Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Should Universities receive a Stimulus Package from Government during COVID-19?

29 April 2020 | Story Prof Francis Petersen. | Photo Sonia Small

Prof Petersen read more — Prof Francis Petersen

The COVID-19 pandemic has created profound disruptions in our economy and society. Due to the challenges of this pandemic, most universities have decided to move from face-to-face classes to online teaching (more accurately defined as emergency remote teaching and learning) so as to complete the 2020 academic year, and to prevent the spread of the virus.

Online learning is the result of careful instructional design and planning, using a systematic model for design and development. With remote emergency teaching and learning, this careful design process is absent. Careful planning for online learning includes not just identifying the content to be covered, but also how to support the type of interactions that are important to the learning process. Planning, preparation, and development time for a fully online university course typically takes six to nine months before the course is delivered.

Emergency teaching and learning is a temporary shift of instructional delivery to an alternative delivery mode due to crisis conditions. Hence, one cannot equate emergency remote teaching and learning with online learning, nor should one compare emergency remote teaching and learning with face-to-face teaching. What is crucial is the quality of the mode of delivery, and although assessment methodologies will differ between face-to-face teaching and remote teaching and learning, the quality of the learning outcomes should be comparable.

The financial model used in a South African (residential) university consists of three main income sources: (i) the state or government through a subsidy (the so-called ‘block grant’), (ii) tuition fees, and (iii) third-stream income (which is mainly a cost-recovery component from contract research, donations, and interest on university investments). The National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) contributes to the tuition fees through a Department of Higher Education, Science and Innovation Bursary Scheme, providing fully subsidised free higher education and training for poor and working-class South Africans (recipients will typically be students from households with a combined income less than R350 k per annum).

The negative impact of COVID-19 on the income drivers of the university can, and probably will, be severe. Although the subsidy from the state or government can be ‘protected’ for a cycle of two to three years through the National Treasury, the pressure on income derived from tuition fees (that component which is not funded through NSFAS) will be increasing, as households would have been affected by the nationwide lockdown and with the economy in deep recession, a significant number of jobs would have been lost. The economic downturn, due to both COVID19 and a sovereign downgrade by all rating agencies, has already negatively impacted local financial markets as well as the global economy. The multiplier effect of this would be that the value of investments and endowments decreases (at the time of writing the JSE was still 20% down compared to the previous year), and philanthropic organisations and foundations will most probably reduce or even terminate ‘givings’ to universities.

Industry, private sector, and commerce will re-assess their funding to universities, whether for research or bursary support. Overall, it is possible that the income sources for universities can be affected negatively in the short term, but it will definitely have longer-term implications on the financial sustainability of universities. In this regard, it would be important for universities to perform scenario planning on the long-term impact of COVID-19 on the financial position of the university, and to adjust their strategic plans accordingly.

The major expense item in the university budget is the salaries of staff – this item is a fixed expense, particularly in the short to medium term. Hence, when introducing emergency remote teaching and learning, hence the switch to a different pedagogy and approach, university management did not have sufficient time to restructure the fixed cost part of the budget. There are certainly other items in the budget which can be reduced, re-allocated or removed, and hence universities should, as a preliminary measure and based on their current financial position, develop a revised or adjusted 2020 budget.

The emergency remote teaching and learning therefore becomes an additional cost. These costs include, amongst others:

• training, development, and assistance to academic staff in converting content to a digital platform and learning management system (LMS),

• procuring data for staff (those who need to interface with the students) working from home,

• expansion of a call centre to guide and assist students,

• the cost of data for students through the reverse billing of data,

• procurement of digital devices (entry-level laptops) for students lacking such devices,

• paying for increased access to e-textbooks provided by publishers,

• payment for copyright clearance of additional material provided online to students,

• re-integration costs of students in terms of social distancing,

• improved hygiene on campus, disinfection of residences and other venues on campus, 360 degree screening (and testing) for the virus, the establishment of quarantine facilities, and the provision of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).

Obviously, these costs need to be offset against the fact that residences were not used for some time, with a subsequent decrease in water and electricity usage and savings on catering in the residences. It should, however, be argued that even if the students were absent from campus and the residences for some time, the salaries of all staff involved with particular functions in relation to residential students, as well as certain fixed and non-controllable costs, still need to be paid. When the offset has been assessed, the residual value, i.e. the additional cost, is still a substantial cost to the university due to the implementation of emergency remote teaching and learning.

The question is: who will fund this cost?

The instinctive answer would be: the university.

I would argue that this cost should be borne by the university, the student, and the state (government). This is a crisis – a global crisis of unprecedented proportions, and in this moment of restrictions on movement, telecommuting, and social distancing, working together is essential to overcome this crisis. Student agency is key, in that they would exhibit the will to positively influence their lives and the environment around them. This is what social justice and fairness are – contributing to the development path of the country.

Although it would be fair to assume that a rebate or pro-rated amount on the residence fees for students should be considered, it would not be an acceptable rationale to apply a rebate on tuition fees, as the 2020 academic programme will be delivered, albeit through a different mode, but ensuring the relevant and appropriate quality. Furthermore, as indicated earlier, the higher education system will be impacted (at least financially) negatively in the short and medium term, and no country can afford a weak, non-functioning higher education system; hence a fiscal stimulus package from the state (government) would be crucial to assist the sector during the COVID-pandemic and beyond (in the short term). South Africa has a highly differentiated higher education system, which is one of the legacies of our past history, and historically disadvantaged institutions will be affected the most during this pandemic.

COVID-19 is presenting unique challenges to universities globally, but it also provides us with an opportunity to be innovative, to improve social solidarity, and to co-create new ways of engagements among stakeholders for the greater good of society. However, without a fiscal stimulus package from government, this pandemic can render our ‘differentiated’ higher education system a massive blow, which will be difficult to recover from.

Opinion article by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof Robert Bragg, Dept. of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology

2006-05-17

Attending the inaugural lecture were in front from the left Prof Robert Bragg (lecturer at the Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology) and Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor). At the back from the left were Prof James du Preez (Departmental Chairperson: Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology) and Prof Herman van Schalkwyk (Dean: Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences). Photo: Stephen Collett

A summary of an inaugural lecture delivered by Prof Robert Bragg at the University of the Free State:

CONTROL OF INFECTIOUS AVIAN DISEASES – LESSONS FOR MAN?

Prof Robert R Bragg
Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology
University of the Free State

“Many of the lessons learnt in disease control in poultry will have application on human medicine,” said Prof Robert Bragg, lecturer at the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology during his inaugural lecture.

Prof Bragg said the development of vaccines remains the main stay of disease control in humans as well as in avian species. Disease control can not rely on vaccination alone and other disease-control options must be examined.

“With the increasing problems of antibiotic resistance, the use of disinfection and bio security are becoming more important,” he said.

“Avian influenza (AI) is an example of a disease which can spread from birds to humans. Hopefully this virus will not develop human to human transmission,” said Prof Bragg.

According to Prof Bragg, South Africa is not on the migration route of water birds, which are the main transmitters of AI. “This makes South Africa one of the countries less likely to get the disease,” he said.

If the AI virus does develop human to human transmission, it could make the 1918 flu pandemic pale into insignificance. During the 1918 flu pandemic, the virus had a mortality rate of only 3%, yet more than 50 million people died.

Although the AI virus has not developed human-to-human transmission, all human cases have been related to direct contact with infected birds. The mortality rate in humans who have contracted this virus is 67%.

“Apart from the obvious fears for the human population, this virus is a very serious poultry pathogen and can cause 100% mortality in poultry populations. Poultry meat and egg production is the staple protein source in most countries around the world. The virus is currently devastating the poultry industry world-wide,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg’s research activities on avian diseases started off with the investigation of diseases in poultry. “The average life cycle of a broiler chicken is 42 days. After this short time, they are slaughtered. As a result of the short generation time in poultry, one can observe changes in microbial populations as a result of the use of vaccines, antibiotics and disinfectants,” said Prof Bragg.

“Much of my research effort has been directed towards the control of infectious coryza in layers, which is caused by the bacterium Avibacterium paragallinarum. This disease is a type of sinusitis in the layer chickens and can cause a drop in egg product of up to 40%,” said Prof Bragg.

The vaccines used around the world in an attempt to control this disease are all inactivated vaccines. One of the most important points is the selection of the correct strains of the bacterium to use in the vaccine.

Prof Bragg established that in South Africa, there are four different serovars of the bacterium and one of these, the serovar C-3 strain, was believed to be unique to Southern Africa. He also recently discovered this serovar for the first time in Israel, thus indicating that this serovar might have a wider distribution than originally believed.

Vaccines used in this country did not contain this serovar. Prof Bragg established that the long term use of vaccines not containing the local South African strain resulted in a shift in the population distribution of the pathogen.

Prof Bragg’s research activities also include disease control in parrots and pigeons. “One of the main research projects in my group is on the disease in parrots caused by the circovirus Beak and Feather Disease virus. This virus causes serious problems in the parrot breeding industry in this country. This virus is also threatening the highly endangered and endemic Cape Parrot,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg’s research group is currently working on the development of a DNA vaccine which will assist in the control of the disease, not only in the parrot breeding industry, but also to help the highly endangered Cape Parrot in its battle for survival.

“Not all of our research efforts are directed towards infectious coryza or the Beak and Feather Disease virus. One of my Masters students is currently investigating the cell receptors involved in the binding of Newcastle Disease virus to cancerous cells and normal cells of humans. This work will also eventually lead to a possible treatment of cancer in humans and will assist with the development of a recombinant vaccine for Newcastle disease virus,” said Prof Bragg.

We are also currently investigating an “unknown” virus which causes disease problems in poultry in the Western Cape,” said Prof Bragg.

“Although disinfection has been extensively used in the poultry industry, it has only been done at the pre-placement stage. In other words, disinfectants are used before the birds are placed into the house. Once the birds are placed, all use of disinfectants stops,” said Prof Bragg.

“Disinfection and bio security can be seen as the ‘Cinderella’ of disease control in poultry. This is also true for human medicine. One just has to look at the high numbers of people who die from hospital-acquired infections to realise that disinfection is not a concept which is really clear in human health care,” said Prof Bragg.

Much research has been done in the control of diseases through vaccination and through the use of antibiotics. “These pillars of disease control are, however, starting to crumble and more effort is needed on disinfection and bio security,” said Prof Bragg.

Prof Bragg has been working in close co-operation with a chemical manufacturing company in Stellenbosch to develop a unique disinfectant which his highly effective yet not toxic to the birds.

As a result of this unique product, he has developed the continual disinfection program for use in poultry. In this program the disinfectant is used throughout the production cycle of the birds. It is also used to ensure that there is excellent pre-placement disinfection.

“The program is extensively used for the control of infectious diseases in the parrot-breeding industry in South Africa and the product has been registered in 15 countries around the world with registration in the USA in the final process,” said Prof Bragg.

“Although the problem of plasmid mediated resistance to disinfectants is starting to rear its ugly head, this has allowed for the opening of a new research field which my group will hopefully exploit in the near future,” he said.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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