Oval’s doors closed by regulators

A PRIVATE college with campuses in Durban, Pietermaritzburg and Johannesburg shut its doors last week because the regulatory bodies governing tertiary education claimed it did not comply with their learning quality standards.

The South African Qualifications Authority (Saqa) informed Oval International Computer Education

(Pty) Ltd in November that six of its qualifications would be de-registered because they did not comply with requirements. Oval brought an urgent high court application but was unsuccessful when judgment was handed down on January 22.

The Minister of Higher Education and Training and the Council on

Higher Education (CHE) were also listed as respondents in the matter.

Saqa’s stance and the court ruling prevented Oval from registering firstyear students for the 2019 academic year for the courses in question.

Oval was founded in 1989 and its offerings included diplomas and degrees in IT courses. “We lost a few hundred students who had to be moved elsewhere and more than 70 jobs were lost,” said Pravin Maharaj, a founding director. “It is sinful how this matter has been handled by the different departments. There has been interdepartmental bungling that has placed us in the firing line and left us with no recourse for years on this matter,” he said. Previously, educational programmes offered at tertiary institutes were assessed and given a National Qualification Framework (NQF) rating, which was governed by the Saqa Act.

In 2009, the act was repealed and a new quality assurance system was instituted by Saqa which resulted in a shift in ratings of programmes from the previous maximum of eight to an NQF of 10. Saqa subsequently adjusted Oval’s programme ratings accordingly.

In court documents, Maharaj said Oval’s problems with the CHE started in 2016 and related to the new ratings. Oval was informed by the

CHE that it intended to withdraw its accreditation for its programmes in July 2016. The reason was the substantial inconsistencies between the NQF levels and credits offered with Oval programmes against those accredited by the CHE and registered by the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET). Maharaj argued that the discrepancy was due to the records of Saqa and the department being at odds with each other. He questioned why the authorities took no action in 2016 but did so in 2018. Maharaj claimed the relevant departments were not forthcoming with assistance to ensure that his organisation complied with Saqa’s new NQF requirements. “Also, we appealed our withdrawal with the minister (DHET) in November and expressed the urgency for a response because we planned to do registrations in January. We are yet to hear from the minister,” Maharaj said. Professor Narend Baijnath, chief executive of the CHE, said its main objective was to promote and ensure the credibility of higher education programmes and qualifications.

Based on a student complaint in 2016, which was lodged with the DHET, the CHE reviewed Oval’s programmes and withdrew accreditation of seven of its eight programmes in September 2016, said Baijnath.

He said Oval brought a high court application in January 2017 to contest its withdrawal but the college had taken no further steps to prosecute its application. “The CHE’S decision

(has been) in force since September 2016, and Oval has continued to enrol students in programmes which did not comply with our quality criteria.”

The CHE had engaged extensively with Oval over several years regarding the quality of its programmes and to have them addressed, but it had failed to do so, said Baijnath. Saqa chief executive Joe Samuels said while honouring its mandate of developing and implementing NQFS, Saqa was always co-operative and gave Oval every opportunity to fix its problems.

“Saqa de-registered Oval on the CHE’S recommendation, which is consistent with the NQF Act, and is lawful.” The DHET did not respond.