Warning: session_start(): open(/tmp/sess_b87bc17f44165bc94d2ad332946675d2, O_RDWR) failed: Read-only file system (30) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 802

Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 802

Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 802

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 675

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 676

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 677

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 678

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php on line 679

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/filestore/classes/fileupload_class_inc.php on line 329

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/filestore/classes/fileupload_class_inc.php on line 334
ࡱ> MOJKL%` bjbjٕ .r4XUXUXUXU<V\XTWLHXHXHXHX\\\ךٚٚٚٚٚٚ$hW[\HXHX 8HXHXךךHXW uvIԩXUU8ۖ(0X@\ i qs={d\\\\\\Xd:t?t? ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in South Africa: National and Institutional Pathways Michael Cross and Fatima Adam School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand, Private Bag 3 Wits, Witwatersrand 2050, RSA. E-mail: Michael.Cross@wits.ac.za, AdamF3@hse.pg.wits.ac.za This paper focuses on policy initiatives and strategies used to promote the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in higher education in South Africa. It explores a wider international outlook and current debates in South Africa to map out an emerging South African perspective concerning the integration of ICT in higher education. It also provides a brief survey of key policy developments on e-education in general to contextualize the use of ICTs. In doing so, the paper addresses the following questions: What general goals do policy makers in South Africa express in national policy documents for the integration of ICT in the education system? What is the role of government regarding the use of ICT in higher education? What policies and strategies for ICT do leaders of South African higher education institutions develop? How do South African national priorities and higher education institutional strategies match? Introduction This paper focuses on policy initiatives and strategies used to promote the use of tools and concepts associated with information and communication technologies (ICTs) with a view to realizing their potential in achieving national, social and economic development goals. It explores a wider international outlook and current debates in South Africa to map out an emerging South African perspective concerning the integration of ICT in higher education. The paper also provides a brief survey of key policy developments on e-education in general to contextualize the integration of ICTs in higher education. In doing so, the paper addresses the following main questions: What general goals do policy makers in South Africa express in national policy documents for the integration of ICT in the education system? What is the role of government regarding the use of ICT in higher education? What policies and strategies for ICT in education do leaders of higher education institutions develop? How do South African national priorities and higher education institutional strategies match? There are three critical dimensions to the argument pursued in this paper. First, in broader lines the paper shows that, while South Africa has gone a long way in adopting an exemplary approach to integration of ICTs in schools, it lacks a national policy framework concerning the role of ICTs in higher education. Institutions have to rely on a series of incoherent and fragmented statements scattered through several policy documents in higher education to make institutional choices aligned with national concerns (NCHE, 1996; Department of Education, 1997a, www.polity.org.za, b; Council on Higher Education, 2000; National Working Group, 2002). Second, the paper argues that, given the contextual diversity at the national, regional and institutional levels, institutions have opted for varied pathways in their efforts to integrate ICTs in the curriculum design and delivery and research work. There is no one-fits-all approach; policy approaches differ from institution to institution, and from department to department in each institution. Elsewhere (Cross and Madiba, 2006), we deal with the challenge of extracting from the differences, replicable common denominators that can be applied across the system. Third, while the literature indicates that policy and implementation trends throughout the world tend to respond to global drivers (knowledge economy and ICT) at the expense of national and institutional interests (Kishun, 1998), the South African experience shows that how South African institutions have responded to these drivers reflects local contextual complexities. We go along with the argument pursued by Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 1) that the different political values embedded in national education systems, the values and visions advocated by political leaders, the value differences held within and across individual institutions and consequent value conflicts, often not explicit, understood or recognized, are y major inhibitors for systemic change. Put differently, technological, epistemological and pedagogical choices in the implementation of ICTs are mediated by institutional academic legacies and micro-politics. In this perspective, the pace, direction of change and its institutional peculiarities cannot be separated from local contextual challenges. There is room for national and institutionally informed choices at a number of levels, despite indications that global imperatives lead to an almost inevitable compliance (Slaughter and Leslie, 1999). Theory and Method Drawing on Twigg (2003), Mhlanga (2005) identifies four main categories concerning the extent of integration of ICTs in academic practice: the supplemental model, the replacement model, the emporium model and the buffet model, which highlight the extent to which institutions have transformed their practices in order to take full advantage of ICT. In the case of the supplemental model, institutions retain their traditional structure of courses and the face-to-face mode of delivery and integrate e-learning as a teaching tool. The replacement model implies a more fundamental shift in practice, involving significant reduction of traditional face-to-face encounter, which is replaced by online, interactive learning activities (Twigg, 2003, 33  HYPERLINK "http://www" http://www. educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf). Like the replacement model, the emporium model also entails a fundamentally different approach to teaching and learning from traditional practice. Face to face is replaced with a learning resource centre (or several resource centres) for online materials and on demand personalized assistance. The buffet model offers an assortment of different paths that suit the students different learning styles, abilities and tastes at each stage of the course. The four models have specific implications for instructional design and delivery and the prevailing institutional cultures. In some cases, incipient combinations of these models can be found. We pay particular attention to these models in our analysis of ICT institutional policies and processes. While these models offer a useful analytical basis for mapping out the position of ICTs with reference to university priorities and policy choices, they fall short from explaining the policy choices and the nature of change brought about by ICTs, particularly at epistemological and pedagogical levels. We have addressed this shortcoming by combining Twiggs framework with Hanson and Holmbergs theory. In their theory, Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 3) use a framework with three categories to analyse policy on ICT, namely Increase, Protect and Change. Increase entails strategies to promote access, cooperation, production and quality; Protect includes protective measures around culture and economy and Change comprises actions on systems, power relations and epistemology. Both Increase and Protect do not imply any paradigm shift, while Change requires a paradigm shift and therefore is fundamental to higher education reform. Existing paradigm Paradigm Shift  Increase Protect Change  Access Culture Systems Cooperation Economy Power relations Production Epistemology Quality  From Hanson, H. and Holmberg, C.A. (2003), p. 4. This framework offers important parameters for assessing the significance of ICT policies and strategies in institutional or systemic transformation. With this conceptual framework in mind, our methodological strategy included the study of background documents from the Department of Education, the Department of Science, Arts and Technology, the reports of the Centre for Educational Technology and Distance ducation (CETDE). At institutional level, we examined the mission statements, ICT projects founding documents and all other documents, which highlight the positioning of the institutions regarding ICTs. A limited number of interviews were undertaken with institutional leaders involved in ICT activities. The review of these documents was combined with the scrutiny of the national and international literature on ICTs policies. Where appropriate, deductive and inductive analyses were used, but ultimately our experience and informed judgement played a critical role in our interpretation of policy. National Vision for Higher Education and the ICT Project in South Africa: Challenges and Constraints The report of the National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) released in September 1996, the White Paper on Higher Education (1997), the Higher Education Act (1997) set out the national vision for higher education in South Africa. Three main features underpin this vision: (i) increased participation; (ii) greater responsiveness and (iii) increased cooperation and partnerships (NCHE, 1996; Cloete, 1998; Cross and Harper, 1999). Increased participation was to be achieved through an expansion of student enrolments, feeder constituencies and programme offerings, guided by the principles of equity and redress as well as alignment with the South African demographic realities and developmental concerns. Responsiveness to societal interests and needs requires engagement with the challenges posed by the South African context: elimination of racial discrimination and oppression, equity, social justice and equal opportunity. Aspects of this context had to be reflected in the content, focus and delivery modes of higher education programmes as well as in the institutional missions and policies. For this purpose, governance structures had to provide for wider stakeholder consultation and participation in decision-making processes. At an epistemological level, concerns with responsiveness were symptomatic of a shift from closed knowledge systems (controlled and driven by canonical norms of traditional disciplines and by collegially recognized authority) to more open knowledge systems with greater mix of programmes and growth in transdisciplinary, transfaculty and transinstitutional programmes (in dynamic interaction with external social interests, consumer or client demand and other processes of knowledge generation). Concerns with responsiveness had also implications for the research function of higher education. In this regard, researchers needed to interact not only with their colleagues in universities, but also with knowledge producers in a range of other organizations. Higher education institutions had to display greater accountability towards the taxpayer and the client/consumer regarding the cost-effectiveness, quality and relevance of teaching and research programmes. In essence, heightened responsiveness and accountability expressed greater impact of the market and civil society on higher education and the consequent need for appropriate forms of regulation (NCHE, 1996, 67). Finally, the inherited tendency towards academic insularity and institutional self-reliance had to make way to the recognition of the interdependence between multiple actors and interests with a stake in higher education through cooperation and partnerships. A single, coordinated system was proposed as the only way in which the inequities, ineffectiveness and inefficiencies of the existing system could be eradicated. Cooperative governance was proposed and adopted as the most appropriate mode of higher education governance. In line with this policy, the directive role of the state was reconceived as steering and coordination. The state would use financial incentives and other steering mechanisms as opposed to measures of control and top-down prescription. Institutional autonomy was to be exercised within the re-defined framework of accountability (NCHE, 1996, 78). Cooperation has implications for relations between higher education and the institutions of civil society. The vision called for more linkages and partnerships between higher education institutions and commercial enterprises, parastatals, research bodies and NGOs, nationally and regionally. Cooperation has implications for relations between and within higher education institutions. To do more with less, the vision emphasized new partnerships and cooperative ventures among regional clusters of institutions to optimize the use of human and infrastructural resources. Increased cooperation and partnerships among a broader range of constituencies would require participatory, responsible and accountable structures and procedures. These would depend upon trust and constructive interaction among all constituencies (NCHE, 1996, 7680). In addition, with the introduction of a new neo-liberal macro-economic policy framework GEAR (Growth, Expansion and Redistribution) efficiency and managerialism became important features of the national fiscal policy and were integrated in the national vision for higher education. This is implicitly articulated in the main implementation documents (CHE, 2000; Department of Education, 2001, 2002a, b; National Working Group, 2002). Arguably the restructuring and rationalization strategies in higher education are rooted in the discourses of efficiency and performativity, which have led the emerging concept of universities as businesses. A whole new vocabulary has become dominant in university circles: outsourcing, core business, scenarios, business units, contracting, etc. There is often a tension between efficiency in terms of saving money and the demands of knowledge and the mission of the institution. Most institutions have attempted to respond to these challenges within the context of a transformatory process which impacts on every aspect of academic life, from student access and support, staff recruitment and retention, to academic programmes development and the social and learning environment on campus. Many academic staff find themselves in a state of flux characterized by a sense of unpredictability, uncertainty and overload and, in some instances, despondency. This situation is made more tenuous by significant cuts in state subsidy to higher education institutions and a shrinking resource base. At some point, many institutions found themselves confronted with fundamental issues of survival to be saved by the mergers. Where and how does ICT feature in this policy context? Increased participation and access, greater responsiveness, inter-institutional coordination and partnerships and efficiency key aspects in South African higher education vision open immense opportunities and possibilities for ICTs in systemic and institutional development. The national vision points by implication to a critical role of ICTs. However, it appears that ICTs have not received enough attention in higher education. As it will be shown later, ICTs are not prioritized per se, unless institutional planners and practitioners have conceptualized such programmes and initiatives as falling within or adding value to the national imperatives for institutional repositioning, survival and transformation. The main goals and principles of the higher education policy framework do not place much emphasis on the use of e-learning both at systemic and institutional levels. Policy strategies can only be decided by implication without clear directives as to how technology should be incorporated into higher education strategies. We illustrate this aspect with reference to the White Paper on Higher Education (Department of Education, 1997a) and the key implementation documents, namely the National Plan on Higher Education (Department of Education, 2001) and the Transformation and Restructuring: A New Institutional Landscape for Higher Education (National Working Group, 2002). First, while the White Paper emphasizes increased participation in higher education as a major policy goal, no reference is made about the use of ICTs as a possible resource to expand access. The strategies suggested in the White Paper only call for planned expansion as opposed to massification and do not prioritize the use of ICTs (Kraak, 2000, 16). An analysis of key policy documents on ICT, suggests that while ICT has received significant attention from the South African government at a number of policy levels and reflect general international trends, ICT policy in higher education does not have the same thrust (see e.g. Gillwald, 2001, 177). Second, while the White Paper emphasizes the need for flexible education offerings, it relates flexibility to issues of diversity in offerings, articulation between programmes as well as entry and exit points to create access; it does not refer to flexibility in the modes of delivery provided by ICTs. Third, the White Paper calls for improvement in teaching and learning strategies to improve quality and throughput, but does not assume that ICT should be used for this purpose. The only reference to technology made in the White Paper concerns the concept of resource-based distance learning which should include the use of appropriate technologies. Unlike the e-Education White Paper (on schooling), where assumptions are made about the ability of ICT to enhance teaching and learning practices and support problem solving and critical thinking development, the higher education White Paper refrains from making assumptions about the relationship between ICT and teaching and learning issues. Briefly, the White Paper on higher education does not provide firm directives on ICT and its relationship to higher education. Department of Education (2001), which provides the implementation framework for achieving the White Papers vision, approaches ICTs with a degree of scepticism and caution, particularly in the context of the strategies aimed at addressing the problems faced by disadvantaged students: Some institutions see information technology-related approaches as the central solution to the problems experienced by disadvantaged students. While the innovative use of technology is to be welcomed, there is a strong risk that approaches which focus on improving delivery through information and communication technology, and which leave traditional curricular structures unchanged, will not provide a comprehensive solution (Department of Education, 2001, 36). The proposal of a single distance education institution would ensure that advantage is taken of the rapid changes in ICTs, which in investment terms would be beyond the scope of any one institution (Department of Education, 2001, 6). It privileges ICTs as a field of study (Department of Education, 2001, 47), particularly in the case of science, engineering and technology (Department of Education, 2001, 43). The document, Transformation and Restructuring: A New Institutional Landscape for Higher Education (National Working Group, 2002), which proposed mergers in higher education, emphasizes that the goals and objectives of the National Plan would require inter alia enhancing the curriculum to respond to the changing needs, in particular, the skills and competencies required to function in the modern world such as communications, computer and information skills (National Working Group, 2002, 226). Against this background, the Report of the Council for Higher Education, which reflects on higher education after 10 years of democracy, concedes that the policy environment makes scant mention of technology. It indicates that this lack of reference to ICT will impact on a number of issues: the international e-learning markets and its effect on South African higher education; poor application and implementation of ICT for teaching and learning; and lack of incentives to innovate around technology (CHE, 2004). Integrating ICTs in Higher Education: Key Assumptions and Arguments Higher education policies differ depending on what assumptions policy makers hold on this particular aspect. Although there seems to be broad consensus about the importance of ICT in higher education, different views and opinions about the approach to its implementation and its effects can be identified. As Van der Wende and Beerkens (1999, 284) have found in the West, in South Africa too, the importance of ICT is seen both in terms of opportunities and in terms of threats. Opportunities are perceived in relation to wider social benefits and the enrichment and enhancement of the curriculum and the efficiency and flexibility of learning processes. In this regard, the rationales for introducing ICTs in education can be classified as social, vocational, catalytic and pedagogical. The social rationale is based on the perceived role that technology now plays in society and emphasizes the need for demystifying technology for students. The vocational rationale is concerned with preparing students for jobs that require skills in technology. The catalytic rationale emphasizes the role of technology in improving performance and effectiveness in teaching, management and many other social activities (Keogh, 2001, 224225). The pedagogical rationale responds to the perceived benefits of technology in enhancing learning, flexibility and efficiency in curriculum delivery. Let us look in more detail at the latter. The ability of ICTs to deliver knowledge flexibly and on a large scale is critically important in addressing the knowledge economies demand for larger numbers of highly skilled people. Thus, ICTs ability to offer new ways of organizing and delivering higher education that is the potential to offer flexible, custom based education available to anybody, anywhere and anytime, paves the way for a different kind of learning environment that is e-learning (Tiffin and Rajasingham, 1995, 118). It changes the higher education landscape in important ways. Firstly, it changes the nature of its student body to include working students, as well as students from across the globe, since students can study when and where they prefer. Related to this is the potential of ICTs to extend lifelong learning opportunities to those currently excluded from learning, those residing in remote areas and disabled and disadvantaged groups (Keogh, 2001, 223). Secondly, it has the potential to scale up the education provision substantially and thus contributes towards massification. Thirdly, it provides opportunities for a variety of public and private institutions to offer education programmes through the Internet, therefore increasing competition from a wider group of providers (for details see Gibbons et al., 1994; Scott, 1997; Lo fstedt, 1999). Clearly, ICTs impact significantly on higher education delivery both from the perspective of new knowledge conception and production as well as new ways of elivering knowledge. As a result many countries have increased their electronic learning offerings. In fact, the distance learning market has dramatically increased as a result of ICT, and is now estimated at 300 billion dollars worldwide (Warwick, 1999,  HYPERLINK "http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp" www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp). Threats are related to the scepticism that has dominated the use of ICTs from their inception in particular the assumption that ICT enhances competition in higher education, which requires that higher education reconsider their roles, profiles, positions, and the alliances that they will need to make (Van der Wende and Beerkens 1999, 284). Despite the huge increase in ICT learning platforms, opinions about the use and usefulness of ICT in higher education provision are divided. Keogh (2001, 225) points that ICTs have been accompanied by scepticism arising from concerns about the motivations of those supporting technology, the possibility of cultural imperialism, the impact on quality, access and equity, and doubts about the reality of cost-effectiveness. This sentiment is well expressed by Tracey (1999, 210) when he indicates that the supporters of ICTs emphasize the market not the society, the consumer not the citizen, the want not the need, the quantity not the quality, the price not the value, the globe not the nation (see also Wilson et al., 1998, 109123). Very often ICTs are introduced with the attitude of here is the solution without asking the question what is the problem? Debates on ICT integration in higher education remain incipient and very limited in South Africa. In substance, generally these reflect international trends. An on-going topic concerns what ICTs can do and cannot do for the benefit of higher education institutions. Some see it as offering flexible and inexpensive delivery that has the potential to respond to manpower shortages by increasing access to education and serving as an equalizer in economic development and transformation (Barker, 1997; Daniel, 1997; IIE, 2001). Others view it as elitist in its use of technology as a delivery vehicle (Kishun, 1998; Muller 2000), suspect in terms of teaching and learning outcomes (Noam, 1995; Hall, 2001) and problematic in unquestioningly propagating economically driven education and Western values which impact negatively on local cultures and general education goals. A recent account of the side effects of digital development by Benner (2003) highlights how the present South African pragmatism towards expanding the ICT project in the country underestimates the potentially negative impact of ICTs on traditional forms of employment and fails to address the volatile nature of employment and skills requirements in ICT industries themselves. The consequence, it is argued, is likely to be the disruption of the already shrinking employment opportunities and the widening of social inequality (Benner, 2003, 126). Unfortunately, the impact of ICT on higher education remains an under researched issue. Harris (1998, 248) and Hall (2001, 233) suggest that very few attempts have been made at evaluating the quality of e-learning in South Africa. Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 1) also indicate that internationally existing studies are limited to English-speaking developed countries whose outcomes are not easily transferable to other political, economic and cultural contexts. National ICT Strategy in Education in South Africa South Africa is making huge efforts to establish itself as an ICT leader within the African continent. Presently, South Africa is the 14th largest user of the Internet in the world, with state of the art communications systems in many urban areas (Department of Education, 2002a, b). The South African government views e-education as a crucial strategy in becoming globally competitive and locally responsive (GCIS, 2002). It is seen as providing the foundation upon which an e-society can be built. Accordingly, e-education is necessary for effective participation in the information society, has the potential to enhance teaching and learning, promote access, create new opportunities for learners and teachers and, therefore, transform education. For the Department of Education it is not whether we y introduce ICT in teaching and learning but how we can successfully introduce ICT in schools (South African Department of Education and Communications, 2001,  HYPERLINK "http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdf" http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdf). The South African government has strongly advocated the use of ICT to support economic growth and development and ensure that South Africa is part of the global economy. It has a broadly favourable policy environment to promote ICT use and development. Steps undertaken in this regard include mobilization of public/private sector partnerships, legislation on telecommunications and the setting up of several structures to promote innovation in the implementation of ICTs in the economic and social sectors (e.g. The Presidential International Advisory Council on ISAD Information Society and Development that comprise international leaders in the ICT Sector, and focuses on ICT infrastructure and services), major projects on ICTs in education, and programmes of skills development and training, ICT literacy and fluency. The vision of the e-Education White Paper is to ensure that every learner in the schooling sector is capable and empowered to use and interact with ICTs by 2013. The aim for the schooling sector is to leverage ICTs to support the development of literacy skills, access information and communicate and combine pedagogy and technology to ensure effective teaching and learning in schools. This policy is underpinned by assumptions about the potential of ICTs in supporting fundamental change in teaching and learning practices (Department of Education, 2004). A brief chronology of events highlights the high level of pragmatism with which the South African government has approached the future of ICTs in its post apartheid policy agenda since the first democratic elections in 1994 (for further details, see James, 2001,  HYPERLINK "http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm" http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm). Brief Chronology of ICT-Related Initiatives in South Africa DevelopmentsObjectives Date Department of Education (DOE) workshopIdentifies need for Technology-Enhanced Learning Investigation in South Africa (TELI) processNovember 1995TELI Discussion DocumentOutlines key principles relevant to the use of technologies in education and identifies key initiatives for developing an enabling infrastructureJuly 1996National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) reportOutlines the vision for higher education in South AfricaSeptember 1996TELI Strategic Plan completedOutlines South African ICT strategy in educationApril 1997Establishment of the Centre for Educational technology and Distance Education (CETDE)Implementation agency to oversee national policy on ICTsEarly 1997Establishment of School Net South AfricaImplementation agency focusing on school connectivity and capacity buildingDecember 1997TELI decision-making frameworkEstablishes guidelines for choosing technologies to use in education and training programmesDecember 1998SABC/DOE Broadcasting ConferenceReintroduces idea of dedicated educational channelFebruary 1999Department of Communications first-phase reportOutlines a strategy for a dedicated educational channelAugust 1999Joint Department of Communications/ Education feasibility report Proposes converged educational networkNovember 1999 DOE releases value-chain framework DOE releases value-chain frameworkMarch 2000Khanya project planning begins in Western CapeProvincial ICT in schools implementation project2000Gauteng Online.com launched in Gauteng ProvinceProvincial ICT in schools implementation projectFebruary 2001National ICT ForumBrings together public and private-sector players in the implementation of a national education networkMarch 2001Draft White Paper on e-EducationDefines ICT policy in educationSeptember 2003National Plan on Higher EducationProvides an implementation strategy of higher education policyMay 2002 By 1995, the theme of Information Society began to gain prominence in the political discourse and policy documents, including the address of the Deputy President Thabo Mbeki at the G7 Conference and the speech of President Nelson Mandela at the 1995 International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Conference (James, 2001, 16). One of the first documents stressing the importance of ICTs in the development of the New South Africa was the 1994 ANC Alliance election manifesto, the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP), (ANC, 1994). However, the use of ICTs in education only became a policy matter from 1995. The first conference on technology enhanced learning, held in November 1995, pointed to the need for a coherent policy on the use of technology in education. In February 1996, the Ministry of Education commissioned a group of experts to develop a national framework and a strategic plan for technology-enhanced learning. It released its report in July 1996, entitled Technology Enhanced Learning Investigation in South Africa, which formed the basis for the establishment of the National Centre for Educational Technology and Distance Education in 1997. These developments were followed by several policy initiatives driven primarily by the desire to establish clear decision-making frameworks at a national level to ensure that educational technology decisions were driven by educational motives and not by the marketing agendas of technology vendors. ICT Developments in Education: Increasing Access, Cooperation and Delivery Strategies The challenge of narrowing the digital divide between South Africa and developed countries and within South Africa has been recognized in current ICT policy framework. The draft e-Education White Paper (2003) indicates Developments Objectives Date Khanya project planning begins in Western Cape Provincial ICT in schools implementation project 2000. Gauteng Online.com launched in Gauteng Province Provincial ICT in schools implementation project February 2001 National ICT Forum Brings together public and private-sector players in the implementation of a national education network March 2001 Draft White Paper on e-Education Defines ICT policy in education September 2003 National Plan on Higher Education Provides an implementation strategy of higher education policy May 2002 that, while almost 35% of people in developed countries are online, only 6% of South Africans are online, with fewer than 2% in developing countries. Within South Africa, just over 12.3% of schools have computers for teaching and learning. E-education in South Africa has been driven by both public and private initiatives. There are at present five major public sector ICT initiatives aimed at promoting the use of ICTs in schools: the National Portal, the Gauteng Online (GOL), the Khanya project in the Western Cape, SCOPE in the Northern Province and Mpumalanga and the Universal Services Agency Deployment of Computers in Schools. In terms of NGO/business-supported initiatives, there are about 40 medium to large-scale initiatives. These include initiatives by SchoolNet-SA, MultiChoice, TELKOM, Hewlett-Packard, INTEL and Microsoft (SchoolNet-SA, 2002a). Evidence indicates an increase in activities related to computing in schools in South Africa, including strategy and policy initiatives and efforts aimed at deploying computers to schools. These range in extent and purpose but it is clear that the investment in ICT in schools has increased both from government as well as other sources (SchoolNet-SA, 2002ac). The Gauteng and the Western Cape provinces have asserted themselves as leaders in this process both in terms of policy, size and scope of their ICT projects. The Northern Province, Mpumalanga and the Gauteng Province, show significant progress in both schools with computers, schools with computers for teaching and learning and learner computer ratios. An audit conducted by SchoolNet-SA (2002) shows that there has been a substantial increase in investment in ICTs in the educational sector in the last 3 years and that provincial governments committed significant funding to educational ICTs for the first time in 2001. The number of computers for Table 1 Provinces and computers in schools (2000) Provinces Schools with computers (%)   teaching and learning has quadrupled since 1996 (Department of Education, 2003a, b). The average ratio of learners to computers for teaching and learning has declined in average from 725:1 in 1996 to 164:1 in 2000 (Table 1). The downside of this process is the lack of research, knowledge and understanding about how these developments impact on classroom practices, particularly the teaching and learning. To meet this challenge, the draft White Paper on e-Education (2003, 36) states that the Department of Education, in collaboration with the Departments of Communications and Science and Technology, the teaching profession, higher education institutions and research agencies, will formulate a research agenda on ICTs for e-learning. Protecting Individual and Institutional Integrity in ICT Practice: Norms, Standards and Values The principles and values underpinning the policy process on ICTs in South Africa can be identified at two levels, namely the policy development level and policy content level. At the process level, there is an increasing realization that the existing initiatives are fragmentary and greater level of integration is desirable. Particular attention has also been paid to the need for broad participation in the policy formulation process. This is generally regarded as essential in ensuring that ICT policy covers the depth and range of issues required for successful implementation (SchoolNet-SA (2002c). The defining keywords include integration, sensitivity to the developing world context, broader participation, and informed decision making. The establishment of the National Information and Technology Forum (NTF) and the Presidential Review Commission (PRC) in February 1997 and the IT Advisory Council consisting of local and international business leaders, representing major stakeholders was to ensure that broader national and international consultation took place in the decision making. Its position paper made it explicit that, while ICTs have enormous potential for development, the challenges ahead for developing countries were different from those in developed countries (NITF, 1996). At content level, the TELI-report established a set of recommendations and guidelines for policy concerning ICT. Content issues are outlined in the TELI decision-making framework. It contains a set of guidelines for choosing technologies to introduce into teaching and learning environments in South Africa. It was meant to facilitate the processes that individuals might go through when deciding between different technologies to use in education and training programmes at all levels. It covers issues of teaching and learning, technologies, integration of technologies into the teaching and learning environment and costing issues (James, 2001, 5). The Draft White Paper on e-Education (2003) sets out the South African Governments response to new ICTs and their potential use within education specifically through the use of digital media and the provision of telecommunication infrastructure. The emerging strategy emphasizes four central themes: equity, access, capacity building, and norm and standards. From the equity perspective, equal access to information and the allocation of resources and equal competence are cited as the objectives of the education system underpinned by the belief that technology tends to amplify advantage. In terms of access, Governments concern is focused on the development of reliable infrastructure and regular systems access and the availability of hardware, software and connectivity. With reference to capacity building, the Government is concerned with the need for programmes that urgently address the competencies of teachers related to the use of ICTs for personal work and in their classrooms. In this regard, it urges the Department of Education and the provincial education departments to collaborate with higher education institutions to design and deliver in-service and pre-service training programmes for teachers, managers and administrators as well as further education and training programmes in the field (Department of Education, 2003a, b, 30, 36). The issue of norms and standards is considered fundamental to the concept of ICT use in education as a means of ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities and improved learner performance. Norms and standards should ensure that the content is relevant, reliable, accessible and useable. They point to the need for local content development, local language use and collective knowledge generation. It is within such a framework that South Africa should build a domestic knowledge economy, overcome cultural inhibitions and insecurities about developing competence for surviving the break-neck speed of the Internet age and its creation of a risk-taking culture, while accepting that ICTs are a core feature of innovation and competitiveness. Institutional Policies or Approaches to ICTs in Higher Education Developing institutional policy frameworks is no easy task and seems to be complicated by the extremely diverse economic, social and physical environments in which South African higher education institutions operate. Diversity has prompted different responses from individual institutions. There is no single approach to policy that provides one-fits-all solution to the challenges of ntegrating ICTs effectively into teaching and learning. Many higher education nstitutions in South Africa do not yet have an institutional vision or strategy in the use of ICT and their activities are limited to somewhat isolated pockets driven by particular projects. An analysis of existing experiences shows that there are common key elements that are addressed in their projects: (i) developing institutional ICT infrastructure, generally through computer centres; (ii) staff professional development; (iii) promotion of broader utilization of ICTs; (iv) integration of ICT in curriculum design and delivery. However, their approaches to these activities differ considerably. We have identified three important categories in this regard. The first comprises institutions that place emphasis on IT infrastructure and services particularly what has been generally known as Computer Centres or Computer Networking Services. They promote the establishment of ICT units dedicated to ICT infrastructure development (software and hardware), maintenance and user support services. Their functions are often extended to embrace targeted software development or adaptation, Internet design and maintenance as well as the training of users on approved software. Generally, these services and facilities exist alongside audiovisual centres or other units catering for different forms of multimedia technology. We refer to this model as IT-oriented approach, or a model where activities related to ICT integration were organized within a technically resourced (both in terms of physical and human resource) unit (e.g. the former Technikon Freestate or ICT integration at Wits University, UCT, Rhodes University, etc.). On Twiggs categorization this approach rests on the assumption that ICTs should only play a supplemental role. The university should retain its traditional structure of courses and the face-to-face mode of delivery while drawing on e-learning as a teaching and learning tool. The second, distance education-oriented approach, has been referred to in South Africa as Telematic Education. It concentrates on appropriation of selected state of the art multimedia technologies to deliver distance learning programmes to targeted students at both secondary and university levels (e.g. University of Pretoria, University of Stellenbosch, University of Potchefstroom and the University of the Western Cape). There is in this case a more fundamental change in teaching and learning practice in that the traditional face-to-face teaching and learning is replaced by online, interactive learning strategies. The universities of the Witwatersrand, Cape Town, Kwazulu-Natal and Rhodes University have stayed way from this approach. The third category includes research-driven ICT development projects where efforts are concentrated towards researching and exploring the potential of new technologies and approaches to support effective teaching and learning (e.g. Universities of Cape Town). Besides providing a knowledge basis for ICT implementation or practice, these research efforts are also geared at producing scholarly outputs (e.g. University of Cape Town). An incipient combination of research and development makes up for open source (research and) development-oriented approaches, focused on developing systems for integration. Examples include the University of the Western Cape (UWC) with their Knowledge Environment for Web-based Learning (KEWL) and University of Kwa-Zulu Natal (UKZN) with Open Learning Systems (OLS), where efforts are concentrated on systems development based on open source technologies. The first two categories tend to replicate international models with very little contextualization and knowledge base to inform choice of technology and method and their implementation (with Computer Centres emphasizing technology implementation and Telematic Centres distance education delivery). Besides addressing particular institutional peculiarities and challenges, the last category pays in varying ways greater attention to adaptation and innovation in its approach to integration of ICTs into teaching and learning. We discuss the experience of the Durban Institute of Technology elsewhere (see Cross and Madiba, 2006). The Multimedia Education Group represents, in our view, a sound generative model for implementing effective and appropriate multimedia learning strategies in a research-intensive higher education in a developing world context. In all three categories, a major challenge has been the difficulty in creating an enabling environment to stimulate ICT usage by faculty members (through incentives, staffing policy, etc.). Some institutions in the USA (e.g. Washington State University) have clauses in their staffing policies aimed at promoting the use of ICTs by their staff. This is an approach not embraced in South African higher education. ICT policies not only shape events (proactive ICT policy), but also respond to events (reactive information policy). Generally, our observation is that these two processes coexist at institutional level. Proactive strategies can be seen in several institutions. The University of Pretoria and the University of North-West, through their telematic programmes, and the Universities of Johannesburg and Free State, through their partnerships with private IT companies, have based their innovation strategies on the need to be more competitive financially and have concentrated their efforts on widening access through online delivery of courses drawing extensively on ICTs. As already indicated, the University of Cape Town and the University of the Witwatersrand have defined themselves as research intensive institutions committed to privileging face to face as the main form of delivery and make use of ICTs as supplementary delivery aids (Mhlanga, 2005). However, our observation is that reactive strategies still prevail across institutions and within divisions in most institutions, a phenomenon which reflects largely the lack of a clearly defined e-learning sub-sectoral policy for higher education at both national and institutional levels. A common denominator in almost all ICT initiatives has been the role of ICT champions. In all cases covered in this study where ICT integration has been initiated successfully, the strong presence of such leadership was evident. In the case of UCT, this is evidenced through the role played by the Multimedia Education Group (MEG) and in particular its director. However, the downside of this is the overdependence on the enthusiasm and energies of a few individuals: Reliance on a few individuals poses serious problems for sustainability, as projects easily collapse when those individuals leave. Similarly, because an undue amount of their time falls into making the project work, these individuals also find few if any opportunities to undertake meaningful succession plan (James, 2001, 11). The downside is also the fact that ICT initiatives have largely remained pilot or small-scale projects, which are not always aligned with the mainstream strategic goals of the institutions. In this case, their assessment with reference to concepts of impact and sustainability has limited significance. With the exception of some projects at UCT, Wits and UWC, there is also serious lack of research in ICT-related areas. This is not to underestimate the efforts undertaken by the National Research Foundation (NRF) and the Department of Arts, Science and Technology to promote research on ICTs (e.g. the NRF ICT focus area). Weighing up Change in ICT in Higher Education: A Paradigm Shift? While significant progress has been made at institutional level to integrate ICTs in educational programmes, South African higher education faces enormous challenges that require important policy choices. The first most important challenge remains the lack of a national vision underpinned by coherent strategies and actions at the national level. Is this an advantage or disadvantage? This is perhaps the most difficult question to address given the dilemmas that policy makers have to consider in making policy choices. Internationally, national strategies supporting the use of ICTs in education have taken different forms, reflecting the particular political and institutional complexities of each country (Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999, 24; Keogh, 2001, 224225). Underpinning current debates is the claim that successful implementation of ICTs requires strong national support from government and local support from relevant institutions and education authorities (Keogh, 2001, 228). Generally, there is agreement that governments should facilitate, support the use of ICT for educational purposes and establish an enabling regulatory environment in order to achieve this goal. There is also relative consensus that the potential of ICTs in higher education can be realized only if a concerted effort is made by governments, the private sector and NGOs to lay the foundations for an Information Society that includes all citizens. However, analysts differ considerably on the way they perceive or interpret this role and the issues on which they place their emphasis. There are those who operate within a market-oriented neo-liberal discourse and emphasize the role of government in facilitating the development of a networked, multimedia educational community in higher education through several strategies, including: (i) deregulation of electronic delivery to stimulate competition; (ii) removal of barriers for institutions operating on national and international scales; (iii) increase of information-consumer functions to inform choice and improve programmes; (iv) use of power of competition and choice to inspire organizational change among public institutions; (v) promotion of inter-institutional cooperation and (vi) support of public/private partnerships in support of ICT needs (Matthews, 1998; Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999). There are those who emphasize issues of accountability, quality assurance, accreditation and consumer protection. For these, education is too important to exist without controls, without licensing, or without credentials. These issues have dominated debates on the role of governments in European and North American contexts (Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999). However, within a developing country such as South Africa, issues of competition, inter-institutional cooperation, public/private partnerships, accountability, quality and consumer protection are directly tied up with pressing challenges linked to poverty, illiteracy, job creation/destruction, skills development and the glaring social inequality. Compromises in choice and emphasis are needed to reconcile a national ICT strategy with these pressures. As Benner (2003, 2) puts it, national ICT policy cannot be limited to simply promoting the use of information technology but must also simultaneously address inequality and the dislocation associated with diffusion of information technology through the economy. Issues that concentrate simply on expanding ICTs in education without addressing broader transformation and social responsibility concerns, risk contributing to significant social and economic distress. This is where government coordination and steering may be required. For example, whether at school level or at tertiary education level, it is extremely difficult to balance the building of an information economy and society, generally driven by globalization pressures with the basic challenges of poverty alleviation, adequate health care, including HIV/AIDS epidemic, employment creation and national and regional security issues. Not always it is clear how ICTs can be reconciled with these priority development areas. Related to this is also the challenge of reconciling the considerable investment that ICTs require with the need to address access and equity issues that the legacy of apartheid poses, through appropriate regulatory framework that does not impinge on institutional autonomy. The challenge is to ensure that the governments demonstrated pragmatic approach to global competitiveness through the building of an information society does not result in the neglect of the basic needs of all South Africans (information, content, applications and services, participation in political processes, employment and access to public services such as education, pensions etc.). The second major challenge in South African higher education has been the development of an ICT infrastructure. In fact, infrastructure development emerged as part of the first wave of policy decisions that institutions had to make. While the emphasis that they placed on ICT infrastructure differed from institution to institution, depending on institutional priorities and budget considerations, generally it seems that there was a general trend to overestimate infrastructural concerns (technology) at the expense of dimensions that relate to the development of human resource capacity and to the production, exchange and dissemination of information-content issues, including pedagogical issues (James, 2001, 1). Note that institutions were doing this at the time where the IT industry was expanding in South Africa, which made it difficult for institutions to keep up with the competition for ICT skilled people on the labour market. One of our interviewees referred to the Computer Centre at Wits University as computer lodge to highlight the difficulties in retaining qualified staff in the centre. The third challenge concerns the relatively low ICT capacity and skills shortage in higher education. The skills base in ICT policy remains very low; few institutions are devoting much attention to this area. Policy choices in this regard will require innovative strategies to minimize or contain the accelerated brain drain of ICT skills to Western countries while expanding the existing pool of skills. Recent decision to embark on a strategy aimed at encouraging retention or repatriation of South African highly skilled workers is to be applauded. Against this background we would argue that increasing the pool of available ICT skills should be a key component of any ICT-related policy in higher education in South Africa. Given the apartheid legacy that has pushed gender discrimination to its extreme, the encouragement of girls and women to use and produce ICTs should also be given attention to ensure that there is equitable access to ICTs and the benefits they can offer. The South African Constitution provides an enabling environment in this regard. There is a great deal of evidence indicating that in this context ICTs do affect the experiences and life of women and men differently (James, 2001). The shortage of classroom face-to-face instruction and the increasing demand expected as the secondary school system regains its feet will certainly result in greater pressures in the use of ICTs to increase access to lifelong learning. Finally, these challenges cannot be met successfully without an enabling strategy regarding research capacity in ICT-related policy. To note also that the expansion of ICTs in the school system through projects such as Gauteng-Online.com, the Khanya project, etc., will put more pressures to tertiary institutions in addressing the needs of school graduates. Finally, South African higher education has gone a long way to turn research into a major component of ICT policy and practice and funding has been made available to this particular field from a variety of sources. To mention a few, the identification of an ICT focus area in the research programme of the National Foundation represents a significant development in this direction. The research programme on skills on demand driven by the Department of Science, Arts and Technology as well as the constitution of several ICT research thrusts in several institutions are also worth mentioning. Against this background, it is our view that, matched with Hanson and Holmberg s analytical framework, South African higher education institutions cannot as yet claim a paradigm shift in the policy choices, strategies and practices that underpin the use of ICTs. Paradigm shifts would include changing teaching and learning practices and systemic change through ICT. Even under the Increase and Protect categories the South African ICT policy initiatives concerning higher education reflect poor relationships between technology and issues of access, quality, production and cooperation. The existing strategies make no sound assumptions about ICT and access, ICT and production, ICT and cooperation or ICT and quality. In terms of the category Protect there is no doubt that while the higher education policy does not deal with issues of culture and local economic context, it does imply protection of culture and nationhood through reference to issues such as democracy, equity, tolerance and development of locally relevant solutions and development of African conceptions of knowledge. For example, as stated in its preamble, the NRF research programme is premised on the assumption that South Africa needs to unlock the relationship between knowledge, technology, and the uniquely South African social and economic development realities that the country faces (NRF, 2006, http://www.nrf.ac.za/focusareas/ict/). Institutions such as the University of the Witwatersrand, the University of Cape Town, the University of Kwazulu-Natal, the University of the Western Cape and Rhodes University in particular would certainly be weary of entertaining any change driven by technology. References African National Congress. (1994) The Reconstruction and Development Programme A Policy Framework, Johannesburg: Umanyano Publications. Barker, P. (1997) Assessing Attitudes to Electronic Lectures, in S. Armstrong, G. Thompson and S. Brown (eds.) Facing up to Radical Changes in Universities and Colleges, London: Kogan Page Limited, published in association with the Staff and Educational Development Association, pp.916. Benner, C. (2003) Digital development and disruption in South Africa: balancing growth and equity in national ICT policies, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 2(1): 126. Cloete, N. (1998) Paper presented at the first national conference for Student Services practitioners, Mimeo. Council on Higher Education. (2000) Towards a New Higher Education Landscape: Meeting the Equity, Quality and Social Development Imperatives of South Africa in the 21st Century, Pretoria:Council on Higher Education. Cross, M. and Harper, A. (1999) Campus Diversity Audit, Pretoria: CHET. Cross, M. and Madiba, M. (2006) Changing Pedagogy for Changing Technology: A Case Study of the Multimedia Group at the University of Cape Town, Mimeo, School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand. Daniel, J. (1997) Technology: its role and impact on education delivery; more means better, Plenary address (theme 5) technology and its impact on education delivery. 13th Commonwealth Conference of Education Ministers Parallel Convention, Botswana. Department of Education. (1997a) Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education, Pretoria: South African Government. Available online. Department of Education. (1997b) Higher Education Act 101, Pretoria: Department of Education, South African Parliament. Department of Education. (2001) National Plan for Higher Education, Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2002a) An implementation framework for the Department of Educations National ICT strategy, Developed for the Minister of Educations ICT Task Team by SchoolNet SA, SAIDE and the Department of Education, Pretoria. Department of Education. (2002b) The Transformation and Reconstruction of Higher Education System, Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2003a) White Paper on e-Education (Draft for Discussion), Pretoria:Department of Education. Department of Education. (2003b) Draft White Paper on e-Education (Transforming Learning and Teaching through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)), Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2004) White Paper on e-education, Pretoria: Department of Education. GCIS. (2002) Mbeki hosts international advisory council on information society and development. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage Publications. Gillwald, A. (2001) Building Castells in the Ether, in J. Muller, N. Cloete and S. Badat (eds.) Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with Manuel Castells, Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman, pp. 168194. Hall, M. (2001) Education and the Margins of the Network Society, in J. Muller, N. Cloete and S. Badat (eds.) Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with Manuel Castells, Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman, pp. 224243. Hanson, H. and Holmberg, C. (2003) A European and Swedish Perspective on ICT Policies and Strategies in Education: National and in Institutional Pathways: Crossings, Blind Alleys and Uphill Slopes, Stockholm: IIE. Harris, M.H. (1998) Is the revolution now over, or has it just begun? A year of the internet in higher education, Internet in Higher Education 1(14): 248. Institute of International Education (IIE). (2001) Virtualization of higher education in the era of globalization. Issues and trends. Supported by the Swedish Research Council; Departments of Education and communication. James, T. (2001) An Information Policy Handbook for Southern Africa: A Knowledge Base for Decision Makers, Johannesburg: International Development Research Centre. Available online. Keogh, K.M. (2001) National strategies for the promotion of on-line learning in higher education, European Journal of Education 36(2): 223236. Kishun, R. (1998) Internationalization in South Africa, in P. Scott (ed.) The Globalization of Higher Education, Buckingham: SRHE, Open Universit, pp. 5869. Kraak, A. (2000) Changing Modes: A Brief Overview of the Mode 2 Knowledge Debate and its Impact on South African Policy Formulation, in A. Kraak (ed.) ChangingModes. NewKnowledge Production and its Implications for Higher Education, Pretoria: Human Science Research Council, pp. 137. Lo fstedt, J.I. (1999) Is Higher Education Turning Virtual? The Virtual University: Issues and Challenges, in I. Fa gerlind, I Holmesland and G. Stro nquivist (eds.) Higher Education at the Crossroads Tradition or Transformation?, Stockholm University: IIE, pp. 147169. Mhlanga, E. (2005) University support for lifelong learning: A case for E-learning at the University of the Witwatersrand. Muller, J. (2000) What Knowledge is of Most Worth for the Millennial Citizen, in A. Kraak (ed.) Changing Modes. NewKnow ledge Production and its Implications for Higher Education, Pretoria: Human Science Research Council, pp. 7087. National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE). (1996) A Framework for Transformation, Pretoria: National Commission on Higher Education. National Information and Technology Forum (NTF). (1996) Position Paper, Pretoria. National Research Foundation (NRF). (2006) Focus area: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and the Information Society in South Africa. Available online. National Working Group. (2002) The Restructuring of the Higher Education System in South Africa. Report of the National Working Group to the Minister of Education, Pretoria. Noam, E.M. (1995) Electronics and the Dim Future of the University, Science 270, pp. 247249. SchoolNet-SA. (2002a) Proposal for the strategic investment in educational ICTs in South Africa by the World Economic Forum, for World Economic Forum SA Task Team (unpublished). SchoolNet-SA. (2002b) Audit of major educational ICT projects in South Africa, for World Economic Forum SA Task Team. (unpublished). SchoolNet-SA. (2002c) An Implementation Framework for the Department of Educations National ICT Strategy. Scott, P. (1997) Changes in Knowledge Production and Dissemination in the Context of Globalization, in N. Cloete, J. Muller, M. W. Makgoba and D. Ekong (eds.) Knowledge Identity and Curriculum Transformation in Africa, section 2. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman. Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. (1999) Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies and the Entreprenureal University, Baltimore, USA: The John Hopkins University Press. South African Departments of Education and Communications. (2001) Strategy for Information and Communication Technology in Education. Available online. The Council on Higher Education. (2004) South African Higher Education in the First Decade of Democracy, Pretoria: CHE. Tiffin, J. and Rajasingham, L. (1995) In Search of the Virtual Class, London: Routledge. Tracey, M. (1999) Whatever It Is, It Is Ours to Think About. Communications Issues in the 1990s: A Philosophical Framework for the IIC, in R. Winsbury and S. Fazal (eds.) Vision and Hindsight: The First 25 Years of the International Institute for Communications, London: John Libbey and Company, pp. 210235. Twigg, C.A. (2003) Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: New Models for Online Learning EDUCAUSE Review Article . Van der Wende, M. and Beerkens, E. (1999) An international orientation of institutional strategies and governmental policies for the use of ICT in higher education, Interactive Learning Environments 7(23): 283321. Warwick, D. (1999) Globalisation: challenges and opportunities for UK higher education, Keynote at Association of University Administrators Conference. Available online. Wilson, M., Qayyum, A. and Boshier, R. (1998) World Wide America? Think globally, click locally, Distance Education 19: 109123, C:\HEP stock 2006\ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in South Africa for publication (Higher Education Policy)1.doc. Table 1 Provinces and computers in schools (2000) Provinces Schools with Schools with computers for Learner computer computers (%) teaching and learning (%) ratio Eastern Cape 8.8 4.5 373:1 Free State 20.6 8.6 181:1 Gauteng 82.5 41.4 65:1 KwaZulu-Natal 18.6 10.0 228:1 Mpumalanga 8.7 8.7 298:1 Northern Cape 57.3 25.3 95:1 Limpopo 11.3 4.6 463:1 North West 21.7 7.6 254:1 Western Cape 78.3 45.2 66:1 National 24.4 12.3 164:1 Source: White Paper on e-Education (Draft for Discussion)  fg" $ % w x   \ ] R S H I 3 4 w x ⯡rddddhCJOJQJ^JaJh^,ho5>*OJQJ^J hoh^,CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh^,CJOJQJ^JaJ hohoCJOJQJ^JaJ hY7hoCJOJQJ^JaJ hY7hY7CJOJQJ^JaJhoOJQJ^J&hoho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ'3efg# $ % "n dh7$8$H$gdo^H dh7$8$H$gdo 7$8$H$gdY7 7$8$H$gdorNO()vw\]lm  RS45|} !jk TU ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJhRCJOJQJ^JaJh=CJOJQJ^JaJh)CJOJQJ^JaJ hohDCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhDCJOJQJ^JaJ hohoCJOJQJ^JaJ556EFjkNO89 "pqӴ&hF%ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhLCJOJQJ^JaJhYyqCJOJQJ^JaJhLCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhRCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJhRCJOJQJ^JaJ/~  ""$$$$%%1%Y%v%~%%%%%%) dh7$8$H$gdF%gd| dh7$8$H$gd45# dh7$8$H$gdo^HGH%&pq  LMVW]^ܯta$hh45#0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jhh45#CJOJQJU^JaJ h45#h45#CJOJQJ^JaJ#jh45#CJOJQJU^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJh45#CJOJQJ^JaJhwCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJ#hwhw>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&CDJK, - } ~  !!j!k!!!""R"S"""""##L#M#####3$4${$|$$$$$$$$$$Әh| hAfh|h|CJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJh ?oCJOJQJ^JaJ h45#h45#CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJh45#CJOJQJ^JaJ3$$$% % %%%%%%'%)%=%?%G%I%d%i%}%~%%%%%%%&&&&N&O&^&_&&&&&&&&&&(')'L'M'N'˺| hF%hF%CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJh?LCJOJQJ^JaJhF%CJOJQJ^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJh|CJOJQJ^JaJh| hAfh|jh|UmHnHu0N'p'q'''''( (L(M(((((((((9):)M)O)))))))))*O*P*****1+2+++++,,c,d,,,ᴠ~~~~~~~~hMCJOJQJ^JaJ&hF%hF%5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hF%ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hF%CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh?LCJOJQJ^JaJhF%CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJ1)))*,,,337@:A:;;==@@@@DKFkFlFH dh7$8$H$gdQ dh7$8$H$gd]s dh7$8$H$gd; dh7$8$H$gdF%,,!-"-f-g---..Q.R.....?/@/////00e0f00000O1P111113242222233_3`33333޴УУУУУУУУУУУУ h;hxCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h;hoCJOJQJ^JaJh;CJOJQJ^JaJhMCJOJQJ^JaJhxCJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hMCJOJQJ^JaJ13344l4m44455T5U55555=6>6w6x6666666B7C777&8'8i8j88899M9N9s9t99999*:+:?:@:A:::::;;f;g;´••••hz[CJOJQJ^JaJ h]sh]sCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJh]sCJOJQJ^JaJ h;hoCJOJQJ^JaJha$CJOJQJ^JaJ:g;;;;;;;;E<F<<<<<)=*=x=y========)>*>w>x>>> ? ?L?M???????2@3@@@@FAGAAAAA+B,BzB{BBBBӣhQCJOJQJ^JaJ h]sh#CJOJQJ^JaJh#CJOJQJ^JaJ h]shz[CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhz[CJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJ:BBCCgChCCCJDKDDDDD(E)EsEtEEEEEFFFFjFkFlFFFGGQGRGGGGG3H4H~HHHHHHHCIDIQI´••••••••´• hQhcCJOJQJ^JaJhcCJOJQJ^JaJ hQhQCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hQhoCJOJQJ^JaJhQCJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJh#CJOJQJ^JaJ2HHcK`MaM~NRPSPRTUU,V-V[[[___M` c cZemg dh7$8$H$gdK dh7$8$H$gdx dh7$8$H$gd* dh7$8$H$gdQQIRIIIIIII4J5J}J~JJJKKKKKKBLCLdLfLLLLL#M$M_M`MaMMMMM;N*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hxho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hxh5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ-[[\ \\\U\V\\\\\7]8]g]h]]]]]]]&^'^v^w^^^ _ _\_]_______````6a7ayazaaaaabb`babbbbb±±±±±±±±±Ÿ#jhKCJOJQJU^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJhKCJOJQJ^JaJhTHCJOJQJ^JaJ hxhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hxhxCJOJQJ^JaJ9bbbbbc c c c cUcVccccccc3d4d~ddddeeeeee8f9fffff$g%gggggɷwwwwwwwwwwwwwiihOCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJ$hhK0JCJOJQJ^JaJ#jhKCJOJQJU^JaJ/jhhKCJOJQJU^JaJhKCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhKCJOJQJ^JaJ)mgggiiCrssOvxyyzzzzzzzzzzz{{ $Ifgd5 dh7$8$H$gdW dh7$8$H$gda; dh7$8$H$gdKgghh]h^hhhhhCiDiiiiii(j)jojpjjjkkTkUkkkkk0l1l}l~lllmmgmhmmmnnOnPnnnnn o"oToUooooo?p@pppppﱣha;CJOJQJ^JaJ ha;hoCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhOCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhOCJOJQJ^JaJ@pqqdqeqqqqqrrrrss(sksmsnsossssssssDtEttttt1u2uӰӘwfXfXfXfXfXhWCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhoCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ$hh!y0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jhh!yCJOJQJU^JaJ ha;h!yCJOJQJ^JaJ#jh!yCJOJQJU^JaJh!yCJOJQJ^JaJha;CJOJQJ^JaJ ha;hoCJOJQJ^JaJ"2uwuxuuuvvvvvv/w0w|w}wwwxx[x\xxxyyylymyyyyy z z$z%z1zdzfzgzhzzzzzzŴӴӊw$hhWy0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jOhhWyCJOJQJU^JaJ#jhWyCJOJQJU^JaJ hWhWyCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhWyCJOJQJ^JaJhWCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhoCJOJQJ^JaJ-zzzzzz{({){{{{{{{@|A|J|L|||||||||}}$}&}{}|}}}}}}}}}7~8~̻yyyrrk h/qh5 h_nh5 hIwh5 hh5 heh5 hzhuh5 h_h5 hOh5h5&h5h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h5h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ#h5h5>*CJOJQJ^JaJh5CJOJQJ^JaJ*{{ {){Q{x{{{{neeeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5{{{{|2|A|K|neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5K|L|j||||||neeeeee $Ifgd5kdR$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5|||}}%}neeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5%}&}F}a}|}}}}neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5}}}}~8~A~F~neeeeee $Ifgd5kdo$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt58~E~G~e~f~~~~~~~%&35deDFhjtvՀրڀ܀ <=JL^_ƁǁсӁ"$EFh5CJOJQJ^JaJ h` +h5 h}5h5 h&h5 hZh5 hy!wh5 h|h5 h h5 hhjh5 h=8h5 hQh5h5 h/qh5=F~G~f~~~~~~neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5~~~~&/4neeeeee $Ifgd5kd-$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt545Reneeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5!:DEneeeeeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5 EF_ijuneeee $Ifgd5kdJ$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5uv΀րۀneeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5ۀ܀ 5=FKneeeeee $Ifgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5KL_ǁҁneeeee $Ifgd5kdg $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5ҁӁ#neeee $Ifgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5#$<Fmneeeee $Ifgd5kd% $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5҄%PQni]]QQQQQ dh7$8$H$gdf dh7$8$H$gdWgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5 ۂ܂)*pqIJhiST78Ӈԇ OPQ޴£{mh.CJOJQJ^JaJ&hfhf5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hfho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhfCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh0CJOJQJ^JaJhfCJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhWyCJOJQJ^JaJ*Q8"cdfhijklmSTU dh7$8$H$gdb 7$8$H$gdJDgdJD 7$8$H$gdo dh7$8$H$gdf9:‰ÉωЉ&'`ahiqrvwGHLMdenoz{ST89ǍȍUVhoCJOJQJ^JaJh|~CJOJQJ^JaJh4 wCJOJQJ^JaJh.CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJHefBC֐אjk'(z{’ !<=SUcdefg޴޴ަޘrdjh/BUmHnHuhJDCJOJQJ^JaJ.jh/BCJOJQJU^JaJmHnHuhbCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJh,}CJOJQJ^JaJhHPoCJOJQJ^JaJh|~CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hfh|~CJOJQJ^JaJ&ghmMOܔݔ,-yzRSTUNONO>?ؙٙ ݳzz h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ&h/ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h/ h/ 5>*CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJ hbhoCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJD0p(~WPQP23ĵ dh7$8$H$gd?B dh7$8$H$gdb XYқԛlmJKsu/0`bIJڟ۟lmGH/0ǢȢXYKL56 h?Bh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJLȥɥhi23ʧ˧hi 45}~ͪϪOP®xxxxxxxxxxxxxxh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yh \Y5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yh/ 5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ)PQ78|}ɬʬ`a67yzƯǯ123|}ǰȰdeGHhiMN޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴£޴޴޴޴޴ h?BhbCJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ@./~ OP45wxŷǷ[\DE۹ܹ)*vwȺɺbcּ׼#$pq ZӣhpCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhB|CJOJQJ^JaJhB|CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhbCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJ:6tupHIUst{|&''{| dh7$8$H$gd?BZ[#%IJ78stubcJK(),-bcӣh{CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhpCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhpCJOJQJ^JaJ9GHI./vwRT=>lmCDrstʶx h?Bh{kCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh{kCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ&h{kh{k5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h{kho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh{CJOJQJ^JaJ, PQFG./z{|fg+,vw YZ45 UVYZ@AhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh2UCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh2UCJOJQJ^JaJF*+xy [\%&'pq WXEFst [\z{|cd޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴£ޕޕޕޕh CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh?BCJOJQJ^JaJhECJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ:OP45VWX67"#pq_`LM#$noGH,-z{ hb%'CJOJQJ^JaJh?BCJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh?BCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh CJOJQJ^JaJA|WXWX|}~ dh7$8$H$gd?B VWX89 !op VW01ef{|01STxyXYᴤh+vho5>*OJQJ^Jh+vCJOJQJ^JaJhb%'CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bhb%'CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ@2UZsp dh7$8$H$gd?BPQqr-.nouvEFpqEF no&'ABab?@{|<=YZuvh `CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh+vCJOJQJ^JaJSMrpC}[Ff|ohx+ dh7$8$H$gd?BvDEde()YZ*+:;mn fgvw)*)& ' c d     6 7     1 3 N O o p        h `CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJYse  8 q   m rs| $$Ifa$$If 7$8$H$edgdJD dh7$8$H$gd?B  H I         k l    !rs"#9owx7mtu !4ipqȺȬȬȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺh/BCJOJQJ^JaJ)hJDhJDB*CJOJQJ^JaJphhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJ hJDhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDOJQJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh `CJOJQJ^JaJ6|sjs $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$If|kd $$Ifedl0^%%"0%4 laitytJD"_YPGP $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifedl\^zz%  0%4 laitytJD"#16w_YPG $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd` $$Ifedl3\^zz%  0%4 laitytJDwxoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd/ $$Ifedl-F z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD,2toi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDtuoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd{$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD oi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd?$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD !*0poi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDpq}oi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDq.`ghn h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhHS^hJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJh/BCJOJQJ^JaJ hJDhJDCJOJQJ^JaJoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD#)goi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$IfkdO$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDghoi$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD dh7$8$H$gd?B$Ifikd$$Ifedl%%0%4 laitytJD,1h/ =!"#$% DyK  http://wwwyK http://www//DyK +www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.aspyK dhttp://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp}DyK Dhttp://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdfyK http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy November 2001.pdfEDyK 4http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htmyK hhttp://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5$$Ifed!vh55%"#v#v%":V l0%55%"4itytJD$$Ifed!vh555 5 #v#v#v #v :V l0%,555 5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh555 5 #v#v#v #v :V l30%555 5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l-0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0ÿ%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5%#v%:V l0%,5%4itytJD@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k@(No List6U@6 45# Hyperlink >*B*phj@j 5 Table Grid7:V0bOb JDDefault 7$8$H$-B*CJOJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH 3  36 3efg#$%" n ~1Yv~!!!"$$$++/@2A233558888<K>k>l>@@cC`EaE~FRHSHJLMM,N-NSSSWWWMX [ [Z]m___aaCjkkOnpqqrrrrrrrrrrrsss s)sQsxssssssst2tAtKtLtjttttttttuu%u&uFuau|uuuuuuuv8vAvFvGvfvvvvvvvvvw&w/w4w5wRwewwwwwwwwxx!x:xDxExFx_xixjxuxvxxxxxxxx y5y=yFyKyLy_yyyyyyyzz#z$zAGHW]hJ0pCB0J0C@0J0 CpJ0  D@J0  PD@J0DpJ0DpHJ0DJ0 J00EpJ0hE@J0E@8J0E@0$N',3g;BQINU[bgp2uz8~gPZ v q)Hmg{{K||%}}F~~4EuۀKҁ#Q|"wt pgZZ[knkk$rgrr XXXX8@d(  HB  C DHB  C DHB  C DHB  C D   S L .`T`T`T`T#"  HB  C DB S  ?~df TTtHHtHHtttTt *T3@CWNCWTNCWNCWMCWMCWTMCWMCWLCWLCWTLCWLCWKCWKCWTKCWKCWJCWJCWTJCWJCWICW5CWd5CW$5CW4CW4CWd4CW$4CW3CW3CWd3CW$3CW2CW2CWd2CW$2CW1CW1CWd1CW$1CW0CW0CWd0CW$0CW/CW/CWd/CW$/CW.CW.CWd.CW$.CW-DW-DWd-DW?DWt?DW4?DW>DW>DWt>DW4> DW= DW= DW DW DWdfDWDWwDW<>DW=DW=DW|=DW<=DW|<DW<DW<DW;DW<<DW:DW DW|DWjDW$kDW DW!DWd"DW #DW< $DW %DW&DW܅ 'DW(DW)DW*DWx+DW ,DWl-DWR.DW/DWD0DW1DW02DWl3DW- 4DW 5DW,!6DWl!7DW!8DW!9DW,":DW;DWTDW?DWT@DWADWBDWCDWTDDWEDWFDWGDWTHDWIDWJDWKDWTLDWMDWNDWODWT©PDWQDWRDWSDWTTDWUDWVDWWDWTXDWYDWZDW[DWT\DW]DW^DW_DWT`DWaDWbDWcDWTdDWTeDW4UfDWtUgDWUhDWUiDW4VjDWtVkDWVlDWVmDW4WnDWtWoDWWpDWWqDW4XrDWtXsDWXtDWXuDW4YvDWtYwDWYxDWYyDW4ZzDWtZ{DWZ|DWZ}DW4[~DWt[DW[DW[DW4\DWt\DW\DW\DW4]DWt]DW]DW]DW4^DWt^DW^DW^DW4_DWt_DW_DW_DW4`DWt`DW`DW`DW4aDWtaDWaDWaDW4bDWtbDWbDWbDW4cDWtcDWcDWcDW4dDWtdDWdDWdDW4eDWteDWeDWeDW4fDWtfDWfDWfDW4gDWtgDWgDWgDW4hDWthDWhDWhDW4iDWtiDWiDWiDW4jDWtjDWjDWjDW4kDWtkDWkDWkDW4lDWtlDWlDWl33]]44 !!""OO``.f.fgg5l5lrrksksttuxxxxyހ''/TT̅ff"5HHPooƠƠ }}es}ϩϩʪʪժƬͲײײ˴$$NN II 33)<FcYYeSSNN}}''}}11TT^;;GG ll}$$BBqqxm55##xxuu! q q          !"#$%&'()*+,-./0213456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdehfgijklmnopqrsutvwxyz{|}~??ii@@ !!""OO(`(`:f:fggAlAlrrwswsttuxxy y y.77``„„݅rr3?OXX{{ҠҠ o{۩۩Ӫ¬ϬϬвǴմ.. ZZUU ##;;%2BOpcmm[[VV--99]hhCC¿SSxx**HHv||sAA//**( { {      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0213456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdeghfijklmnopqrsutvwxyz{|}~9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplaceB*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState )- D H k o U [ KO pt&! NV  f!o!%#&###3$<$&(&' (O(Y(**//u4476E66699N:R:m:q:::1;;;>???????@@AA$B(BEEEFHHMIQIMMfOiOjOoOtO|OPPSS~TTUUVVWWWXaXXX Y YYY([2[Q[U[B\E\F\K\P\X\]]/]9]n^r^T_X_``!b'bddrl|lmmnnnnooooppqquuvvvx|x ||||||W[ĆφhqNRΊҊ=A8<Ɩʖʙpzim͞ўistx 5<æ̦֦ͦ 'bf! dk :>-1$,#+$(qrZd\_`ejrNR26% )dm"3CCKairx/8FKjp NSjqx+4},5OUqvyr  DVI!X!$$//x03144*7.78888<<cCfC~FFLLWWMXVXYYZ]e]m_p_mhnhOnVnpp||%}-}"O^mupxi(-W]PT[dժ6?pzUV',;Cnp0 r}YlnfioUfx+8QRce-@Zkmjpr 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333ffg"Z [kk$rrvvDEdeff()YZ*+:;mn fgvw)*&)&'cd6713NOopHI kl !qr   r JIY7Mbx/BB|#45#a$b%'1>.;a;g;?BJDTHo^HO2U \Yz[HS^{k ?oHPoYyq+v4 w||~*=W `/ fL?)D]sW5?LR-u.WyF%Kbxw,} ^,!yoQpcEy0{}zLrrrss)sssssAtKtLttttttu%u&u|uuuuu8vFvGvfvvvvv&w4w5wewwwwwxExFxixjxuxvxxxxx y=yKyLy_yyyyyz#z$zFzzzzrs|"#16wx,2tu ! * 0 p q }        # ) g h    @##I## @UnknownG: Times New Roman5Symbol3& : Arial9AdvTimes=AdvTimes-baNEACB P+ Adv TimesAdv TimesaNEACD B+ Adv TimesAdv TimesaNEACD D+ Adv TimesAdv Times"qhxĦF>+'G+'GY24d2HX)?o22ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education inuwcuwcOh+'0 , L X dpx4ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education inuwcNormaluwc62Microsoft Office Word@N*@T˦@^0ԩ+'G՜.+,D՜.+,` hp|  uwc' 3ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSA8an 4http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htmT =?@http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy November 2001.pdfT G2http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.aspT ~+ http://www/T   !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789;<=>?@ACDEFGHINRoot Entry FxIԩPData i1TableWordDocument.SummaryInformation(:DocumentSummaryInformation8BCompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/cshe/templates/page/download_page_tpl.php on line 23

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/cshe/templates/page/download_page_tpl.php on line 24

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/cshe/templates/page/download_page_tpl.php on line 25

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/classes/core/engine_class_inc.php:802) in /srv/www/htdocs/cshe/modules/cshe/templates/page/download_page_tpl.php on line 26
ࡱ> MOJKL%` bjbjٕ .r4XUXUXUXU<V\XTWLHXHXHXHX\\\ךٚٚٚٚٚٚ$hW[\HXHX 8HXHXךךHXW uvIԩXUU8ۖ(0X@\ i qs={d\\\\\\Xd:t?t? ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in South Africa: National and Institutional Pathways Michael Cross and Fatima Adam School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand, Private Bag 3 Wits, Witwatersrand 2050, RSA. E-mail: Michael.Cross@wits.ac.za, AdamF3@hse.pg.wits.ac.za This paper focuses on policy initiatives and strategies used to promote the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in higher education in South Africa. It explores a wider international outlook and current debates in South Africa to map out an emerging South African perspective concerning the integration of ICT in higher education. It also provides a brief survey of key policy developments on e-education in general to contextualize the use of ICTs. In doing so, the paper addresses the following questions: What general goals do policy makers in South Africa express in national policy documents for the integration of ICT in the education system? What is the role of government regarding the use of ICT in higher education? What policies and strategies for ICT do leaders of South African higher education institutions develop? How do South African national priorities and higher education institutional strategies match? Introduction This paper focuses on policy initiatives and strategies used to promote the use of tools and concepts associated with information and communication technologies (ICTs) with a view to realizing their potential in achieving national, social and economic development goals. It explores a wider international outlook and current debates in South Africa to map out an emerging South African perspective concerning the integration of ICT in higher education. The paper also provides a brief survey of key policy developments on e-education in general to contextualize the integration of ICTs in higher education. In doing so, the paper addresses the following main questions: What general goals do policy makers in South Africa express in national policy documents for the integration of ICT in the education system? What is the role of government regarding the use of ICT in higher education? What policies and strategies for ICT in education do leaders of higher education institutions develop? How do South African national priorities and higher education institutional strategies match? There are three critical dimensions to the argument pursued in this paper. First, in broader lines the paper shows that, while South Africa has gone a long way in adopting an exemplary approach to integration of ICTs in schools, it lacks a national policy framework concerning the role of ICTs in higher education. Institutions have to rely on a series of incoherent and fragmented statements scattered through several policy documents in higher education to make institutional choices aligned with national concerns (NCHE, 1996; Department of Education, 1997a, www.polity.org.za, b; Council on Higher Education, 2000; National Working Group, 2002). Second, the paper argues that, given the contextual diversity at the national, regional and institutional levels, institutions have opted for varied pathways in their efforts to integrate ICTs in the curriculum design and delivery and research work. There is no one-fits-all approach; policy approaches differ from institution to institution, and from department to department in each institution. Elsewhere (Cross and Madiba, 2006), we deal with the challenge of extracting from the differences, replicable common denominators that can be applied across the system. Third, while the literature indicates that policy and implementation trends throughout the world tend to respond to global drivers (knowledge economy and ICT) at the expense of national and institutional interests (Kishun, 1998), the South African experience shows that how South African institutions have responded to these drivers reflects local contextual complexities. We go along with the argument pursued by Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 1) that the different political values embedded in national education systems, the values and visions advocated by political leaders, the value differences held within and across individual institutions and consequent value conflicts, often not explicit, understood or recognized, are y major inhibitors for systemic change. Put differently, technological, epistemological and pedagogical choices in the implementation of ICTs are mediated by institutional academic legacies and micro-politics. In this perspective, the pace, direction of change and its institutional peculiarities cannot be separated from local contextual challenges. There is room for national and institutionally informed choices at a number of levels, despite indications that global imperatives lead to an almost inevitable compliance (Slaughter and Leslie, 1999). Theory and Method Drawing on Twigg (2003), Mhlanga (2005) identifies four main categories concerning the extent of integration of ICTs in academic practice: the supplemental model, the replacement model, the emporium model and the buffet model, which highlight the extent to which institutions have transformed their practices in order to take full advantage of ICT. In the case of the supplemental model, institutions retain their traditional structure of courses and the face-to-face mode of delivery and integrate e-learning as a teaching tool. The replacement model implies a more fundamental shift in practice, involving significant reduction of traditional face-to-face encounter, which is replaced by online, interactive learning activities (Twigg, 2003, 33  HYPERLINK "http://www" http://www. educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0352.pdf). Like the replacement model, the emporium model also entails a fundamentally different approach to teaching and learning from traditional practice. Face to face is replaced with a learning resource centre (or several resource centres) for online materials and on demand personalized assistance. The buffet model offers an assortment of different paths that suit the students different learning styles, abilities and tastes at each stage of the course. The four models have specific implications for instructional design and delivery and the prevailing institutional cultures. In some cases, incipient combinations of these models can be found. We pay particular attention to these models in our analysis of ICT institutional policies and processes. While these models offer a useful analytical basis for mapping out the position of ICTs with reference to university priorities and policy choices, they fall short from explaining the policy choices and the nature of change brought about by ICTs, particularly at epistemological and pedagogical levels. We have addressed this shortcoming by combining Twiggs framework with Hanson and Holmbergs theory. In their theory, Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 3) use a framework with three categories to analyse policy on ICT, namely Increase, Protect and Change. Increase entails strategies to promote access, cooperation, production and quality; Protect includes protective measures around culture and economy and Change comprises actions on systems, power relations and epistemology. Both Increase and Protect do not imply any paradigm shift, while Change requires a paradigm shift and therefore is fundamental to higher education reform. Existing paradigm Paradigm Shift  Increase Protect Change  Access Culture Systems Cooperation Economy Power relations Production Epistemology Quality  From Hanson, H. and Holmberg, C.A. (2003), p. 4. This framework offers important parameters for assessing the significance of ICT policies and strategies in institutional or systemic transformation. With this conceptual framework in mind, our methodological strategy included the study of background documents from the Department of Education, the Department of Science, Arts and Technology, the reports of the Centre for Educational Technology and Distance ducation (CETDE). At institutional level, we examined the mission statements, ICT projects founding documents and all other documents, which highlight the positioning of the institutions regarding ICTs. A limited number of interviews were undertaken with institutional leaders involved in ICT activities. The review of these documents was combined with the scrutiny of the national and international literature on ICTs policies. Where appropriate, deductive and inductive analyses were used, but ultimately our experience and informed judgement played a critical role in our interpretation of policy. National Vision for Higher Education and the ICT Project in South Africa: Challenges and Constraints The report of the National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) released in September 1996, the White Paper on Higher Education (1997), the Higher Education Act (1997) set out the national vision for higher education in South Africa. Three main features underpin this vision: (i) increased participation; (ii) greater responsiveness and (iii) increased cooperation and partnerships (NCHE, 1996; Cloete, 1998; Cross and Harper, 1999). Increased participation was to be achieved through an expansion of student enrolments, feeder constituencies and programme offerings, guided by the principles of equity and redress as well as alignment with the South African demographic realities and developmental concerns. Responsiveness to societal interests and needs requires engagement with the challenges posed by the South African context: elimination of racial discrimination and oppression, equity, social justice and equal opportunity. Aspects of this context had to be reflected in the content, focus and delivery modes of higher education programmes as well as in the institutional missions and policies. For this purpose, governance structures had to provide for wider stakeholder consultation and participation in decision-making processes. At an epistemological level, concerns with responsiveness were symptomatic of a shift from closed knowledge systems (controlled and driven by canonical norms of traditional disciplines and by collegially recognized authority) to more open knowledge systems with greater mix of programmes and growth in transdisciplinary, transfaculty and transinstitutional programmes (in dynamic interaction with external social interests, consumer or client demand and other processes of knowledge generation). Concerns with responsiveness had also implications for the research function of higher education. In this regard, researchers needed to interact not only with their colleagues in universities, but also with knowledge producers in a range of other organizations. Higher education institutions had to display greater accountability towards the taxpayer and the client/consumer regarding the cost-effectiveness, quality and relevance of teaching and research programmes. In essence, heightened responsiveness and accountability expressed greater impact of the market and civil society on higher education and the consequent need for appropriate forms of regulation (NCHE, 1996, 67). Finally, the inherited tendency towards academic insularity and institutional self-reliance had to make way to the recognition of the interdependence between multiple actors and interests with a stake in higher education through cooperation and partnerships. A single, coordinated system was proposed as the only way in which the inequities, ineffectiveness and inefficiencies of the existing system could be eradicated. Cooperative governance was proposed and adopted as the most appropriate mode of higher education governance. In line with this policy, the directive role of the state was reconceived as steering and coordination. The state would use financial incentives and other steering mechanisms as opposed to measures of control and top-down prescription. Institutional autonomy was to be exercised within the re-defined framework of accountability (NCHE, 1996, 78). Cooperation has implications for relations between higher education and the institutions of civil society. The vision called for more linkages and partnerships between higher education institutions and commercial enterprises, parastatals, research bodies and NGOs, nationally and regionally. Cooperation has implications for relations between and within higher education institutions. To do more with less, the vision emphasized new partnerships and cooperative ventures among regional clusters of institutions to optimize the use of human and infrastructural resources. Increased cooperation and partnerships among a broader range of constituencies would require participatory, responsible and accountable structures and procedures. These would depend upon trust and constructive interaction among all constituencies (NCHE, 1996, 7680). In addition, with the introduction of a new neo-liberal macro-economic policy framework GEAR (Growth, Expansion and Redistribution) efficiency and managerialism became important features of the national fiscal policy and were integrated in the national vision for higher education. This is implicitly articulated in the main implementation documents (CHE, 2000; Department of Education, 2001, 2002a, b; National Working Group, 2002). Arguably the restructuring and rationalization strategies in higher education are rooted in the discourses of efficiency and performativity, which have led the emerging concept of universities as businesses. A whole new vocabulary has become dominant in university circles: outsourcing, core business, scenarios, business units, contracting, etc. There is often a tension between efficiency in terms of saving money and the demands of knowledge and the mission of the institution. Most institutions have attempted to respond to these challenges within the context of a transformatory process which impacts on every aspect of academic life, from student access and support, staff recruitment and retention, to academic programmes development and the social and learning environment on campus. Many academic staff find themselves in a state of flux characterized by a sense of unpredictability, uncertainty and overload and, in some instances, despondency. This situation is made more tenuous by significant cuts in state subsidy to higher education institutions and a shrinking resource base. At some point, many institutions found themselves confronted with fundamental issues of survival to be saved by the mergers. Where and how does ICT feature in this policy context? Increased participation and access, greater responsiveness, inter-institutional coordination and partnerships and efficiency key aspects in South African higher education vision open immense opportunities and possibilities for ICTs in systemic and institutional development. The national vision points by implication to a critical role of ICTs. However, it appears that ICTs have not received enough attention in higher education. As it will be shown later, ICTs are not prioritized per se, unless institutional planners and practitioners have conceptualized such programmes and initiatives as falling within or adding value to the national imperatives for institutional repositioning, survival and transformation. The main goals and principles of the higher education policy framework do not place much emphasis on the use of e-learning both at systemic and institutional levels. Policy strategies can only be decided by implication without clear directives as to how technology should be incorporated into higher education strategies. We illustrate this aspect with reference to the White Paper on Higher Education (Department of Education, 1997a) and the key implementation documents, namely the National Plan on Higher Education (Department of Education, 2001) and the Transformation and Restructuring: A New Institutional Landscape for Higher Education (National Working Group, 2002). First, while the White Paper emphasizes increased participation in higher education as a major policy goal, no reference is made about the use of ICTs as a possible resource to expand access. The strategies suggested in the White Paper only call for planned expansion as opposed to massification and do not prioritize the use of ICTs (Kraak, 2000, 16). An analysis of key policy documents on ICT, suggests that while ICT has received significant attention from the South African government at a number of policy levels and reflect general international trends, ICT policy in higher education does not have the same thrust (see e.g. Gillwald, 2001, 177). Second, while the White Paper emphasizes the need for flexible education offerings, it relates flexibility to issues of diversity in offerings, articulation between programmes as well as entry and exit points to create access; it does not refer to flexibility in the modes of delivery provided by ICTs. Third, the White Paper calls for improvement in teaching and learning strategies to improve quality and throughput, but does not assume that ICT should be used for this purpose. The only reference to technology made in the White Paper concerns the concept of resource-based distance learning which should include the use of appropriate technologies. Unlike the e-Education White Paper (on schooling), where assumptions are made about the ability of ICT to enhance teaching and learning practices and support problem solving and critical thinking development, the higher education White Paper refrains from making assumptions about the relationship between ICT and teaching and learning issues. Briefly, the White Paper on higher education does not provide firm directives on ICT and its relationship to higher education. Department of Education (2001), which provides the implementation framework for achieving the White Papers vision, approaches ICTs with a degree of scepticism and caution, particularly in the context of the strategies aimed at addressing the problems faced by disadvantaged students: Some institutions see information technology-related approaches as the central solution to the problems experienced by disadvantaged students. While the innovative use of technology is to be welcomed, there is a strong risk that approaches which focus on improving delivery through information and communication technology, and which leave traditional curricular structures unchanged, will not provide a comprehensive solution (Department of Education, 2001, 36). The proposal of a single distance education institution would ensure that advantage is taken of the rapid changes in ICTs, which in investment terms would be beyond the scope of any one institution (Department of Education, 2001, 6). It privileges ICTs as a field of study (Department of Education, 2001, 47), particularly in the case of science, engineering and technology (Department of Education, 2001, 43). The document, Transformation and Restructuring: A New Institutional Landscape for Higher Education (National Working Group, 2002), which proposed mergers in higher education, emphasizes that the goals and objectives of the National Plan would require inter alia enhancing the curriculum to respond to the changing needs, in particular, the skills and competencies required to function in the modern world such as communications, computer and information skills (National Working Group, 2002, 226). Against this background, the Report of the Council for Higher Education, which reflects on higher education after 10 years of democracy, concedes that the policy environment makes scant mention of technology. It indicates that this lack of reference to ICT will impact on a number of issues: the international e-learning markets and its effect on South African higher education; poor application and implementation of ICT for teaching and learning; and lack of incentives to innovate around technology (CHE, 2004). Integrating ICTs in Higher Education: Key Assumptions and Arguments Higher education policies differ depending on what assumptions policy makers hold on this particular aspect. Although there seems to be broad consensus about the importance of ICT in higher education, different views and opinions about the approach to its implementation and its effects can be identified. As Van der Wende and Beerkens (1999, 284) have found in the West, in South Africa too, the importance of ICT is seen both in terms of opportunities and in terms of threats. Opportunities are perceived in relation to wider social benefits and the enrichment and enhancement of the curriculum and the efficiency and flexibility of learning processes. In this regard, the rationales for introducing ICTs in education can be classified as social, vocational, catalytic and pedagogical. The social rationale is based on the perceived role that technology now plays in society and emphasizes the need for demystifying technology for students. The vocational rationale is concerned with preparing students for jobs that require skills in technology. The catalytic rationale emphasizes the role of technology in improving performance and effectiveness in teaching, management and many other social activities (Keogh, 2001, 224225). The pedagogical rationale responds to the perceived benefits of technology in enhancing learning, flexibility and efficiency in curriculum delivery. Let us look in more detail at the latter. The ability of ICTs to deliver knowledge flexibly and on a large scale is critically important in addressing the knowledge economies demand for larger numbers of highly skilled people. Thus, ICTs ability to offer new ways of organizing and delivering higher education that is the potential to offer flexible, custom based education available to anybody, anywhere and anytime, paves the way for a different kind of learning environment that is e-learning (Tiffin and Rajasingham, 1995, 118). It changes the higher education landscape in important ways. Firstly, it changes the nature of its student body to include working students, as well as students from across the globe, since students can study when and where they prefer. Related to this is the potential of ICTs to extend lifelong learning opportunities to those currently excluded from learning, those residing in remote areas and disabled and disadvantaged groups (Keogh, 2001, 223). Secondly, it has the potential to scale up the education provision substantially and thus contributes towards massification. Thirdly, it provides opportunities for a variety of public and private institutions to offer education programmes through the Internet, therefore increasing competition from a wider group of providers (for details see Gibbons et al., 1994; Scott, 1997; Lo fstedt, 1999). Clearly, ICTs impact significantly on higher education delivery both from the perspective of new knowledge conception and production as well as new ways of elivering knowledge. As a result many countries have increased their electronic learning offerings. In fact, the distance learning market has dramatically increased as a result of ICT, and is now estimated at 300 billion dollars worldwide (Warwick, 1999,  HYPERLINK "http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp" www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp). Threats are related to the scepticism that has dominated the use of ICTs from their inception in particular the assumption that ICT enhances competition in higher education, which requires that higher education reconsider their roles, profiles, positions, and the alliances that they will need to make (Van der Wende and Beerkens 1999, 284). Despite the huge increase in ICT learning platforms, opinions about the use and usefulness of ICT in higher education provision are divided. Keogh (2001, 225) points that ICTs have been accompanied by scepticism arising from concerns about the motivations of those supporting technology, the possibility of cultural imperialism, the impact on quality, access and equity, and doubts about the reality of cost-effectiveness. This sentiment is well expressed by Tracey (1999, 210) when he indicates that the supporters of ICTs emphasize the market not the society, the consumer not the citizen, the want not the need, the quantity not the quality, the price not the value, the globe not the nation (see also Wilson et al., 1998, 109123). Very often ICTs are introduced with the attitude of here is the solution without asking the question what is the problem? Debates on ICT integration in higher education remain incipient and very limited in South Africa. In substance, generally these reflect international trends. An on-going topic concerns what ICTs can do and cannot do for the benefit of higher education institutions. Some see it as offering flexible and inexpensive delivery that has the potential to respond to manpower shortages by increasing access to education and serving as an equalizer in economic development and transformation (Barker, 1997; Daniel, 1997; IIE, 2001). Others view it as elitist in its use of technology as a delivery vehicle (Kishun, 1998; Muller 2000), suspect in terms of teaching and learning outcomes (Noam, 1995; Hall, 2001) and problematic in unquestioningly propagating economically driven education and Western values which impact negatively on local cultures and general education goals. A recent account of the side effects of digital development by Benner (2003) highlights how the present South African pragmatism towards expanding the ICT project in the country underestimates the potentially negative impact of ICTs on traditional forms of employment and fails to address the volatile nature of employment and skills requirements in ICT industries themselves. The consequence, it is argued, is likely to be the disruption of the already shrinking employment opportunities and the widening of social inequality (Benner, 2003, 126). Unfortunately, the impact of ICT on higher education remains an under researched issue. Harris (1998, 248) and Hall (2001, 233) suggest that very few attempts have been made at evaluating the quality of e-learning in South Africa. Hanson and Holmberg (2003, 1) also indicate that internationally existing studies are limited to English-speaking developed countries whose outcomes are not easily transferable to other political, economic and cultural contexts. National ICT Strategy in Education in South Africa South Africa is making huge efforts to establish itself as an ICT leader within the African continent. Presently, South Africa is the 14th largest user of the Internet in the world, with state of the art communications systems in many urban areas (Department of Education, 2002a, b). The South African government views e-education as a crucial strategy in becoming globally competitive and locally responsive (GCIS, 2002). It is seen as providing the foundation upon which an e-society can be built. Accordingly, e-education is necessary for effective participation in the information society, has the potential to enhance teaching and learning, promote access, create new opportunities for learners and teachers and, therefore, transform education. For the Department of Education it is not whether we y introduce ICT in teaching and learning but how we can successfully introduce ICT in schools (South African Department of Education and Communications, 2001,  HYPERLINK "http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdf" http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdf). The South African government has strongly advocated the use of ICT to support economic growth and development and ensure that South Africa is part of the global economy. It has a broadly favourable policy environment to promote ICT use and development. Steps undertaken in this regard include mobilization of public/private sector partnerships, legislation on telecommunications and the setting up of several structures to promote innovation in the implementation of ICTs in the economic and social sectors (e.g. The Presidential International Advisory Council on ISAD Information Society and Development that comprise international leaders in the ICT Sector, and focuses on ICT infrastructure and services), major projects on ICTs in education, and programmes of skills development and training, ICT literacy and fluency. The vision of the e-Education White Paper is to ensure that every learner in the schooling sector is capable and empowered to use and interact with ICTs by 2013. The aim for the schooling sector is to leverage ICTs to support the development of literacy skills, access information and communicate and combine pedagogy and technology to ensure effective teaching and learning in schools. This policy is underpinned by assumptions about the potential of ICTs in supporting fundamental change in teaching and learning practices (Department of Education, 2004). A brief chronology of events highlights the high level of pragmatism with which the South African government has approached the future of ICTs in its post apartheid policy agenda since the first democratic elections in 1994 (for further details, see James, 2001,  HYPERLINK "http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm" http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm). Brief Chronology of ICT-Related Initiatives in South Africa DevelopmentsObjectives Date Department of Education (DOE) workshopIdentifies need for Technology-Enhanced Learning Investigation in South Africa (TELI) processNovember 1995TELI Discussion DocumentOutlines key principles relevant to the use of technologies in education and identifies key initiatives for developing an enabling infrastructureJuly 1996National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) reportOutlines the vision for higher education in South AfricaSeptember 1996TELI Strategic Plan completedOutlines South African ICT strategy in educationApril 1997Establishment of the Centre for Educational technology and Distance Education (CETDE)Implementation agency to oversee national policy on ICTsEarly 1997Establishment of School Net South AfricaImplementation agency focusing on school connectivity and capacity buildingDecember 1997TELI decision-making frameworkEstablishes guidelines for choosing technologies to use in education and training programmesDecember 1998SABC/DOE Broadcasting ConferenceReintroduces idea of dedicated educational channelFebruary 1999Department of Communications first-phase reportOutlines a strategy for a dedicated educational channelAugust 1999Joint Department of Communications/ Education feasibility report Proposes converged educational networkNovember 1999 DOE releases value-chain framework DOE releases value-chain frameworkMarch 2000Khanya project planning begins in Western CapeProvincial ICT in schools implementation project2000Gauteng Online.com launched in Gauteng ProvinceProvincial ICT in schools implementation projectFebruary 2001National ICT ForumBrings together public and private-sector players in the implementation of a national education networkMarch 2001Draft White Paper on e-EducationDefines ICT policy in educationSeptember 2003National Plan on Higher EducationProvides an implementation strategy of higher education policyMay 2002 By 1995, the theme of Information Society began to gain prominence in the political discourse and policy documents, including the address of the Deputy President Thabo Mbeki at the G7 Conference and the speech of President Nelson Mandela at the 1995 International Telecommunication Union (ITU) Conference (James, 2001, 16). One of the first documents stressing the importance of ICTs in the development of the New South Africa was the 1994 ANC Alliance election manifesto, the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP), (ANC, 1994). However, the use of ICTs in education only became a policy matter from 1995. The first conference on technology enhanced learning, held in November 1995, pointed to the need for a coherent policy on the use of technology in education. In February 1996, the Ministry of Education commissioned a group of experts to develop a national framework and a strategic plan for technology-enhanced learning. It released its report in July 1996, entitled Technology Enhanced Learning Investigation in South Africa, which formed the basis for the establishment of the National Centre for Educational Technology and Distance Education in 1997. These developments were followed by several policy initiatives driven primarily by the desire to establish clear decision-making frameworks at a national level to ensure that educational technology decisions were driven by educational motives and not by the marketing agendas of technology vendors. ICT Developments in Education: Increasing Access, Cooperation and Delivery Strategies The challenge of narrowing the digital divide between South Africa and developed countries and within South Africa has been recognized in current ICT policy framework. The draft e-Education White Paper (2003) indicates Developments Objectives Date Khanya project planning begins in Western Cape Provincial ICT in schools implementation project 2000. Gauteng Online.com launched in Gauteng Province Provincial ICT in schools implementation project February 2001 National ICT Forum Brings together public and private-sector players in the implementation of a national education network March 2001 Draft White Paper on e-Education Defines ICT policy in education September 2003 National Plan on Higher Education Provides an implementation strategy of higher education policy May 2002 that, while almost 35% of people in developed countries are online, only 6% of South Africans are online, with fewer than 2% in developing countries. Within South Africa, just over 12.3% of schools have computers for teaching and learning. E-education in South Africa has been driven by both public and private initiatives. There are at present five major public sector ICT initiatives aimed at promoting the use of ICTs in schools: the National Portal, the Gauteng Online (GOL), the Khanya project in the Western Cape, SCOPE in the Northern Province and Mpumalanga and the Universal Services Agency Deployment of Computers in Schools. In terms of NGO/business-supported initiatives, there are about 40 medium to large-scale initiatives. These include initiatives by SchoolNet-SA, MultiChoice, TELKOM, Hewlett-Packard, INTEL and Microsoft (SchoolNet-SA, 2002a). Evidence indicates an increase in activities related to computing in schools in South Africa, including strategy and policy initiatives and efforts aimed at deploying computers to schools. These range in extent and purpose but it is clear that the investment in ICT in schools has increased both from government as well as other sources (SchoolNet-SA, 2002ac). The Gauteng and the Western Cape provinces have asserted themselves as leaders in this process both in terms of policy, size and scope of their ICT projects. The Northern Province, Mpumalanga and the Gauteng Province, show significant progress in both schools with computers, schools with computers for teaching and learning and learner computer ratios. An audit conducted by SchoolNet-SA (2002) shows that there has been a substantial increase in investment in ICTs in the educational sector in the last 3 years and that provincial governments committed significant funding to educational ICTs for the first time in 2001. The number of computers for Table 1 Provinces and computers in schools (2000) Provinces Schools with computers (%)   teaching and learning has quadrupled since 1996 (Department of Education, 2003a, b). The average ratio of learners to computers for teaching and learning has declined in average from 725:1 in 1996 to 164:1 in 2000 (Table 1). The downside of this process is the lack of research, knowledge and understanding about how these developments impact on classroom practices, particularly the teaching and learning. To meet this challenge, the draft White Paper on e-Education (2003, 36) states that the Department of Education, in collaboration with the Departments of Communications and Science and Technology, the teaching profession, higher education institutions and research agencies, will formulate a research agenda on ICTs for e-learning. Protecting Individual and Institutional Integrity in ICT Practice: Norms, Standards and Values The principles and values underpinning the policy process on ICTs in South Africa can be identified at two levels, namely the policy development level and policy content level. At the process level, there is an increasing realization that the existing initiatives are fragmentary and greater level of integration is desirable. Particular attention has also been paid to the need for broad participation in the policy formulation process. This is generally regarded as essential in ensuring that ICT policy covers the depth and range of issues required for successful implementation (SchoolNet-SA (2002c). The defining keywords include integration, sensitivity to the developing world context, broader participation, and informed decision making. The establishment of the National Information and Technology Forum (NTF) and the Presidential Review Commission (PRC) in February 1997 and the IT Advisory Council consisting of local and international business leaders, representing major stakeholders was to ensure that broader national and international consultation took place in the decision making. Its position paper made it explicit that, while ICTs have enormous potential for development, the challenges ahead for developing countries were different from those in developed countries (NITF, 1996). At content level, the TELI-report established a set of recommendations and guidelines for policy concerning ICT. Content issues are outlined in the TELI decision-making framework. It contains a set of guidelines for choosing technologies to introduce into teaching and learning environments in South Africa. It was meant to facilitate the processes that individuals might go through when deciding between different technologies to use in education and training programmes at all levels. It covers issues of teaching and learning, technologies, integration of technologies into the teaching and learning environment and costing issues (James, 2001, 5). The Draft White Paper on e-Education (2003) sets out the South African Governments response to new ICTs and their potential use within education specifically through the use of digital media and the provision of telecommunication infrastructure. The emerging strategy emphasizes four central themes: equity, access, capacity building, and norm and standards. From the equity perspective, equal access to information and the allocation of resources and equal competence are cited as the objectives of the education system underpinned by the belief that technology tends to amplify advantage. In terms of access, Governments concern is focused on the development of reliable infrastructure and regular systems access and the availability of hardware, software and connectivity. With reference to capacity building, the Government is concerned with the need for programmes that urgently address the competencies of teachers related to the use of ICTs for personal work and in their classrooms. In this regard, it urges the Department of Education and the provincial education departments to collaborate with higher education institutions to design and deliver in-service and pre-service training programmes for teachers, managers and administrators as well as further education and training programmes in the field (Department of Education, 2003a, b, 30, 36). The issue of norms and standards is considered fundamental to the concept of ICT use in education as a means of ensuring equitable access to learning opportunities and improved learner performance. Norms and standards should ensure that the content is relevant, reliable, accessible and useable. They point to the need for local content development, local language use and collective knowledge generation. It is within such a framework that South Africa should build a domestic knowledge economy, overcome cultural inhibitions and insecurities about developing competence for surviving the break-neck speed of the Internet age and its creation of a risk-taking culture, while accepting that ICTs are a core feature of innovation and competitiveness. Institutional Policies or Approaches to ICTs in Higher Education Developing institutional policy frameworks is no easy task and seems to be complicated by the extremely diverse economic, social and physical environments in which South African higher education institutions operate. Diversity has prompted different responses from individual institutions. There is no single approach to policy that provides one-fits-all solution to the challenges of ntegrating ICTs effectively into teaching and learning. Many higher education nstitutions in South Africa do not yet have an institutional vision or strategy in the use of ICT and their activities are limited to somewhat isolated pockets driven by particular projects. An analysis of existing experiences shows that there are common key elements that are addressed in their projects: (i) developing institutional ICT infrastructure, generally through computer centres; (ii) staff professional development; (iii) promotion of broader utilization of ICTs; (iv) integration of ICT in curriculum design and delivery. However, their approaches to these activities differ considerably. We have identified three important categories in this regard. The first comprises institutions that place emphasis on IT infrastructure and services particularly what has been generally known as Computer Centres or Computer Networking Services. They promote the establishment of ICT units dedicated to ICT infrastructure development (software and hardware), maintenance and user support services. Their functions are often extended to embrace targeted software development or adaptation, Internet design and maintenance as well as the training of users on approved software. Generally, these services and facilities exist alongside audiovisual centres or other units catering for different forms of multimedia technology. We refer to this model as IT-oriented approach, or a model where activities related to ICT integration were organized within a technically resourced (both in terms of physical and human resource) unit (e.g. the former Technikon Freestate or ICT integration at Wits University, UCT, Rhodes University, etc.). On Twiggs categorization this approach rests on the assumption that ICTs should only play a supplemental role. The university should retain its traditional structure of courses and the face-to-face mode of delivery while drawing on e-learning as a teaching and learning tool. The second, distance education-oriented approach, has been referred to in South Africa as Telematic Education. It concentrates on appropriation of selected state of the art multimedia technologies to deliver distance learning programmes to targeted students at both secondary and university levels (e.g. University of Pretoria, University of Stellenbosch, University of Potchefstroom and the University of the Western Cape). There is in this case a more fundamental change in teaching and learning practice in that the traditional face-to-face teaching and learning is replaced by online, interactive learning strategies. The universities of the Witwatersrand, Cape Town, Kwazulu-Natal and Rhodes University have stayed way from this approach. The third category includes research-driven ICT development projects where efforts are concentrated towards researching and exploring the potential of new technologies and approaches to support effective teaching and learning (e.g. Universities of Cape Town). Besides providing a knowledge basis for ICT implementation or practice, these research efforts are also geared at producing scholarly outputs (e.g. University of Cape Town). An incipient combination of research and development makes up for open source (research and) development-oriented approaches, focused on developing systems for integration. Examples include the University of the Western Cape (UWC) with their Knowledge Environment for Web-based Learning (KEWL) and University of Kwa-Zulu Natal (UKZN) with Open Learning Systems (OLS), where efforts are concentrated on systems development based on open source technologies. The first two categories tend to replicate international models with very little contextualization and knowledge base to inform choice of technology and method and their implementation (with Computer Centres emphasizing technology implementation and Telematic Centres distance education delivery). Besides addressing particular institutional peculiarities and challenges, the last category pays in varying ways greater attention to adaptation and innovation in its approach to integration of ICTs into teaching and learning. We discuss the experience of the Durban Institute of Technology elsewhere (see Cross and Madiba, 2006). The Multimedia Education Group represents, in our view, a sound generative model for implementing effective and appropriate multimedia learning strategies in a research-intensive higher education in a developing world context. In all three categories, a major challenge has been the difficulty in creating an enabling environment to stimulate ICT usage by faculty members (through incentives, staffing policy, etc.). Some institutions in the USA (e.g. Washington State University) have clauses in their staffing policies aimed at promoting the use of ICTs by their staff. This is an approach not embraced in South African higher education. ICT policies not only shape events (proactive ICT policy), but also respond to events (reactive information policy). Generally, our observation is that these two processes coexist at institutional level. Proactive strategies can be seen in several institutions. The University of Pretoria and the University of North-West, through their telematic programmes, and the Universities of Johannesburg and Free State, through their partnerships with private IT companies, have based their innovation strategies on the need to be more competitive financially and have concentrated their efforts on widening access through online delivery of courses drawing extensively on ICTs. As already indicated, the University of Cape Town and the University of the Witwatersrand have defined themselves as research intensive institutions committed to privileging face to face as the main form of delivery and make use of ICTs as supplementary delivery aids (Mhlanga, 2005). However, our observation is that reactive strategies still prevail across institutions and within divisions in most institutions, a phenomenon which reflects largely the lack of a clearly defined e-learning sub-sectoral policy for higher education at both national and institutional levels. A common denominator in almost all ICT initiatives has been the role of ICT champions. In all cases covered in this study where ICT integration has been initiated successfully, the strong presence of such leadership was evident. In the case of UCT, this is evidenced through the role played by the Multimedia Education Group (MEG) and in particular its director. However, the downside of this is the overdependence on the enthusiasm and energies of a few individuals: Reliance on a few individuals poses serious problems for sustainability, as projects easily collapse when those individuals leave. Similarly, because an undue amount of their time falls into making the project work, these individuals also find few if any opportunities to undertake meaningful succession plan (James, 2001, 11). The downside is also the fact that ICT initiatives have largely remained pilot or small-scale projects, which are not always aligned with the mainstream strategic goals of the institutions. In this case, their assessment with reference to concepts of impact and sustainability has limited significance. With the exception of some projects at UCT, Wits and UWC, there is also serious lack of research in ICT-related areas. This is not to underestimate the efforts undertaken by the National Research Foundation (NRF) and the Department of Arts, Science and Technology to promote research on ICTs (e.g. the NRF ICT focus area). Weighing up Change in ICT in Higher Education: A Paradigm Shift? While significant progress has been made at institutional level to integrate ICTs in educational programmes, South African higher education faces enormous challenges that require important policy choices. The first most important challenge remains the lack of a national vision underpinned by coherent strategies and actions at the national level. Is this an advantage or disadvantage? This is perhaps the most difficult question to address given the dilemmas that policy makers have to consider in making policy choices. Internationally, national strategies supporting the use of ICTs in education have taken different forms, reflecting the particular political and institutional complexities of each country (Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999, 24; Keogh, 2001, 224225). Underpinning current debates is the claim that successful implementation of ICTs requires strong national support from government and local support from relevant institutions and education authorities (Keogh, 2001, 228). Generally, there is agreement that governments should facilitate, support the use of ICT for educational purposes and establish an enabling regulatory environment in order to achieve this goal. There is also relative consensus that the potential of ICTs in higher education can be realized only if a concerted effort is made by governments, the private sector and NGOs to lay the foundations for an Information Society that includes all citizens. However, analysts differ considerably on the way they perceive or interpret this role and the issues on which they place their emphasis. There are those who operate within a market-oriented neo-liberal discourse and emphasize the role of government in facilitating the development of a networked, multimedia educational community in higher education through several strategies, including: (i) deregulation of electronic delivery to stimulate competition; (ii) removal of barriers for institutions operating on national and international scales; (iii) increase of information-consumer functions to inform choice and improve programmes; (iv) use of power of competition and choice to inspire organizational change among public institutions; (v) promotion of inter-institutional cooperation and (vi) support of public/private partnerships in support of ICT needs (Matthews, 1998; Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999). There are those who emphasize issues of accountability, quality assurance, accreditation and consumer protection. For these, education is too important to exist without controls, without licensing, or without credentials. These issues have dominated debates on the role of governments in European and North American contexts (Van der Wende and Beerkens, 1999). However, within a developing country such as South Africa, issues of competition, inter-institutional cooperation, public/private partnerships, accountability, quality and consumer protection are directly tied up with pressing challenges linked to poverty, illiteracy, job creation/destruction, skills development and the glaring social inequality. Compromises in choice and emphasis are needed to reconcile a national ICT strategy with these pressures. As Benner (2003, 2) puts it, national ICT policy cannot be limited to simply promoting the use of information technology but must also simultaneously address inequality and the dislocation associated with diffusion of information technology through the economy. Issues that concentrate simply on expanding ICTs in education without addressing broader transformation and social responsibility concerns, risk contributing to significant social and economic distress. This is where government coordination and steering may be required. For example, whether at school level or at tertiary education level, it is extremely difficult to balance the building of an information economy and society, generally driven by globalization pressures with the basic challenges of poverty alleviation, adequate health care, including HIV/AIDS epidemic, employment creation and national and regional security issues. Not always it is clear how ICTs can be reconciled with these priority development areas. Related to this is also the challenge of reconciling the considerable investment that ICTs require with the need to address access and equity issues that the legacy of apartheid poses, through appropriate regulatory framework that does not impinge on institutional autonomy. The challenge is to ensure that the governments demonstrated pragmatic approach to global competitiveness through the building of an information society does not result in the neglect of the basic needs of all South Africans (information, content, applications and services, participation in political processes, employment and access to public services such as education, pensions etc.). The second major challenge in South African higher education has been the development of an ICT infrastructure. In fact, infrastructure development emerged as part of the first wave of policy decisions that institutions had to make. While the emphasis that they placed on ICT infrastructure differed from institution to institution, depending on institutional priorities and budget considerations, generally it seems that there was a general trend to overestimate infrastructural concerns (technology) at the expense of dimensions that relate to the development of human resource capacity and to the production, exchange and dissemination of information-content issues, including pedagogical issues (James, 2001, 1). Note that institutions were doing this at the time where the IT industry was expanding in South Africa, which made it difficult for institutions to keep up with the competition for ICT skilled people on the labour market. One of our interviewees referred to the Computer Centre at Wits University as computer lodge to highlight the difficulties in retaining qualified staff in the centre. The third challenge concerns the relatively low ICT capacity and skills shortage in higher education. The skills base in ICT policy remains very low; few institutions are devoting much attention to this area. Policy choices in this regard will require innovative strategies to minimize or contain the accelerated brain drain of ICT skills to Western countries while expanding the existing pool of skills. Recent decision to embark on a strategy aimed at encouraging retention or repatriation of South African highly skilled workers is to be applauded. Against this background we would argue that increasing the pool of available ICT skills should be a key component of any ICT-related policy in higher education in South Africa. Given the apartheid legacy that has pushed gender discrimination to its extreme, the encouragement of girls and women to use and produce ICTs should also be given attention to ensure that there is equitable access to ICTs and the benefits they can offer. The South African Constitution provides an enabling environment in this regard. There is a great deal of evidence indicating that in this context ICTs do affect the experiences and life of women and men differently (James, 2001). The shortage of classroom face-to-face instruction and the increasing demand expected as the secondary school system regains its feet will certainly result in greater pressures in the use of ICTs to increase access to lifelong learning. Finally, these challenges cannot be met successfully without an enabling strategy regarding research capacity in ICT-related policy. To note also that the expansion of ICTs in the school system through projects such as Gauteng-Online.com, the Khanya project, etc., will put more pressures to tertiary institutions in addressing the needs of school graduates. Finally, South African higher education has gone a long way to turn research into a major component of ICT policy and practice and funding has been made available to this particular field from a variety of sources. To mention a few, the identification of an ICT focus area in the research programme of the National Foundation represents a significant development in this direction. The research programme on skills on demand driven by the Department of Science, Arts and Technology as well as the constitution of several ICT research thrusts in several institutions are also worth mentioning. Against this background, it is our view that, matched with Hanson and Holmberg s analytical framework, South African higher education institutions cannot as yet claim a paradigm shift in the policy choices, strategies and practices that underpin the use of ICTs. Paradigm shifts would include changing teaching and learning practices and systemic change through ICT. Even under the Increase and Protect categories the South African ICT policy initiatives concerning higher education reflect poor relationships between technology and issues of access, quality, production and cooperation. The existing strategies make no sound assumptions about ICT and access, ICT and production, ICT and cooperation or ICT and quality. In terms of the category Protect there is no doubt that while the higher education policy does not deal with issues of culture and local economic context, it does imply protection of culture and nationhood through reference to issues such as democracy, equity, tolerance and development of locally relevant solutions and development of African conceptions of knowledge. For example, as stated in its preamble, the NRF research programme is premised on the assumption that South Africa needs to unlock the relationship between knowledge, technology, and the uniquely South African social and economic development realities that the country faces (NRF, 2006, http://www.nrf.ac.za/focusareas/ict/). Institutions such as the University of the Witwatersrand, the University of Cape Town, the University of Kwazulu-Natal, the University of the Western Cape and Rhodes University in particular would certainly be weary of entertaining any change driven by technology. References African National Congress. (1994) The Reconstruction and Development Programme A Policy Framework, Johannesburg: Umanyano Publications. Barker, P. (1997) Assessing Attitudes to Electronic Lectures, in S. Armstrong, G. Thompson and S. Brown (eds.) Facing up to Radical Changes in Universities and Colleges, London: Kogan Page Limited, published in association with the Staff and Educational Development Association, pp.916. Benner, C. (2003) Digital development and disruption in South Africa: balancing growth and equity in national ICT policies, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology 2(1): 126. Cloete, N. (1998) Paper presented at the first national conference for Student Services practitioners, Mimeo. Council on Higher Education. (2000) Towards a New Higher Education Landscape: Meeting the Equity, Quality and Social Development Imperatives of South Africa in the 21st Century, Pretoria:Council on Higher Education. Cross, M. and Harper, A. (1999) Campus Diversity Audit, Pretoria: CHET. Cross, M. and Madiba, M. (2006) Changing Pedagogy for Changing Technology: A Case Study of the Multimedia Group at the University of Cape Town, Mimeo, School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand. Daniel, J. (1997) Technology: its role and impact on education delivery; more means better, Plenary address (theme 5) technology and its impact on education delivery. 13th Commonwealth Conference of Education Ministers Parallel Convention, Botswana. Department of Education. (1997a) Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education, Pretoria: South African Government. Available online. Department of Education. (1997b) Higher Education Act 101, Pretoria: Department of Education, South African Parliament. Department of Education. (2001) National Plan for Higher Education, Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2002a) An implementation framework for the Department of Educations National ICT strategy, Developed for the Minister of Educations ICT Task Team by SchoolNet SA, SAIDE and the Department of Education, Pretoria. Department of Education. (2002b) The Transformation and Reconstruction of Higher Education System, Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2003a) White Paper on e-Education (Draft for Discussion), Pretoria:Department of Education. Department of Education. (2003b) Draft White Paper on e-Education (Transforming Learning and Teaching through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)), Pretoria: Department of Education. Department of Education. (2004) White Paper on e-education, Pretoria: Department of Education. GCIS. (2002) Mbeki hosts international advisory council on information society and development. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, London: Sage Publications. Gillwald, A. (2001) Building Castells in the Ether, in J. Muller, N. Cloete and S. Badat (eds.) Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with Manuel Castells, Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman, pp. 168194. Hall, M. (2001) Education and the Margins of the Network Society, in J. Muller, N. Cloete and S. Badat (eds.) Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with Manuel Castells, Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman, pp. 224243. Hanson, H. and Holmberg, C. (2003) A European and Swedish Perspective on ICT Policies and Strategies in Education: National and in Institutional Pathways: Crossings, Blind Alleys and Uphill Slopes, Stockholm: IIE. Harris, M.H. (1998) Is the revolution now over, or has it just begun? A year of the internet in higher education, Internet in Higher Education 1(14): 248. Institute of International Education (IIE). (2001) Virtualization of higher education in the era of globalization. Issues and trends. Supported by the Swedish Research Council; Departments of Education and communication. James, T. (2001) An Information Policy Handbook for Southern Africa: A Knowledge Base for Decision Makers, Johannesburg: International Development Research Centre. Available online. Keogh, K.M. (2001) National strategies for the promotion of on-line learning in higher education, European Journal of Education 36(2): 223236. Kishun, R. (1998) Internationalization in South Africa, in P. Scott (ed.) The Globalization of Higher Education, Buckingham: SRHE, Open Universit, pp. 5869. Kraak, A. (2000) Changing Modes: A Brief Overview of the Mode 2 Knowledge Debate and its Impact on South African Policy Formulation, in A. Kraak (ed.) ChangingModes. NewKnowledge Production and its Implications for Higher Education, Pretoria: Human Science Research Council, pp. 137. Lo fstedt, J.I. (1999) Is Higher Education Turning Virtual? The Virtual University: Issues and Challenges, in I. Fa gerlind, I Holmesland and G. Stro nquivist (eds.) Higher Education at the Crossroads Tradition or Transformation?, Stockholm University: IIE, pp. 147169. Mhlanga, E. (2005) University support for lifelong learning: A case for E-learning at the University of the Witwatersrand. Muller, J. (2000) What Knowledge is of Most Worth for the Millennial Citizen, in A. Kraak (ed.) Changing Modes. NewKnow ledge Production and its Implications for Higher Education, Pretoria: Human Science Research Council, pp. 7087. National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE). (1996) A Framework for Transformation, Pretoria: National Commission on Higher Education. National Information and Technology Forum (NTF). (1996) Position Paper, Pretoria. National Research Foundation (NRF). (2006) Focus area: Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and the Information Society in South Africa. Available online. National Working Group. (2002) The Restructuring of the Higher Education System in South Africa. Report of the National Working Group to the Minister of Education, Pretoria. Noam, E.M. (1995) Electronics and the Dim Future of the University, Science 270, pp. 247249. SchoolNet-SA. (2002a) Proposal for the strategic investment in educational ICTs in South Africa by the World Economic Forum, for World Economic Forum SA Task Team (unpublished). SchoolNet-SA. (2002b) Audit of major educational ICT projects in South Africa, for World Economic Forum SA Task Team. (unpublished). SchoolNet-SA. (2002c) An Implementation Framework for the Department of Educations National ICT Strategy. Scott, P. (1997) Changes in Knowledge Production and Dissemination in the Context of Globalization, in N. Cloete, J. Muller, M. W. Makgoba and D. Ekong (eds.) Knowledge Identity and Curriculum Transformation in Africa, section 2. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman. Slaughter, S. and Leslie, L. (1999) Academic Capitalism. Politics, Policies and the Entreprenureal University, Baltimore, USA: The John Hopkins University Press. South African Departments of Education and Communications. (2001) Strategy for Information and Communication Technology in Education. Available online. The Council on Higher Education. (2004) South African Higher Education in the First Decade of Democracy, Pretoria: CHE. Tiffin, J. and Rajasingham, L. (1995) In Search of the Virtual Class, London: Routledge. Tracey, M. (1999) Whatever It Is, It Is Ours to Think About. Communications Issues in the 1990s: A Philosophical Framework for the IIC, in R. Winsbury and S. Fazal (eds.) Vision and Hindsight: The First 25 Years of the International Institute for Communications, London: John Libbey and Company, pp. 210235. Twigg, C.A. (2003) Improving Learning and Reducing Costs: New Models for Online Learning EDUCAUSE Review Article . Van der Wende, M. and Beerkens, E. (1999) An international orientation of institutional strategies and governmental policies for the use of ICT in higher education, Interactive Learning Environments 7(23): 283321. Warwick, D. (1999) Globalisation: challenges and opportunities for UK higher education, Keynote at Association of University Administrators Conference. Available online. Wilson, M., Qayyum, A. and Boshier, R. (1998) World Wide America? Think globally, click locally, Distance Education 19: 109123, C:\HEP stock 2006\ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in South Africa for publication (Higher Education Policy)1.doc. Table 1 Provinces and computers in schools (2000) Provinces Schools with Schools with computers for Learner computer computers (%) teaching and learning (%) ratio Eastern Cape 8.8 4.5 373:1 Free State 20.6 8.6 181:1 Gauteng 82.5 41.4 65:1 KwaZulu-Natal 18.6 10.0 228:1 Mpumalanga 8.7 8.7 298:1 Northern Cape 57.3 25.3 95:1 Limpopo 11.3 4.6 463:1 North West 21.7 7.6 254:1 Western Cape 78.3 45.2 66:1 National 24.4 12.3 164:1 Source: White Paper on e-Education (Draft for Discussion)  fg" $ % w x   \ ] R S H I 3 4 w x ⯡rddddhCJOJQJ^JaJh^,ho5>*OJQJ^J hoh^,CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh^,CJOJQJ^JaJ hohoCJOJQJ^JaJ hY7hoCJOJQJ^JaJ hY7hY7CJOJQJ^JaJhoOJQJ^J&hoho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ'3efg# $ % "n dh7$8$H$gdo^H dh7$8$H$gdo 7$8$H$gdY7 7$8$H$gdorNO()vw\]lm  RS45|} !jk TU ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJhRCJOJQJ^JaJh=CJOJQJ^JaJh)CJOJQJ^JaJ hohDCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhDCJOJQJ^JaJ hohoCJOJQJ^JaJ556EFjkNO89 "pqӴ&hF%ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhLCJOJQJ^JaJhYyqCJOJQJ^JaJhLCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhRCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJhRCJOJQJ^JaJ/~  ""$$$$%%1%Y%v%~%%%%%%) dh7$8$H$gdF%gd| dh7$8$H$gd45# dh7$8$H$gdo^HGH%&pq  LMVW]^ܯta$hh45#0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jhh45#CJOJQJU^JaJ h45#h45#CJOJQJ^JaJ#jh45#CJOJQJU^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJh45#CJOJQJ^JaJhwCJOJQJ^JaJ ho^HhoCJOJQJ^JaJ#hwhw>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&CDJK, - } ~  !!j!k!!!""R"S"""""##L#M#####3$4${$|$$$$$$$$$$Әh| hAfh|h|CJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJh ?oCJOJQJ^JaJ h45#h45#CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJh45#CJOJQJ^JaJ3$$$% % %%%%%%'%)%=%?%G%I%d%i%}%~%%%%%%%&&&&N&O&^&_&&&&&&&&&&(')'L'M'N'˺| hF%hF%CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJh?LCJOJQJ^JaJhF%CJOJQJ^JaJ h45#hoCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJh|CJOJQJ^JaJh| hAfh|jh|UmHnHu0N'p'q'''''( (L(M(((((((((9):)M)O)))))))))*O*P*****1+2+++++,,c,d,,,ᴠ~~~~~~~~hMCJOJQJ^JaJ&hF%hF%5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hF%ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hF%CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh?LCJOJQJ^JaJhF%CJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJ1)))*,,,337@:A:;;==@@@@DKFkFlFH dh7$8$H$gdQ dh7$8$H$gd]s dh7$8$H$gd; dh7$8$H$gdF%,,!-"-f-g---..Q.R.....?/@/////00e0f00000O1P111113242222233_3`33333޴УУУУУУУУУУУУ h;hxCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h;hoCJOJQJ^JaJh;CJOJQJ^JaJhMCJOJQJ^JaJhxCJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hoCJOJQJ^JaJ hF%hMCJOJQJ^JaJ13344l4m44455T5U55555=6>6w6x6666666B7C777&8'8i8j88899M9N9s9t99999*:+:?:@:A:::::;;f;g;´••••hz[CJOJQJ^JaJ h]sh]sCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJh]sCJOJQJ^JaJ h;hoCJOJQJ^JaJha$CJOJQJ^JaJ:g;;;;;;;;E<F<<<<<)=*=x=y========)>*>w>x>>> ? ?L?M???????2@3@@@@FAGAAAAA+B,BzB{BBBBӣhQCJOJQJ^JaJ h]sh#CJOJQJ^JaJh#CJOJQJ^JaJ h]shz[CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhz[CJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJ:BBCCgChCCCJDKDDDDD(E)EsEtEEEEEFFFFjFkFlFFFGGQGRGGGGG3H4H~HHHHHHHCIDIQI´••••••••´• hQhcCJOJQJ^JaJhcCJOJQJ^JaJ hQhQCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hQhoCJOJQJ^JaJhQCJOJQJ^JaJ h]shoCJOJQJ^JaJh#CJOJQJ^JaJ2HHcK`MaM~NRPSPRTUU,V-V[[[___M` c cZemg dh7$8$H$gdK dh7$8$H$gdx dh7$8$H$gd* dh7$8$H$gdQQIRIIIIIII4J5J}J~JJJKKKKKKBLCLdLfLLLLL#M$M_M`MaMMMMM;N*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hxho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hxh5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ-[[\ \\\U\V\\\\\7]8]g]h]]]]]]]&^'^v^w^^^ _ _\_]_______````6a7ayazaaaaabb`babbbbb±±±±±±±±±Ÿ#jhKCJOJQJU^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJhKCJOJQJ^JaJhTHCJOJQJ^JaJ hxhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hxhxCJOJQJ^JaJ9bbbbbc c c c cUcVccccccc3d4d~ddddeeeeee8f9fffff$g%gggggɷwwwwwwwwwwwwwiihOCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJ$hhK0JCJOJQJ^JaJ#jhKCJOJQJU^JaJ/jhhKCJOJQJU^JaJhKCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhKCJOJQJ^JaJ)mgggiiCrssOvxyyzzzzzzzzzzz{{ $Ifgd5 dh7$8$H$gdW dh7$8$H$gda; dh7$8$H$gdKgghh]h^hhhhhCiDiiiiii(j)jojpjjjkkTkUkkkkk0l1l}l~lllmmgmhmmmnnOnPnnnnn o"oToUooooo?p@pppppﱣha;CJOJQJ^JaJ ha;hoCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhOCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hKhOCJOJQJ^JaJ@pqqdqeqqqqqrrrrss(sksmsnsossssssssDtEttttt1u2uӰӘwfXfXfXfXfXhWCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhoCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ$hh!y0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jhh!yCJOJQJU^JaJ ha;h!yCJOJQJ^JaJ#jh!yCJOJQJU^JaJh!yCJOJQJ^JaJha;CJOJQJ^JaJ ha;hoCJOJQJ^JaJ"2uwuxuuuvvvvvv/w0w|w}wwwxx[x\xxxyyylymyyyyy z z$z%z1zdzfzgzhzzzzzzŴӴӊw$hhWy0JCJOJQJ^JaJ/jOhhWyCJOJQJU^JaJ#jhWyCJOJQJU^JaJ hWhWyCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhWyCJOJQJ^JaJhWCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhoCJOJQJ^JaJ-zzzzzz{({){{{{{{{@|A|J|L|||||||||}}$}&}{}|}}}}}}}}}7~8~̻yyyrrk h/qh5 h_nh5 hIwh5 hh5 heh5 hzhuh5 h_h5 hOh5h5&h5h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h5h55>*CJOJQJ^JaJ#h5h5>*CJOJQJ^JaJh5CJOJQJ^JaJ*{{ {){Q{x{{{{neeeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5{{{{|2|A|K|neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5K|L|j||||||neeeeee $Ifgd5kdR$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5|||}}%}neeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5%}&}F}a}|}}}}neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5}}}}~8~A~F~neeeeee $Ifgd5kdo$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt58~E~G~e~f~~~~~~~%&35deDFhjtvՀրڀ܀ <=JL^_ƁǁсӁ"$EFh5CJOJQJ^JaJ h` +h5 h}5h5 h&h5 hZh5 hy!wh5 h|h5 h h5 hhjh5 h=8h5 hQh5h5 h/qh5=F~G~f~~~~~~neeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5~~~~&/4neeeeee $Ifgd5kd-$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt545Reneeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5!:DEneeeeeeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5 EF_ijuneeee $Ifgd5kdJ$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5uv΀րۀneeeee $Ifgd5kd$$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5ۀ܀ 5=FKneeeeee $Ifgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5KL_ǁҁneeeee $Ifgd5kdg $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5ҁӁ#neeee $Ifgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5#$<Fmneeeee $Ifgd5kd% $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5҄%PQni]]QQQQQ dh7$8$H$gdf dh7$8$H$gdWgd5kd $$IflF ,"   t06    44 layt5 ۂ܂)*pqIJhiST78Ӈԇ OPQ޴£{mh.CJOJQJ^JaJ&hfhf5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&hfho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhfCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh0CJOJQJ^JaJhfCJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hWhWyCJOJQJ^JaJ*Q8"cdfhijklmSTU dh7$8$H$gdb 7$8$H$gdJDgdJD 7$8$H$gdo dh7$8$H$gdf9:‰ÉωЉ&'`ahiqrvwGHLMdenoz{ST89ǍȍUVhoCJOJQJ^JaJh|~CJOJQJ^JaJh4 wCJOJQJ^JaJh.CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJHefBC֐אjk'(z{’ !<=SUcdefg޴޴ަޘrdjh/BUmHnHuhJDCJOJQJ^JaJ.jh/BCJOJQJU^JaJmHnHuhbCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJh,}CJOJQJ^JaJhHPoCJOJQJ^JaJh|~CJOJQJ^JaJ hfhoCJOJQJ^JaJ hfh|~CJOJQJ^JaJ&ghmMOܔݔ,-yzRSTUNONO>?ؙٙ ݳzz h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ&h/ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h/ h/ 5>*CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJ hbhoCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJD0p(~WPQP23ĵ dh7$8$H$gd?B dh7$8$H$gdb XYқԛlmJKsu/0`bIJڟ۟lmGH/0ǢȢXYKL56 h?Bh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJLȥɥhi23ʧ˧hi 45}~ͪϪOP®xxxxxxxxxxxxxxh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yh \Y5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yh/ 5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h \Yho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh/ CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh/ CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ)PQ78|}ɬʬ`a67yzƯǯ123|}ǰȰdeGHhiMN޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴£޴޴޴޴޴ h?BhbCJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh \YCJOJQJ^JaJ@./~ OP45wxŷǷ[\DE۹ܹ)*vwȺɺbcּ׼#$pq ZӣhpCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhB|CJOJQJ^JaJhB|CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhbCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhbCJOJQJ^JaJ:6tupHIUst{|&''{| dh7$8$H$gd?BZ[#%IJ78stubcJK(),-bcӣh{CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhCJOJQJ^JaJhCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhpCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhpCJOJQJ^JaJ9GHI./vwRT=>lmCDrstʶx h?Bh{kCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJh{kCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ&h{kh{k5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ ho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ&h{kho5>*CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh{CJOJQJ^JaJ, PQFG./z{|fg+,vw YZ45 UVYZ@AhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh2UCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh2UCJOJQJ^JaJF*+xy [\%&'pq WXEFst [\z{|cd޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴޴£ޕޕޕޕh CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh?BCJOJQJ^JaJhECJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhL?CJOJQJ^JaJ:OP45VWX67"#pq_`LM#$noGH,-z{ hb%'CJOJQJ^JaJh?BCJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bh?BCJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh CJOJQJ^JaJA|WXWX|}~ dh7$8$H$gd?B VWX89 !op VW01ef{|01STxyXYᴤh+vho5>*OJQJ^Jh+vCJOJQJ^JaJhb%'CJOJQJ^JaJ h?Bhb%'CJOJQJ^JaJhoCJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJ@2UZsp dh7$8$H$gd?BPQqr-.nouvEFpqEF no&'ABab?@{|<=YZuvh `CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh+vCJOJQJ^JaJSMrpC}[Ff|ohx+ dh7$8$H$gd?BvDEde()YZ*+:;mn fgvw)*)& ' c d     6 7     1 3 N O o p        h `CJOJQJ^JaJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJYse  8 q   m rs| $$Ifa$$If 7$8$H$edgdJD dh7$8$H$gd?B  H I         k l    !rs"#9owx7mtu !4ipqȺȬȬȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺȉȺh/BCJOJQJ^JaJ)hJDhJDB*CJOJQJ^JaJphhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJ hJDhJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDOJQJ h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJh `CJOJQJ^JaJ6|sjs $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$If|kd $$Ifedl0^%%"0%4 laitytJD"_YPGP $$Ifa$ $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$Ifedl\^zz%  0%4 laitytJD"#16w_YPG $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd` $$Ifedl3\^zz%  0%4 laitytJDwxoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd/ $$Ifedl-F z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd $$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD,2toi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDtuoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd{$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD oi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd?$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD !*0poi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDpq}oi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDq.`ghn h?BhoCJOJQJ^JaJhHS^hJDCJOJQJ^JaJhJDCJOJQJ^JaJh/BCJOJQJ^JaJ hJDhJDCJOJQJ^JaJoi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD#)goi`W $IfgdJD $$Ifa$$IfkdO$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJDghoi$Ifkd$$IfedlF z%o w 0%    4 laitytJD dh7$8$H$gd?B$Ifikd$$Ifedl%%0%4 laitytJD,1h/ =!"#$% DyK  http://wwwyK http://www//DyK +www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.aspyK dhttp://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.asp}DyK Dhttp://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy%20November%202001.pdfyK http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy November 2001.pdfEDyK 4http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htmyK hhttp://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htm]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5]$$If!vh5 5 5 #v :Vl t65 yt5$$Ifed!vh55%"#v#v%":V l0%55%"4itytJD$$Ifed!vh555 5 #v#v#v #v :V l0%,555 5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh555 5 #v#v#v #v :V l30%555 5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l-0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0ÿ%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%,5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5o 5w5 #vo #vw#v :V l0%5o 5w5 4itytJD$$Ifed!vh5%#v%:V l0%,5%4itytJD@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRi@R  Table Normal4 l4a (k@(No List6U@6 45# Hyperlink >*B*phj@j 5 Table Grid7:V0bOb JDDefault 7$8$H$-B*CJOJQJ^J_HaJmH phsH tH 3  36 3efg#$%" n ~1Yv~!!!"$$$++/@2A233558888<K>k>l>@@cC`EaE~FRHSHJLMM,N-NSSSWWWMX [ [Z]m___aaCjkkOnpqqrrrrrrrrrrrsss s)sQsxssssssst2tAtKtLtjttttttttuu%u&uFuau|uuuuuuuv8vAvFvGvfvvvvvvvvvw&w/w4w5wRwewwwwwwwwxx!x:xDxExFx_xixjxuxvxxxxxxxx y5y=yFyKyLy_yyyyyyyzz#z$zAGHW]hJ0pCB0J0C@0J0 CpJ0  D@J0  PD@J0DpJ0DpHJ0DJ0 J00EpJ0hE@J0E@8J0E@0$N',3g;BQINU[bgp2uz8~gPZ v q)Hmg{{K||%}}F~~4EuۀKҁ#Q|"wt pgZZ[knkk$rgrr XXXX8@d(  HB  C DHB  C DHB  C DHB  C D   S L .`T`T`T`T#"  HB  C DB S  ?~df TTtHHtHHtttTt *T3@CWNCWTNCWNCWMCWMCWTMCWMCWLCWLCWTLCWLCWKCWKCWTKCWKCWJCWJCWTJCWJCWICW5CWd5CW$5CW4CW4CWd4CW$4CW3CW3CWd3CW$3CW2CW2CWd2CW$2CW1CW1CWd1CW$1CW0CW0CWd0CW$0CW/CW/CWd/CW$/CW.CW.CWd.CW$.CW-DW-DWd-DW?DWt?DW4?DW>DW>DWt>DW4> DW= DW= DW DW DWdfDWDWwDW<>DW=DW=DW|=DW<=DW|<DW<DW<DW;DW<<DW:DW DW|DWjDW$kDW DW!DWd"DW #DW< $DW %DW&DW܅ 'DW(DW)DW*DWx+DW ,DWl-DWR.DW/DWD0DW1DW02DWl3DW- 4DW 5DW,!6DWl!7DW!8DW!9DW,":DW;DWTDW?DWT@DWADWBDWCDWTDDWEDWFDWGDWTHDWIDWJDWKDWTLDWMDWNDWODWT©PDWQDWRDWSDWTTDWUDWVDWWDWTXDWYDWZDW[DWT\DW]DW^DW_DWT`DWaDWbDWcDWTdDWTeDW4UfDWtUgDWUhDWUiDW4VjDWtVkDWVlDWVmDW4WnDWtWoDWWpDWWqDW4XrDWtXsDWXtDWXuDW4YvDWtYwDWYxDWYyDW4ZzDWtZ{DWZ|DWZ}DW4[~DWt[DW[DW[DW4\DWt\DW\DW\DW4]DWt]DW]DW]DW4^DWt^DW^DW^DW4_DWt_DW_DW_DW4`DWt`DW`DW`DW4aDWtaDWaDWaDW4bDWtbDWbDWbDW4cDWtcDWcDWcDW4dDWtdDWdDWdDW4eDWteDWeDWeDW4fDWtfDWfDWfDW4gDWtgDWgDWgDW4hDWthDWhDWhDW4iDWtiDWiDWiDW4jDWtjDWjDWjDW4kDWtkDWkDWkDW4lDWtlDWlDWl33]]44 !!""OO``.f.fgg5l5lrrksksttuxxxxyހ''/TT̅ff"5HHPooƠƠ }}es}ϩϩʪʪժƬͲײײ˴$$NN II 33)<FcYYeSSNN}}''}}11TT^;;GG ll}$$BBqqxm55##xxuu! q q          !"#$%&'()*+,-./0213456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdehfgijklmnopqrsutvwxyz{|}~??ii@@ !!""OO(`(`:f:fggAlAlrrwswsttuxxy y y.77``„„݅rr3?OXX{{ҠҠ o{۩۩Ӫ¬ϬϬвǴմ.. ZZUU ##;;%2BOpcmm[[VV--99]hhCC¿SSxx**HHv||sAA//**( { {      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0213456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdeghfijklmnopqrsutvwxyz{|}~9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplaceB*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState )- D H k o U [ KO pt&! NV  f!o!%#&###3$<$&(&' (O(Y(**//u4476E66699N:R:m:q:::1;;;>???????@@AA$B(BEEEFHHMIQIMMfOiOjOoOtO|OPPSS~TTUUVVWWWXaXXX Y YYY([2[Q[U[B\E\F\K\P\X\]]/]9]n^r^T_X_``!b'bddrl|lmmnnnnooooppqquuvvvx|x ||||||W[ĆφhqNRΊҊ=A8<Ɩʖʙpzim͞ўistx 5<æ̦֦ͦ 'bf! dk :>-1$,#+$(qrZd\_`ejrNR26% )dm"3CCKairx/8FKjp NSjqx+4},5OUqvyr  DVI!X!$$//x03144*7.78888<<cCfC~FFLLWWMXVXYYZ]e]m_p_mhnhOnVnpp||%}-}"O^mupxi(-W]PT[dժ6?pzUV',;Cnp0 r}YlnfioUfx+8QRce-@Zkmjpr 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333ffg"Z [kk$rrvvDEdeff()YZ*+:;mn fgvw)*&)&'cd6713NOopHI kl !qr   r JIY7Mbx/BB|#45#a$b%'1>.;a;g;?BJDTHo^HO2U \Yz[HS^{k ?oHPoYyq+v4 w||~*=W `/ fL?)D]sW5?LR-u.WyF%Kbxw,} ^,!yoQpcEy0{}zLrrrss)sssssAtKtLttttttu%u&u|uuuuu8vFvGvfvvvvv&w4w5wewwwwwxExFxixjxuxvxxxxx y=yKyLy_yyyyyz#z$zFzzzzrs|"#16wx,2tu ! * 0 p q }        # ) g h    @##I## @UnknownG: Times New Roman5Symbol3& : Arial9AdvTimes=AdvTimes-baNEACB P+ Adv TimesAdv TimesaNEACD B+ Adv TimesAdv TimesaNEACD D+ Adv TimesAdv Times"qhxĦF>+'G+'GY24d2HX)?o22ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education inuwcuwcOh+'0 , L X dpx4ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education inuwcNormaluwc62Microsoft Office Word@N*@T˦@^0ԩ+'G՜.+,D՜.+,` hp|  uwc' 3ICT Policies and Strategies in Higher Education in Title 8@ _PID_HLINKSA8an 4http://www.apc.org/books/ictpolsa/intro/fulltoc.htmT =?@http://education.pwv.gov.za/teli2/ICTStrategy November 2001.pdfT G2http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/speeches/show.aspT ~+ http://www/T   !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~      !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789;<=>?@ACDEFGHINRoot Entry FxIԩPData i1TableWordDocument.SummaryInformation(:DocumentSummaryInformation8BCompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q
Warning: Unknown(): open(/tmp/sess_b87bc17f44165bc94d2ad332946675d2, O_RDWR) failed: Read-only file system (30) in Unknown on line 0

Warning: Unknown(): Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct (/tmp) in Unknown on line 0