Latest News Archive

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

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 vs emergency teaching and learning
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.

Funding to universities 
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.

By Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.
 

News Archive

A position statement by the School of Medicine, UFS, regarding the crisis in health care in the Free State
2009-05-27

The executive management of the School of Medicine (SOM) at the University of the Free State (UFS) and its senior members wish to express their grave concern at the way the financial crisis in the Free State has negatively impacted on the provision of health care to the population. The unavailability of goods and services at every level of care has become so severely compromised that the staff of the SOM can no longer remain silent on this issue. By remaining silent it may be construed that we are either indifferent to, or even accepting the situation. Neither is true. The SOM can in no way condone, sanction or accept the current situation of health care in the Free State.

Other concerns expressed by the SOM include:

  • Medical services have been severely compromised due to the disintegrating primary health care system in the FS. This has resulted in patients who were in need of more advanced levels of medical care not being referred appropriately or timeously to level two hospitals and from there for tertiary care. Inpatient as well as outpatient numbers are steadily declining and the tendency now is to fill fewer beds with critically ill or terminally ill patients. It is also becoming increasingly difficult to find suitable patients for training and examination purposes.
     
  • It becomes more difficult to attract and retain experienced and suitably qualified medical specialists interested in an academic career, due to the inability to provide prospective career opportunities. This is particularly the case in the surgical disciplines.
     
  • It is also becoming more difficult to attract and appoint highly qualified registrars (future specialists) since the reputation of this SOM has been compromised by the negative publicity created by the financial difficulties of the FSDoH. Registrars form the backbone of the clinical work force in all teaching hospitals. If vacant posts cannot be filled in time service provision, as well as undergraduate teaching are severely jeopardised.
     
  • As a direct consequence of the rationing of health care, fewer surgical procedures are being performed. The point may soon be reached where registrars in the surgical disciplines may not get sufficient hands-on experience to allow them to qualify within the required time frame.
     
  • Non-payment of accounts to service providers and suppliers including the National Health Laboratory Services (NHLS), maintenance contracts and industry will severely compromises health care and future loyalty, goodwill and provision of critical services.
     
  • The dwindling number of qualified and experienced nurses in the public (and private) health care sector is an ongoing unresolved issue. Despite the fact that primary health care is mainly nurse-driven, nursing colleges were closed during the previous decade. These colleges must now be re-commissioned at high cost adding to the financial burden.
     
  • The morale of health care workers at all levels of health care has reached an all-time low
     
  • It is becoming increasingly difficult to conduct meaningful research in all disciplines due to staff shortages and lack of funding.

See attachment for the full statement on by the School of Medicine, regarding the crisis in health care in the Free State.

Media Release
Issued by: Mangaliso Radebe
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2828
Cell: 078 460 3320
E-mail: radebemt.stg@ufs.ac.za
26 May 2009
 

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