Accreditation in South Africa is a relatively new phenomenon compared to other countries. The United States of America have used accreditation for over a hundred years as a basis for quality assurance. This private, voluntary system of self-examination and peer review has been central to the creation of a U.S. higher education enterprise that is outstanding in many respects (Council for Higher Education Accreditation, 2013). Since the implementation of accreditation into the South African Quantity Surveying education system at Higher Education Institutes, it has promised numerous benefits with positive outcomes for universities and graduates. However, it has failed to convert these promises into a process that adequately prepares graduates that pass through the quantity surveying education programmes for the working world of the built environment industry. This investigation sought to discover the reasons why accreditation was not producing skilled graduates from accredited programmes in South Africa despite its claimed theoretical benefits. The research methodology adopted in this study was a quantitative approach. Two close ended well-structured questionnaires were developed and directed to a sample of quantity surveying graduates and built environment organisations who were actively practicing quantity surveying in Kwazulu-Natal. The purpose of the graduate questionnaire was to determine the opinions from graduates of quantity surveying programmes, their level of work readiness and the skills and competencies that they require for the world of work. The employer questionnaire identified the level of graduate quantity surveyors work readiness and the skills and competencies that they require for professional practice. Further investigations highlighted the responses of graduates from traditional universities and universities of technology, as well as male verse female comparisons. The findings of the study show that quantity surveying graduates were neutral about programme accreditation criterion and in it adequately preparing them for the world of work and professional practice. Employers agreed that students did not demonstrate a good balance of theoretical, practical and experiential knowledge. They were neutral about quantity surveying graduates and their level of work readiness from accredited quantity surveying programmes. They also regarded a combination of traditional, evolved and emerging skills and competencies as important for graduates to possess. The results indicate that the prescribed programme criterion for quantity surveying programmes do not align themselves with the expectations and needs of professional practice. Further findings indicate the SACQSP routes to registration requires students to graduate from accredited quantity surveying programmes. Only then can graduates professionally register and practice as professionals in society. However, it should be noted that most organizations (72.7%) did not require quantity surveying graduate employees to be registered with the SACQSP. A further analysis of quantity surveying graduates from traditional universities compared to universities of technology and male responses compared to female responses were conducted. The findings showed that there were no statistically significant differences between the them. To conclude, the current quantity surveying programmes offered by higher education institutes do not meet the requirements of the built environment industry by adequately preparing skilled quantity surveying graduates. The following recommendations were highlighted to assist in improving the current higher education quantity surveying programmes. These recommendations include an increased role and involvement of the built environment industry, collaboration between the SACQSP, higher education institutions and the built environment industry and future programme development.

show more