Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 August 2021 | Story André Damons | Photo Charl Devenish
Ebeth Grobbelaar is a Scientific Manager in the South African Doping Control Laboratory (SADoCoL) who is responsible for the review and approval of results at SADoCoL, to ensure compliance with the technical requirements of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

For Ebeth Grobbelaar, Scientific Manager in the South African Doping Control Laboratory (SADoCoL) – which is housed by the University of the Free State (UFS) – her work at the laboratory is profound, as fairness on and off the playing field is vital to her.

“Creating a fair playing field for athletes to compete carries a heavy responsibility, as an anti-doping violation impacts the athlete’s career,” says Grobbelaar, who is responsible for the review and approval of results at SADoCoL to ensure compliance with the technical requirements of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA).

Women are the cogs in the wheel

According to her, anabolic steroids, the multiple analytical disciplines, and rapidly changing technical requirements from WADA have attracted her to the sciences of anti-doping. Sixty percent of her colleagues at SADoCoL are women.  “They are the cogs in the wheel, ensuring the laboratory's smooth operation, taking daily challenges in their stride, and excelling in what they do as analysts and administrative staff,” says Grobbelaar.

Grobbelaar says there are many options in the anti-doping field for women inside and outside of the laboratory. Some of the most influential people in the anti-doping community are women – in their roles as laboratory directors, leading researchers, directors of athlete passport management units for international sports federations, or national anti-doping agencies in various capacities.

With all the responsibilities, come challenges and pressure – especially in a year when the Olympic Games take place. 

Women should learn how to say ‘no’ 

“An Olympic year always has additional stress due to the large number of samples before the games. This year, the pressure is more, with not all accredited laboratories operational, as well as disrupted testing schedules due to COVID-19.  Enabling athletes to compete in fairness on the world stage is a responsibility and a privilege.”

“My faith is my anchor.  As far as possible, I try to leave my work behind when I leave the laboratory, and concentrate on enjoyable things such as gardening, my dog, reading, and walking with my dog. On challenging days, something sweet also helps,” explains Grobbelaar the pressure and how she copes with it. 

This Women’s Month, Grobbelaar says, women should learn how to say ‘no’ to create time for rest and play. Says Grobbelaar: “For many women, ‘doing your best’ or saying yes means working yourself to the point of a mental and physical breakdown. Having the courage to say no, loving oneself through rest and play, replenishing our spirits, and realising that we are unique and precious in God’s eyes, is a challenge that many women face.” 

“Rest and play can take different forms, such as having coffee with a friend or being creative.  The important thing is that your rest or play activity brings joy to your soul and energises you. Ask your friends to support and assist you,” she concludes. 

News Archive

Council on Higher Education LLB qualification review not yet complete
2017-05-16

The reaction from various stakeholders following the ‘Outcomes of the National Review of the LLB Qualification’ by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) on 12 April 2017 requires the CHE to clarify that the national review process has not been completed and is ongoing.

The peer-review process conducted under the auspices of the CHE is based on the LLB Standards Document which was developed in 2014-2015 with input from higher-education institutions and the organised legal profession. Following self-review and site visits by peers, the process is now at the point where commendations and shortcomings have been identified, and the statement of 12 April reflects those findings. All law faculties and schools have been asked to improve their LLB programmes to meet the LLB Standard, and no LLB programme has been de-accredited. All institutions retain the accreditation they had before the Review process began and all institutions are working towards retaining their accreditation and improving their LLB programmes.

The South African Law Deans’ Association (SALDA) has issued a set of responses regarding the LLB programme review. The following questions and answers were published to give more clarity on the questions raised.

1.    What is the effect of a finding of conditional accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

(“Accreditation refers to a recognition status granted to a programme for a stipulated period of time after an HEQC evaluation indicates that it meets minimum standards of quality.”)

The institution must submit a progress report by 6 October 2017 that indicates how short-term aspects raised in the HEQC reports have been addressed and an improvement plan to indicate how longer-term aspects will be addressed.

2.    What is the effect of a finding of notice of withdrawal of accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

The institution must submit an improvement plan by 6 October 2017 to indicate how the issues raised in the HEQC report will be addressed, including time frames.

3.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect current students?
Students currently enrolled for the LLB programme at any institution are not affected at all. They will graduate with an accredited qualification.

4.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect new applicants?
The programmes remain accredited and institutions may enrol new students as usual. This also includes students completing BA/BCom (Law) programmes who wish to continue with the LLB programme.

5.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect prior graduates?
Degrees previously conferred are not affected.

6.    What happens when the improvement plans are submitted in October 2017?
The CHE will evaluate the plans when they are submitted, and the programmes remain accredited until a decision is taken whether the improvement plan is sufficient and has been fully given effect to or not. The institutions will have to submit progress reports to the CHE indicating implementation of measures contained in the improvement plan.

Should a decision at some stage be taken that a programme’s accreditation must be withdrawn, a teaching-out plan would be implemented so that all enrolled students would have the opportunity to graduate with an accredited degree.

For more information on the CHE’s pronouncement please contact Moleboheng Moshe-Bereng on MosheBerengMF@ufs.ac.za.

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