The context of the issue under discussion is two-fold. On the one hand, there is the immediate context which refers to the manifestations of the problem at the doorstep of the university. This is the primary context to which student support is often directed. On the other, there is a broader context of historical imbalances, manifesting in glaring social inequality as observed in the Green Paper on Post- School Education (DHET 2012), which continue to dog South Africa twenty years into a democracy and of which the manifestations in the immediate context are a by-product. The discussion is divided into four sub-headings.
Bread and butter issues
Higher education institutions are faced with the unenviable task of having to respond to challenges whose origins lie beyond the parameter of the institution, in yesteryear’s socio-economic baggage. The problem manifests in various ways at the doorstep of the institution, often with no prospect of a solution. Even what appear to be solutions only amount to ad hoc steps which in some cases lead to new problems.
Some manifestations take the form of ‘bread and butter’ issues. These are summed up in the following excerpt from another context:
It is no longer shocking when the Dean of Students receives reports about a student or two who regularly spend their nights in the
Towards an asset-based model of support
131
university’s ablutions block or under the shelter of a local train station or at the local filling station. If that is not the case, the Dean of Students’ office is inundated with calls from concerned people about students who turn up in class ‘looking weak’ as a result of hunger or one or two who miss their classes because they are unable to deal with the pangs of hunger. Many students complain about the distance they travel between home and the institution which causes them to only sleep for three to four hours before they board the earliest train or bus or taxi back to campus to attend the following day’s classes.
Others request the Dean of Students’ intervention in cases where they were unable to present themselves for their semester tests due to inability to find a taxi fare for the day. An occasional cry for assistance with books, photocopy money and accommodation is not foreign to the office of the Dean of Students either (Speckman 2011, Notes for the Senior Management Beraad)9.
The above list describes the experience of students from disadvantaged backgrounds in a number of institutions, whether affluent or economically struggling. Each of the challenges, no matter how insignificant they might appear to be, distracts a student’s attention from the academic business at best, while at worst, they become a stumbling block to an individual’s success. In a different context (Speckman 2006) I have alluded to ‘pearls hidden in poverty’. This primarily refers to individuals whose development is negatively impacted by unfavourable socio- economic conditions.
Access and retention
Institutions react to material needs because of the widely held perception that mediocre performance and attrition are its direct consequences. The question of access may be positively ascribed to a lack of finances. However, attrition is not as straightforward. Recent limited studies10 have neither confirmed nor disproved the theory that a lack of finances is solely responsible for attrition although there is a propensity towards questioning it. A study by du Plessis et al. (2008) at the University of Pretoria for example, managed to trace 63 per cent of the students who cancelled their studies in 2008. These were drawn from all racial groups and across faculties. Of the four reasons advanced for attrition, those related to material needs only accounted for 7.2 per cent of the total number of students surveyed (Du Plessis et al. 2008: 1). A huge percentage (61.9 per cent) advanced career choice or study direction as the major reason for cancelling their studies.
The University of Pretoria had arguably one of the best counseling divisions in the world11 which had assisted a number of would-be drop outs to stay on course.
However, the study has revealed that 69 per cent of the students who cancelled their studies did not make use of the Student Support Division at the University of Pretoria (Du Plessis et al. 2008: 2). It would appear that this, more than the lack of material support, could have aggravated the situation.
In a different study conducted on behalf of the Kellogg Foundation (2006- 2007), Ludeman has confirmed the negative impact of socio-economic conditions on academic performance (HESA, NASPA presentation 2008). However, the reasons cited in his study range from home language, distance from home, age, finance, etc. Ludeman (April 2013) confirmed by means of an email to me that the ‘socio-economic background was cited as one of the causes (my emphasis) of attrition’. This corroborates du Plessis’ conclusions.
The above findings are corroborated by another independent study (Focus March 2013). It is not clear where the study of the Helen Suzman Foundation was conducted and what methodology was utilized. However, its conclusions come close to the conclusion reached by the former two researchers. The study found that there were factors other than economic conditions which determined whether the student stayed on or terminated their studies. These included inter alia, the culture of the institution, a choice of study direction (as hinted at in du Plessis’ findings), etc. According to the Foundation’s report (Focus March 2013), students try to deal with their reality by either finding part-time work or they cancel their studies.
Although in the North American and New Zealand sense attrition is used in the context of discharging oneself permanently from an obligation (Concise Oxford Dictionary), for example, a job, the popular view is the military sense. The latter refers to the strategy of wearing out the enemy through acts of attrition, for example systematically bombing strategic positions and key installations before confronting the already demoralised enemy with ground battalions. If it is part of the military strategy to pound the enemy until its energy and capability are worn out, the unfavourable socio-economic conditions as described in the above excerpt, are thought to have had the same effect on the disadvantaged over the years. This might be a reflection of the experiences of some who were confronted with severe socio-economic conditions. Conventional wisdom is that ‘all’ black students are descendants of the victims of apartheid and that they are still reeling from the
‘acts of attrition’ resulting from the apartheid policies. I do not necessarily agree.
Mention of the extreme end of attrition is also germane to an analysis of the immediate context of student material support. While normally, attrition refers to a self-discharge from the system before completion of studies, the extreme end of
Towards an asset-based model of support
133
it is that non-performers entrench themselves in the system and stay much longer than they should. The ‘trickling in’ of support from schemes such as NSFAS seems to result in a ‘trickling in’ of learning. This dilutes the quality and impacts the value of the degree and access for prospective students.
Learning institutions can never completely ignore the issues of material support although to date, no sustainable or effective solution has been found. Nor is there any overwhelming scientific evidence of a direct link between attrition and economic conditions. Evidence shows that attrition cuts across the economic divide.
Social stagnation
Experience in black communities shows that before the 1990s, it was predominantly children whose parents had the means, who were able to attend university and complete their studies. Yet most students who did not complete their studies in Historically Black Institutions were those expelled for either their political activism or on academic grounds. Very few cancelled their studies due to financial challenges. This situation changed in the mid-1990s, particularly after the creation of a single department of higher education. Students from different backgrounds were suddenly able to study wherever they wished to study, regardless of affordability. However, an intergenerational cycle of poverty constantly placed every new-born child in the category of the indigent with limited economic prospects unless its parents fell in the category of the privileged.
In a different context I alluded to some ‘landing on purple cloth at birth while others landed on rags’ (Speckman 2009)12. Others refer to the former as being
‘born with a silver spoon in the mouth’. I went on to argue that the rags they land on tend to follow them throughout their lives even as they attempt to climb the social ladder, as if South Africa subscribes to a caste system. In other words, for a few, there might be upward social mobility while for the majority there is social stagnation. Although opportunities are now being opened up, the historical backlog continually abides with them. Clearly, the solution cannot only be brought about by a focus on material needs. There will never be enough to go around while other vistas could be opened up through a different model of intervention.
Extended family needs
It has become commonplace that the problem begins much earlier and is broader than the demands of the higher education context. For instance, according to recent statistics, of the number of children who register in Grade 1, only 60 per cent of the total number reach Grade 12 (National School Monitor May 2012).
There are a myriad of reasons for this, including a family background that is characterised by illiteracy. For example, there are two categories of needy students
in every institution of higher learning - those who perform academically and are eligible for NSFAS funding and merit bursaries, and others who struggle both academically and financially. The latter are in a ‘chicken and egg’ situation for they cannot qualify for NSFAS funding until their academic performance improves13. Yet their academic performance will not improve unless their socio-economic conditions change for the better.
A number of students in this category find it difficult to cope with having to study while their siblings and other family members are starving. The financial aid given to those who pass the means test is often not enough, while others do not at all have the benefit of financial aid. Curiously, there is little variance in the degree of suffering experienced by the respective two categories. This contradicts the assumption that students with academic potential have a better chance of doing well in their studies since they are primarily supported by the NSFAS (Van der Berg 2013). These students often find themselves in the same situation as the non-funded students, the reason being that their concerns are not only of a financial nature although their use of the funds allocated to them to support their families might be misleading in this regard14. Thus, as Tinto found in the American context, their door to higher education is ‘only partially open’ (Tinto 2008: 1) in that they have no other non-monetary support, therefore, no real opportunity despite access being granted. Hence in some cases, access becomes a revolving door (Tinto 2008). Students gain access but soon find themselves out due to lack of non-monetary but crucial support.
The above context confirms the need. Although it would seem that socio- economic conditions are the source of most of the above challenges, it would be erroneous to regard funding as a quick-fix solution while it is only one aspect of a broader strategy that should be in place to reverse the apartheid legacy. Nor would it be correct to treat the symptom as if it were the actual problem while the problem is much bigger.