Capacity Building Among Student Affairs Practitioners In Higher Education Institutions In South Africa With Regard To Student Governance

Abstract

The aim of the study was to determine the need for capacity building among student affairs practitioners with regards to student governance. As cited in the literature review chapter, minimal progress has been made in South Africa towards capacitating student affairs practitioners and this reality has led to the conception of this study. Pertinent questions were formulated and expressed for the qualitative section of the study. For the quantitative section of the study hypotheses were formulated to determine the relationship(s) between and amongst the independent variables of the study: which are male and female student affairs practitioners, senior and junior student affairs practitioners, and professionally trained and non-professionally trained practitioners. Finally, the researcher examined the views of student affairs practitioners regarding the professionalization of student affairs practice.

In the light of the foregoing assertions the researcher sought to solicit views of the different student affairs practitioners on the need to professionalize student affairs practice, with special reference to student governance. The qualitative design allowed the researcher a more interactive experience with the interviewees and thereby facilitated more in-depth and meaningful responses in pursuit of the goals of the study. The phenomenological method was identified as the most suitable research method for this study.

The quantitative research design allowed the researcher to specify phenomena being studied and to quantify the relationships between and within variables of the study namely: Gender (Male versus Female student affairs practitioners), Experience (Senior versus Junior student affairs practitioners), and Professional training (Professionally trained versus Non-Professionally trained student affairs practitioners) as Independent Variables (IV) and Student Governance as a Dependent Variable (DV). The research method best suited for this research design was found to be the descriptive method.

This study used Sequential Exploratory Triangulation, where interviews were conducted first with a sample of convenience; and the adapted questionnaire was then administered to a wider pool of 150 student affairs practitioners conveniently sampled from the membership databases of both SAASSAP and NASDEV.

The approved questionnaire was further subjected to tests of statistical validity. In this manner factor analyses was conducted by subjecting the forty two items of the questionnaire to principal component analyses using varimax rotation of one (1) criterion to extract the categories or components of the questionnaire. Twenty seven (27) items which had an Eigenvalue of above .50 were extracted and dispersed into two factors namely Personal Capability and Professional Competence. Fifteen items below the Eigenvalue of .50 were, therefore, discarded from the final questionnaire which the researcher named Student Affairs Professional Competency Scale (SAPCS). The SAPCS that was administered to the sample of 150 participants; yielded a 74,6% response rate for analysis.

The results of the study supported current research that there is a need for capacity building for student affairs practitioners responsible for student governance. However, the main limitation of this study is that the findings and results are not applicable to the Further Education and Training (FET) sector, who have since become part of higher education administration, and consequently student affairs practitioners from this sector have recently been accepted as members of NASDEV. Their exclusion from this study is mainly due to the fact that the conception of this study preceded these recent developments in the sector. More inclusive research needs to be pursued in future and it is envisaged that future research in the field of student affairs in South Africa should be more representative and therefore include both qualitative and quantitative presentation.