Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
02 October 2019 | Story Anneri Meintjes | Photo Charl Devenish
Anneri Meintjes
Anneri Meintjes from the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the UFS.

The #FeesMustFall student-led movement started in 2015 to protest against increasing student fees and to call for increased government funding of universities. At the end of 2016, the protests led to mass disruption of academic activities in higher-education institutions countrywide. Some universities, including the University of the Free State (UFS), suspended academic activities for extended periods which necessitated online and blended learning approaches (the combination of face-to-face and online learning) to complete the academic year. In most cases, these methods were unplanned and unstructured, and knowledge gaps in good blended learning practice were identified.

The Carnegie Corporation of New York funded a two-year research project in collaboration with the University of Pretoria, UFS, University of Cape Town and University of Johannesburg to investigate the use of blended learning at the end of 2016, during the campus disruptions, as well as how these respective institutions used blended learning in 2017.

The prohibitive cost of data in South Africa means few of our students have access to the internet off-campus. The most recent data on UFS student digital identity shows that only 21% have consistent, reliable access to the internet at home. This is a challenge not only for the UFS but for all universities in the country.

“For technology to be used in a way that contributes to learning and teaching, we needed to investigate what works well and what does not, considering our contextual challenges” says Anneri Meintjes from the Centre for Teaching and Learning, who was the principal researcher for the UFS on this project. In the first phase of the research, she wrote a case study on the UFS’ approach to blended learning during and after the protests in 2016. The findings of this phase of the research were presented at a national convening of higher-education institutions across South Africa.

In the second phase of the research, the four participating universities produced open educational resources on good, blended learning practice to share with universities countrywide. The UFS was responsible for the development of online assessment resources and general best-practice guidelines for the use of blended learning. Anneri says: “While we had laid solid foundations for the effective use of online assessment at the UFS prior to 2016 through the investment in online assessment software and staff development in online assessment design, we learnt many valuable lessons during that time. It provided momentum for the establishment of formal online assessment procedures and refinement of best-practice guidelines. This research project gave us an opportunity to share our work on a national platform.” The number of lecturers that use online assessment in their modules has grown considerably at the UFS since 2016. In 2016, 211 online assessments were completed on Questionmark (UFS online assessment programme) and in 2018, this number had grown to 743. Institutional Blackboard use data shows that at least one online assessment tool is used in 47% of all modules on Blackboard.

Resources developed by the other participating institutions include a self-evaluation app that academics can use to reflect on their existing blended learning practices, and an online utility that assists lectures and course designers to plan blended learning modules.

Anneri also coordinated the development of the national website, which was launched at the Flexible Futures conference hosted by the University of Pretoria on 9-10 September 2019. The website and resources were praised at the conference for being a timely response to a critical need in the higher education community in South Africa.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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