Chapter Ten

The Life History of Induction Programmes at Vaal University of Technology: Complexities, Contestations, Change

Masebala Tjabane, Sibongile Nthabiseng Hlubi and Nalini Chitanand

Introduction

This chapter, titled “The Life History of Induction Programmes at VUT: Complexities, Contestations, Change”, presents a case study that delves into the evolving journey of academic induction programmes at the Vaal University of Technology (VUT). Through conceptualising and framing this study as a life history, we emphasise the organic, evolving nature of the programmes, which are shaped by various forces along its trajectory. The subtitle, “Complexities, Contestations, Change”, depicts the multifaceted nature of this narrative account, highlighting the layered challenges, conflicts and transformative moments that characterise this life history.

We trace the evolution of VUT’s induction programme over a period of two decades: moving from a traditional, information-laden orientation to a more progressive and ultimately transformative approach. VUT, established in the 1960s as a college for advanced technical education and later becoming a university of technology, provides a unique lens and opportunity to examine the complexities, contestations and change in academic development in a historically disadvantaged higher education institution in South Africa.

Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of critical and social realism, we analyse the structural, cultural and agential factors that have shaped the trajectory of VUT’s induction programmes. Our analysis focused on three key moments in this evolution: the traditional orientation of the early 2000s, the progressive phase from 2005-2015 and the recent shifts towards a transformed induction programme grounded in critical pedagogy and drawing on the African philosophical approach of ubuntu (see figure 59). Rather than a linear progression for the various moments, we chose to depict this evolution of academic induction programmes at VUT using the spiral. The spiral denotes for us a continuous process, an evolving dynamic process that remains in-becoming as the contexts of higher education and South Africa more generally grow, change and advance.

As academic developers intimately engaged in academic induction processes and participants in the New Academics Transitioning into Higher Education Project (NATHEP), we also reflect on our journeys of professional learning and professional growth and the impact of our engagements during NATHEP on our own learning and its influence in shaping the induction programmes at VUT.

Background and context of VUT

The VUT monograph, 50 Years of Excellence in Education (1966-2016) highlights key milestones of the institution from a college for advanced technical education established in 1966, to being configured as a university of technology (UoT) in 2004.

These milestones, referred to as the Founding, Strengthening, Growing, Changing and Building phases, highlight key moments in the history of VUT (see figure 60, below).

During the apartheid era in the 1960s, the Founding period, the institution was established as a college for advanced technical education. Its primary purpose was to provide a skilled workforce to the growing industry in Southern Gauteng. In the period from 1970-1990s – the Strengthening and Growing periods – it changed its name to “technikon”, continuing with the provision of more advanced programmes and the emergence of doctoral qualifications. During the democratic dispensation in the 2000s, the Changing and Building periods saw a reconfiguring of the institution as a UoT. This was due to the reorganisation of the higher education sector (VUT, 2016a). In terms of institutional classification, the university had evolved from a historically advantaged white institution during the technikon period to a historically disadvantaged black UoT in its current status. Since then, there have been notable expansions in scope, transformation and positional relevance to 21st century learning and teaching discourses. This is evidenced in the adoption of progressive modern discourses of flexible learning and teaching that promote technology education (VUT, 2016b).

The student body is diverse and representative of all the population groups in the countries as well as more than twenty other countries. It is one of the largest universities of technology in South Africa, with an annual enrolment of about 21 000 students. As a historically disadvantaged and black institution, the majority of the students enrolled at the university face various challenges related to academic underpreparedness and challenges to epistemological access.

The institution is classified as a teaching-intensive university with high class size, low research output per academic, low socio-economic status of students, and higher first-generation student ratios (Cooper, 2015). Most academics are drawn from industry with minimal experience and qualification in teaching at the tertiary level. Therefore, the Centre for Academic Development plays a pivotal role in enhancing the teaching capabilities of academics through various academic staff orientation and induction programmes that initiate academics into the culture and practices of teaching in higher education.

The focus of this case study resonates with the mandate of supporting newly appointed academics. We discuss the three moments that characterised the various iterations of orientation and induction programmes and we attempt to integrate the social realist perspectives to understand and explain why particular configurations of induction programmes existed, in the ways that they did. We discuss these three moments in the following sections and include reflective interludes through engaging in a pedagogy of pausing (Patel, 2016).

Methodology

This case study weaves together multiple and varied experiences, theoretical perspectives, and diverse narratives to present the life history of induction of new academics at VUT. Our position is based on the notion that knowledge building is a relational and social construct. We used the reciprocal self-interview strategy (Meskin & de Walt, 2014) to create an imagined dialogue of the various iterations of the VUT orientation programmes from our perspectives and positionalities. This technique enabled us to provide a thick description of the three moments of the induction of new academics at VUT. We analysed the narrative dialogues, from a social realist (Archer, 2000) perspective, to understand how structure, culture and agency influenced and shaped the induction programmes at VUT.

Moment one: the traditional orientation

Higher education institutions in South Africa and attempts at improving learning and teaching have constantly been part of the transformation agenda. More recently, the focus of the Council on Higher Education in the 2018 Framework for Enhancing Academics as University Teachers is continuing with this mandate. In response, universities have also attempted to address the academic’s professional learning needs through a variety of developmental programmes such as academic induction programmes (Council on Higher Education, 2017).

In this first moment we discuss the initial attempts to support and induct new staff to the university. We refer to this at the traditional orientation, that occurred in the period 2000-2005. It traverses the period when the institution functioned as a technikon and then a university of technology.

During the technikon period, the staff orientation was a three-day event that aimed to introduce academics to the varied dynamics of learning and teaching at a UoT. A key emphasis has been on introduction to institutional structural arrangements with broad stroke foci and attention learning and teaching. The programme consisted of the administrative component, for which human resources was responsible, on day one. The academic development sector, Centre for Academic Development (CAD) was responsible for days two and three. Institutional leadership and management presented on the first day, with a welcome message and sharing the strategic direction of the institution. This was followed by the human resources (HR) department with an explanation of VUT’s HR processes. The HR component of the orientation was more of a promotional showcase of top management with very limited engagement from the academics. The focus was on the importance of institutional strategy and meeting targets.

Their non-availability at times would signal a key cultural constraint for the induction of new staff to the university context, the focus of this initial orientation programme. The academic component included an introduction to support services as well as dynamics of learning and teaching at VUT. This included the overview of CAD and overviews of learning and teaching policy, teaching perspective inventory, best practices and the scholarship of teaching and learning. The three-day orientation programme was predominantly traditional in style and adopted a sage-on-thestage approach with information overload.

The focus on this phase of the orientation programme was on institutional needs with very limited focus on academics as part of the institutional system. The result has been a compliance culture on the part of academics, which appears to reproduce higher education and societal inequality and injustices by hesitancy to intentionally advance empowering discourses and narratives. Orientation programmes have been criticised for the lack of preparing academics holistically and theoretically for their university roles. A further critique by Billot and King (2017), suggests that the traditional, one-size-fits-all induction that focuses on the “doing” of academic practice leaves individuals unequally prepared for academic life.

The structure and content of the orientation revealed the underpinning institutional structural and cultural dynamics and power plays at work and how this interplay constructed the initial orientation programme. While senior management was present to set the strategic tone for the new academics, the session was presented through the discourse of managerialism. The presentations were dominated by graphic displays of figures and numbers indicating pre-determined objectives of the Department of Higher Education (DHET) and targets that needed to be met. The HR and finance components of the orientation was presented by mostly middle management personnel, referred to as business partners. In explaining VUT’s administrative processes, there was frequent reference to the language of business – performance targets and skills development. There appeared to be a disconnect between them and aspects of teaching and learning. This is illustrated through the encroaching business language in higher education discourse, which often alienated academics. During this session there was not much engagement between academics and HR, as expected, because HR and finance were performing their role and their manner was information dissemination. The sessions glossed over the role, of a technikon and pillars of a university of technology with limited discussion on their relation to the role that the academics are to assume after the orientation.

Reflective interlude I: the traditional orientation from the perspective of critical and social realism

The administrative orientation was a representation of VUT’s structural arrangement and can be regarded as enabling for academics to understand the strategic direction of the institution and aligned policies. While information on the policies and procedures was enabling, the structuring of the orientation programme for the day was constraining because it did not allow for activities that would make academics feel at ease and relax such as ice breakers. In addition to this, the sage-on-the-stage approach to presentation tended to limit participant engagement and heighten passivity. It was not just the day one structuring that acted as a constraining element, there was dominating managerialism discourse from HR and finance. The focus was mainly on being a university of technology that produces employable graduates. The structural elements presented were institutional policy documents such as the VUT strategic direction. The cultural elements were illustrative of the continuation of conservative learning and teaching versus progressive teaching and learning. The broader institutional culture played a significant role as the institution was under persistent institutional capture and political conflict.

The cultural dynamics of the period included VUT’s adoption of the Transformation Charter, which was based on the South African Constitution. At the same time, there were remnants of conservatism seen as the “Afrikaner way” of doing things. This emerged as a cultural contestation between inclusive and progressive versus the conservative ways of doing things which may be argued, still exists. As a result, there continues to be an uneasy coexistence of aspirations for transformed culture, and defence for conservative culture in the institution. The custodians of these two ways of doing things continue to live in a contested environment. As a way of addressing this, our transformed orientation will be informed by transformational pedagogies that would contribute to a genuine transformed institutional culture in future.

The institutional capture was illustrated in the crisis in governance and management, resulting in the institution falling under administration three times. While this was happening the academic agenda was being marginalised, even at HR level, through political appointments of personnel who had limited understanding of matters related to learning and teaching and required a strengthened orientation programme. As agents of change, we resolved to adopt a progressive paradigm and drew on experiences from the Basic Education Level. This informed our next moment two (see below). We made use of these experiences because they resonate with our values of promoting progressive learning and teaching with reference to the outcomes-based education (OBE) paradigm. We focused more on student-centeredness while taking into consideration some of its challenges. We also extended the culture of critique further by embracing critical pedagogy in its various forms.

Moment two: the progressive orientation

The academic component of the orientation programme was restructured to align with the university’s shift toward student centred learning and teaching, embracing principles of outcomes-based education and training. Many lecturers appointed at this time were from industry and were expected to follow the principles of OBE and student-centred learning during classroom management, assessment, and student engagement, but OBE principles were resisted by new and experienced academics alike. There was much apprehension and misconception about the OBE approach coupled with resistance to adopting new ways, particularly the guide-by-side metaphor seen in the student-centred ways of foregrounding the learner and adopting the facilitation role of the teacher. Over the 2005-2015 period, the orientation was coordinated and organised by the Centre for Academic Development (CAD) with the HR component taking a less prominent role. The academic component of the programme took a slightly more progressive stance in that the discourses that informed the orientation were based on VUT’s learning and teaching model informed by social constructivism. An important component of the orientation was the introduction to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) as an attempt to develop the culture of writing for publication. This component was positively received, and academics were encouraged to contribute to the annual staff development conference. SoTL was valued because of its research and knowledge creation possibility. This possibly reflects the valorisation of research over learning and teaching in higher education. It could be said that while the orientation was traditional, it had in it some elements of soft reform, particularly in embracing student-centred teaching and learning.

The academic agenda of the institution was in a way promoted by the orientation as described above. However, while the institutional academic environment and internal structural arrangement appeared to be stable on the surface, there were many challenges. These sentiments and challenges emerged as we engaged with academics during the orientation. The cultural contestations presented themselves in the form of frequent campus disturbances and protests, marginalisation of the academic agenda and promotion of the administrative staff over academic staff.

A reflective interlude II: morphogenisis during NATHEP encounters

As academic developers, we have always felt the need to change the orientation as it is not sustainable in meeting the needs of academics within specific learning and teaching contexts and the needs of diverse students. As part of our orientation change strategy, we created opportunities to explore a variety of discourses that provide an alternative to traditional orientation processes.

In doing this, we were guided by Fairclough et al.’s (2004) conception of discourse as social analysis that uses normative and explanatory critique. We identified some of the alternative discourses and practices proposed by the New Academics Transitioning into Higher Education Project (NATHEP), based on the critical and social realist perspectives of Bhaskar (2010) and Archer (2000). Engagement with these theoretical perspectives contributed to the need to revamp the induction and consider the potential to include transformative elements. These elements could provide for an in-depth and nuanced understanding of learning and teaching and the process of professional development at global, institutional, faculty, departmental and self/personal levels.

Critical realism (Bhaskar, 2010) and Archer’s social realism (2000) provided us with a crucial and relevant lens to understand the underlying generative mechanisms that impacted on the various iterations of our induction programmes. This in turn enabled us to exercise our agency in disrupting the status quo aligned to the traditional academic induction so that it can be transformed and meaningfully contribute to the enhancement of learning and teaching practices. Therefore, as we illustrate in the poem in the introduction to this chapter, this case study also includes the metamorphosis of the VUT induction programme through embracing transformational pedagogies.

In critical realism terms, the domain of the real is all-encompassing of entities. It consists of structural and cultural mechanisms, events and experiences that are either reproduced or transformed by all participants in the orientation at VUT. The orientation as an event is an enactment of VUT’s structural and cultural elements. The realm of the actual consists of events and experiences, the orientation is an event, and we are writing about our experiences as academic development practitioners. We delve next through an autobiographical portrayal of how our experiences at NATHEP transformed our own learning and roles as facilitators of the academic induction programme. We also reflect on how our metamorphosis manifests itself in VUT’s evolved orientation.

Using Bhaskar’s (2010) critical realism, we show the stratified social reality elements with reference to the VUT orientation. It became evident how, as we interacted with the structural and cultural components of the internal VUT mechanisms, our experiences influenced and impacted on our agency. In this process our active state of being is better explained by Archer’s (2000) development of the interplay between structure, culture and agency and the processes of morphostasis and morphogenesis. As we were continuously grappling with internal contestations in our context seen in unchanging structural and cultural mechanisms, we experienced a change in our agency. An example of this change was the mutual adoption of ubuntu, the adoption of the Sisonke concept and the identification with progressive learning and teaching ideals like inclusion and collaboration. The concept of “sisonke” in isiZulu refers to togetherness. It resonates with ubuntu, and is related to an Nguni expression, “umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu”, which means “a person is a person through other people” thus also fostering togetherness. These were not just identified in principle but were also enacted practically through the traditional and progressive orientation restructuring. It was predominantly facilitated through a guide-on-the-side mode as opposed to the sage-onthe- stage mode. In addition, we used the practice of critical reflection with the infusion of transformational pedagogies. This initiated the change in ourselves, making it easier to journey with others in the process of adopting transformational pedagogies. We include a list (see Appendix 1) of the transformational pedagogies that we viewed could be essential in the next phase of the induction programme. Furthermore, the constellation of transformational pedagogies is representative of the constancy of change valued for enabling the disruption of the status quo and promoting human flourishing.

We intended to produce an induction programme that is transformative and embraces the principles of ubuntu. The common explanation that captures the African conception of the term is humanness, elaborated as “I am because we are”. This implies that each person’s existence is closely linked to that of others and therefore the attribute of humanness and doing good is important. We identified with Bhaskar’s (2009) aim of contributing to the flourishing of human beings because it resonates with the concept of ubuntu or botho that we have come to adopt. We also identify with Bhaskar (2010 p.114) in his argument “… that the moral evolution of the human species is unfinished”. This implies we are forever evolving in a context that has complexities, contestations and continuous change within all levels of society. Our vision has been that to create professional learning opportunities through a transformative induction programme will contribute towards a future society that is better than the current one. We envisioned that an ubuntu-inspired programme would foster transformative possibilities towards a good society exemplified in humanism.

Moment three: revamped-transformed induction at VUT towards enhancing professional learning

The desire to change the orientation towards professional learning and pedagogy of engagement emerged from our reflection that the traditionally informed orientation did not develop academics as critically reflective and reflexive practitioners to exercise their agency to question and challenge the cultural and structural factors influencing learning and teaching. In the traditional orientation, academics were just introduced to teaching as a technical and instrumentalist activity with limited consideration of agential, cultural and structural aspects that enable or constrain teaching and learning. The revamped induction programme was developed on paper (see Appendix 2) and partially implemented in practice. COVID-19 and its long-standing effects in higher education was one of the factors that prevented the full implementation of the programme. At the time of conceptualising this case study, the aspects implemented included the exercise on the teaching perspective inventory and the teaching metaphor that teachers ascribed to their teaching. This activity enabled participants to talk about their perspectives on teaching in a free and safe environment. We also introduced SoTL as an initial step towards professional learning. The rest of the orientation continued as normal, in the traditional format, and so the notion of introducing teachers as agents of change was not implemented. In the section that follow we present the revampedtransformed induction programme and how transformational pedagogies have equipped us as authors to work towards a transformed programme.

The revamped academic induction programme aimed to cultivate the attributes and dispositions of academics’ professional learning theoretically and practically. We aimed to achieve the theoretical aspects we envisioned by basing the programme on the social and critical realism frameworks and introducing the progressive pedagogies of engagement, hope, discomfort and strategic empathy. On the other hand, the practical aspects we aimed to achieve by creating a community of practice and cultivating and nurturing critical reflection on action with the aim of improving learning and teaching practices and embedding transformative learning (Mezirow, 1994). We further drew on Whitehead’s (2008, p.104) living educational theory, which would enable participants to provide accounts of “their educational influence in their own learning, in the learning of others and in the learning of the social formation” through generating knowledge through a simple yet complex question, “How do I improve what I am doing?” (Whitehead, 2008, p.103)

Reflective interlude III: our reflection on change

In explaining the change, we experienced as academic developers in more nuanced detail, we used Archer’s (2000) morphogenesis framework. In sharing our experiences, most of our narrative centres on cultural conditioning and cultural elaboration with limited instances of structural conditioning and elaborations. The guiding question we adopted was: “What are the conditions that enabled and constrained the journey of newly appointed academics in learning to teach through the induction programme?” In response to this question, we reflected on our role through the various iterations of academic induction programmes and adopted the transformational pedagogies as one of the strategies that supports and enables change.

The change we desired, is manifested in the “imagined” and conceptualised revamped-transformed induction that is based on transformational pedagogies. This was influenced by our social and academic identity formation and shaped through our participation in the NATHEP programme – pre-, during and post- COVID-19. The NATHEP experience enriched our exposure and engagement with transformation and pedagogies of engagement that empower all involved to contribute to change at all levels, starting with agential change. In a way as academic developers, already identifying with progressive and transformative discourses, the NATHEP experiences enabled us to formulate a framework of transformational pedagogies that would inform the revamped-transformed induction programme at VUT. In social realist terms, the proposed framework is referred to as agential morphogenesis, that enabled us to move into brave spaces that facilitated the selection of transformational pedagogies. Our original role as teachers and academic development practitioners was positively influenced by the NATHEP experience to bravely shift from traditional and progressive learning and teaching discourses to transformational and engagement pedagogies that empower us to question the status quo and develop alternatives to further enhance transformation. We are comforted with the knowledge that a community of practice such as NATHEP provides the support and nurturing environment to enable the changes we envision through professional learning opportunities for academic developers.

At the cultural and structural level, we cannot boldly state that there was some form of morphogenesis because the institution was going through crises and challenges in leadership and governance, leading to it being placed under assessment and administration until 2021. So, at the structural level this aspect can be referred to as regression or negative morphogenesis because the status quo was maintained (morphostasis). We acknowledge though that there were simultaneously pockets of good practice that continued to contribute positively to the structure and culture of the institution.

We continued to perform our role as change agents during the contested and challenging times, even though the structural and cultural dynamics appeared to be hostile to the ideals of our transformed induction. We adopted Mahatma Gandhi’s position that we should be the change that we would like to see in our induction programme and in the world. The first steps in this change process have been our own reflective and reflexive thinking which has led us to promote transformational pedagogies for a revamped-transformed induction programme which we strive to align with NATHEP’s CRiTicAL Framework (Behari-Leak et al., 2020)

Conclusion

The life history of VUT’s academic induction programme that we have reflected on and narrated in this chapter reflects the broader academic development and South African higher education context. As reflected by the title of this chapter, this journey has been marked by challenges, moments of conflict and significant transformative intentions and aspirations. Our analysis of the key moments depicted in this study reveal key insights that speak to the complexities,contestations and changes. The importance of theoretical grounding in academic development work was evident through this case study and crucial for advancing the transformative aspirations for the induction programme. We recognise that the traditional orientation was based on limited theorised pedagogies and practices that appeared to limit change. We therefore advance that the transformed orientation needs to be informed by theory and transformational pedagogies. This could include for example NATHEP’s CRiTicAL Framework (Behari-Leak et al., 2020). Furthermore, the incorporation of critical and social realism frameworks provided a lens through which to understand and navigate the complex interplay of structure, culture and agency in shaping the induction programmes at VUT.

This case study reflects the critical role of academic developers as agents of change. Our own experiences of morphogenesis through engagement with new ideas and engaging in communities of practice such as NATHEP were instrumental in us reimagining and reshaping the induction programme. Another key insight from our case study refers to the incorporation of indigenous philosophies such as ubuntu and a decolonial focus to inform and enrich induction programmes and academic development more generally. While we recognise that much more engagement, reflection and integration with decolonial approaches is required, we submit that a transformed induction programme grounded in decoloniality and ubuntu principles offers a promising direction for creating a more inclusive and culturally responsive and contexualised induction programmes.

In conclusion the evolving higher education context necessitates that induction programmes and academic development more generally needs continuous reflection, review, reimagining and recreating through theoretical engagement and adaptive practices. It is through these continuous spirals of reflective and reflexive engagements that we can hope to create truly transformative, inclusive and socially just higher education institutions in South Africa.

Appendex 1 Transformational pedagogies informing our conceptualisation of the revamped-transformed induction programme

Appendix 2 Developing revamped-transformed induction programme