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

University tips its hat to final-year students
2013-09-13

 
From the left: Lauren Marais, Werner Landman, Herloise Jordaan and Louis Rossouw (PwC).
13 September 2013

The Alumni Office at the University of the Free State (UFS), in partnership with PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), held its first Alumni Evening for final-year students.

The students received valuable advice from various speakers during the event. Werner Landman – also a UFS graduate – highlighted the differences in approach between the current and previous generations. Landman explained that Generation Y students have greater influence and are extensively connected socially as they enter the work environment. “You are people who will work to live, unlike us, Generation X, who live to work,” he said. With their degrees – some already busy with their post-graduate studies – they are more likely to be appointed in professions which will allow them to live better, he added.

Heloise Jordaan, former 2008/9 SRC president, who holds three degrees from Kovsies to her name, also addressed the final-years. She currently holds the position of brand manager at Urban Hotels, although she only started working recently. Through sharing her personal work experiences, she gave the audience a glimpse into the workplace."You guys need to realise that when you step into the working sphere, you need to be open minded and also work to the best of your abilities,” Jordaan encouraged.

The evening was concluded on a high note with a prize-giving. Pieter du Toit, UFS Alumni Chair, was in charge of handing over the awards. Residences were compared to find which ones generated the most residing final-year and postgraduate students. House Tswelopele and Soetdoring clinched the honours and walked away with R2 000 each for their house.

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