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

Breeding of unique game requires a balance between conservation and sustainable use
2014-05-20

 

Game bred for qualities such as unconventional hair colour or horn quality, may on the long term have unexpected consequences for biodiversity and game farming.

This is according to the inaugural lecture of Prof Paul Grobler from the Department of Genetics at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Prof Grobler feels that the consequences of selective breeding should be examined carefully, as there is currently much speculation on the subject without sound scientific information to back it.

“At the moment, colour variation invokes much interest among game farmers and breeders. Unusual colour variants are already available in different game species. These unusual animals usually fetch much higher prices at auctions compared to prices for the ‘normal’ individuals of the species.”

Examples of these unusual variants are springbuck being bred in white, black or copper colours, the black-backed or ‘saddleback’ impala, and the gold-coloured and royal wildebeest.

A black-backed impala was recently sold for R5,7 million.

“Based on genetic theory, good reason exists why these practices need to be monitored, but one should also take care not to make the assumption that selective breeding will inevitably lead to problems,” warns Prof Grobler.

Grobler says that negative characteristics in a species can sometimes unwittingly be expressed during the selection process for a unique colour. “It is seen, for example, in purebred dogs where the breeding of a new race sometimes brings underlying genetic deviations in the species to the front.” He also believes that some of these animals may not be able to adapt to changing environmental conditions.

“However, one should also look at the positive side: because of the good demand for game, including unusual variants, there is much more game in South Africa today than in many decades. Balance should be found between the aims of conservation and the sustainable utilisation of game.”

Research at the UFS’s Department of Genetics is now trying to establish the genetic effects of intensive game breeding and predict the impact on biodiversity.

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