Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 May 2018

The National Research Foundation (NRF) ratings are considered the benchmark for research excellence. This year the University of the Free State (UFS) has 17 newly NRF-rated researchers. This brings the total number of NRF-rated researchers at UFS to 160.
 
NRF ratings are allocated based on a researcher’s recent research outputs and impact as perceived by national and international peer reviewers. The rating system encourages researchers to publish high-quality research papers in journals of high impact and to publish books through reputed academic publishers. The NRF rating system is a valuable tool for benchmarking the quality of our researchers against the best in the world.

Research at the heart of the UFS
Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor, has indicated that the UFS provides significant support to researchers to apply for new NRF ratings or to re-apply for rating. These initiatives include the mock NRF rating panels managed by the Prestige Scholars Programme (PSP), evaluation of individual research outputs and recommendations on timely applying for rating, and improvements on rating applications by a panel consisting of internal and external members. These initiatives are bearing fruit by increasing the number of rated researchers who will transform the research profile and increase the diversity of UFS researchers.
Cultivating the best researchers.

According to Eleanor van der Westhuizen, from Research Development: “The rating of individuals is based primarily on the quality and impact of their research outputs over the past eight years, taking into consideration the evaluation made by local and international peers. It identifies researchers who count among the leaders in their fields of expertise and gives recognition to those who have a sustained production of high-quality research outputs. Several South African universities use the outcomes of the NRF evaluation and rating process to position themselves as research-intensive institutions, while others such as the UFS provide incentives for their staff members to acquire and maintain a rating.”

Cream of the crop
The UFS has also upped the ante with regard to its total number of NRF-rated researchers during the latest rating and evaluation, with an increase from 149 to 160 rated researchers in 2018.
 
Prof Heidi Hudson, Dean of Humanities, received an NRF B-rating, which brings the total of B-rated researchers to six. Other B-rated researchers incude Prof Johann Meyer (Mathematics), Prof Fanie Snyman and Prof Francois Tolmie (Theology), Prof Felicity Burt (Medical Microbiology) and Prof Andre Roodt (Chemistry). A total number of 10 new C-ratings and six new Y-ratings were achieved during the 2018 evaluation process.

“NRF-rating is indicative of the university’s drive to enhance its research profile nationally and internationally. Congratulations to all the scientists and scholars who received a rating in 2017. I am thankful to our academics for their commitment to the rating process,” said Prof Corli Witthuhn, Vice-Rector: Research at the UFS.

News Archive

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans
2006-05-19

From the left are Prof Magda Fourie (Vice-Rector: Academic Planning), Prof Gerhardt de Klerk (Dean: Faculty of the Humanities), George Weideman and Prof Bernard  Odendaal (acting head of the UFS  Department of Afrikaans and Dutch, German and French). 
Photo (Stephen Collett):

Weideman focuses on misconceptions with regard to survival of Afrikaans

On the survival of a language a persistent and widespread misconception exists that a “language will survive as long as people speak the language”. This argument ignores the higher functions of a language and leaves no room for the personal and historic meaning of a language, said the writer George Weideman.

He delivered the D.F. Malherbe Memorial Lecture organised by the Department Afrikaans at the University of the Free State (UFS). Dr. Weideman is a retired lecturer and now full-time writer. In his lecture on the writer’s role and responsibility with regard to language, he also focused on the language debate at the University of Stellenbosch (US).

He said the “as-long-as-it-is spoken” misconception ignores the characteristics and growth of literature and other cultural phenomena. Constitutional protection is also not a guarantee. It will not stop a language of being reduced to a colloquial language in which the non-standard form will be elevated to the norm. A language only grows when it standard form is enriched by non-standard forms; not when its standard form withers. The growth or deterioration of a language is seen in the growth or decline in its use in higher functions. The less functions a language has, the smaller its chance to survive.

He said Afrikaans speaking people are credulous and have misplaced trust. It shows in their uncritical attitude with regard to the shifts in university policies, university management and teaching practices. Afrikaners have this credulity perhaps because they were spoilt by white supremacy, or because the political liberation process did not free them from a naïve and slavish trust in government.

If we accept that a university is a kind of barometer for the position of a language, then the institutionalised second placing of Afrikaans at most tertiary institutions is not a good sign for the language, he said.

An additional problem is the multiplying effect with, for instance, education students. If there is no need for Afrikaans in schools, there will also be no  need for Afrikaans at universities, and visa versa.

The tolerance factor of Afrikaans speaking people is for some reasons remarkably high with regard to other languages – and more specifically English. With many Afrikaans speaking people in the post-apartheid era it can be ascribed to their guilt about Afrikaans. With some coloured and mostly black Afrikaans speaking people it can be ascribed to the continued rejection of Afrikaans because of its negative connotation with apartheid – even when Afrikaans is the home language of a large segment of the previously oppressed population.

He said no one disputes the fact that universities play a changing role in a transformed society. The principle of “friendliness” towards other languages does not apply the other way round. It is general knowledge that Afrikaans is, besides isiZulu and isiXhosa, the language most spoken by South Africans.

It is typical of an imperialistic approach that the campaigners for a language will be accused of emotional involvement, of sentimentality, of longing for bygone days, of an unwillingness to focus on the future, he said.

He said whoever ignores the emotional aspect of a language, knows nothing about a language. To ignore the emotional connection with a language, leads to another misconception: That the world will be a better place without conflict if the so-called “small languages” disappear because “nationalism” and “language nationalism” often move closely together. This is one of the main reasons why Afrikaans speaking people are still very passive with regard to the Anglicising process: They are not “immune” to the broad influence that promotes English.

It is left to those who use Afrikaans to fight for the language. This must not take place in isolation. Writers and publishers must find more ways to promote Afrikaans.

Some universities took the road to Anglicision: the US and University of Pretoria need to be referred to, while there is still a future for Afrikaans at the Northwest University and the UFS with its parallel-medium policies. Continued debate is necessary.

It is unpreventable that the protest over what is happening to Afrikaans and the broad Afrikaans speaking community must take on a stronger form, he said.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept