Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
07 December 2020 | Story Eugene Seegers | Photo Jolandi Griesel
From the left; Tiana van der Merwe, Deputy-director: CTL; Prof Francois Strydom, Director: CTL, and Gugu Tiroyabone, Head of Advising, Access, and Success in CTL.

The UFS has taken an evidence-based approach to managing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the first week of lockdown, the Rector and Vice-Chancellor, Prof Francis Petersen, put appropriate governance structures in place, consisting of a COVID-19 Senior Executive Team and seven task teams focused on managing the different aspects and responses to the pandemic. One of these task teams was the Teaching and Learning Management Group (TLMG), chaired by the Vice-Rector: Academic, Dr Engela van Staden. This multi-stakeholder group represents all the environments in the university responsible for teaching, learning, and support to the academic core.

The core function of the TLMG was to ensure that teaching and learning could continue in order to help staff and students to complete the academic year successfully. The first step in the evidence-based response was to understand students’ device access, data access, and connectivity.  The Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) developed a survey to which 13 500 students responded. The results showed that 92% of students had an internet-enabled device, 70% could get access to the internet off campus, and 56% had access to a laptop.

The survey was followed by the Vulnerable Student Index (VSI) developed by the Directorate for Institutional Research and Academic Planning (DIRAP), which helped the university to create a better understanding of the vulnerability of about 22 000 students at the UFS. 

#UFSLearnOn is born

Based on VSI results, the UFS immediately initiated the purchase of 3 500 laptops to be distributed to assist more students. In addition, the #KeepCalm, #UFSLearnOn and #UFSTeachOn campaigns were launched. These campaigns are aimed at creating the best possible support for academic staff and students respectively, by adapting existing support and practices most suited to an emergency remote-learning environment. The departure point of both campaigns was to design a response for the constrained environments of our students. 

The #UFSLearnOn for students creates materials that students can download on cellphones and that would provide them with skills and ideas on how to get connected and create an environment where they could study at home. The #UFSLearnOn website has been viewed by more than 77 000 students to date, and the resources were shared with other universities to support a collaborative approach to addressing the COVID-19 challenge. A total of 177 000 Facebook users have been reached by these #UFSLearnOn materials.

The #UFSTeachOn campaign focused on supporting staff to transform their materials and teaching approach to a new reality. Staff members who attended training sessions numbered 3 800, a testament to their commitment to create the best possible response. Both the #UFSLearnOn and #UFSTeachOn campaigns are continuing, with an overwhelmingly positive response from staff and students.

Multi-pronged approach

However, these campaigns would become two of the 16 strategies the UFS has developed to manage the risks created by the pandemic. Creating responses is, however, not enough; you need evidence that these initiatives are making a difference. Therefore, the CTL was tasked with creating a monitoring system using data analytics. To date, 34 reports have served at the weekly TLMG meetings. The reports monitor the number of staff and students on the Learning Management System (LMS), measuring how much time they are spending learning, and whether they are completing assessments. 

During the peak of the first semester, 90% of students were online, supported by academic and support staff. The average performance of students per faculty per campus was monitored. The use of data analytics allowed the UFS to identify students who were not connecting, as part of the #NoStudentLeftBehind initiative. 

A ‘no-harm intervention’

Gugu Tiroyabone, Head of Advising, Access, and Success in CTL, says that this intervention was designed to effect behavioural change while not scaring a student, in an effort to enhance chances of success: “Under the banner of No Student Left Behind (NSLB) at the UFS – a ‘no-harm intervention’ – the task team continuously reflects on the numbers, which provides insights on student behaviour relating to access/engagement on the LMS system. The quantitative data is integrated with students’ qualitative narratives to tailor individualised responsive support through academic advising, tutorial support, and other student-support services in faculties and student affairs. The NSLB was one of many other faculty and institutional initiatives deployed during the pandemic to promote equitable outcomes despite the disparities students face as a result of the pandemic. The NSLB has fast-tracked the use of analytics and student narratives to transform the way we support students and enhance student success by effecting behavioural change that promotes student and institutional agency. NSLB has been an exercise of shared efforts to cultivate effective learning, teaching, and support that has exemplified the UFS’ organisational growth-mindedness. Numbers and words tell a better story – this has helped us become an agile, focused, and responsive institution.”

Keep moving forward

This approach has resulted in 99,95% of students participating in the first semester. The 0,05% (or 204) students who were not able to participate are being supported to continue their studies successfully. 

The success of the UFS’ approach is not only borne out by quantitative evidence, but also by qualitative feedback, such as the following quote sent to an academic adviser on 24 August:

“Thank you so much (adviser’s name); if it wasn't for you, I would have dropped out, deregistered or even committed suicide during this pandemic. I want to say that I have passed all my modules with distinctions, all thanks to you. After all the difficulty of learning I have experienced during this period. Please continue your great work to others (you were truly meant for this job) and God bless you.”

There are hundreds more testimonials like these, which testify to the inspiring efforts of students and staff at the UFS to finish the academic year successfully with very low risk. Some of these testimonials have been captured in the CTL publication, Khothatsa, which means ‘to inspire or uplift’.

News Archive

SA universities are becoming the battlegrounds for political gain
2010-11-02

Prof. Kalie Strydom.

No worthwhile contribution can be made to higher education excellence if you do not understand and acknowledge the devastating, but unfortunately unavoidable role of party politics in the system and universities of higher education and training (HET).

This statement was made by Prof. Kalie Strydom during his valedictory lecture made on the Main Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) in Bloemfontein recently.

Prof. Strydom, who was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by the UFS in 2010, presented a lecture on the theme: The Long Walk to Higher Education and Training Excellence: The Struggle of Comrades and Racists. He provided perspectives on politics in higher education and training (HET) and shared different examples explaining the meaning of excellence in HET in relation to politics.

“At the HET systems level I was fortunate to participate in the deliberations in the early nineties to prepare policy perspectives that could be used by the ANC in HET policy making after the 1994 elections.  At these deliberations one of the important issues discussed was the typical educational and training pyramid recognised in many countries, to establish and maintain successful education and training. The educational pyramid in successful countries was compared to the SA “inverted” pyramid that had already originated during apartheid for all races, but unfortunately exploded during the 16 years of democracy to a dangerous situation of 3 million out-of school and post-school youth with very few education and training opportunities,” he said.

In his lecture, Prof. Strydom answered questions like: Why could we as higher educationists not persuade the new democratically elected government to create a successful education and training pyramid with a strong intermediate college sector in the nineties?  What was the politics like in the early and late nineties about disallowing the acceptance of the successful pyramid of education and training?  Why do we only now in the latest DHET strategic planning 2010–2015 have this successful pyramid as a basis for policymaking and planning?

At an institutional level he explained the role of politics by referring to the Reitz incident at the UFS and the infamous Soudien report on racism in higher education in South Africa highlighting explosive racial situations in our universities and the country.  “To understand this situation we need to acknowledge that we are battling with complex biases influencing the racial situation,” he said.

“White and black, staff and students at our universities are constantly battling with the legacy of the past which is being used, abused and conveniently forgotten, as well as critical events that white and black experience every day of their lives, feeding polarisation of extreme views while eroding common ground.  Examples vary from the indoctrination and prejudice that is continued within most homes, churches and schools; mass media full of murder, rape, corruption; political parties skewing difficult issues for indiscrete political gain; to frustrating non-delivery in almost all spheres of life which frustrates and irritates everyone, all feeding racial stereo typing and prejudice,” said Prof. Strydom.

A South African philosopher, Prof. Willie Esterhuyse, recently used the metaphor of an “Elephant in our lounge” to describe the syndrome of racism that is part of the lives of white and black South Africans in very different ways. He indicated that all of us are aware of the elephant, but we choose not to talk about it, an attitude described by Ruth Frankenberg as ‘colour evasiveness’, which denies the nature and scope of the problem.

Constructs related to race are so contentious that most stakeholders and role-players are unwilling to confront the meanings that they assign to very prominent dimensions of their experience; neither does management at the institutions have enough staff (higher educationists?) with the competencies to interrogate these meanings, or generate shared meanings amongst staff and students (common ground).  A good example that could be compared with “the elephant in our lounge” remark is the recent paper of Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS on race categorisation in education and training.

According to Prof. Strydom, universities in South Africa are increasingly becoming the battlegrounds for political gain which creates a polarised atmosphere on campuses and crowds out the moderate middle ground, thereby subverting the role and function of the university as an institution within a specific context, interpreted globally and locally. 

Striving for excellence, mostly free from the negative influences of politics, in HET, from the point of view of the higher educationist, is that we should, through comparative literature review and research, re-conceptualise the university as an institution in a specific context.  This entails carefully considering environment and the positioning of the university leading to a specific institutional culture and recognising the fact that institutional cultures are complicated by many subcultures in academe (faculties) and student life (residences/new generations of commuter students).

Another way forward in striving for excellence, mostly free from politics, is to ensure that we understand the complexities of governing a university better.  D.W. Leslie (2003) mentions formidable tasks related to governance influenced by politics:

  • Balancing legitimacy and effectiveness.
  • Leading along two dimensions: getting work done and engaging people.
  • Differentiating between formal university structures and the functions of universities as they adapt and evolve.
  • Bridging the divergence between cultural and operational imperatives of the bureaucratic and professional sides of the university.

Prof. Strydom concluded by stating that it is possible to continue with an almost never ending list of important themes in HE studies adding perspectives on why it is so easy to misuse universities for politics instead of recognising our responsibility to carefully consider contributions to transformation in such an immensely complicated institution as the university within a higher education and training system. 

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Director: Strategic Communication (acting)
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl@ufs.ac.za
29 October 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