Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
04 August 2021 | Story Giselle Baillie

A project working towards the achievement of the Integrated Transformation Plan of the University of the Free State.


The names of buildings are not neutral ideas – even more so when they reflect, for example, the names or namesakes of people, places, or concepts on campus. Rather, they play a significant role in expressing and shaping what the institution values, who the space is for, and how communities engaging with the space are encouraged to think, feel, and behave. 

The Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) is undertaking two name review projects as part of its transformation processes. The first focuses on the review of the names and symbols of buildings utilised as student residences. Framed by the Integrated Transformation Plan (ITP) of the UFS and mandated by the Naming Committee of the UFS, the process entails that all residences evaluate whether their current building/house names reflect and align with the values of the constitution and the values of the UFS, and whether these names create a sense of inclusion and belonging for all within the UFS community. 

Furthermore, whether the symbols (songs, practices, and so forth) utilised within the junior residences are up to date regarding these objectives, and whether they demonstrate and create experiences for their communities that are aligned with these values. 

The second project focuses on the review of the name of a building currently occupied by the Faculty of Health Sciences, and which was utilised as a student hostel in previous years. 

Since early 2021, various partners from the UFS have been engaged in consultations and planning with their stakeholders and communities for these projects, which will unfold in the second semester. 

The objectives of these projects are to engage through education and dialogue processes in critical reflections on the role that the names and symbols associated with buildings on a university campus play in shaping and expressing institutional values and culture, and the associated sense of belonging that it creates for its diverse communities. Furthermore, to provide the opportunity for the UFS community to craft a new institutional culture through new names and renewed cultural practices, where necessary, based on constitutional as well as UFS values.

The UFS community is invited to participate in the projects as follows:

The Bloemfontein Campus Residence Name and Symbol Review Process

9-24 August: A Blackboard platform hosting educational materials on the project will be launched, with the UFS community encouraged to engage with this. 

9-16 August: Junior and day residences will host various dialogues within their houses, focusing on exploring their names and symbols. Senior residences with associated names or conceptual frames, as well as alumni, are encouraged to join these dialogues. Recordings of the dialogues will also be made available on the project’s Blackboard platform. 

16-19 August: A range of institutional dialogues will take place, focused on key reflections regarding the current names of residences. These dialogues will take place daily from 16:00 to 19:00 and will be convened and moderated by SRC representatives. 

Click below to access the different dialogue invitations and to find the virtual links to these dialogues.

16 August 2021

17 August 2021

18 August 2021

19 August 2021

20-24 August: The Bloemfontein Campus community, inclusive of students, staff, and alumni, are invited to participate by expressing their thinking regarding the current building names through an online review platform. Where participants feel that the current name/s are not aligned with constitutional and UFS values and the desired institutional culture of the UFS, they will be encouraged to promote a new name/s as per the guidelines that will be provided for naming. Residence students will also be afforded the opportunity to critically reflect on and review their residence symbols.


23 September: Findings from the review process will be communicated to the UFS community.  

December 2021: The decisions of Council on the review and possible new names will be communicated to the UFS community. 

The CR de Wet Building Name Review Project

2-17 August: A Blackboard platform hosting educational materials on the project be found at this link, with the UFS community encouraged to engage with this.

3-12 August: Students and staff of the Faculty of Health Sciences will engage in dialogues focused on reviewing the name of one of its buildings, the CR de Wet Building, which houses the staff offices, as well as lecture and practical venues of the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and the departments of Family Medicine, Occupational Therapy, Optometry, Biostatistics, Physiotherapy, and Nutrition and Dietetics.

10-11 August: The broader UFS community is invited to also engage in a dialogue focused on reviewing the name of the afore-mentioned building.

11 August: Alumni of the former CR de Wet hostel will engage in a dialogue focused on reviewing the name of the afore-mentioned building.

12-17 August: The Bloemfontein Campus community, inclusive of students, staff, and alumni, are invited to participate by expressing their thinking regarding the current building name through an online review platform. Where participants feel that the current name needs to be changed, they will be encouraged to promote a new name as per the guidelines that will be provided for naming.

23 September: Findings from the review process will be communicated to the UFS community.  

December 2021: The decision of Council on the review and possible new name – where the review necessitated change – will be communicated to the UFS community.  

 

News Archive

Middle East activists speak about peace on the Bloemfontein Campus
2012-03-15

 

Bassem Eid (left) and Benjamin Pogrund discuss the situation in the Middle East.
Photo: Johan Roux
15 March 2012

Peace is a big word in the Middle East, particularly amongst Israelis and Palestinians. After years of conflict, people yearn for peace; they want an end to the killings and the uncertainty. The problem is that both sides are actively doing things that undermine the prospect of peace. There is also double talk, lies and evasion with each side pointing fingers. This was the word from Benjamin Pogrund, an Israeli peace activist, addressing staff and students on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State. He and fellow peace activist Bassem Eid, a Palestinian, visited the campus to speak about the situation in the Middle East.

Both men agreed that peace efforts were hindered by the Israeli and the Palestinian leaders. According to Pogrund, neither the Palestinians, nor the Israelis are leading the way in accepting that the conflict must end.
 
“Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders say let us get together with no pre-conditions. Then the Israeli leaders say, Jerusalem we cannot share, that is not for negotiation. And, they say to the Palestinians you must recognise Israel as a Jewish state. So, what they say is unless you agree to these pre-conditions there can be no talks without pre-conditions.
 
“And the Palestinians in turn say the settlement construction must cease immediately, and unless that happened, there is no point in meeting. And they say we will never acknowledge you as a Jewish state so do not even bother talking about it. And we insist on the right of return of Palestinian refugees. So they also say unless you acknowledge these pre-conditions there is no point in meeting with our pre-conditions. So as you can gather each side blames the other side, each side points the finger and says you are responsible for the lack of progress.”
 
Pogrund said both the Israelis and the Palestinians could demand legitimacy in that part of the world.
 
“Both Jewish and Arabs can say we have history on our side. We have religion on our side, culture.”
 
To compare Israel to Apartheid South Africa is wrong, he said.
 
“It is an occupation, it is repression, but it is not Apartheid.”
 
Eid, who is the director of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, said the Palestinians were close to having a complete independent Palestinian state from 1994 to 1999.
 
“But in one rocket former Israeli Prime minister Ariel Sharon destroyed it.”
 
He said Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005 did not bring political unity.
 
“We, the Palestinians, were supposed to start building the infrastructure of the Gaza Strip but unfortunately Hamas started dancing on that Israeli disengagement and considered it as their own success because of their military resistance against the occupation.” He also said Hamas is satisfied with its hold in the Gaza Strip and Fatah is also very satisfied with its hold in the West Bank. According to Eid, it is convenient for the Israelis that the Palestinians are separated.

 

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