July 31, 2023

Rankings and the myth of an equal playing field

University rankings have received much publicity recently, but South African private higher education institutions (PHEIs) often find themselves overlooked or absent from these rankings. To gain a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities that PHEIs face concerning university rankings, we asked a few SAPHE members to share their insights.


It is evident from their responses that rankings are not a one-size-fits-all matter. Numerous rankings exist, each with its own evaluation criteria, focusing on different aspects of higher education. Moreover, the diversity among higher education institutions in terms of size, history, context, focus, funding, and qualifications offered, amongst other, makes it difficult for any single ranking to encompass all these variables.


Prof. Zaheer Hamid, Director: Chief Academic Officer at Mancosa, points out that institutions are founded with contextual diversity, and as such have unique ways of making an impact and promoting a particular set of values. He emphasises that the market is not a homogeneous environment where a single tool can effectively review institutional value and competitiveness.


While different rankings have different rating criteria, research outputs is a key factor in most of them. Dr Dianne Manning, Manager: Quality Assurance and Evaluation at the Foundation for Professional Development, notes that comparing institutions with different levels of resources becomes challenging. Additionally, the unequal playing field in South Africa, where private institutions lack research subsidies available to public universities, makes it hard to compare private and public institutions.


According to Hamid the system of rankings itself is self-defeating as it assumes a limited, narrow approach to evaluation of institutional value and competitiveness. He says PHEIs are structured and led differently to traditional institutions and as such often remain unsatisfied that ranking criteria are not aligned to a more broad-based lens in education.


Dr Willy Engelbrecht, Dean: Research and Postgraduate Studies at The IIE, shares the view that research often takes priority in rankings at the expense of other dimensions. He proposes a ranking that prioritises teaching and learning excellence to deliver quality education and prepare graduates for the workforce and future studies. This focus would provide a new perspective on the quality of teaching at higher education institutions.


Looking at rankings from a different angle, Manning says rankings often concentrate on outputs such as student throughput, visibility, reputation and graduate employability, neglecting inputs and culture. She says transformation imperatives may disadvantage universities investing more in social equity related to access, at the expense of supporting research.


When asked about ensuring a fair and comprehensive assessment of private higher education institutions in rankings, Hamid suggests reevaluating the purpose and relevance of rankings. He believes that measuring impact across multifaceted criteria, including a broad-based focus on the environment, transformation, society, community, and graduates' quality of life, is more warranted than a ranking system.


Although the measuring of the quality of education might be complicated, it should not be avoided. Says Manning: “Those who are invested in higher education, whether through taxes and/or fees and other contributions, deserve to be able to make informed decisions on the quality of the different institutions. There is definitely scope for SAPHE to lead a comprehensive assessment of the ranking terrain in South Africa identifying criteria and processes for private HEI’s that will be valid, transparent, acceptable and informative.”


The discussion on rankings and the myth of an equal playing field highlights the complexity and challenges of evaluating higher education institutions across the board. Recognising the unique contributions and contexts of diverse institutions is crucial for a fair and comprehensive assessment. 

August 12, 2025
In celebration of Women’s Month , SAPHE spoke to Dr Marianne Louw , Executive Dean at Cornerstone Institute, leadership specialist, and author of Leading Experts: How to bring out the best in clever team members. Dr Louw brings a wealth of experience and insight to the conversation on women in leadership. Navigating leadership: Challenges women face According to Dr Louw, women leaders tend to face two broad categories of challenges: environmental and internal. Understanding both is key to creating more equitable and empowering workplaces. Environmental challenges , she explains, are often systemic. “Many women struggle to get ahead at work because they continue to carry a disproportionate share of household and family responsibilities compared to their male spouses and colleagues.” This burden is exacerbated by the outdated notion of the “ideal worker” — someone fully devoted to work and constantly present in the office. Such a model excludes many women from key leadership opportunities. She says research also shows that women take on the majority of ‘office housework’ – spending time (often beyond their official responsibilities) helping colleagues maintain work-life balance and championing diversity and inclusion. This important work is rarely formally recognised and adds further stress on women in leadership roles. How can this be addressed? Dr Louw believes that organisations must take deliberate steps: “Senior management should recognise the value of this work and ensure these responsibilities are acknowledged and rewarded. Creating workplaces that are both flexible and predictable in terms of schedules can also make a major difference.” We should challenge the outdated ‘ideal worker’ model that undervalues those who cannot conform to it.” Overcoming internal barriers Furthermore, women also often have to contend with internalised norms and communication habits that can undermine their leadership presence. Dr Louw highlights that women who communicate in traditionally feminine ways — with inclusivity and tentativeness — may find it harder to gain the respect of colleagues who favour a more assertive, masculine style. “In meetings, many women tend to preface their contributions with phrases like, ‘Sorry, I just want to add…’ or ‘I’m not sure if this is relevant, but…’” she says. “While these approaches are well-intentioned, they can come across as a lack of confidence — and in leadership, confidence is still closely tied to credibility.” Women are also more likely to believe that their work will speak for itself, and tend to apply for leadership positions only when they meet all the listed criteria — unlike many men, who apply even when underqualified and often succeed. Any advice? “Since these are internal challenges, they must be tackled internally. Communicating with confidence is not arrogance. Stop apologising. Speak up about your contributions and make sure decision-makers are aware of your value. Don’t wait to be perfect before stepping forward. Dare to take risks, to ask, to try. What’s the worst that could happen? Inspiring the next generation How can today’s women leaders empower the next generation? For Dr Louw, the most powerful inspiration is often a living example. “Women are widely recognised for their grit and empathy, and when confidence – balanced with humility – is added to the mix, it can be truly transformative. She emphasises the importance of intentional mentorship , encouraging leaders to help younger or more junior women see beyond day-to-day tasks and to actively look for opportunities to contribute meaningfully to their organisations and communities.” Dr Louw says, ”We must share the success stories of women who’ve gone before us – from our own lives and from research now demonstrating the tangible benefits of female leadership on team performance, organisational culture, and yes – even the bottom line. In short: show and tell. Show and tell”. An unexpected career in Higher Education Reflecting on her own journey into higher education, Dr Louw admits it was never part of the plan — but it turned out to be exactly the right path. “I was a young journalist working at a struggling newspaper when I took a job as a junior lecturer at the University of Johannesburg. I quickly discovered I loved it,” she recalls. Years later, after stepping away from academia, she reluctantly agreed to teach one module at the then Monash University South Africa. “One year later, I was permanently appointed as an academic head. I’ve since moved institutions, but I’ve never left higher education again.” Final thoughts  Dr Louw’s reflections remind us that the journey toward more inclusive, representative leadership is ongoing — but possible.
July 22, 2025
The Faranani session on 17 July examined assessment from various perspectives. With just two carefully crafted questions, David Maclean, facilitator and founder of Learning Advisory, created a space for lively conversation and engagement on the real purpose and value of assessment. The first question, What would assessment look like if it served learning rather than sorting?, prompted reflection on the difference between ‘assessment for learning’ and ‘assessment of learning’. Participants explored the role of continuous assessment as a compass that guides learning, rather than a tool for ranking or gatekeeping. The second question, How do we truly know when learning has occurred at the deepest level?, encouraged participants to share personal experiences and teaching practices that reveal meaningful learning beyond surface-level achievement. The session reframed assessment by focusing on its potential to enhance learning and support development, moving beyond its traditional role as a final evaluation tool.  Embodying the spirit of a wisdom circle, the Faranani session offered space for collective reflection, shared insights, and mutual learning.
July 17, 2025
SAPHE’s first Research Community of Practice (CoP) meeting took place on Monday, 30 June, marking an important step toward strengthening research capacity and collaboration within private higher education. As research is a core pillar of higher education, SAPHE members welcomed the opportunity to engage on research-related matters. The first session focused on supporting those who have made submissions for the upcoming SAPHE Conference. A highlight of the session was a presentation on the use of AI in research. From sparking ideas to helping with literature reviews and writing, AI was framed as a powerful research tool, similar to a calculator for a mathematician or a camera for a photographer. But, the message was clear: AI can assist, but the researcher remains the author!  True to the spirit of a Community of Practice, this new SAPHE initiative creates a collaborative space for sharing, questioning, and growing together. We look forward to many more engagements as this CoP evolves.