The doctorate in SA: Trends, challenges and constraints Johann Mouton jm6@sun.ac.za SA PhD Regional Conference: Bloemfontein 25 February 2016
Thesis 1: Influence of policy imperatives The first thesis of this paper is that four policy imperatives intersect in current debates on the production of PhDs in South Africa. These imperatives, illustrated in the Figure overleaf, address the need for increased volumes of PhD output (quantity), transformation, efficiency, and quality. But our argument is not that these four imperatives are simply separate and parallel forces that have differential impact on doctoral production in SA. We argue that these imperatives are often at odds with each other, they co-exist - mostly in tension - and are even contradictory when taken together. The pursuit of quantity may, for example, impact negatively on the achievement of quality and even compromise efficiency. These imperatives operate in a complex (higher education) system of recursive causality (feedback loops) and emergent properties (different levels of impact).
Intersection of external pressures on doctorate production in SA
Thesis 2: The material reality The second thesis of the paper is that the policy imperatives referred to in thesis 1 are constrained by the reality of doctoral production in the country. Even though these imperatives may embody generally accepted values and ideals of good practice in doctoral production, they are also intrinsically limited by the deep structures of student and supervisors realities. These realities concern sociodemographic, field and institutional forces that constitute limiting conditions that at best constrain the achievement of these policy imperatives or at worst invalidate them.
Outline of presentation In the next section, we present data on the most recent trends in doctoral production in SA within the framework of the policy imperatives: Quantity: Trends in growth of doctoral enrolments and graduations (overall and by field) Efficiency: Completion rates of doctoral graduates Transformation: Trends in doctoral enrolments and graduations by race, gender and age Quality: Ratio s of doctoral students to doctorate staff This is followed by a brief discussion of the realities at different levels that constitute the limiting conditions within which these imperatives (have to) operate.
Part One: Trends in doctoral production in SA
Growth trends
The growth imperative Despite the absence of a coordinated policy focus, a strong emphasis on the production of more doctoral graduates has emerged in the post-2008 period. For a start, the Department of DST set initial targets for PhD production, as described in its Ten-Year Innovation Plan: To build a knowledge-based economy positioned between developed and developing countries, South Africa will need to increase its PhD production rate by a factor of about five over the next 10 20 years (DST 2008). In 2010, the ASSAf study proposed, amongst others, an escalation of the numbers of graduates, increased funding for full-time doctoral students, targeting specific institutions with capacity to produce more PhDs and advocating for public support amongst the public for a better understanding of the value of the PhD. The NDP 2030 echoes many of the ASSAf recommendations, but with much more specific targets, such as the aim of producing more than 100 doctoral graduates per one million of the population by 2030. This would translate into 5 000 per annum in 2030 (compared to the latest output of 2 051 in 2013).
Growth in PhD graduates in South Africa: 1920-2013 Source: Garbers (1960), DNO (1982), DoE (1999), DHET (2013)
Average annual growth rate of PhD graduates, for the period 1920 2012 Source: Garbers (1960), DNO (1982), DoE (1999), DHET (2013) 10
Average shares of the doctoral graduates in the various fields of study (1996-2012)
First conclusions The growth data show very clearly that the university system has responded positively to the imperative for increased growth in doctorates. This is especially true for the period since 2008 when the new DHET funding incentives kicked in. The disaggregation by field also shows that this growth has been achieved more prominently in the SET-fields: another imperative incorporated in the 1996 White Paper on Science and Technology
Efficiency: Trends in completion rates
The efficiency imperative The second discourse on doctoral production relates to the imperative of efficiency. Not surprisingly, the government wants high graduate returns on its subsidy investments in doctoral enrolments (as in other spheres of education). In debates around efficiency, high dropout and low completion rates are regarded as major indicators of inefficiency in the production of doctoral graduates. This led to the development of efficiency indicators and targets in the 2001 National Plan for Higher Education (Ministry of Education 2001). The work of the Centre of Higher Education Transformation (CHET) and the Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) contributed significantly to the efficiency indicators. However, targets set in the National Plan were unrealistically high: 75% of all students entering doctoral programmes in universities were expected to graduate. When empirical data gathered through the Higher Education Management Information System (HEMIS) began to show that only around 50% of national cohorts entering doctoral programmes would eventually graduate, the target was modified to 65%.
Progression and completion from masters to doctorate On average 16% of masters graduates in SA continue to enrol for a PhD within 5-years of completing their masters studies. Two in five of this 2001 cohort completed their doctoral studies within 7 years.
Progression and completion from masters to doctorate (disaggregation) The analysis by demographic variables shows that the progression rates of masters to doctoral students for the following sub-groups significantly exceeded the national average of 16%: Students in education (27.4%); Students in the natural sciences (26.2%) (Mainly those younger than 35 and older than 40); Indian students (20.3%); Coloured students (19.7%); Students older than 40 years (21.3%)
SA Doctoral completion rate (2001 cohort; n = 1877)
Summary of progress of 2006 intake of new doctoral students after 7 years, by university
International comparison of completion rates Completion rates
First conclusions If we take completion rate as the best measure of the efficiency of the HE system in producing doctoral graduates, the picture that we presented here is mixed. The average doctoral completion rate in South Africa over the past decade is just below 50%. At first glance, this does not compare favourably with other countries. However, it is important to keep in mind that 70% of SA doctoral students study part-time. Case-specific information shows that full-time doctoral students complete at much higher rates. The disaggregation by institution also presents a much differentiated picture with the completion rates of the top universities in the range between 55% and 65%. Finally, the disaggregation by demographics also show that certain subgroups (such as females, white and younger students) have higher completion rates.
Transformation trends
The transformation imperative The third policy discourse is around transformation. There have been many reviews of transformation or the lack thereof, but the most comprehensive theoretical and policy review was by Badat (2004). Starting with the National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) in 2000, Badat listed the main areas of transformation as system and structures, equity, quality and responsiveness. He subsequently reduced his focus to two key areas, being institutional restructuring and human resources. While equity could be regarded as involving a range of issues, including race, class and gender, in DHET policy terms, it increasingly refers to race, and to the participation of African students in particular.
SA Doctoral enrolments by race, 1996 to 2012 Source: DoE (1999) & DHET (2013) 23
Percentage of doctoral enrolments by gender (1996-2012)
SA Doctoral graduates by race (1996 2012)
African enrolments and graduates from South Africa and the rest of Africa (2000-2010)
On race, gender and nationality The data clearly show how comprehensive the transformation of the doctorate cohorts have been both as far as race and gender of doctoral students are concerned. But simply focusing on race without taking into consideration the nationality of students now especially from other African countries would lead to very misleading conclusions. In 2000, the number of SA-African enrolments (990) was almost double those of the rest of Africa (526), but by 2012 there were 750 more enrolments from the rest of Africa (3 717) than the SA-African (2 967) enrolments. And more surprising, the annual growth rate was almost twice as high for students from the rest of Africa (17.7% vs. 9.6% for SA-Africans). And the picture at the graduation level is no different. While the number of SA graduates increased by 78% post-2000, graduates from the rest of Africa increased by 644% and by 2012 they outnumbered the SA-African Africans by 496 to 325. All of this means that the huge growth in the number of African enrolments and graduates is mainly due to the influx of students from other African countries and not because we have managed to increase the participation rates of SA African students to acceptable levels (See overleaf).
Doctoral participation rates by year and subgroup Year SA African females SA African males Total White females White males 1996 South African graduates 10 48 58 219 368 587 2012 South African graduates 106 219 325 449 367 816 2012 Rest of Africa 134 362 496 Total 30 to 49 year old population - 1996 (x 1000) 3 333 3 606 6 939 634 658 1 292 30 to 49 year old population - 2012 (x 1000) 4 470 4 545 9 015 449 456 905 % increase for South Africans graduates - 2012 vs 1996 960% 356% 460% 105% 0% 39% % change in the 30 to 49 year age cohort 34% 26% 30% -29% -31% -30% 1996 graduates per 100 000 of the 30 to 49 year old population cohort 0.30 1.33 0.84 34.54 55.93 45.43 2012 graduates per 100 000 of the 30 to 49 year old population cohort 2.37 4.82 3.61 100.00 80.48 63.16
Quality trends
Against this background it is perhaps not surprising that one has to resort to a proxy measure of the quality of doctoral students. The measure that we have used is the proportion of supervising staff at SA universities with doctoral degrees. It can be argued that this measure constitutes a necessary condition only (and not a sufficient condition) to ensure high quality supervision. But in the absence of more than mere anecdotal evidence, we have decided to use this. The quality imperative The fourth discourse concerns the quality of doctoral production. The competition for talent and use of the PhD as a talent indicator clearly assume high quality. Although the 1996 NCHE report and the 1997 Education White Paper stated that quality throughout the system was important, neither document discussed methods by which the quality of doctoral programmes could be assessed. Despite the requirement for ministerial approval for programme and qualifications mixes (PQMs), very few of the doctoral programmes offered by South African higher education institutions have thus far undergone detailed quality reviews by the CHE. Instead, the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) accreditation model locates responsibility for higher education programme quality with the institutions themselves and proposed that institutions should maintain in-house quality assurance mechanisms.
Proportions of Academics with Doctorate Degrees (2005 2014)
Percentage of academic staff with doctorates by institution (2005-2014)
Nr of PhD graduates per Doctorate Staff Member, 2013
Increased proportion of academics with PhD: An attainable objective? The number of staff with PhD needed to achieve the 5 000 target can be calculated in the same way, by multiplying the current staff with the same factor of increase which shows that 17 946 academic staff members would be needed to produce the required number of doctoral studnets. This means that on average approximately 622 additional academic staff members with PhDs will be needed each year to maintain the current ratio of staff with PhDs and PhD students. From 2010 to 2011, there was an increase of 388 permanent academic staff members with PhDs and for 2011 to 2012 the increase was 388. Roughly about 400 academic staff members have thus been added to the academic staff complement of universities. These number are below the required rate and very importantly - do not take into account normal attrition of academic staff which will happen due to retirement, emigration and other factors.
Challenges and constraints
Why the current imperatives and goals are unlikely to be achieved Our final argument is that there are deep demographic, institutional and systemic realities that make it unlikely that the imperatives discussed above will be achieved or at least achieved in concert. We will discuss each thesis briefly: The demographics of SA doctorate mitigate against easy solutions to achieving current growth and efficiency targets. The hugely skewed institutional differentiated landscape (with a disproportionate burden on the top universities) already suggest that we are at the limits of our (current) capacity to supervise more doctoral students. The systemic realities mostly the lack of sufficient funding for doctoral studies pose a serious constraint to the achievement of continued growth and improved completion rates.
Demographic constraints: Age profiles of doctoral enrolments in 2013 Doctorate Students (2013) Age demographics Entrant New Entrant 37.4 Returning Entrant 39.6 Black 39.3 Race Coloured 39.5 Indian 37.8 White 38.7 Gender Male 39.2 Female 38.6 South African 39.2 Nationality Rest of Africa 38.4 Rest of the World 38.6 Business, Economics & Management Sciences 40.1 Education 45.4 Science Domain Engineering 35.5 Health Sciences 40.6 Humanities & Social Sciences 40.8 Natural Sciences 34.5
Demographic realities The previous slide points to a major constraint to achieving improved growth and efficiency gains the fact that the average age of a doctoral student in SA at enrolment is 39. Given that the average doctoral student takes about 4.5 years to complete his or her doctoral studies, this means that the average age of a doctoral graduate is in the early fourties. But it is not merely the age of the student that we are concerned with but more specifically the implied study trajectory of this reality. I have elsewhere spoken about the devastating effects that an interrupted study trajectory has on the readiness and levels of preparedness of students to cope with doctoral studies (and the obvious consequences for quality). This is a clear consequence of the fact that approximately 60% of South African doctoral students study part-time: the study while they work.
Institutional constraints: A skewed productive capability (1996 2012) 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 Col % Universities Fort Hare 1 27 30 216 284 2.0% Limpopo 36 76 143 136 189 1.4% Western Cape 132 170 304 386 603 4.3% North West 247 327 615 758 1 048 7.5% Rhodes 130 181 216 245 420 3.0% KwaZulu-Natal 517 684 1 115 1 095 1 626 11.6% Stellenbosch 529 708 780 880 1 308 9.4% Witwatersrand 574 605 643 988 1 424 10.2% Cape Town 571 698 898 1 030 1 328 9.5% Pretoria 848 1 143 1 597 1 458 1 860 13.3% Free State 339 429 520 580 531 3.8% Universities 3 924 5 048 6 861 7 772 10 621 76.1% Comprehensives 1 190 1 195 1 973 1 835 2 638 18.9% Universities of Technology 38 111 270 387 706 5.1%
Total number of doctoral graduates per institution (2014) Institution PhD graduates Cum total Cum % UNISA 268 268 11.9% UKZN 264 532 23.6% UP 237 769 34.1% SU 234 1003 44.4% UCT 204 1207 53.5% WITS 199 1406 62.3% NWU 171 1577 69.8% UJ 106 1683 74.5% UWC 104 1787 79.1% UFS 104 1891 83.7% RU 76 1967 87.1% NMMU 72 2039 90.3% UFH 66 2105 93.2% TUT 46 2151 95.3% UZ 25 2176 96.4% UL 25 2201 97.5% DUT 18 2219 98.3% CPUT 17 2236 99.0% CUT 12 2248 99.6% WSU 8 2256 99.9% UV 1 2257 100.0% VUT 1 2258 100.0%
Why do students consider discontinuing their studies? Top 3 reasons by race, per degree level HONOURS African/ Coloured/ Indian White Challenges to cope with study demands 61% 50% Challenges to find sufficient time for studies 59% 47% Financial challenges 52% 36% MASTERS Financial challenges 56% 36% Challenges to find sufficient time for studies 49% 48% Lack of sufficient academic supervision 44% 36% DOCTORAL Financial challenges 66% 39% Challenges in my personal/family/social life 52% 36% Challenges to find sufficient time for studies 44% 46% Uncertainty about career aspirations (32%) 36%
What are students primary source(s) of financial support for their studies? Top 3 sources by race, per degree level HONOURS African/ Coloured/ Indian White Family earnings or savings (incl. those of partner) 41% 70% Other scholarship/bursary (not NRF) 33% 30% Personal earnings/savings 31% 37% MASTERS Personal earnings/savings 38% 47% Other scholarship/bursary (not NRF) 31% 41% Family earnings or savings (incl. those of partner) 23% 34% Employer reimbursement/assistance 23% (18%) DOCTORAL Other scholarship/bursary (not NRF) 42% 49% Personal earnings/savings 34% 42% NRF scholarship 33% 46%
Concluding observations
High Level Findings 1. Financial challenges constitutes the single biggest obstacle to producing more post-graduate students in South Africa 2. Financial challenges are more prevalent for black students at all levels in the system 3. Low progression and retention rates are mainly due to part-time nature of studies (which is related to the lack of funding for full-time studies) 4. Students in the natural sciences (where larger proportions study full-time) have significantly higher progression and completion rates. 5. Various factors influence student choice about continuation and discontinuation of studies but the main reason (again) is availability of funding followed by family considerations. Choice of university and degree programme at all levels is mostly informed by academic reputation and quality considerations (as well as employability factors).
Final conclusions (1) It is possible that recent growth rates will be sustained in the near future but this will only be achieved if enrolments from other African countries continue to increase. It is unlikely that current completion rates (which effectively means that 1 in 2 doctoral students are likely to complete within a reasonable time period) will improve unless significantly higher proportions of students manage to study full-time. But this condition is so deeply entrenched in the socio-economic and employment realities of the country, that we cannot see this changing. The challenge of increasing the proportion of academic staff with PhD s remains. We anticipate that this proportion is likely to increase but not significantly so.
Final conclusions (2) All of this means that the target of reaching 5 000 PhD s by 2030 can only be met under very stringent conditions, e.g. continued growth in academic capacity, increase in number of universities where more than 55% of staff have doctorates and very importantly increased efficiency in supervision rates. The latter is most likely under a scenario where we have increasing numbers of doctoral students starting much earlier with their doctoral studies and studying full-time. And very importantly: the burden of supervision on the top 10 12 universities that are already producing 90% of total doctoral output will continue to increase. Students will continue to flock to the top universities who have better completion rates and more resources. The already very skewed HE system as reflected in research production is likely to continue as is and may even become more skewed in overall knowledge production.
Thank you