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
04 January 2021 | Story Andre Damons | Photo Supplied
From left to right: Makashane Ntlhabo (PhD student at the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies), Dr Tascha Vos (Centre for Environmental Management) and Dr Stephanie Cawood (Centre for Gender and Africa Studies).

Two researchers from the University of the Free State (UFS) are studying how water quality could be used at informal heritage sites to measure the health of the sites. They are also aiming to test the workability of their Rapid Integrity Appraisal (RIA) bio-cultural screening model as a way to safeguard informal heritage sites and cultural heritage.

Dr Stephanie Cawood from the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies and Dr Tascha Vos from the Centre for Environmental Management,a limnologist with a doctorate in environmental management, hope to achieve wider application for the RIA model beyond the eastern Free State’s sacred sites and to consider the feasibility of RIA to inform the monitoring and management regimes of formal heritage sites as well.

This interdisciplinary research is unique and brings together the science of aquatic ecology (limnology) as well as the cultural and social human dynamics of heritage, pilgrimage and ritual and how they interact.

Sacred sites and places of pilgrimage

“In previous research, we documented a link between the environmental integrity and public health of informal heritage sites in the eastern Free State and the cultural heritage associated with these sites. They are considered sacred sites and places of pilgrimage and include various sacred valleys and caves in the Mohokare Valley in the eastern Free State along the South Africa-Lesotho border.

“We detected a cycle of risk between human, animal and ecological risk factors where water quality is representative of ecological risk and cultural practices associated with the intrinsic heritage of the sites. Based on this cycle of risk and conventional aquatic biomonitoring models, we developed a unique bio-cultural screening model called Rapid Integrity Appraisal specifically designed for the biomonitoring of informal heritage sites such as the eastern Free State sacred sites,” the two researchers explain.

Rapid Integrity Appraisal

According to Dr Cawood, who is very knowledgeable about pilgrimage movement in the Mohokare Valley and has conducted regular fieldwork trips to these sites from 2007-2010, RIA is a bio-cultural screening model to determine the need for intervention at informal heritage sites.

Says Dr Cawood: “Ideally, a complete bio-cultural screening model would include all existing bio-monitoring indices. However, in a country such as South Africa which has immense social challenges, the formal heritage sector is under-resourced. Resources are even scarcer for informal heritage management.”

Dr Vos says this means that the full spectrum of biomonitoring indices simply cannot be justified for informal heritage sites. Therefore, in the specific context of limited resources in terms of time, expertise and funding, a pragmatic view has to be taken to rapidly and efficiently assess the integrity of informal sites.

“We found certain analyses related to water quality more valuable for extrapolation than others and we conceptualised these parameters as forming the RIA model. The idea behind RIA was to find the most expedient and efficient mode to rapidly assess the integrity of a particular informal heritage site. RIA is not meant to be a comprehensive method but is rather aimed at collecting baseline data for immediate decision-making and the possible implementation of a full water-quality assessment, or perhaps a complete bio-cultural screening,” according to Dr Vos.

Great potential

They have recently been funded by the UFS for this interesting interdisciplinary project which started in 2018. They have already completed the fieldwork and are now left with the data analysis and interpretation and the writing of articles. Unfortunately, the coronavirus pandemic negatively affected their progress in this regard, but they hope to finalise the project next year.

According to the researchers the project has great potential for application in heritage management anywhere, not only for the monitoring of informal heritage sites, but for poorly managed tourist sites that may be ecologically compromised.

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