Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
20 April 2021 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo istock
The Faculty of the Humanities webinar series will provide opportunities for future research collaboration.

How does an anthropologist, a linguist, and a health systems researcher collect data during COVID-19 when human interaction is limited? Speaking at the first webinar hosted by the Faculty of the Humanities on Fieldwork in the time of COVID-19, Prof Deborah Posel, Research Professor in Sociology, said, “Lockdown impacted social sciences just as much. For us it was a lockout from people, libraries, and field research.” 

“The benefits (of the webinar) for Humanities research are obvious. Research in the Humanities differs a lot from research in other disciplines such as Natural Sciences; it happens in silos and not as a group focused,” said Prof Heidi Hudson, Dean of the Faculty of the Humanities. This webinar series will provide a platform to engage, but also for inter-departmental and inter-disciplinary research in the faculty. “Using this platform to engage and talk about our shared experiences will help bring researchers together and to reflect on our own experiences,” Prof Hudson said. 

Academics from different departments in the faculty shared how the COVID-19 lockdown affected their research projects. They were Dr Gladys Kigozi, Senior Researcher in the Centre for Health Systems Research and Development (CHSR&D), Dr Kristina Riedel from the Department of Linguistics and Language Practice, and Prof Joy Owen from the Department of Anthropology

Different approaches implemented 

Centre for Health Systems Research and Development
Research in the CHSR&D focuses mainly on in-person research. “COVID-19 has diminished the interaction between researchers and participants, and it threatened the quality of data gathering,” Dr Kigozi said. Field activities were thus suspended for six months, which compromised the timeline of projects.  

The CHSR&D aligned their projects with COVID-19 regulations and had virtual consolidations with the Free State Department of Health, while advertising research through health-care workers and social media.

Listen to a recording of the webinar here: 


Faculty of the Humanities webinar on Fieldwork in the time of COVID-19


Department of Linguistics and Language Practice 
For Dr Kristina Riedel, COVID-19 was not the proverbial nail in the coffin of linguistics research. There is great body of spoken, signed or written language that has been transcribed. “Linguists may also study public or private online data or printed texts such as newspapers, social media, and Bible translations,” Dr Riedel said. 

Language documentation usually happens with a researcher interacting with a speaker or group of speakers, which is then recorded in a high-quality, low-noise environment. Just like Anthropology, the best form of understanding data comes from in-person documentation. “We often need to work with people who are not connected to online spaces, such as the elderly and marginalised communities,” Dr Riedel said. Researchers sometimes need to be immersed in the community when recording takes place.

Department of Anthropology 
Prof Joy Owen provided perspective on how Anthropology as a discipline and anthropologists have been impacted by the lack of human interaction, which is what Anthropology is essentially about. “Anthropology, as founded in the early 20th century, is a fully immersive experience. Body, mind, psyche, and spirt were employed to understand the other (people),” Prof Owen said in her opening remarks. The anthropological encounter could thus not be socially and physically distant. 

The continuous shift to virtual interaction is not an ideal practice. “A video call, however initiated, cannot provide access to the daily nuances of life,” Prof Owen said. The video call/interview cannot replace the in-person ‘hanging out.'


News Archive

Media: ANC can learn a lesson from Moshoeshoe
2006-05-20


27/05/2006 20:32 - (SA) 
ANC can learn a lesson from Moshoeshoe
ON 2004, the University of the Free State turned 100 years old. As part of its centenary celebrations, the idea of the Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture was mooted as part of another idea: to promote the study of the meaning of Moshoeshoe.

This lecture comes at a critical point in South Africa's still-new democracy. There are indications that the value of public engagement that Moshoeshoe prized highly through his lipitso [community gatherings], and now also a prized feature in our democracy, may be under serious threat. It is for this reason that I would like to dedicate this lecture to all those in our country and elsewhere who daily or weekly, or however frequently, have had the courage to express their considered opinions on pressing matters facing our society. They may be columnists, editors, commentators, artists of all kinds, academics and writers of letters to the editor, non-violent protesters with their placards and cartoonists who put a mirror in front of our eyes.

There is a remarkable story of how Moshoeshoe dealt with Mzilikazi, the aggressor who attacked Thaba Bosiu and failed. So when Mzilikazi retreated from Thaba Bosiu with a bruised ego after failing to take over the mountain, Moshoeshoe, in an unexpected turn of events, sent him cattle to return home bruised but grateful for the generosity of a victorious target of his aggression. At least he would not starve along the way. It was a devastating act of magnanimity which signalled a phenomenal role change.

"If only you had asked," Moshoeshoe seemed to be saying, "I could have given you some cattle. Have them anyway."

It was impossible for Mzilikazi not to have felt ashamed. At the same time, he could still present himself to his people as one who was so feared that even in defeat he was given cattle. At any rate, he never returned.

I look at our situation in South Africa and find that the wisdom of Moshoeshoe's method produced one of the defining moments that led to South Africa's momentous transition to democracy. Part of Nelson Mandela's legacy is precisely this: what I have called counter-intuitive leadership and the immense possibilities it offers for re-imagining whole societies.

A number of events in the past 12 months have made me wonder whether we are faced with a new situation that may have arisen. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and highly committed South Africans across the class, racial and cultural spectrum 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. It must have something to do with an accumulation of events that convey the sense of impending implosion. It is the sense that events are spiralling out of control and no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a handle on things.

I should mention the one event that has dominated the national scene continuously for many months now. It is, of course, the trying events around the recent trial and acquittal of Jacob Zuma. The aftermath continues to dominate the news and public discourse. What, really, have we learnt or are learning from it all? It is probably too early to tell. Yet the drama seems far from over, promising to keep us all without relief, and in a state of anguish. It seems poised to reveal more faultlines in our national life than answers and solutions.

We need a mechanism that will affirm the different positions of the contestants validating their honesty in a way that will give the public confidence that real solutions are possible. It is this kind of openness, which never comes easily, that leads to breakthrough solutions, of the kind Moshoeshoe's wisdom symbolises.

Who will take this courageous step? What is clear is that a complex democracy like South Africa's cannot survive a single authority. Only multiple authorities within a constitutional framework have a real chance. I want to press this matter further.

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 become "the opposition". In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there was no longer a single [overwhelmingly] dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of change. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than ones that seek to prevent it. 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 currently is 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 itself in different articulations of itself, which then contend for social influence.

In this way, the vision never really dies, it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. If the resulting versions are what is called "the opposition" that should not be such a bad thing - unless we want to invent another name for it. The image of flying ants going off to start other similar settlements is not so inappropriate.

I do not wish to suggest that the nuptial flights of the alliance partners are about to occur: only that it is a mark of leadership foresight to anticipate them conceptually. Any political movement that has visions of itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few 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 1990s. 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. It is not a time for repeating old platitudes. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed up to the adoption or our Constitution?

Morena Moshoeshoe faced similarly formative challenges. He seems to have been a great listener. No problem was too insignificant that it could not be addressed. He seems to have networked actively across the spectrum of society. He seems to have kept a close eye on the world beyond Lesotho, forming strong friendships and alliances, weighing his options constantly. He seems to have had patience and forbearance. He had tons of data before him before he could propose the unexpected. He tells us across the years that moments of renewal demand no less.

  • This is an editied version of the inaugural Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture presented by Univeristy of Cape Town vice-chancellor Professor Ndebele at the University of the Free State on Thursday. Perspectives on Leadership Challenges In South Africa

 

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