Latest News Archive
Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
![]()
The special task team met today (23 April 2018) to discuss the feedback received from the Free State Provincial Heritage Resources Authority (FSPHRA) regarding the task team’s submission to obtain a permit for the possible covering of the statue until the formal review process on the position of the statue in front of the Main Building on the Bloemfontein Campus has been concluded.
The special task team submitted a submission to the FSPHRA on 17 April 2018, in which the following three possible options were proposed to make the statue topical in a way that would symbolise the seriousness and urgency of the review process and stimulate engagement on the issue:
1. fencing in the statue;
2. creating an exchange of information around it; and
3. covering the statue.
Options 1 and 2 emanated from the consultation process with the university community on the possible covering of the statue.
The Permit Committee of the FSPHRA approved Option 2 during its meeting on 17 April 2018, as it cultivates opportunity for scholarly engagement. The committee indicated that the statue should still be visible, ‘uncovered’, and accessible and granted the UFS a permit on 20 April 2018 to make the MT Steyn statue topical while the review process is underway.
Permit document
The special task team welcomes the decision of the Permit Committee and supports the conditions stated in the permit, as it protects the credibility of the review process.
According to the National Heritage Resources Act No 25 of 1999, members of the university community and other stakeholders have 14 days from the date of issue of the permit (i.e. 17 April 2018) to appeal directly to the Permit Committee regarding its decision to grant the permit.
The way forward regarding the review process:
- While the decision of the Permit Committee is open for appeal, the special task team is refining the detailed feedback and alternative suggestion/view on Option 2 made by the FSPHRA to ensure the practical execution thereof. This conceptional framework of Option 2 (creating an exchange of information around it) will be shared with the university community once completed.
- The UFS has appointed a heritage consultant to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA).
- Once a preliminary report from the HIA has been submitted by the heritage consultant, it will be made public for a minimum period of 30 days for input from the university community and other stakeholders, during which a public participation process will commence in order for the university community and others to deliberate about the preliminary report. During this time, various opportunities for engagement will be created on all three campuses to afford the university community and other stakeholders an opportunity to engage with the report.
- The heritage consultant will submit a final report to the special task team after the engagement period has been completed.
The specific dates and timelines of the public participation process will be shared when finalised.
Released by:
Lacea Loader (Director: Corporate Communication and Marketing)
Telephone: +27 51 401 2584 | +27 83 645 2454
Email: news@ufs.ac.za | loaderl@ufs.ac.za
Fax: +27 51 444 6393
Council on Higher Education LLB qualification review not yet complete
2017-05-16
The reaction from various stakeholders following the ‘Outcomes of the National Review of the LLB Qualification’ by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) on 12 April 2017 requires the CHE to clarify that the national review process has not been completed and is ongoing.
The peer-review process conducted under the auspices of the CHE is based on the LLB Standards Document which was developed in 2014-2015 with input from higher-education institutions and the organised legal profession. Following self-review and site visits by peers, the process is now at the point where commendations and shortcomings have been identified, and the statement of 12 April reflects those findings. All law faculties and schools have been asked to improve their LLB programmes to meet the LLB Standard, and no LLB programme has been de-accredited. All institutions retain the accreditation they had before the Review process began and all institutions are working towards retaining their accreditation and improving their LLB programmes.
The South African Law Deans’ Association (SALDA) has issued a set of responses regarding the LLB programme review. The following questions and answers were published to give more clarity on the questions raised.
1. What is the effect of a finding of conditional accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.
(“Accreditation refers to a recognition status granted to a programme for a stipulated period of time after an HEQC evaluation indicates that it meets minimum standards of quality.”)
The institution must submit a progress report by 6 October 2017 that indicates how short-term aspects raised in the HEQC reports have been addressed and an improvement plan to indicate how longer-term aspects will be addressed.
2. What is the effect of a finding of notice of withdrawal of accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.
The institution must submit an improvement plan by 6 October 2017 to indicate how the issues raised in the HEQC report will be addressed, including time frames.
3. How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect current students?
Students currently enrolled for the LLB programme at any institution are not affected at all. They will graduate with an accredited qualification.
4. How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect new applicants?
The programmes remain accredited and institutions may enrol new students as usual. This also includes students completing BA/BCom (Law) programmes who wish to continue with the LLB programme.
5. How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect prior graduates?
Degrees previously conferred are not affected.
6. What happens when the improvement plans are submitted in October 2017?
The CHE will evaluate the plans when they are submitted, and the programmes remain accredited until a decision is taken whether the improvement plan is sufficient and has been fully given effect to or not. The institutions will have to submit progress reports to the CHE indicating implementation of measures contained in the improvement plan.
Should a decision at some stage be taken that a programme’s accreditation must be withdrawn, a teaching-out plan would be implemented so that all enrolled students would have the opportunity to graduate with an accredited degree.
For more information on the CHE’s pronouncement please contact Moleboheng Moshe-Bereng on MosheBerengMF@ufs.ac.za.