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

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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