we are not the only messed up people in the world! We have problems but we will overcome. The new system will work but like any other system it will have its challenges. This is my two cents worth.
17th Nov 2016 at 2:19 pm #25225
Hi Lynel, your summary is extremely well written. It is succinct and highlights the major changes very well. Have these interventions been finalised or are they still in the discussion phase yet to be announced? If all responsibility lies hereon with the DHET for applications and disbursements of funds do you perhaps know when the Skills Development Act will be amended again? Is there still a role for the NSA?
17th Nov 2016 at 2:27 pm #25224
Thank you Des, appreciated. Everything that I have recorded is from the NSLP – 2015, that was published in the Government Gazette No 1088. The first implementation will comence no later than April 2017. The implementation that the NSLP report refers to is the standardisation. We are well aware that the QCTO have monitors at all the Setas, so things are happening (we just don’t see what is happening in the background).
We hope that this structure will be streamlined, monitored, evaluated and reviewed continuesly in order to not fail. The Employers will continue paying their levies as per normal to SARS, the difference in the process will be that SARS will distribute the funds to the NSF, whereby they will control the funds. And the proposal that Employers will be able to get more back than what they contributed, should give them motivation to increase training (this is important for the Providers). It is clear, that Providers will have a future, but if Employers don’t buy-in, then we will be doomed. I fully agree with you Des, I am also ready for the changes and embrace good decisions that will benefit and redress the past.
17th Nov 2016 at 2:33 pm #25223
Xolani, I like your two cents! You are right, and thank you for your contribution to this discussion, I really appreciate it. Every country has their problems, but no country have skills universe and members so passionate about education and upskilling learners! We will move into a positive direction, and yes we face challenges, but we will face them together! I agree with you that DHET and the QCTO will have challenges. All we can do to ensure that this will work, is that we contribute to quality education and engage with QCTO and DHET. We can make a difference together.
17th Nov 2016 at 2:42 pm #25222
17th Nov 2016 at 2:45 pm #25221
Dr Rooksana, thank you so much. I am absolutely honoured by your comment, thank you. I do hope that members can actually see how major these changes are – this doesn’t happen overnight, and a lot of thought and discussions was done to get to this point in South Africa. I don’t believe that the interventions have been finalised as yet and yes, there are various discussions currently (continuesly), and the final input on all these changes will be gazetted (not yet, to my knowledge). I unfortunately cannot give comment on the SDA as yet, but what I have done thus far is started to engage with DHET. I wanted to know when the new NSDS IV will be published, and I forwarded gaps identified in the proposal (although a bit late). The response from DHET was favourable and they advised that the Task Team is currently busy updating the proposal. DHET is also currently consulting with the social partners on the draft Strategy before it will be issued for public comments – here we need to act fast, read through it and submit our feedback. I do believe that many of our questions will be clearly recorded in the NSDS. I am sorry that I could not answer all your questions, however, if there are any member that can share additional information, please do so!
17th Nov 2016 at 3:30 pm #25220
Thank you. I absolutely agree with you on everything you say. I would add – never underestimate the power of South Africans – we are a tough, strong, resourceful, and resilient nation. All groups have individuals that shame them, and your key words: “not all of them” applies not only to SETAs.
17th Nov 2016 at 4:28 pm #25219
17th Nov 2016 at 6:01 pm #25218
17th Nov 2016 at 6:05 pm #25217
17th Nov 2016 at 6:10 pm #25216
17th Nov 2016 at 6:21 pm #25215
No problem Sylvia! I was at first a bit hesitant to post, but then I remembered that I did say that I will post a summary, so I pressed the submit button. I am sure there are various questions that will come through, and I will try my best to answer them (some answers I won’t have, but will try to find out).
17th Nov 2016 at 7:17 pm #25214
17th Nov 2016 at 7:22 pm #25213
Fiona de Beer NelParticipant
May I ask if you have an idea how the following will be implemented
“The SETABs will secure workplace-based learning opportunities for learners”
I hope I understand it correctly in terms that this is the workplace placement? I am from the North West and to find workplaces here that is open to take in learners is very difficult, so I would like to know how the SETAB will establish this.
If I misunderstand what this point means, apologies
17th Nov 2016 at 7:32 pm #25212
17th Nov 2016 at 7:58 pm #25211
17th Nov 2016 at 8:02 pm #25210
Fiona and Sylvia, this issue is most important, and a lot of thought must be put in as to how this will be implemented and to get buy-in from Employers. This issue is unfortunately nationwide, and as Sylvia has stated an international issue. Somehow there must be a plan of action, but I have not seen this yet. Most interesting!
17th Nov 2016 at 8:12 pm #25209
17th Nov 2016 at 9:13 pm #25208
Fiona de Beer NelParticipant
Is this not causing a barrier to learning? Should some or other plan not be made in this regards, because how can we stop learning due to a lack of workplaces that won’t accommodate the cause.
I was directly told by the employer that this learners will only delay their deadlines and they don’t have time to train people.
Would it be possible or sufficient to use simulations / roleplay / case studies as a replacement in this regards.
Another workplace has indicated that the learners are not reliable. In this sense I agree, because if you look at the drop-out rates from learnerships, how can the workplace depend on these students. But yes at the same time there is the active student that wants to do well.
18th Nov 2016 at 5:47 am #25207
Hi Fiona, I fully understand where you are coming from. Emloyers do feel that they are loosing time and money by opening there workplace for learners. A replacement component for the workplace area should be explored, as there must be another way in getting the practical workplace component other than begging Employers to give learners the opportunity to complete “logbooks”. A simulated working environment? Maybe you are on to something here. We know that the workplace component is a problem, that’s reality. Now, in training there is always methods and “plan B”, surely suggestions must be looked at to cover the workplace in another way. Any solutions ?
18th Nov 2016 at 10:18 am #25206
Hi Lynel, I too think that we are still in the planning phase with no confirmation as yet. However, it is imperative that as providers we understand what the thinking, planning and implications are before interventions are finalised and upon us!. So thank you for starting this discussion. It certainly reaches a very wide audience. Of concern obviously is that the NSDS IV, taking the White Paper for Post School Education and Training into consideration, will once again focus mainly on funding public institutions. With the fees must fall campaign and the dire need for upliftment of our TVET system that is very understandable. However, what happened to workers, redress and transformation in the workplace? Can our public institutions manage their current responsibilities AND employee development without the participation of private ETD providers? Will the NSF consider the role that skills development providers play when funds are allocated? I sincerely hope that these aspects will be taken into consideration when finalising the NSDS IV. That SETA systems need to be streamlined, it is about time!
Please keep up the good work and keep us informed. Thank you.
18th Nov 2016 at 11:18 am #25205
Thank you Dr Rooksana, for this input and valuable comments. The concerns raised are very important and should be addressed once the NSDS IV comes out for comment. This time around, I recommend that we carefully go through this document once published, and ensure that we address issues and concerns which is not clearly stated or clarified. The main problem we are facing currently is the lack of information and tight deadlines for input to ensure that we cover all the aspects. It is important that we include the redress and transformation in the workplace. If we work together on this submission, most of the concerns will be addressed. It can however not be done by one or two individuals, as our expertise are in different fields – but a collection of this knowledge and experience will go a long way! We will continue to seek information, be current and on top of our game, to ensure that we can make a positive difference and an important change in quality education.
18th Nov 2016 at 2:11 pm #25204
Hi all. I have quite some experience with international courses. In those cases it is difficult to actually get workplace practice because different people from different countries participate. So yes we do use case studies, simulations and role plays. They need to be properly developed to be useful. But it can be done. My preference is a combination of the three which can be done as part of the classroom (of course that would require half a day or a day extra in the classroom). I have developed a few ages ago. Case studies that include role play are obviously based on real life situations. I remember participating in a course that used a simulated integrated development project in a simulated country. All theoretical issues were practised through that project. And simulation, role plays and case studies are accepted assessment methods so why not. As long as it is realistic. And it may need a bit more effort from the assessment designer/developer.
18th Nov 2016 at 3:52 pm #25203
Thanks very much for the summary Lynel. Is it possible to post the full document to the portal?
Not having read through the Proposed Landscape – NSLP 2015 and from your summary, I would really like to hear from others as to where in this landscape are the Professional Bodies and should they not be instrumental in determining skills needs of employers within their own industries as well as educational standard setting and facilitate quality assurances within their workplaces?
I also ask how the SETABs will secure workplace based learning? Whilst I firmly believe it is core to occupational learning and should be seen by employers as a necessity it is not always the case. Once again possibly Professional Bodies and industry would be closer to this than SETAs?
18th Nov 2016 at 4:51 pm #25202
I have collated the links in one place in the Post-school E & T group. This has the links to the presentation and the gazette.
This link is not uploading properly for some reason – please just copy and post into the URL field.
21st Nov 2016 at 12:16 pm #25201
22nd Nov 2016 at 10:48 am #25200
I was thinking the same thing . . . all i see is really more shake-up and hence more confusion for the poor man-on-the-street – with further delays from clients who will need to understand the new structure – and further delays from the new structures as they find their feet and more than likely face exactly the same issues you outline – of inefficiences and under-resourcing etc.
I remember the huge excitement when we went from training boards to setas – with exactly the same expressed hopes.
I would be interested in your views around a workable system for provider/provision quality control Dr Nel?
30th May 2018 at 11:56 am #66482
30th May 2018 at 3:32 pm #66490
30th May 2018 at 8:29 pm #66491
4th Jun 2018 at 2:36 pm #66540
14th Jun 2018 at 9:23 am #66679
Hi all, Can someone who is closer to the rock face please update me regarding the intention to dispense with single Unit Standards and only allow registration of Skills Programmes, Learnerships of full qualifications?
I find it difficult to understand the rationale behind this stated intention, given the fact that certain Unit Standards, ie. Assessor and Moderator, form an integral part of all Assessment, Moderation and Appeals policies of all training providers and ETQAs. In fact, these qualifications are entrenched in law as well, i.e the Government Gazette which dictates how training in the materials handling industry should be conducted.
In my opinion, this is a bit of overkill. By implication, all future Assessors and Moderators will have to subject themselves to a Skills Programme, Learnership or full qualification like a Certificate in ODETDP in order to fulfill the function of an Assessor? To extrapolate further, must a baggage handler at an airport become a pilot in order to fulfill their daily functions? Must a nurse who changes bedpans become a medical doctor to fulfill his/her daily functions? I am aware that these are extreme examples, but the underlying argument remains the same.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.