Picture Credit: Ian Landsberg/African News Agency (ANA) - It is unfair for universities to continue to offer academic programmes which will not be funded by NSFAS, says the writer.
By Hendrick Makaneta
The debate that the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) can no longer fund certain courses has caused great anxiety and uncertainty for many students across the country. However, it is important to contextualise this debate.
Recently, the Department of Basic Education indicated that it would introduce 38 new subjects in what the department calls a three-stream model. There is a growing consensus that the department must modernise the education system to ensure that pupils leave the system with certain skills that can help them to survive in a post-schooling environment.
The Department of Higher Education, Science and Innovation, on the other hand, is also actively involved in modernising its own academic programmes to improve them and in the process may faze out some of the courses offered in universities. As part of these changes, it is common cause that the financial aid scheme may also have to align its funding model to prioritise all the courses that will make a meaningful impact on the mainstream economy.
The key question that must be answered is whether NSFAS will be justified in excluding some of the courses that are deemed not to produce relevant skills in the 21st century. If not managed properly, the issue of financial exclusion of some students by NSFAS will create anxiety which may lead to student protests on campuses.
It is unfair for universities to continue to offer academic programmes which will not be funded by NSFAS. The least the institutions can do is to timeously inform society of the so-called legacy qualifications and discourage new entrants who are likely to be negatively affected by lack of funding. In the past two years, there was a lot of confusion because the legacy qualifications were not clarified.
Apparently, some universities enrolled students even though the students would suffer the consequences of being excluded by NSFAS. At the same time, NSFAS should get its house in order. We need proper mechanisms in place to allow students to prosper.
The fact that the scheme was put under administration at some point, coupled with several issues of corruption by students means that urgent steps need to be taken to safeguard the resources at its disposal. It cannot be correct that some needy students cannot access funding because of systems that fail to detect crimes committed by students against NSFAS.
It is a good thing the Special Investigating Unit is now looking at all the issues at NSFAS with a view to helping improve its efficiency and capacity to look after public funds. Corruption only robs students and denies them an opportunity to create a future for themselves.
One of the strategies that NSFAS can use is to constantly look for those past beneficiaries who have defaulted on their payments. Those who benefited from the scheme should also do the right thing and repay their loans. The next generation of students will rely on funding and support to get access and success in the higher education terrain.
Without more cash flow from graduates, the scheme may continue to experience shortfalls, particularly at the beginning of the year when the majority of students are expected to register. The private sector should be applauded for playing a role in various corporate social investments in the country.
The scheme should be expanded and given more support from the private sector so it can deal with the growing number of students, particularly those from poor communities. The issue of the “missing middle students” has not been addressed.
These are students who do not qualify for financial aid and loans that are offered by banks. Given the demand in the new world economy, it is only fair that NSFAS prioritises all the courses that will yield economic fruits. It does not make sense for the country to remain stagnant while the rest of the world continues to modernise.
Communication between the NSFAS and the department is important so students are always kept abreast. More importantly, the government should also look at the possibility of increasing the skills development levy by an additional 1% and ringfence such a percentage which can be used in the development of skills for our graduates.
Of course, the government alone will not win the war against the rising levels of unemployment related to a skills shortage in the economy. The private sector must also actively come on board to assist in the process of skilling and reskilling our graduates and give them support to contribute positively to the well-being of the country.
We all have a duty to help build an inclusive education system that will produce graduates with the capacity to take the country to new heights.
Makaneta is an education activist completing an LLB degree with the University of Pretoria.