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

State of our campuses: Impact of non-completion of the 2016 academic year on UFS students
2016-10-08

Dear Parents/Guardians and Students,

Impact of non-completion of the 2016 academic year

The University of the Free State (UFS) reiterates its support and commitment to the cause of free higher education. We have stated our position in all the available spaces. We want to work with UFS students to put pressure on the government to commit itself to accept the many suggestions put forward to make free education possible within a negotiated timeframe.

We are also seriously committed to our responsibility of providing education to all students enrolled at the university. We are doing our outmost to ensure that we can resume academic activities next week.

Description: " Academic non-completion 2016 Tags: " Academic non-completion 2016

We want to bring to your attention what will happen to individual students if the UFS cannot resume classes fully on Monday 10 October 2016.

Currently we have extended the academic year by one week. Some faculties are working on Saturdays and Sundays, starting earlier and finishing later to complete the material that needs to be taught and the practical work that students need to do to be able to write exams.

In the three biggest faculties at the university: Education, the Humanities, and Natural Sciences, this is what will happen:

  • Education will fail to graduate 1 193 students
  • Humanities will fail to graduate 1 125 students
  • Natural and Agricultural Sciences will fail to graduate 1 390 students

In the professional faculties: Economic and Management Sciences, Health Sciences, and Law, this will happen:

  • Economic and Management Sciences will fail to graduate 997 students
  • Health Sciences will fail to graduate 633 students
  • Law will fail to graduate 619 students

In total, approximately 6 000 students will not receive complete transcripts of their degrees and the certificates for their qualifications.

The university currently has 3 238 students on NSFAS bursaries. None of these students will be able to apply for bursaries for the lost year. They will be regarded as having failed or not completed their courses. They will not only miss this year, but the opportunity of studying in the future.

These students come from families to which their success in higher education was supposed to mean a change in the future of the entire family. Some parents/guardians hold more than one job to be able to pay tuition fees.

In not allowing the year to continue and students to finish, we are throwing away the efforts that entire families of poor people have made for four or five years to put their children through university. The promise of free education for future generations means nothing to these families who are poor in the present.

In terms of the academic calendar, it is a false argument to say that universities will be able to enrol first-years, because what 2016 students will miss, is the second semester.

We do not have the capacity to teach double the number of students in the second semester. This also misses the point that those students who were completing modules in order to graduate, will waste an entire year (assuming they have funding) to complete their degrees. This argument does not see the knock-on effect that students, not promoting in modules from first to second and second to third year, etc., will have. Finally, this also misses the point of what will happen to students who have to repeat first-semester modules.

In terms of academic staff, students are discounting the willingness of academic staff to teach double or to have the academic year extended by approximately six weeks between teaching and examinations. The same can be said for all the administrative and support staff required for running the university.

In our case, all the students in the University Preparation Programme (UPP) on the South Campus in Bloemfontein will be stuck without being able to move into mainstream modules, preventing a new intake of UPP students for 2017. These are the poorest and most disadvantaged students at the UFS.

It is absolutely necessary to find a means of protest and political action that will not jeopardise the future of current students and the country’s desperate need for critical skills.  The interdict against violent protest secured by the UFS is still in force. The police will intervene if the interdict is not respected and the UFS will have no control over police actions.

We trust that parents/guardians and students understand the implications of the situation.

Kind regards,

Prof Nicky Morgan
Acting Rector
University of the Free State

 

Released by:
Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Telephone: +27 51 401 2584 | +27 83 645 2454
Email: news@ufs.ac.za | loaderl@ufs.ac.za
Fax: +27 51 444 6393


State of our campuses #11: Academic activities on UFS campuses continue

State of our campuses #10: Impact of non-completion of the 2016 academic year on UFS students 

State of our campuses #9: Academic programme on all UFS campuses to resume on Monday 10 October 2016

State of our campuses #8:  UFS extends vacation as from 28 September until 7 October 2016, 28 September 2016

State of our campuses #7: All three UFS campuses will be closed today, 27 September 2016.

State of our campuses #6: All UFS campuses reopen on Tuesday 27 September 2016

State of our campuses #5: UFS campuses to remain closed on Monday 26 September 2016

State of our campuses #4: Decisions about the UFS academic calendar

State of our campuses #3: UFS campuses closed until Friday 23 September 2016 

State of our campuses #2: UFS Bloemfontein and South Campuses closed on Tuesday 20 September 2016 (19 September 2016)

State of our campuses #1: Academic activities suspended on UFS Bloemfontein Campus (19 September 2016)

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