Towards a Framework for CAES Planning and Performance Management at Unisa: The Role of BI & IR Presented to CAES College Board 9 April 2009

Towards a Framework for CAES Planning and Performance Management at Unisa: The Role of BI & IRPresented to CAES College Board9 April 2009

Current Budg etPrev. Budget

Year+1 BudgetYear+2 Budget

Year+3 BudgetYear+4 BudgetHeadquarters

British Columbia Prair ie

Central Quebec

Atlantic

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%

50.00%60.00%70.00%

MEASURES

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

AB BC CO EO FO MB NB NF

No. of Members

LegendRecreationalCOMPSKEXECUTIVEOFFICIALPRECSKTESTSK

Professor George SubotzkyExecutive Director:Information and Strategic Analysis

Overview of presentation

• Background– Context and purpose of engagement

• Integrated Strategic Planning Framework– DISA role and mandate within this

• What is BI? Key concepts:– IM MI & BI– OPM– Outputs, outcomes and performance measures/indicators– The Information Hierarchy: The BI Pyramid– Analytic Maturity Curve– Technological Maturity Curve

• Elements of the BI Framework• Key college strategic planning issues

• Enrolment planning• Success & throughput model

• Example of OP as M & E tool• Examples of performance dashboards• CAES profile• Engagement

Acknowledgements

• BI: Suzette van Zyl– Conceptual Genesis of BI Unisa– Research/PhD– Project leader

• George Subotzky– Eager novice, quick learner

• Prof Baijnath: Convinced supportive champion• Gartner: mixed value report• Business Intelligence 2008 Conference• Profile: Herbert Zemann and Herman Visser

Strategic Management Framework & Planning

Process and the role of BI & IR

Types & sources of data & information: Different views

Counting Students

Registration

Temporary

Provisional HC Enrolments(“Registered”)

FormalRegister

edCancellatio

ns

Provisional

HEMIS Cancelled

HEMIS Total HC

HEMIS Active HC

Non-Active

Provisional HC Enr

DoE Subsid

y

Non-formal

Official HEMIS submissions of headcounts & FTEs to DoE based on census days:

1st Submission (31 Oct): Preliminary2nd Submission (30 Apr): Preliminary3rd Submission (31 July): Final Audited

• Provisional headcounts and coursecounts of registrations/enrolments from opening of registration in December onwards

• Previous year’s figures are updated as a result of subsequent cancellations & reinstatements

Success & ThroughputSuccess – Course Level

• Exam Success Rate (Passed/Wrote)• Course Success Rate (Passed/Nett Enrolments)- 2010 Ministerial Target: 56% Currently: 54,6%

- Prognosis: Good• Nett & Gross Attrition/Survival Rates (Cancellations, absentees & failures – full model analysis underway)

Throughput – Qualification Level• Proxy Measure (Graduated/Enrolments)- 2010 Ministerial Target: 8,37%Currently: 6%- Prognosis: Bad

• Cohort Method (Appropriate benchmarks?)- Completion Rate & Time to completion

Sources of Information & Analysis

• Institutional Information & Analysis Portal– Reports/tables– Profiles/overviews/pocket stats– Pivot tables– Downloadable analyses, reports, briefings

• Information & Analysis Outputs– Institutional Research/analyses/briefings– Ad hoc requests

• Statutory reports• Power User Groups

Key strategic planning issues

Strategic Reference Points

2015 Strategic Plan:• Strategic Outcomes: revisit• 10 Strategic Objectives:

thematic clustering• Strategies: review • Targets : review

Strategy:• Vision & Mission: clear - postmerger• Social Mandate: requires clarification• Business Model (ODL): requires clarification

IOP: 3 Strategically-aligned Operational Themes:

• Institutional Identity:- ODL- Africanness- Comprehensiveness- Teaching/Research/CE Emphasis

• Academic Identity & Focus:- ODL- Comprehensive PQM- Delivery model- Graduateness- Access and admissions policy

• Enabling Mechanisms & Resources- Primary & support services

- Appropriate BA/EAs: (People, Systems, Resources/Infrastructure & Technology)

- Enabling Conditions: (Leadership & Management, Culture & Climate)

Strategic Planning Issues

• IOP list – organisational issues (distilled from: recent Makgotla, PVC summit, HEQC, 2008 IOP mid-year progress report)– Leadership & management– Communication– Alignment of individual, departmental institutional and social

purpose & meaning– Shared understandings & buy-in

• PQM – HEQC (comprehensiveness)• Recurriculation – relevance (Africanness)• Enrolment planning (teaching input, operational implications)• Throughput and success (teaching output)• Research output (M&D, publications)• QA/Risk Management/IPMS• Staffing: Achram, capacity, employment equity, succession

planning• Budget

Implementation• College plan & College component of

other plans– Objectives– Strategies projects – Resources– Activities/actions

• Projects• Scheduling/dependencies

• Importance of shifting planning/project management mode in order to execute strategy

Performance Management

• Targets• Performance measures • Progress reporting/Monitoring &

Evaluation (Review)• Supported by Information &

Analysis:–Business Intelligence Framework– Institutional Research

Strategic Planning Issues:

1. Enrolment Planning

Key strategic decision• Comply with ministerial target or negotiate upwards and/or

onwards? Can we sustain quality and operational service delivery?

• Accepting increases based on potential new negotiated role for Unisa: – Maintaining high participation rates in the light of declining

residential enrolments and impacts of HIV/AIDS– Addressing teacher education crisis– Serving continental needs

• Despite ‘knee-jerk’ nature of recent HE policy (generated by tension between widened participation imperative/Treasury efficiency concerns & fiscal constraint), this new role will not be condoned without Unisa responsibly and demonstrably addressing success & throughput efficiencies

Key strategic challenge

• Responsibly managed open access is therefore an unavoidable imperative

• This means balancing seemingly contradictory policy goals:– Commitment to open access, as part of our

institutional social mandate– Commitment to enhancing success &

throughput efficiency– Commitment to ensuring high quality &

relevant graduate outcomes for employment and the critical citizenship in the African context

Managed open access• Not exclusionary, but realistically supportive in

the light of changing student profile (details in forthcoming HEMIS update)

• Involves rigorous pre-registration engagement to: – Test appropriately for academic potential and

readiness– Ensure conducive & supportive life conditions– Ensure right programme & subject choice and

realistic study loads – Identify appropriate tutorial & Pastoral support and

channelling

• HE fulfils multiple purposes:– Academic, vocational & professional graduates for

labour market– Knowledge production for innovation and economic &

social development– Formative education, cultural & intellectual enrichment – Independent space for fostering critical debate &

citizenship– Means of enhancing social mobility and distribution of

opportunity & wealth• Attempting to fulfil these simultaneously can

generate (apparent & real) conflicts and policy tensions– eg Excellence/Efficiency vs Equity/Access

Policy Tensions

At the heart of Unisa’s enrolment planning lies such a policy tension namely:• Growth & expansion, driven by:

– National policy framework emphasising widening participation, driven, in turn, by both equity and development needs

– Unisa’s social mandate to provide affordable, flexible access to higher education for non-traditional, disadvantaged students

– Increasing & unabating market demand (see figures)– Unisa’s emerging role in addressing teacher education crisis and

continental HRD needsvs

• Controlled growth & capping, driven by:– Fiscal constraint, leading to ministerial enrolment targets (role of

Treasury)– Concern for efficiency & success/throughput – avoiding the

revolving door syndrome (systemic & institutional levels)– Operational efficiency & service delivery constraints

Policy Tension in Enrolment Planning

The Key Strategic Decision

• Continued Open access in line with DoE requirements for widened participation, market demand

vs

• New ‘Responsible’ open admission & enrolment in line with renegotiated DOE enrolment targets, emphasis on success & throughput, operational considerations

• Total HEMIS HCs– Increased from

206 178 in 2004 to 254 136 in 2007

– 2006/5: 9,43% up– 2007/6: 11,69% up• Active HCs – 2007: 239 581 (94,3%

active rate) – 5,4% increase on 2006

– Approaching 2010 ministerial target of 258 023

HEMIS Enrolment Trends, 2004-7

2004

(Tota

l)

2005

(Tota

l)

2006

(Tota

l)

2007

(Tota

l)

2007

(Activ

e)

2010

MOE Targ

et -

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

2008 Enrolment Projection

Provis

ional

Enrol

ments

(1st R

eg Pe

riod)

Provis

ional

Enrol

ments

(Entire

year)

HEMIS

Total

HEMIS

Final

(Active o

nly)

Minister

ial 20

10 Ta

rget (

Active o

nly) -

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

Focus

Actual Actual Actual Projected Projected Projected 2010

Approve

d Targets

2005 2006 2007 2008 (9,4%)

2009 (8%)

2010(8%)

Overall enrolments: 207 931 227 539

239 581 261 889 282

840 305 467 258 023

Fields of study:

SET 25 771 26 085 26 639 27

172 27

715 28 270

(9%) 13%Bus/Man:

85 639 95 605 104 047 114 452

124 466

135 668 (44%) 50%

Humanities:

72 880 80 336 82 992 92 121

101 794

112 482 (37%) 37%

Education

23 641 25 513 25 903 27 716 29 656 31 732 (10%) 12%

Qualification

levels: UG diplomas: 57 673 61 675 65 401 69

979 74

878 80 119

(26%) 28%

UG degrees: 117 757 127 694 133 508 145 524

158 766

173 055 (57%) 62%

PG < Masters: 15 506 17 469 18 472 20 873

23 587

26 653 (9%) 7%

PG M & D: 6 871 6 408 5 183 5 338

5 552

5 830 (2%) 3%

Unweighted FTEs: 100 875 109 707 116 531 

127 381

137 572 148 578  128 840

Success rate: 53,60% 50,80% 54,30%  55,00% 55,50% 56% 56%Throughput

rate: % 7,17% 6,50% 6,45%  6,17% 6,09% 5,99% 8.37%

Graduates 14 185 13 855 14 364  15 000 16 000  17 000 20 231

Teaching Input

Units: Weighted teaching input units 83 558 90 803 95 887 104

815 113

200 122 257 102 100

Actual & projected enrolment & output performance against

targets

Strategic Planning Issues:

2. Improving Throughput & Success

A visual metaphor ...

• Key success factor: adequate time for study

• Key risk factor: unrealistic course load

• Consequence: no progression!

Performance Management:

Examples of Performance Dashboards

Progress Monitoring:

Example of OP Monitoring Tool

Profiling, tracking, modelling & prediction – in different

views

Educational Background

Unisa Destination

StudentSES/

Demographics

• Matric Status (Exempt./Non)• Matric Aggregate• Previous Inst. Type

• Matric Scores

• College• CESM/FOS

• Race• Gender• Age

• Home language• Nationality

• Qual. Category (B Tech etc)• Qual. Type (Degree/Dipl/Cert.)• Qual. Level (UG/PG)

• Employment Status• Location• Marital Status• Economic Status

• Domestic/Financial responsibilities

• Health & Wellness

• Course Type• Course Load

Individual factors

• Socio-psychological metrics (?)• Academic Record• Academic Activities/Behaviours (tracking)

Student Profiling

Course level

Course type

CESM/FOS

• Entry• Exit

• Pre-requisite • Compulsory• Elective

• Humanities & Social Sciences/Education• Law • Business/Commerce• Science, Engineering & Technology

Course history• Enrolment/• sustainability patterns• Success Rate (‘killer Module’?)

• Student evaluation

Course Profiling

Staff profiling• Employment equity: key variables by designated

groups• Succession planning: key variables by age• Capacity development: key variables by highest

qualifications• Qualitative profiling

– Understanding (but not necessarily condoning) the attitudes & experiences of staff is key to effective change management as a basis for realising strategic goals

– Organisational theory identifies various positions which staff take up within organisations in relation to change initiatives

– What might this look like in current Unisa climate?

Change profileSelf constructions/identity tensions:• Collegialism-managerialism: Resistance to

compliance and planned environment vs nostalgic attavists

• Teaching-Research nexis• Academic-Educator identity• Meaningful identification-alienation :

– Based on alignment of personal, departmental, institutional and social purposes, and shared understandings of institutional vision (King Solomon/NASA/Disney adage)

• Self-interested minimalists-inspired initiative takers

College Profile

1. 2004 - 2009 Provisional Registration Figures

Provisional Registration Formal Headcounts by College,

2004 - 2009 to date

CAES CEMS CHS CLAW CSET OCCA-SIONAL 0

20 000

40 000

60 000

80 000

100 000

120 000

140 000

160 000

Provisional Registration Proportion of Formal Headcounts by College, 2004 - 2009 to date, compared to Ministerial

targets

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

2010 (Targets)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Provisional Registration

CAES Place of Residence by Continent, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Africa 1 858 99,36% 2 202 99,14% 2 701 99,19% 3 686 99,30% 4 481 99,42% 3 921 99,39%

Asia 2 0,11% 6 0,27% 2 0,07% 5 0,13% 6 0,13% 8 0,20%

Europe 6 0,32% 10 0,45% 13 0,48% 15 0,40% 14 0,31% 12 0,30%

Oceania 0,00% 2 0,09% 3 0,11% 4 0,11% 4 0,09% 2 0,05%

The Americas 2 0,11% 1 0,05% 4 0,15% 2 0,05% 2 0,04% 2 0,05%

Unknown 2 0,11% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00%

Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES Place of Residence by Hub, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

CAPE COASTAL 291 15,56% 365 16,43% 358 13,15% 494 13,31% 542 12,03% 504 12,78%

GAUTENG 485 25,94% 599 26,97% 791 29,05% 1 083 29,18% 1 364 30,26% 1 258 31,89%

KZN 318 17,01% 434 19,54% 621 22,81% 936 25,22% 1 179 26,16% 1 022 25,91%

MIDLANDS 230 12,30% 275 12,38% 261 9,59% 302 8,14% 397 8,81% 337 8,54%

N EASTERN 447 23,90% 458 20,62% 591 21,70% 764 20,58% 868 19,26% 671 17,01%

Unknown 99 5,29% 90 4,05% 101 3,71% 133 3,58% 157 3,48% 153 3,88%

Grand Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES by Age Group, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

< 20 47 2,51% 75 3,38% 188 6,90% 267 7,19% 330 7,32% 210 5,32%

20-29 758 40,53% 984 44,30% 1 299 47,70% 1 911 51,48% 2 427 53,85% 2 133 54,07%

30-39 659 35,24% 711 32,01% 778 28,57% 986 26,56% 1 115 24,74% 991 25,12%

40-49 330 17,65% 347 15,62% 381 13,99% 455 12,26% 528 11,72% 489 12,40%

50-59 67 3,58% 75 3,38% 70 2,57% 86 2,32% 90 2,00% 105 2,66%

60-69 3 0,16% 5 0,23% 6 0,22% 6 0,16% 14 0,31% 16 0,41%

>= 70 0,00% 0,00% 1 0,04% 1 0,03% 2 0,04% 1 0,03%Not Listed 6 0,32% 24 1,08% 0,00% 0,00% 1 0,02% 0,00%

Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES Headcount by Qualification Types, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

UnderGraduate 1 707 91,28% 2 020 90,95% 2 434 89,39% 3 301 88,93% 3 857 85,58% 3 317 84,08%

Honours 142 7,59% 162 7,29% 220 8,08% 335 9,02% 563 12,49% 534 13,54%

Masters 16 0,86% 31 1,40% 52 1,91% 63 1,70% 72 1,60% 53 1,34%

Doctorate 5 0,27% 8 0,36% 17 0,62% 13 0,35% 15 0,33% 41 1,04%

Grand Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES Headcount by Home Language, 2004-9

NB: Please note that French & Portuguese were classified as other African languages as the majority of our students are African

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

English/Afrikaans 657 35,13% 711 32,01% 741 27,21%1 002 26,99%1 167 25,89% 1 090 27,63%

Other African Languages 1 198 64,06%1 503 67,67%1 970 72,35%2 684 72,31%3 306 73,35% 2 829 71,71%

Other Foreign Languages 8 0,43% 5 0,23% 12 0,44% 23 0,62% 25 0,55% 19 0,48%

Unknown 7 0,37% 2 0,09% 0,00% 3 0,08% 9 0,20% 7 0,18%

Grand Total 1 870 100,00%2 221 100,00%2 723 100,00%3 712 100,00%4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES Headcount by Matric Certification, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Exemption 835 44,65% 1 166 52,50% 1 451 53,29% 1 925 51,86% 2 321 51,50% 2 197 55,69%

Non-Exemption 897 47,97% 902 40,61% 1 066 39,15% 1 517 40,87% 1 793 39,78% 1 510 38,28%

NA/Unknown 138 7,38% 153 6,89% 206 7,57% 270 7,27% 393 8,72% 238 6,03%

Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

Provisional Registration

CAES Headcount by Employment Status, 2004-9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (To Date)

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Employed 858 45,88% 936 42,14% 1 067 39,18% 1 402 37,77% 1 589 35,26% 1 345 34,09%

Full time student 21 1,12% 48 2,16% 391 14,36% 583 15,71% 764 16,95% 679 17,21%

Not Classified 553 29,57% 609 27,42% 630 23,14% 793 21,36% 970 21,52% 1 020 25,86%

Un-employed 438 23,42% 628 28,28% 635 23,32% 893 24,06% 1 115 24,74% 883 22,38%

Unknown 0,00% 0,00% 0,00% 41 1,10% 69 1,53% 18 0,46%

Total 1 870 100,00% 2 221 100,00% 2 723 100,00% 3 712 100,00% 4 507 100,00% 3 945 100,00%

College Profile

2. 2004 - 2008 HEMIS Figures

CAES HEMIS Headcounts 2004-8,

compared to Ministerial target

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 (Target)

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

CAES HEMIS Headcount by Race,

2004-8

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

CAES HEMIS Headcount by

Race, 2004-8

2004 2005 2006 2007 20080%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

CAES HEMIS Headcounts by

Gender, 2004-8

2004 2005 2006 2007 20080

5001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

CAES HEMIS Headcount by

Gender, 2004-8

2004 2005 2006 2007 20080%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

HEMIS CAES Graduations, 2004-8

2004 2005 2006 2007

Diplomas 45 6 9 4

Degrees 44 46 49 67

Honours 16 19 12 36

Masters 1 1 2 4

Doctoral 1 0 2 0

Grand Total 107 72 74 111

College Profile

3. Throughput & Success Rates

Unisa UG GR Benchmarks

• 3-year undergraduate qualifications– Cohort graduation rate: 35% (corresponds to

the low National Plan benchmark)– Cohort dropout rate: 40%

• 4-year or more undergraduate qualifications – Cohort graduation rate: 54% (high)

(corresponds to the high Ministerially revised National Plan benchmark)

– Cohort dropout rate: 36% (high)

NPHE/Revised GRs & DRs

UG Qual-

ification

Bench-mark

NPHE Proxy

GR

NPHE Cohort

GR

NPHE Cohort Dropout Rate

Revised Proxy

GR

Revised Cohort

GR

Revised Cohort Dropout Rate

3-year High/NPHE 15,0% 75,0% 25,0% 13,5% 67,5% 22,5%Typical/Low 10,0% 35,0% 65,0% 9,0% 31,5% 58,5%

4-year High/NPHE 10,0% 60,0% 40,0% 9,0% 54,0% 36,0%

CAES National Diplomas: Graduation, Dropout and In-process Rates, 2002-2007

CohortsCohort

YearNumber of

Entering Students

Graduates Dropouts/Transfers out In Process

No % Avg time (years) No % Avg time

(years) No % Avg time (years)

1998 298 2 0,67 1,00 294 98,66 1.21 2 0,67 5,00

1999 60 . . . 54 90,00 1.07 6 10,00 3,67

2000 4 . . . 4 100,00 2.00 . . . 2001 . . . . . . . . . . 2002 870 102 11,72 2,41 736 84,60 1.75 32 3,68 4,69

2003 838 68 8,11 1,62 732 87,35 1.45 38 4,53 4,42

2004 618 4 0,65 2,00 572 92,56 1.10 42 6,80 3,38

2005 2 552 26 1,02 1,69 1 598 62,62 1.30 928 36,36 2,83

2006 2 496 12 0,48 1,17 1 344 53,85 1.00 1 140 45,67 2,00

2007 3 066 2 0,07 1,00 3 064 99,93 1,00

Minimum Time to Qualify (Full-time): 3,0 years (ochre shading)

Minimum Time to Qualify (DE): Minimum Time (Full-time) + 50%) 4,5years (rounded up to 5 years - orange shading)

Please note that in early years students could exit with a National Certificate or National Higher Certificate and would then be regarded as Transfers out.

CAES BTech: Graduation, Dropout and In-process Rates, 2002-2007

CohortsCohort Year

Number of Entering Students

Graduates Dropouts In-Process

No % of Entering Students

Avg Time (Years) No % of Entering

StudentsAvg Time

(Years) No % of Entering Students

Avg Time (Years)

1998 66 26 39,4% 1,92 40 60,6% 1,50 - - -

1999 52 12 23,1% 3,50 38 73,1% 1,84 2 3,8% 2,00

2000 182 72 39,6% 2,39 100 54,9% 1,70 10 5,5% 5,00

2001 312 122 39,1% 2,44 178 57,1% 1,36 12 3,8% 3,33

2002 224 88 39,3% 2,61 116 51,8% 1,57 20 8,9% 3,40

2003 218 76 34,9% 2,34 124 56,9% 1,65 18 8,3% 3,56

2004 310 96 31,0% 2,27 184 59,4% 1,51 30 9,7% 3,40

2005 406 82 20,2% 1,95 188 46,3% 1,34 136 33,5% 2,74

2006 408 34 8,3% 1,47 182 44,6% 1,00 192 47,1% 2,00

2007 608 6 1,0% 1,00 602 99,0% 1,00

Minimum Time to Qualify (Full-time): 1,0 years (ochre shading) Minimum Time to Qualify (DE): Minimum Time (Full-time) + 50%) 1,5 years (rounded to 2,0 - orange shading)Reliable years: 1998-2004 Minimum times above are for a B Tech following on a National Diploma

CAES Prof. 1st B Degrees: Graduation, Dropout and In-process Rates, 2002-2007

CohortsCohort

YearNumber of

Entering Students

Graduates Dropouts In-Process

No% of

Entering Students

Avg Time

(Years)No

% of Entering Students

Avg Time

(Years)No

% of Entering Students

Avg Time

(Years)

20002

- - - - - - 2 100,0%

3,00

20011

- - - - - - 1 100,0%

4,00

2002

20032

- - - 1 50,0%

2,00 1 50,0%

5,00

2004158 29 18,4%

2,10 83 52,5%

1,94 46 29,1%

3,87

2005135 3 2,2%

1,00 96 71,1%

1,23 36 26,7%

2,89

2006328

- - - 175 53,4%

1,00 153 46,6%

2,00

2007427

- - - 427 100,0%

1,00

Minimum Time to Qualify (Full-time): 4,0years (ochre shading)

Minimum Time to Qualify (DE): Minimum Time (Full-time) + 50%) 6,0years (orange shading)

Not sufficient time elapsed to have reliable years, interpret with caution

CAES Honours Degrees: Graduation, Dropout and In-process Rates, 2002-2007

CohortsCohort Year

Number of Entering Students

Graduates Dropouts In-Process

No % of Entering Students

Avg Time (Years) No % of Entering

StudentsAvg Time

(Years) No % of Entering Students

Avg Time (Years)

1998 170 38 22,4% 3,79 124 72,9% 1,61 8 4,7% 4,25

1999 102 28 27,5% 3,50 68 66,7% 1,56 6 5,9% 5,33

2000 112 34 30,4% 3,47 72 64,3% 1,64 6 5,4% 4,00

2001 116 18 15,5% 2,11 92 79,3% 1,37 6 5,2% 4,00

2002 122 26 21,3% 2,85 84 68,9% 1,64 12 9,8% 3,83

2003 128 24 18,8% 2,50 82 64,1% 1,56 22 17,2% 3,73

2004 150 18 12,0% 2,56 114 76,0% 1,37 18 12,0% 3,22

2005 170 18 10,6% 2,00 110 64,7% 1,38 42 24,7% 2,71

2006 360 2 0,6% 1,00 212 58,9% 1,00 146 40,6% 2,00

2007 550 - - - 550 100,0% 1,00

Minimum Time to Qualify (Full-time): 1,0 years (ochre shading)

Minimum Time to Qualify (DE): Minimum Time (Full-time) + 50%) 1,5 years (rounded up to 2 years - orange shading)Reliable years: 1998-2004

CSR by College, 2004-7

CAES CEMS CHS CLAW CSET

2004 61,96% 48,97% 70,23% 53,72% 44,62%2005 52,53% 46,73% 70,14% 53,64% 37,58%2006 50,31% 43,90% 66,57% 50,82% 36,76%2007 56,66% 48,07% 69,65% 53,93% 41,46%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

AGRIC, ANIM HEAL & HUMAN ECO

ANIMAL & VET PUBLIC HEALTH CONSUMER SCIENCES ENVIRONMENTAL

SCIENCES GEOGRAPHY LIFE AND CONSUMER SCIENCES

2004 64,46% 0,00% 64,79% 60,37% 63,19% 60,69%2005 44,58% 57,14% 73,07% 42,81% 55,66% 58,95%2006 41,97% 0,00% 0,00% 43,77% 52,71% 57,79%2007 57,78% 0,00% 0,00% 50,18% 56,88% 60,89%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

CSR by Department, 2004-7

2004 2005 2006 2007AGRIC, ANIM HEAL & HUMAN ECO Occ 81,83% 50,37% 25,46% 46,55% UG 66,29% 44,80% 41,35% 58,25% PG 7,40% 33,36% 57,65% 48,41%AGRIC, ANIM HEAL & HUMAN ECO Total 64,46% 44,58% 41,97% 57,78%ANIMAL & VET PUBLIC HEALTH Occ UG 57,14% PG ANIMAL & VET PUBLIC HEALTH Total 57,14% CONSUMER SCIENCES Occ 100,00% 80,24% UG 64,33% 72,57% PG CONSUMER SCIENCES Total 64,79% 73,07% ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Occ 60,53% 53,65% 55,82% 53,41% UG 60,31% 43,47% 43,13% 47,14% PG 42,50% 59,28%ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Total 60,37% 42,81% 43,77% 50,18%GEOGRAPHY Occ 56,61% 55,34% 51,68% 56,06% UG 64,04% 58,22% 55,62% 57,23% PG 61,91% 42,78% 36,09% 54,39%GEOGRAPHY Total 63,19% 55,66% 52,71% 56,88%LIFE AND CONSUMER SCIENCES Occ 60,13% 53,37% 49,22% 49,63% UG 60,68% 60,11% 59,22% 63,33% PG 76,70% 55,82% 68,25% 54,71%LIFE AND CONSUMER SCIENCES Total 60,69% 58,95% 57,79% 60,89%College Total 61,96% 52,53% 50,31% 56,66%

HEMIS CAES Success Rate By Race, 2004-7

African Coloured Indian White Total0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

HEMIS CAES Success Rate By Gender,

2004-7

Female Male Total0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

HEMIS CAES Success Rate by Course Level, 2004-7

2004 2005 2006 2007Occasional 59,51% 53,92% 49,68% 51,31%Technikon type UG National Certificate 15,38% 59,05% 42,88% National diploma 46,30% 43,17% 47,79% Btech 33,06% 32,82% 61,49% UG Total 43,48% 41,51% 49,88% PG Mtech 33,33% 66,67%Total 43,19% 41,46% 49,96%University type UG UG Dip/Cert 59,19% 62,36% 68,01% UG Dip/Cert (3 Years) 62,88% 66,84% 46,47% 34,12% Gen Ac 1st B Degree 61,74% 58,40% 54,79% 58,68% Prof 1st B Degree (3 y) 50,01% 67,95% Prof 1st B Degree (4 y) 64,39% 59,00% 62,27% 66,11% UG Total 62,41% 58,64% 56,35% 62,04% PG PG Dip/Cert 88,29% 100,00% 82,76% 77,78% Honours Degree 62,08% 45,03% 40,03% 63,12% Masters Degree 8,86% 30,71% 50,32% 33,10% Doctoral Degree 80,84% 44,64% PG Total 61,40% 41,84% 43,12% 56,61%Total 62,31% 57,11% 54,73% 61,26%College Total 61,96% 52,53% 50,31% 56,66%

College Profile:

4. Publications

CAES Articles, 2005-7

   2005 2006  2007 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE & ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 4,16 8,08 6,85

School of Agriculture & Life Sciences 0,00 1,00 2,86

Agriculture, Animal Health & Human Ecology   1,00 1,34

Life and Consumer Sciences     1,52

School of Environmental Sciences 3,66 7,08 3,99

Environmental Sciences 3,16 6,08 2,99

Geography 0,50 1,00 1,00

UNISA Articles by College, 2004-7

 2004 2005 2006 2007

   %

Growth  %

Growth  %

Growth  %

Growth

 N 2003-

2004N 2004-

2005N 2005-

2006N 2006-

2007

TOTAL FOR INSTITUTION 470,54 19,16 502,26 6,74 564,70 12,43 522,75 -7,43GRADUATE SCHOOL FOR BUSINESS LEADERSHIP 2,33 21,99 0,33 -85,84 5,67 1618,18 9,47 67,02

ADMINISTRATIVE & SPECIALIST DEPARTMENTS 8,33 233,20 6,08 -27,01 9,84 61,84 22,70 130,69COLLEGE OF ECONOMIC & MANAGEMENT SCIENCES 46,89 65,11 68,76 46,64 72,10 4,86 55,01 -23,70

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, NAT RESOURCES 3,16 316,00 4,16 31,65 8,08 94,23 6,85 -15,22

COLLEGE OF HUMAN SCIENCES 213,64 8,95 249,83 16,94 279,25 11,78 254,90 -8,72COLLEGE OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY 30,99 7,57 29,61 -4,45 28,10 -5,10 22,32 -20,57

COLLEGE OF LAW 163,70 20,67 143,49 -12,35 159,16 10,92 149,50 -6,07

Unisa Rated Researchers by College, 2007

  CHS CAES CEMS CLAW CSET ISTE SBL Total

B1 1  1        2

B2 2 1 1 4

B3   1 5 6

C1 2 5 1 8

C2 15 1 1 15 2 34

C3 16 1 2 8 4 1 32

L 3 2 4 1 10

Y   1 1

Y2 1 1 4 6

Total 40 2 4 32 22 1 2 103