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

Cardiology Unit involved in evaluation of drug for rare genetic disease
2013-01-04

Front from the left, are: Marinda Karsten (study coordinator and registered nurse),
Laumarie de Wet (clinical technologist), Charmaine Krahenbuhl (study coordinator and radiographer),
Lorinda de Meyer (administrator), Andonia Page (study coordinator and enrolled nurse);
back Dr Gideon Visagie (sub investigator), Dr Derick Aucamp (sub investigagtor),
Prof. Hennie Theron, (principal investigator) and Dr Wilhelm Herbst (sub investigator).
Photo: Supplied
09 January 2013


The Cardiology Research Unit at the University of the Free State (UFS) contributed largely to the evaluation of the drug Juxtapid (lomitapide), which was developed by the Aegerion pharmaceutical company and approved by the FDA (Federal Drug Administration). Together with countries such as die USA, Canada and Italy, the UFS’ Unit recruited and evaluated the most patients (5 of 29) for the study since 2008.  

The drug was evaluated in persons with so-called familial homozygous hypercholesterolemia (HoFH).  

Following its approval by the FDA, Juxtapid is now a new treatment option for patients suffering from HoFH. The drug operates in a unique way which brings about dramatic improvements in cholesterol counts.  

According to Prof. Hennie Theron, Associate Professor in the Department of Cardiology at the UFS and Head of the Cardiology Contract Research Unit, HoFH is a serious, rare genetic disease which affects the function of the receptor responsible for the removal of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (“bad” cholesterol) from the body. Damage to the LDL receptor function leads to extremely high levels of blood cholesterol. HoFH patients often develop premature and progressive atherosclerosis, which is a narrowing or blockage of the arteries.  

“HoFH is a genetically transmitted disease and the most severe form of hypercholesterolemia. Patients often need a coronary artery bypass or/and aortic valve replacement before the age of 20. Mortality is extremely high and death often occurs before the third decade of life. Existing conventional cholesterol-lowering medication is unsuccessful in achieving normal target cholesterol values in this group of patients.  

“The only modality for treatment is plasmapheresis (similar to dialysis in patients with renal failure). Even with this type of therapy the results are relatively unsatisfactory because it is very expensive and the plasmapheresis has to be performed on a regular basis.  

“The drug Juxtapid, as currently evaluated, has led to a dramatic reduction in cholesterol values and normal values were achieved in several people. No existing drug is nearly as effective.  

“The drug represents a breakthrough in the treatment of familial homozygous hypercholesterolemia. The fact that it has been approved by the FDA, gives further impetus to the findings,” says Prof. Theron.  

In future further evaluation will be performed in other forms of hypocholesterolemia.  

According to Prof. Theron, the findings of the study, as well as the recent successful FDA evaluation, once again confirms the fact that the UFS’ Cardiology Contract Research Unit is doing outstanding work.  

Since its inception in 1992, the Unit has already been involved in more than 60 multi-centre, international phase 2 and 3 drug studies. Several of these studies, including the abovementioned study, really affected the way in which cardiology functions.  

The UFS’ Cardiology Contract Research Unit is being recognised nationally and internationally for its high quality of work and is constantly approached for their involvement in new studies.  

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