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

ANC is not a party of the people - Mbeki
2010-08-30

 

 

“The unions in this country do not understand the political economy of South Africa. They think that the ANC is the party of the people. The ANC is the party of the black middle class. The fact that the masses vote for it does not mean they control it. The policies of the ANC favour the black middle class and the established businesses. They do not favour the working class.”

This was said by renowned economic and political commentator Mr Moeletsi Mbeki, brother of former president Thabo Mbeki, during a guest lecture he recently presented to Economics students of the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein.

“You just have to look at the types of houses that the ANC government builds for ordinary South Africans,” he said.

“If you had a party that was a pro-working class party it would not have built these so-called RDP houses that are being built by the ANC government. The unions have all along been under the illusion that the ANC is the government of the working class and (Zwelinzima) Vavi and them are now beginning to realise that this is not the case.

“The public-sector workers are in a special dilemma. They think the ANC is their ally but at the same time they feel they are not getting any benefits out of this alliance. Therefore you are beginning to get a very acrimonious environment emerging between the public-sector unions and the government.”

Regarding the current issue of the Protection of Information Bill and the proposed media tribunal that have brought the media and the government onto a collision course, Mbeki said the ANC government was trying to muzzle the media because it wanted to safeguard corruption within government.

“The question of freedom of information is very closely linked to the rise in corruption in the government,” he said.

“What the politicians are doing is that they are trying to hide that corruption. The media in this country have been playing a very critical role in exposing cases of corruption. That is why Vavi now has bodyguards.”

He said he recently met Vavi, the General Secretary of Cosatu, surrounded by four bodyguards. He said Vavi told him that he was getting death threats because he was opposing corruption in government.

Mbeki said the economic policies of South Africa were the “worst in the world” because they benefited people who were already rich and militated against the emergence of entrepreneurs.

“In fact, one of the serious downsides of Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is that it takes people who should normally be entrepreneurs and who should be creating new companies and new jobs, out of that space and just makes them wealthy. BEE has been a disaster because it created this massive economic inequality; it created this class of idle rich who have tons of money but do nothing,” he added.

He said the under-investment in the economy was having dire consequences in terms of unemployment and poverty. He said this, coupled with the growth of consumption that Black Nationalism was driving, was actually driving down the ability of the economy to absorb labour.

“What really lies at the bottom of our economic problems in South Africa is that we have too much of a one-party dominance of our political system. We need more competition in our political system and until we realise the policies of the ANC are not going to change,” he said.

Mbeki’s guest lecture was on the topic: Architects of Poverty: Why African capitalism needs changing.

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