Semi-Annual Report of Institutional Progress


part of the report covers the important section of test administration. Two



Yüklə 0,54 Mb.
səhifə2/5
tarix25.07.2018
ölçüsü0,54 Mb.
#57877
1   2   3   4   5
part of the report covers the important section of test administration. Two
main themes are presented, namely the number of students tested
(quantitative data) and details on the process of administration of tests.

25

Table 1 shows the number of students tested at each of the fully participating


institutions for the Year 4 (Version 4) of each test in 2002:

INSTITUTION

LANGUAGE

MATHS

SCIENCE

Mangosuthu Technikon

1350

1350

1350

MLSultan Technikon

744

332

-

Peninsula Technikon

1576

551

553

Technikon North West

845

149

138

University of Fort Hare

751

246

141

University of the Northwest

1052

466

203

sity University of Transkei

337

489

307

University of the Western
Cape

2189

72

68

University of Zululand

660

465

271

Vista University

2235

1541

240

Table 1: Total number of students tested for three areas

Regarding the second theme, feedback from institutions indicated that test


administration is running smoothly. This is largely the result of clearly
identified testing co-ordinators at the various institutions. Better organisation,
in terms of logistics (timeous provision of materials, smoother invigilation and
a streamlined marking procedure), has led to a more positive experience by
participating institutions.

The process has not been without its share of challenges. Although minor in


nature, it has impacted on the success of the project. These have been
identified as:

  • A lack of resources and expertise has impacted on the establishment of
    the databases.

  • The development and implementation of comprehensive testing and
    placement policies is progressing slowly in most institutions.

  • Inadequate dissemination of information about the project at senior
    management level.

As the fully participating institutions have attested, the relevant tests were
applied to ail the students who were registered and available, on the agreed

26

testing dates, in the targeted programmes where compensatory programmes


were available.

The participating institutions determined the at-risk students based on SAT's


scores in the three areas. The following table represents the total figure for
students identified as at risk across these institutions.

INSTITUTION

TOTAL

INSTITUTION

TOTAL

Mangosuthu Technikon

1452

University of the Northwest

1129

ML Sultan Technikon

671

University of Transkei

466

Peninsula Technikon
Technikon North West
University of Fort Hare

1035
486
1138

University of the Western
Cape

University of Zululand


Vista University

1670

699
2913



Table 3: Total number of students

s identified as at risk




There have been a significantly higher number of students placed in bridging
and compensatory programmes in Year Four as opposed to Year Three. The
following table presents the placement totals for Years Three and Four for the
fully participating institutions.

INSTITUTION

YEAR 3

YEAR 4




Lang

Maths

Science

Lang

Maths

Science

Mangosuthu Technikon

143
100%

311
100%

215
100%

333
100%

616
100%

503
100%

ML Sultan Technikon

600
100%

300
100%

0

414
100%

257
100%

0

Peninsula Technikon

613
70%

612
80%

153
50%

583
100%

295
100%

157
100%

Technikon North West

0

117
67%

70
61%

202
77%

106
88%

66
71%

University of Fort Hare

0

0

0

709
94%

234
95%

138
98%

University of the
Northwest

367
100%

150
100%

140
100%

690
100%

290
100%

149
100%

University of the Transkei

0

0

0

40
73%

181
85%

136
69%

University of the Western
Cape

509
79%

116
57%

79
66%

1273
83%

72
100%

68
100%

University of Zululand

0

0

0

175
64%

268
91%

130
100%

Vista University

0

0

0

1792
96%

883
94%

88
86%






















Table 4: Student enrolment in compensatory

programmes for Years 3 & 4




27

Mangosuthu Technikon, Peninsula Technikon and University of the Northwest


placed 100% of students identified as at risk in all three areas, namely
Language, Mathematics and Science, whilst ML Sultan Technikon placed
100% of students in Language and Mathematics. The University of Western
Cape placed 100% of students in Mathematics and Science and over 80% in
Language. The University of Fort Hare placed over 90% of students in all
three areas. The remaining four fully participating institutions, Technikon
North West, University of Transkei, University of Zululand and Vista
University, placed the required 65% in many cases exceeding this
significantly.

The data indicates that the project (Result) has met its placement targets.


The ten fuliy participating organisations placed more than 65% of the students
tested and identified as at risk (by the institutions) in appropriate bridging
programmes. It is important to note that the placement percentage in nearly
all the cases significantly exceeded the 65 % criterion.

The successful placement of students takes on greater significance when


seen against a backdrop of a host of constraints militating against the
success of this project (Result). It speaks of the resilience of committed and
dedicated staff at the institutions. The support via the National workshop and
other interventions is also an essential part of the success equation.

Compensatory programmes were operating in all three areas, namely


Language, Mathematics and Science. These programmes covered the whole
spectrum from add-on to fully integrated, flexible and fundable programmes.
This is an area that needs more support and development Institutions need
to spend more resources on the research and development of these
interventions. This is the following logical focal shift that needs to occur.

Achievement of Year Four Result 2:

Ten HDIs assessing all first-year students and providing an appropriate
compensatory (bridging) program for at least 65 % of those students
requiring help in key strategic areas of Math, English, and Science.

The placement aspect of the project was successful in that, in the ten fully


participating institutions, more than 65% of the students tested and assessed
as being at-risk were provided with relevant compensatory Programmes.
These institutions include:

  • Mangosuthu Technikon

  • Durban Institute of Technology

  • Peninsula Technikon

  • Technikon North West

28

  • University of Fort Hare

  • University of the Northwest

  • University of the Transkei

  • University of the Western Cape

  • University of Zululand

  • Vista University

Recommendations for Year 5

  1. Information regarding the project should be disseminated to all relevant
    stakeholders, including senior management officials. This will facilitate the
    more effective functioning and status of the programme at institutions. In
    this regard DTET could facilitate the information sharing process around
    project information with relevant decision-makers at institutions.

  2. There is still a paucity of appropriate bridging programmes. It is therefore
    recommended that DTET assist institutions in evaluating existing bridging
    programmes.

  3. There is still a lack of appropriate programmes such as extended curricula
    into which students can be placed and substantial work needs to be done
    to enable institutions to make fundamental paradigm shifts away from the
    add-on support model of intervention towards the extended programme
    model. It is therefore recommended that:




  • Consultation at the level of senior management, including Deans,
    Heads of Schools, and Programme Co-ordinators, must take place in
    this regard.

  • Further institution specific workshops to be held based on a needs
    analysis of each institution.




  1. One aspect of the project which to date has not received adequate
    attention is that of the development of the databases in each institution. It
    is therefore recommended that institutions identify one person who will be
    responsible for setting up and maintaining a database on a dedicated
    computer and that he/she is assisted by a consultant to do so.

  2. The process of test validation remains a key factor in the success of the
    project. It is therefore recommended that a document that addresses the
    process of test validation to date is prepared and circulated to key staff

29

members in the institutions, particularly Deans, Heads of Schools and


Programme Co-ordinators.

  1. It is recommended that the TELP SAT project aim is extended to include
    an examination of the use of the tests to identify students who do not meet
    the necessary admission criteria but through alternative selection
    procedures may be granted admission.

  2. Finally, it is recommended that institutionally based meetings be held to
    provide feedback to senior management and Deans, the TELP Co-
    ordinator, the DTET Project Manager and a relevant consultant. This
    should include a review of the project to date and planning to address the
    recommendations made above.

IV. Staff Development

Staff development is one of the cross-cutting activities that involve each of


the TELP Components. Thus, interventions are discussed throughout the
focus areas of the individual progress reports. This section of the Executive
Summary, however, will focus on the Institution Specific Activities
Component and its objective to build capacity in proposal writing and project
implementation.

Staff development has also taken place through participation in workshops


and overseas study travel, thus, information on the overseas staff
development activities will focus on the number of participant trainees that
traveled under TELP funds, either through the PIL activities and/or linkage
grants. A chart indicating the level of workshop participation under the
various TELP components is also provided.

During the current reporting period, IS staff development activities focused on


receiving the Round 6 PIL proposals. In order to improve the quality of
proposal submissions, the Year 4 strategy for capacity building in proposal
writing was the same as Year 3, employing a three-phase approach. Phase
One involved institution-based project conceptualization workshops. Phase
Two involved two regional proposal writing capacity-building workshops and a
review of Draft #1 of the proposal. Phase Three involved regional feedback
workshops for Draft #2 of the proposals and individual feedback of Draft #3,
where necessary. It is also significant that the same facilitator was used
again during Year 4, so the continuity and familiarity with individual
institutional capacity also contributed greatly to the success of this strategic
intervention. Institutions received a thorough briefing and assistance in line
with USAID proposal writing guidelines, and HDI's were also provided
opportunities to share knowledge and resources around HIV/AIDS
interventions. The evaluations from the three November and the one

30

February workshops indicated that the participants were satisfied with the


new strategy employed by UNCFSP.

Semi-Annual Reporting

Reporting back on actual implementation of PILs has increased the level of


accountability for implementation practices. UNCFSP in collaboration with
USAID, developed guidelines and a standard format in order to increase HDI
capacity to develop reporting skills. The Semi-Annual Report is an important
monitoring and evaluation mechanism for the Institution Specific Activities
Component. Institutions are required to submit semi-annual reports by 30
April for the period 1 October to 31 March and 30 October for the period 1
April to 30 September of each year.

During the current reporting period, UNCFSP noted some improvements in


semi-annual reporting. This improvement can be traced to the special
feedback mechanism that has been developed that provides a more detailed
report that specifically indicates the problems with the reporting mechanism
used by the institution. A comparison between the feedback provided for the
October 2001 submission and the April 2002 submissions indicates that the
greatest need was in the reporting of financial data and providing details
concerning success stories.

In Year Four, two milestones provided training in all aspects of the PIL


process, program management and semi-annual reporting. A two-day PIL
Implementation Workshop was held in September 2001 and was attended by
project leaders and financial managers of new PILs and Special PILS. The
purpose of the workshop was to ensure that the project directors and financial
managers are fully conversant with UNCFSP/ USAID requirements with
regard to the PIL process, including semi-annual reporting. Participants
evaluated the workshop indicating that they had gained the knowledge to
write the necessary financial, monitoring and evaluation (semi-annual)
reports.

Also, a one-day training and re-tooiing workshop was held in November 2001


for TELP Co-ordinators in aspects of PILs and programme management. This
workshop addressed many aspects of the PIL process including the financial
standing of the institutions as related to the claiming of expenditures from
USAID and continued the discussion relative to the reasons institutions failed
to claim in a timely manner. The importance of claiming was emphasized and
the correlation between claiming and qualifying for Round 6 PIL competition
was shown. Most the TCs agreed that the day had been very informative,
with 53.3 per cent strongly agreed that the workshop assisted and motivated
them to carry Year Four activities, 46.7 per cent agreed, with no one
disagreeing or strongly disagreeing.

31

Implementation and Monitoring Plans

UNCFSP developed a set of guidelines on how to develop implementation


and monitoring plans in 1999. This was done in order to improve upon
practices associated with submitting claims, purchasing materials and
equipment, and generally adhering to host country contracting requirements.

Problems associated with the successful implementation and monitoring of


PIL activities were addressed during the November 2001 TELP Coordinators
Workshop. Dr. Khehla Ndolvu of USAID solicited from the TELP
Coordinators those issues that explained why a large sum of funds remain in
the pipeline. TELP Coordinators provided thirteen points that were reported
on in the December 2001 Progress Report. Most HDIs have made marked
improvements in the implementation and monitoring of PILs. As the figures
indicate below, these discussions paid off in high improvements of actual
claims during the first half of 2002.

During the period January 25, 2002 to July 30, 2002 the exchange rate used


to calculate the rand value of PILs were changed for the purpose of freeing up
funds and shortening USAID's pipeline. During this period, most HDIs spent
their time minimizing amounts that would have been lost with these PILs,
increasing the percentage claimed of the minimum required claims on expired
PILs from 78% to 81%. This is above the average claims made on all PILs by
all HDIs to date being 78%, which in itself is a huge improvement over the
67% of the previous period.

The HDIs in general showed a mammoth improvement in the actual claims,


claiming on average 27% better on active PILs in this period than that of the
previous. All HDIs who have been working so hard to attain this good rating
should be commended.

PIL DISBURSEMENTS
AT 30/07/02





ACTUAL
DISBURSEMENT
ZAR


REQUIRED
DISBURSEMENT
ZAR


VARIANCE
ZAR


Percentage
Disbursed
of Required


ACTIVE PILs
EXPIRED PILs


10,478,431
36,155,807

15,003,066
44,607,116

4,524,635
8,451,309

70%
81%

TOTAL

46,634,238

59,610,182

12,975,944

78%




ACTUAL
DISBURSEMENT
US$


REQUIRED
DISBURSEMENT
US$


VARIANCE
US$


Percentage
Disbursed
of Required


ACTIVE PILs
EXPIRED PILs


$ 1,337,671
$ 5,682,181

$ 2,329,682
$ 8,769,043

$ 992,011
$ 3,086,862

57%
65%

TOTAL

$ 7,019,852

$ 11,098,725

$ 4,078,873

63%

The differences between the percentage disbursed of retired per US$'and ZAR are because of the
Depreciation of the ZAR against the US$ since the signing of PILs to the payment of disbursements.
The effect is that the US$ amounts disbursed becomes smaller in relation to the ZAR amounts
disbursed.


PIL DISBURSEMENTS

at:

JO/01/2002
















ACTUAL

REQUIRED




Percentage




DISBURSEMENT

DISBURSEMENT

VARIANCE

Disbursed







ZAR

ZAR

ZAR

of Required

ACTIVE PILs




7,669,086

17,720,260

10,051,174

43%

EXPIRED PILs




31,252,298

40,145,952

8,893,654

78%

TOTAL




38,921,385

57,866,213

18,944,828

67%







ACTUAL

REQUIRED




Percentage




DISBURSEMENT

DISBURSEMENT

VARIANCE

Disbursed







US$

US$

US$

of Required

ACTIVE PILs

$

1,278,181

$ 2,868,142

$1,589,961

45%

EXPIRED PILs

$

5,208,716

$ 8,044,788

$ 2,836,072

65%

TOTAL

$

6,486,897

$ 10,912,930

$ 4,426,033

59%

















Actual amounts Claimed against Required










amounts Claimed per HDI



















July 30 January August February

Last







25

20

28

Period

Historically Disadvanced

2002

2002

2001

2001

Movement

Institution
















Border Technikon

90%

84%

92%

89%

6%

Durban Westville

80%

61%

67%

77%

19%

Eastern Cape

73%

58%

57%

66%

15%

Fort Hare

71%

64%

49%

53%

7%

Mongosuthu Technikon

51%

50%

54%

48%

1%

Medunsa

98%

81%

84%

90%

17%

ML Sultan

84%

80%

78%

75%

4%

University of the North

57%

50%

67%

N/A

7%

University of North West

83%

61%

70%

78%

22%

Technikon Northern Gauteng

58%

46%

51%

49%

12%

Peninsula Technikon

106%

99%

115%

120%

7%

Technikon North West

89%

46%

45%

55%

43%

University of Transkei

60%

61%

68%

68%

-1%

University of Venda

84%

53%

56%

62%

31%

VISTA

41%

28%

33%

0%

13%

Western Cape

87%

79%

74%

76%

8%

University of Zululand

62%

57%

60%

58%

5%

Average Percentage claimed

75%

62%

66%

67%

13%

per HDI
















Percentage of combined total

78%

67%

62%

76%

11%

value claimed
















Yüklə 0,54 Mb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   2   3   4   5




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©muhaz.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

gir | qeydiyyatdan keç
    Ana səhifə


yükləyin