Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 May 2020

RETURN OF STAFF AND STUDENTS TO ALL CAMPUSES AS FROM 1 JUNE 2020

Message by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor

Dear Colleagues,

I hope that you are well, healthy, and safe. Since my last message to you, President Cyril Ramaphosa has announced that our country will move to Level 3 of the national lockdown on 1 June 2020. Subsequently, Dr Blade Nzimande, Minister of Higher Education, Science and Innovation, announced specific measures for the post-school education sector in response to the COVID-19 epidemic under Level 3, in order to re-integrate staff and students on campus.  

Over the past few weeks, a tremendous amount of work has been done to ensure the continuation of the Academic Project, and to prepare our campuses for the return of staff and students, ensuring that it is aligned with national directives and protocols. This was no small task. In a crisis, we have to do more than expected, and we have to go beyond the call of duty. During the past two months, I have seen and experienced many instances where multi-functional teams effectively engaged to ensure the continuity of the Academic Project, and the ongoing functioning of the university’s operations. I am immensely proud of what has been achieved so far.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has forced us to explore and implement many innovative ways to ensure sustainability and survival. The university management followed a risk-based approach in devising a plan to continue providing tuition and academic activities to students during this time, and to complete the 2020 academic year. Over and above this, we have ensured that our campuses are ready for the return of staff and students from 1 June 2020. In our planning, a phased-in approach is followed to limit the number of staff and students present at a single location at any given time. This is in line with the national directive that a maximum of 33% of the university’s staff and student population may be allowed on campus during Level 3 of the national lockdown.

The Special Executive Group (SEG), which I chair, and which was established at the beginning of March 2020, continues to meet weekly to discuss and decide on the university’s response to COVID-19 as this pandemic develops over time. Consisting of a number of task teams, the SEG is the decision-making entity that responds rapidly, and in a coordinated manner to combat the threats to business continuity. It also identifies opportunities where the intellectual knowledge base of the university could be utilised to impact society positively.

As from 1 June 2020, all staff members – except those categories of staff specifically mentioned in the re-integration plan – will continue working from home during Level 3, until such time as they are officially informed by their line managers to return to work. However, staff members may be expected to return to work during this period if the situation so requires. Staff members must therefore be available and contactable by their line managers at all times during normal UFS working hours.

Staff members returning to campus as from 1 June 2020 will include academic staff who support and lecture our returning students, as well as support staff in specifically identified business areas. I want to assure you that your safety, health, and well-being remain our first priority when you return to campus. Teams from University Estates and other business areas have worked tirelessly over the past weeks to prepare the campuses. This includes the disinfection and deep cleaning (where necessary) of open areas and the hygienic preparation of the campuses (e.g. hand sanitisers, hand-washing stations at, for instance, entrance gates and areas with high pedestrian traffic, Perspex screens installed in high-traffic reception areas where face-to-face engagement is needed, and social distancing markers in high-traffic buildings). Similarly, lecture halls are also being prepared to ensure social/physical distancing.  

Strict access protocols will be maintained at the campus entrances during Level 3 of the national lockdown. Only staff and students authorised to return to the campuses and issued with authorisation letters will be granted access to the campuses. The wearing of masks is compulsory when entering the campuses and proof of screening must be provided. An online screening questionnaire has been designed for this purpose. These measures will help ensure that it is safe for staff and students to return to our campuses. 

Residences on the three campuses are currently being prepared to receive students. This includes the installation of hand-sanitiser stations at the entrances of buildings and maintaining social/physical distancing in the general areas. Daily screening of students in residences will be compulsory.

I am attaching a document that explains the re-integration plan for Level 3 in detail, including the arrangements for the return of staff and students to our campuses: the categories of staff and students, entry to the campus, wearing of cloth masks, social distancing, environmental hygiene, protocol for on-campus meetings, vulnerable members of staff, staff with minor children, public transport, and the management of visitors during this period. The plan will be amended as and when needed. 

It is important that you maintain regular contact with your team and fellow colleagues. Most of our staff has been working from home for more than two months, and I know you might be missing the collegiality and campus environment. I want to encourage you to be patient, to look after your physical and mental health, and to make use of the resources available from the Department of Human Resources.

COVID-19 has provided us with opportunities to rethink the world of higher education afresh, and its impact has been transformative and forced us to think beyond the pandemic.

May you have a good and restful weekend – remember to #StayAtHome.

Regards,
Prof Francis Petersen
Rector and Vice-Chancellor

News Archive

Media: Sunday Times
2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity
 

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

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