Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
12 May 2020 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Francis Petersen.
In a rapidly changing, uncertain and complex world, the role that universities are playing as the engines of social mobility, as drivers of the economy and as generators of new ideas, is now more critical than ever.  Due to the universal nature of knowledge, universities are global in scope – a space that encourages new ideas, controversy, inquiry, and argument and challenges orthodox views, but they are also deeply entrenched in their local environment, influenced by socio-economic and political dynamics.  There is an expectation that universities should exhibit great levels of responsiveness and public accountability, with higher levels of trust in higher education, and between higher education and government, and higher education and the public.  The challenge for both higher education and government is to allow institutional autonomy without oppressive accountability.  

Over the past few years, the purpose of universities has been challenged in relation to their role in society, their advocacy for speaking truth to power, their continuous strive to be great universities without being elitist, and their ability to function in an age of populism. The Trump administration and, more recently, Brexit have demonstrated that there is a decline in the respect for evidence and advice from subject-specific experts.  It seems (as in the case of the Trump administration) as if empirical reality does not matter, nor does empirical reasoning form the basis of public policy – a political place that is becoming increasingly anti-intellectual.  Emotion and personal belief have been shown to carry more weight than objective facts and evidence in terms of influencing public opinion.  Fake news and ‘the alternative truth’ have also challenged the fundamental principles of a university – academic freedom and the generation of new knowledge in the pursuit of truth.

A digitally unequal society
The COVID-19 pandemic has shown deep fault lines in our society – stark poverty and inequality – that universities should engage with (and they do); however, they cannot eliminate it on their own, but can be part of the solution.  South Africa is the most unequal society in the world.  Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the South African economy was already in deep trouble, with sovereign downgrades by all the rating agencies and with an unemployment rate close to 30%.   The national lockdown, in an attempt to ‘flatten the infection curve’ and hence manage the response of the national health system to COVID-19 cases, has added to the pressure on the economy.  It is envisaged that a large number of people (estimated between 3 and 7 million South Africans) will lose their jobs after the national lockdown period, adding to poverty and an already high unemployment rate.  Even during the lockdown period, there are many South Africans living in crowded spaces, hence finding it difficult to practise social distancing, may not have running water and proper sanitation, and possibly do not have regular access to food.  

As schools and the post-school education and training sectors move online with their learning, it further shows how digitally unequal our society really is – access to connectivity, data, and an appropriate digital device is a challenge, and electricity is not evenly distributed or is non-existent in our society.  These institutions, within the environment of digital inequality, are ensuring that digital equity is maintained as far as possible.  Many churches, business leaders, and certain politicians have called for a different social pact between business, labour, and government to address the state of the economy – any such action, however, must be supplemented by concrete measures for social reform.

Regaining trust in universities
But perhaps this pandemic has also created an opportunity for science and evidence to regain credibility in informing government decisions and public trust, and for universities to demonstrate respect for evidence. During the initial stages (early March) of COVID-19 in South Africa, the epidemiologists and virologists have shown through confirmed data from the National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD) that South Africa was in the early phase of the infection curve – also interpreted to be the relatively low-risk phase of the curve; this would be the right time to apply the principle of social distancing.  It allowed certain organisations (such as universities) to pro-actively suspend part of their activities so as to minimise the number of people in their operational environment, well before the national lockdown was announced on 26 March – a decision based on science.

Through data and proper analyses, the NICD, other scientific bodies and the Ministerial Advisory Committee on COVID-19 provided evidence-based information to government and the public, from which meaningful decisions could be taken.  The South African government has made it perfectly clear that decisions around COVID-19 will be made based on the science associated with this pandemic – a stance to be applauded.  Hence, the risk-adjusted approach of ‘opening up’ the economy through easing the lockdown measures but constantly monitoring the infection curve is an excellent example of risk management while continuously assessing the risks.

Universities, science laboratories, and pharmaceutical companies around the globe are hard at work to develop an effective vaccine for COVID-19, which is another opportunity to demonstrate how science can assist in protecting people from this terrible virus. Universities are making advances in personal protective equipment (PPE), the development of new technologies for non-ICU provision of oxygen to COVID-19 patients, more advanced methods of testing (for the virus) to reduce turnaround times, and various other scientific studies.  

This platform is giving universities a renewed impetus to use science and scientific developments to advance societal agendas such as climate change, poverty and inequality, public health and social justice (ethics of care) – and more immediate – assisting in re-building a strong South African economy.  It is an opportunity for the public and politicians to regain trust in universities, but it is also an opportunity for universities to profile their public intellectuals so that the value of science and evidence-based output is part of policy debates and informed decision-making.  However, in doing so, universities must strengthen their relationship with society at large, be inquiry-driven, and at the same time be learning and co-creating.

Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.

News Archive

MBA Programme - Question And Answer Sheet - 27 May 2004
2004-05-27

1. WHAT MUST THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE (UFS) DO TO GET FULL ACCREDITATION FOR THE MBA PROGRAMMES?

According to the Council on Higher Education’s (CHE) evaluation, the three MBA programmes of the UFS clearly and significantly contribute to students’ knowledge and skills, are relevant for the workplace, are appropriately resourced and have an appropriate internal and external programme environment. These programmes are the MBA General, the MBA in Health Care Management and the MBA in Entrepreneurship.

What the Council on Higher Education did find, was a few technical and administrative issues that need to be addressed.

This is why the three MBA programmes of the UFS received conditional accreditation – which in itself is a major achievement for the UFS’s School of Management, which was only four years old at the time of the evaluation.

The following breakdown gives one a sense of the mostly administrative nature of the conditions that have to be met before full accreditation is granted by the CHE:

a. A formal forum of stakeholders: The UFS is required to establish a more structured, inclusive process of review of its MBA programmes. This is an administrative formality already in process.

b. A work allocation model: According to the CHE this is required to regulate the workload of the teaching staff, particularly as student numbers grow, rather than via standard management processes as currently done.

c. Contractual agreements with part-time staff: The UFS is required to enter into formal agreements with part-time and contractual staff as all agreements are currently done on an informal and claim-basis. This is an administrative formality already in process.

d. A formal curriculum committee: According to the CHE, the School of Management had realised the need for a structure – other than the current Faculty Board - where all MBA lecturers can deliberate on the MBA programmes, and serve as a channel for faculty input, consultation and decision-making.

e. A system of external moderators: This need was already identified by the UFS and the system is to be implemented as early as July 2004.

f. A compulsory research component: The UFS is required to introduce a research component which will include the development of research skills for the business environment. The UFS management identified this need and has approved such a component - it is to take effect from January 2005. This is an insufficient element lacking in virtually all MBA programmes in South Africa.

g. Support programmes for learners having problems with numeracy: The UFS identified this as a need for academic support among some learners and has already developed such a programme which will be implemented from January 2005.

The majority of these conditions have been satisfied already and few remaining steps will take effect soon. It is for this reason that the UFS is confident that its three MBA programmes will soon receive full accreditation.

2. WHAT ACCREDITATION DOES THE UFS HAVE FOR ITS MBA PROGRAMME?

The UFS’s School of Management received conditional accreditation for its three MBA programmes.

Two levels of accreditation are awarded to tertiary institutions for their MBA programmes, namely full accreditation and conditional accreditation. When a programme does not comply with the minimum requirements regarding a small number of criteria, conditional accreditation is given. This can be rectified during the short or medium term.

3. IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE ACADEMIC CORE OF THE UFS’s MBA PROGRAMMES?

No. The UFS is proud of its three MBA programmes’ reputation in the market and the positive feedback it receives from graduandi and their employers.

The MBA programmes of the UFS meet most of the minimum requirements of the evaluation process.

In particular, the key element of ‘teaching and learning’, which relates to the curriculum and content of the MBA programmes, is beyond question. In other words, the core of what is being taught in our MBA programmes is sound.

4. IS THE UFS’s MBA A WORTHWHILE QUALIFICATION?

Yes. Earlier this year, the School of Management – young as it is - was rated by employers as the best smaller business school in South Africa. This was based on a survey conducted by the Professional Management Review and reported in the Sunday Times Business Times, of 25 January 2004.

The UFS is committed to maintaining these high standards of quality, not only through compliance with the requirements of the CHE, but also through implementing its own quality assurance measures.

Another way in which we benchmark the quality of our MBA programmes is through the partnerships we have formed with institutions such as the DePaul University in Chicago and Kansas State University, both in the US, as well as the Robert Schuman University in France.

For this reason the UFS appreciates and supports the work of the CHE and welcomes its specific findings regarding the three MBA programmes.

It is understandable that the MBA review has caused some nervousness – not least among current MBA students throughout the country.

However, one principle that the UFS management is committed to is this: preparing all our students for a world of challenge and change. Without any doubt the MBA programme of the UFS is a solid preparation.

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