Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
18 March 2020 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo Charl Devenish
Education
Members of the Faculty of Education Academic Advisory Board at its inaugural meeting held on the University of the Free State’s Bloemfontein Campus.

A first of its kind for the University of the Free State (UFS), the Faculty of Education Academic Advisory Board (AAB) was inaugurated on 5 March 2020 to provide guidance on developing industry-driven academic programmes.

Chairman of the Board and Dean of the faculty, Prof Loyiso Jita, explained the relevance of the structure. “Essentially, the Board is there to provide advice to the faculty on how we can be at the top of our game, connect with practitioners out there, and give ourselves an edge both in terms of our strategic research goals as well as raising the required finance to run our programmes effectively.”

A future-focused faculty
At its first sitting on the UFS Bloemfontein Campus, the Board made recommendations which the faculty has committed to implementing. The first suggestion put forward was to align the faculty to the larger higher-learning industry and education practitioners.

Bridging the gap between the institution and these stakeholders is of utmost significance: “There is still a feeling that we universities operate as ivory towers. Everything that we do, whether it is research, engaged scholarship, or teaching, has to be anchored in the practice. It has to be designed to influence and in most cases to change the practice in our communities,” added Prof Jita.

Other key focus areas identified include science and mathematics education. Prof Jita leads the South African National Roads Agency (Sanral) Research Chair that focuses on science education in the country. In the first five years of its existence, the Chair has helped graduates achieve 28 PHDs, eight master’s degrees, and has produced 66 publications. Prof Jita revealed that the Sanral Chair has challenged itself to double these statistics in the next five years.

Childhood development
Early Childhood Development (ECD), as a development zone will be championed as recommended by the Board. According to the Dean: “We have developed a strength as a faculty in that we have been leading in curriculum development in the area of ECD and have even hosted a number of workshops for other universities.”

Subsequent to that, the faculty has also decided to shine a spotlight on literacy. A project plan is pending submission to the National Research Foundation (NRF) for funding.

Long-term sustainability
The Advisory Board made a commitment to help the faculty develop more durable partnerships with industry players instead of the usual year-to-year collaborations. Undertaking the task to develop medium- to long-term partnerships of three to five years would be helpful because that could result in more sustainable projects and funding. A progress report is expected by the Board at its follow-up meeting scheduled for November 2020. 

Why an Academic Advisory Board?
Academic Advisory Boards are established across higher-learning institutions to ensure development aligned with regional, local, and global standards. Our Faculty of Education intends to use this structure to assist in terms of strategic direction and quality assurance of curriculum development and content delivery. Generally, the establishment of active AABs seeks to ensure that graduates comply with the expectations of the workplace, curriculum relevance for industry and the inclusion of the necessary knowledge, skills and attributes graduates will need in their specific fields.

Its purpose is to also assist in formulating and achieving strategic objectives, help make the connection between academic knowledge and “real work” skills, build a list of practitioners who could serve as classroom and graduation guest speakers, and create opportunities for students to learn workplace skills by providing suitable internship locations.

The Faculty of Education’s Board consists of the chief executive officers (CEOs) from the Education, Training and Development Practices Sector Education and Training Authority (ETDP SETA); the South African Council for Educators (SACE),the National Education Collaboration Trust (NECT) and Umalusi. In addition to the CEOs are six external members, three Heads of Schools, the Programme Director for Research and Engaged Scholarship, the Assistant Dean of the faculty at the Qwaqwa Campus, the Vice-Dean, as well as the Dean. 

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