Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 May 2019 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Petersen opinion piece
Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.

OPINION ARTICLE BY PROF FRANCIS PETERSEN, UFS RECTOR AND VICE-CHANCELLOR



The youth must vote, and political patronising must fall; or else our calls for young people to exercise their hard-won right to vote, will continue to be ignored.

South Africa’s youth does not have a culture of voting. And it is getting worse – that much is clear from statistics.

Earlier this year, the Electoral Commission of South Africa indicated that young people aged 18-19 make up only 16% of the voters’ roll. This is a sharp decline from the 34% in the 2014 national elections.

Those who do register to vote, often decide in the end not to cast their ballots. For example, in the 2016 local government elections, only 50% of registered voters aged 20 to 39 showed up at the polls on voting day.

Apathy vs disillusionment

Is it because young people simply do not care about the future of our country?

I would be very surprised if this was the case – as it simply does not line up with my experiences with the majority of students on the three campuses of the University of the Free State (UFS). What I often encounter, is young people who are keen to make a difference in society, but who are sceptical to do it via political means.

Studies done by the Institute for Security Studies and others seem to support this, concluding that young people have high expectations of politics and democracy, but find party politics confusing and alienating.  From their youthful vantage point, they seem to cut through the rhetoric quite easily, and quickly see when the promises and actions of politicians do not line up.

This leads understandably to young people who have very low levels of trust in political leaders. They also feel increasingly alienated by government’s lack of responsiveness to their needs, poor service delivery, and corruption.

It does not seem to point to apathy, but rather that young voters are using non-voting to protest a political climate where they feel they are not being heard.

Young people have shown signs of dissatisfaction with the currently available choices of political parties – making it more and more difficult to attract them to vote for political parties they cannot relate to.

Protest more effective

And why should they vote? Young South Africans have found that they often accomplish more through protest than through participation. The 2015-2016 #RhodesMustFall and #FeesMustFall movements bear stark evidence of this, where a concerted, coercive student effort seems to have forced the hand of government where traditional communication channels failed.

It is a dangerous situation when established systems of governance are circumvented and replaced with more radical means, simply because quicker and better results are obtained in this way.

The all-important youth voice

The bottom line is that we need our youth to become involved in order to be an effective democracy. Effective governance requires participation, and a low voter turnout weakens the quality of a democracy.

South Africa has one of the youngest populations in the world. More than 58% of our population is under the age of 30 years. This translates into a significant voter block that simply cannot be ignored.

By exercising their considerable voting power, young people can ensure that issues they deem relevant and important are prioritised.

Advances in technology and connectivity mean our youth are probably more equipped to make informed decisions than any generation before them. But somehow, all this access to information, opinions, and analysis is still not motivating them to take action by voting.

The challenge remains to provide them with political-party options that they can identify with, that actively promote issues of importance to them, and that follow through on promises with real action.

Creating responsible citizens

Our institutions of higher education are doing what we can to produce not only well-equipped, employable workers, but also good, responsible citizens.

At the UFS, we have a renewed focus on providing a safe space where openness, tolerance, diversity, and inclusivity are actively promoted. In April, we celebrated Social Justice Week through a range of events and activities aimed not only at sensitising our student population to social-justice issues, but also giving them an opportunity to actively participate in promoting it on various platforms.

Through our Free State Centre for Human Rights, the UFS is also compiling a set of guidelines for protests and political activities, making sure there is an ever-present human-rights foundation guiding the actions of and consequences for protesting students, non-protesting students, and security staff.

We train and appoint Human Rights ambassadors in our hostels to help establish mutual tolerance, non-discrimination, and transformation in on-campus living spaces.

Our Office for Student Leadership Development offers initiatives such as selective leadership programmes that cater for high-achieving student leaders who show potential.

We want to develop effective, agile, and inclusive student leaders. And, we want to equip them to become part of a new generation of responsible, forward-thinking, and innovative national leaders. If they cannot find a suitable political home that matches their expectations, they should have the skills and drive to create their own.

Yes – it is time for young people to vote.

But it is also time for our current elected leaders to take them seriously, and to really listen to the concerns of our youth.

If they don’t, we can in all probability expect more protest initiatives, perhaps of an increasingly violent and destructive nature. Moving further and further away from a healthy democracy and edging closer and closer towards anarchy.

News Archive

UFS hosts colloquium on technological higher education
2016-10-27

Description: Technology colloquium Tags: Technology colloquium

Prof Lew Zipin, Prof Sechaba Mahlomaholo,
Prof Marie Brennan and Dr Milton Nkoane,
attended the Faculty of Education’s colloquium
on the field of technological higher education
and its contribution to the knowledge society,
at the UFS Bloemfontein Campus. 

The University of the Free State’s (UFS) Faculty of Education, in collaboration with the Research and Development Unit from the Central University of Technology (CUT), hosted a colloquium on the field of technological higher education and its contribution to the knowledge society. Prof Marie Brennan and Prof Lew Zipin, both from Victoria University in Melbourne, Australia, presented the keynote addresses of the colloquium.

The past, present and future
The current fees protests in South Africa have caused universities to rethink and strategise new ways of delivering knowledge. Prof Brennan cautioned that when moving towards technological solutions for teaching, a crucial balance between past knowledge and practices and present and future knowledge and practices needed to be maintained.
“Knowledge is always dynamic, always generated from live problems, and therefore always relies on social interactions. Face-to-face interaction is removed by intense interaction with technology. If knowledge is presently linked to technology, we as academics must be able to move it. However, we should not neglect the indigenous knowledge that was generated through face-to-face interaction,” said Prof Brennan.
She purported that a reconnection between social relations and technology was important but to achieve this, a clearer pedagogical understanding of knowledge production was needed.

Never simplify complex problems

Prof Zipin said academics were constantly seeking complex problems and therefore could not reduce the complexity of a problem to simplify it for students entering the higher education space.
“We need to become a knowledge society. Ideologies often sway us not to look at the complexities of knowledge otherwise these ideologies would not be persuasive,” said Prof Zipin.

Is the technological move counterproductive?
Prof Zipin also cautioned that the move towards technological means for transferring knowledge had its own drawbacks. Institutions are a knowledge economy and its product is human capital. However, producing graduates who catered only to a technological society created downward mobility.
“People’s jobs are replaced by technology. This causes wages to decrease significantly because of structural inequalities, the move towards tech-based schooling should be done cautiously,” said Prof Zipin.

Simplicity not the ultimate sophistication
Prof Zipin concluded by stating that higher education had a responsibility to give its students the best possible future, this could be done by creating hegemonic relationships between institutions of higher learning, government and the private sector. Academics needed to fill the gap and apply their knowledge by applying complexity to social issues and allowing the complexity of these issues to flourish, the professor 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