Albeit with different conceptualizations, the engagement between universities and external communities continues to gain significant currency. While the emphasis has been on more socio-economic relevance in a period of significant financial constraints and a changing clientele, a more significant area of engagement has been on promoting the scholarship of engagement towards regional/local development. The praxis and outcomes of community engagement continues to be surrounded by strong debate on issue such as its impact on the core functions of the university, teaching and research. This article sheds light on the community engagement practices from a case-study university in Africa. Using Ernest Boyer"s proposed scholarship of engagement model as a framework, findings provide evidence that, different contextual specificities affect the way university-community engagement practices evolve. The methodology involved an analysis of primary and secondary data collected through interviews with policy and academic staff. The article concludes with an argument that the success of university-community engagement in fostering social and economic development significantly relates to how much the practices of engagement is foregrounded in the universities" core policy and practice. But also on how much academic scholarship draws on engagement activities. The challenge lies in ensuring this balance.

The funding of public higher education is currently a moot issue in South Africa. Public funding has been declining and opportunities for winning non-government revenue remain limited. The frequent raising of tuition fees, which is one of the main strategies public universities have resorted to mitigate declining state funding is not without controversy. The article discusses these funding challenges. It argues that the current higher education funding conundrum will hamstring the achievement of the important higher education policy goals articulated in the National Plan on Higher Education. The article finally argues for a shift towards a redistributive funding model by changing the current formula for allocating funding for student aid to universities so that resources are redistributed in favour of the genuinely poor. By so doing, it is anticipated that higher education will be affordable for the poor who are generally sensitive to tuition fee increases, and also the rich, who can afford the current (high) tuition fee charges.

This study addresses the implications of higher education marketisation for quality in Kenya. It focuses on full fee-paying programmes, the de facto market source of revenue for Kenya's public universities. The study argues that Kenya's public universities were precipitately subjected to diminished public capitation, and so was their plunging into marketisation. These institutions started enrolling full fee-paying students at a time when they were strained in terms of institutional capacity. There were not enough physical facilities, and most of those available were suffering decay following many years of neglect. They did not have enough teaching staff, a problem, which the marketisation agenda has made worse. The desire to claim a bigger share in the student market has seen the introduction of many new courses in advance of capacity to offer them. The study concludes that by seeking economic self-determination through full fee-paying programmes, in advance of a well-developed institutional capacity, the subsequent pressure seems to have made the quality situation worse.

No abstract

The funding of higher education in South Africa has in the recent past been a subject of animated debate. This debate has ranged from the adequacy of government funding of higher education, the suitability of the funding framework, to protestations against frequent tuition fee increases. At present, the debate is mainly about "free" higher education. Unlike most African countries, South Africa has an established history of cost sharing. But, for a while now, students, especially Black students, have been demanding tuition free higher education even though the country has a student financial aid scheme to support talented but poor students. The demands for tuition free higher education suggest, among others, the possible existence of financial barriers to higher educational opportunities. This paper is a sequel to the debate on free higher education in South Africa. It seeks, in the main, to understand and examine the rationale and drivers for the students" demand for "free" higher education. What are the financial barriers to higher educational opportunities that the current funding architecture has failed to address? Secondly, why are students demanding free higher education when there is a scheme to support talented but poor students? Is cost sharing inconsistent with the country"s postapartheid transformation policy in higher education? Finally, is "free" higher education the panacea to the access and participation challenges facing Black students?