Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
20 April 2020 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Francis Petersen.

Our world has changed.  The aspects that we have accepted as daily occurrences, and those that we have taken for granted, are no longer possible.  Anxiety and uncertainty have filled our lives.  After the first infections in China at the end of 2019, the Coronavirus (COVID-19) has continued to spread across the world.  The number of people infected and those who die is increasing daily, and no continent has been able to escape this pandemic.  In addition to the threat to public health, the economic and social disruption threatens the long-term livelihoods and well-being of millions.  It has been said that the rate and global spread of infection by COVID-19, and the impact it could have on a globalised financial, political, and social architecture, sets this particular pandemic apart from any other in modern times.

Not only have governments declared national emergencies and implemented lockdown policies to curb the spread of the disease, they have also taken unprecedented measures to lessen the impact on business, jobs, and the vulnerable communities in our society.   The COVID-19 outbreak has catalysed a crisis, which is questioning the confines of inherited structures that have perhaps lost their intellectual edge and global mandate.

How are universities as global institutions of higher learning managing COVID-19?  

Universities are complex institutions.  I will not attempt to describe the role and purpose of the modern university here – safe to say that the views of John Henry Newman (The Idea of a University) and Wilhelm von Humboldt (his recommended views led to the creation of the University of Berlin) dominated Western thinking about the functions of a university.  Sir Colin Lucas, former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Oxford, remarked “…(universities) are seen as vital sources of new knowledge and innovative thinking, as providers of skilled personnel and credible credentials, as contributors to innovation, as attractors of international talent and business investment into regions, as agents of social justice, and as contributors to social and cultural vitality”.  There is no doubt that universities, through their intellectual knowledge base, can add (and they do) enormously to the science of COVID-19, whether it is developing a new vaccine, modelling, and forecasting skills to understand the spread of the virus in specific regions or innovative methods for supplemental oxygen delivery.  The role played by universities in this context is vast and critical.  

Universities serve a large variety of functions in the delivery of the academic project, which involves teaching, learning, and research to maintain, manage, and develop the physical and digital infrastructure – the engagement with external stakeholders (to foster societal impact) such as alumni, schools, governments, industry, the private sector, commerce, donors, and philanthropic foundations. Many universities are training medical doctors and other healthcare professionals, engaging with academic hospitals and placing them at the forefront of the healthcare system – a very complex organisation to manage, even in times with no crises!

Many universities have disaster management committees that were rapidly activated during COVID-19 to prepare plans for the unexpected.  This pandemic, due to the extent of unfamiliarity and uncertainty thereof, can challenge these efforts and expose limitations in such plans.

It is important that universities have a framework approach of effective coordination, integration, and decision making that is centrally located but can act fast.  Although universities are not the same, there is a common drive for the health, well-being, and safety of staff and students. Typically, such a framework could converge in an Executive Centre (decision-making) or nerve centre, which should preferably be convened by the Vice-Chancellor, and include expertise in areas of scenario planning, project management, science (in this particular case it would be virologists and/or epidemiologists), communication, and institutional culture.  In order for the Executive Centre (EC) to be effective and fast-moving (with urgency and robust thinking), it should be organised around multi-disciplinary task teams, each with key responsibilities:

Teaching and Learning –with the suspension of classes (specifically in countries where there is a lockdown), alternative methods need to be utilised to deliver the academic project, and most universities have moved online (although not online in the purest form, rather emergency remote learning – turning a course virtual in a short period of time, and more importantly, doing it well, is nearly impossible for faculty members accustomed to lecturing in front of students). Based on the extent of the particular lockdown period, academic calendars need to be adjusted. Low-technology approaches to teaching and learning should be developed that are sensitive to the challenges of connectivity, bandwidth, and the type of devices that students use, realising the deep socio-economic inequalities and digital divide in our society. It is critically important to stay in touch with the students, and to provide online assistance with respect to counselling and mental health.

Research – focusing on how experimental research will be conducted during lockdown, how research contracts will be managed during this period and beyond, and whether research funding will be redirected or terminated;

Science – to understand epidemiological developments, verified information on COVID-19 (against the background of fake news);

Operations – mainly focusing on environmental hygiene and the business continuation of the physical and digital plant;

Staff – working remotely, essential services (as defined by government), and crucial university functions, constantly staying in touch with the staff, especially regarding their state of mind (mental health) due to social isolation;  

Students – with a focus on responsible student integration on the re-opening of the campus, where the principle of social distancing need to be adhered to;

Financial and Legal – responsible for financial scenario planning, short-term cash management and risk management, and mitigation; and

Communications – need to be centralised to ensure that it is consistent, correct, rapid and that it takes into account institutional culture when communicating – crises create anxiety, but keeping people informed helps reduce stress.

It is advisable to include a student voice or student input in the Teaching and Learning Task Team, as the living experience of students can thus be captured more accurately, which can enhance strategies.

It is clear that the world will operate differently post-COVID-19 than before the pandemic (‘new normal’); the EC will become the source of scenario planning on how universities will have to ‘re-imagine’ themselves post this pandemic.  It is thus critical to ensure that data, experiences (although a health crisis, an economic, and perhaps a social crisis – an opportunity as a thought experiment), ideas and new networks are captured with a strategic intent and reflection within the EC. Not only has this crisis questioned the neo-liberal economies that traditionally limit government intervention and prioritise market interests, it also asked universities to think differently about their models of teaching, research, and internationalisation, and how co-creation across boundaries and different sectors of the economy need to be imagined.

A crisis is never straightforward to manage, but an Executive Centre-type structure could not only assist universities during this period, but can add valuable strategies to position universities after such a crisis.



Prof Francis Petersen is Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State, South Africa. He has extensive experience in scenario planning and systems thinking in both higher education and industry.

News Archive

Higher than expected prevalence of dementia in South African urban black population
2010-09-22

 Prof. Malan Heyns and Mr Rikus van der Poel

Pilot research done by University of the Free State (UFS) indicates that the prevalence of dementia, of which Alzheimer’s disease is only one of the causes, is considerably higher than initially estimated. Clinical tests are now underway to confirm these preliminary findings.

To date it has been incorrectly assumed that dementia is less prevalent among urban black communities. This assumption is strongly disputed by the findings of the current study, which indicates a preliminary prevalence rate of approximately 6% for adults aged 65 years and older in this population group. Previous estimates for Southern Africa have been set at around 2,1%.

The research by the Unit for Professional Training and Services in the Behavioural Sciences (UNIBS) at the UFS and Alzheimer’s South Africa is part of the International 10/66 Dementia Research Group’s (10/66 DRG) initiative to establish the prevalence of dementia worldwide.

Mr Rikus van der Poel, coordinator of the local study, and Prof. Malan Heyns, Principal Investigator, say worldwide 66% of people with dementia live in low and middle income countries. It is expected that it will rise to more than 70% by 2040, and the socio-economic impact of dementia will increase accordingly within this period. 21 September marks World Alzheimer’s Day, and this year the focus is on the global economic impact of dementia. Currently, the world wide cost of dementia exceeds 1% of the total global GDP. If the global cost associated with dementia care was a company, it would be larger than Exxon-Mobil or Wal-Mart.

The researchers also say that of great concern is the fact that South Africa’s public healthcare system is essentially geared toward addressing primary healthcare needs, such as HIV/Aids and tuberculosis. The adult prevalence rate of HIV was 18,1% in 2007. According to UNAIDS figures more than 5,7 million people in South Africa are living with HIV/Aids, with an estimated annual mortality of 300 000. In many instances the deceased are young parents, with the result that the burden of childcare falls back on the elderly, and in many cases elderly grandparents suffering from dementia are left without children to take care of them. “These are but a few reasons that highlight the need for advocacy and awareness regarding dementia and care giving in a growing and increasingly urbanized population,” they say.

Low and middle income countries often lack epidemiological data to provide representative estimates of the regional prevalence of dementia. In general, epidemiological studies are challenging and expensive, especially in multi-cultural environments where the application of research protocols relies heavily on accurate language translations and successfully negotiated community access. Despite these challenges, the local researchers are keen to support advocacy and have joined the international effort to establish the prevalence of dementia through the 10/66 DRG.

The 10/66 DRG is a collective of researchers carrying out population-based research into dementia, non-communicable diseases and ageing in low and middle income countries. 10/66 refers to the two-thirds (66%) of people with dementia living in low and middle income countries, and the 10% or less of population-based research that has been carried out in those regions.

Since its inception in 1998, the 10/66 DRG has conducted population based surveys in 14 catchment areas in ten low and middle income countries, with a specific focus on the prevalence and impact of dementia. South Africa is one of seven LAMICs (low and medium income countries) where new studies have been conducted recently, the others being Puerto Rico, Peru, Mexico, Argentina, China and India.

Mr Van der Poel says participating researchers endeavour to conduct cross-sectional, comprehensive, one-phase surveys of all residents aged 65 and older within a geographically defined area. All centres share the same core minimum dataset with cross-culturally validated assessments (dementia diagnosis and subtypes, mental disorders, physical health, anthropometry, demographics, extensive non-communicable risk factor questionnaires, disability/functioning, health service utilization and caregiver strain).

The local pilot study, funded by Alzheimer’s South Africa, was rolled out through an existing community partnership, the Mangaung University of the Free State Community Partnership Programme (MUCPP).

According to Mr Van der Poel and Prof. Heyns, valuable insights have been gained into the myriad factors at play in establishing an epidemiological research project. The local community has responded positively and the pilot phase in and of itself has managed to promote awareness of the condition. The study has also managed to identify traditional and culture-specific views of dementia and dementia care. In addition, existing community-based networks are being strengthened, since part of the protocol will include the training and development of family caregivers within the local community in Mangaung.

“Like most developing economies, the South African population will experience continued urbanization during the next two decades, along with increased life expectancy. Community-based and residential care facilities for dementia are few and far between and government spending will in all probability continue to address the high demands associated with primary healthcare needs. These are only some of the reasons why epidemiological and related research is an important tool for assisting lobbyists, advocates and policymakers in promoting better care for those affected by dementia.”

Media Release
Issued by: Mangaliso Radebe
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2828
Cell: 078 460 3320
E-mail: radebemt@ufs.ac.za  
21 September 2010

 

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