Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 March 2021 | Story Mosa Moerane
Mosa Moerane
Mosa Moerane from the UFS Liaison, Advocacy and Awareness Officer at CUADS

by Mosa Moerane, Liaison, Advocacy and Awareness Officer at CUADS

Annually, the month of March marks Human Rights Month in South Africa. This month also commemorates the Sharpeville massacre that took place on 21 March 1960, where police opened fire on a group of protesters who sought the banning of the repressive pass laws of that era. Sixty-nine people were killed. We honour their sacrifice by, firstly, observing Human Rights Month and, secondly, persistently seeking to ensure that we dismantle systems that uphold and maintain the status quo so that nobody has to protest in order to have their voices and needs heard and addressed. We acknowledge that we are still some distance from this ideal.

It is against this background that the article seeks to invite some thinking around disability rights and disability justice within higher education. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), people with disabilities make up 15% of the world population. Disability transcends gender, class, race, and origin. However, society appears to be constructed to negate this fact.

South Africa is party to international laws and agreements such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) of 2006, which South Africa ratified in 2007. This means that the country accepts all the legal obligations imposed by this instrument. The CRPD seeks to promote, protect, and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights by persons with disabilities. According to the CRPD, persons with disabilities include those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments, which, in interaction with various barriers, may obstruct their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis. This is a clear recognition that persons with disabilities are equal and valuable members of society and should be recognised in all aspects of life. There is no single definition of disability that has achieved international consensus, since the concept of disability is evolving. The concept evolved from the initial charity or welfare approach that viewed persons with disabilities as objects of pity who required help, to the medical approach that sought to treat the disability in isolation, to the current social and human rights approach.

Universal Access in Higher Education
Universal access addresses, among others, structural barriers such as accessibility to facilities and infrastructure, the lack of support services or technology, the lack of availability of information in accessible formats, and the lack of reasonable accommodation in schools and workplaces. To this end, it is imperative that we align ourselves with the values of universal accessibility and universal design. Universal access is when the focus of attention is shifted from the individual with the disability to the environment in which they live. In this instance, universal access demands that the environment and society be more adaptable and flexible. The universal access approach conceptualises a disability as an experience where the environment in which a person functions or interacts is inaccessible, and may include social, attitudinal, learning, administrative, and physical barriers for a student. Therefore, while universal access does benefit people with disabilities, other demographics of people enjoy the advantages brought about by this approach.

Let us use two examples to illustrate this: Firstly, ramps are indeed useful for wheelchair users and people who use canes/crutches to gain entry to buildings. However, it is also useful for students and professionals who may regularly cart around large volumes of documents, files, and/or books – hello Accounting students! The second example is one highlighted by the current COVID-19 pandemic: creating opportunities for multiple methods of submitting assessments. In responding to the pressures and threat that COVID-19 posed for the academic year, it quickly became obvious that the stringent methods of assessment that we were accustomed to would simply not suffice, as students grappled with varying degrees of access to equipment and infrastructure in order to make these submissions. Therefore, more academic staff embraced and opened opportunities for submissions through alternative platforms that require significantly less data and is therefore less expensive. While this was helpful to students who faced unprecedented pressure due to lack of access to university computer labs, it also expanded the opportunities for more diverse student-teacher engagement beyond the often-inaccessible methods previously available.

Universally Accessible Communication
With the advent of COVID-19, various institutions have embarked on aggressive communication campaigns to ensure that they convey their messages as clearly and to as wide an audience as possible. However, unfortunately these were not always successful, as they often failed to prioritise people with disabilities by not ensuring that the methods of communication were accessible to all. For example, in order to simplify the message of COVID-19 transmission, a lot of organisations developed animation videos. However, these videos would either have audio not accompanied by closed captions/subtitles, which resulted in deaf, hard-of-hearing, and deafened members of our communities not being able to access the message. Alternatively, the video would only have subtitles, thereby excluding blind and partially sighted people.

This finally brings us to the crux of this article: to encourage all of us to treat universal access as the primary approach of communication in order to avoid the exclusion of significant sections of society. This approach further ensures that the constitutionally mandated right of access to information is upheld for all people. Access to information is vital to ensure maximum participation and opportunities for success, particularly for those who have previously been denied their human rights – such as persons with disabilities, through ostracism, exclusion, and discrimination.

In keeping with the UFS Language Policy, our university communication is conveyed in English. However, statistically speaking, the majority of the university staff and students indicate English as their second and sometimes even third language. To this end, a universally accessible strategy would improve the quality of communication and encourage wider engagement if it employed multiple methods of conveyance, for example, audio, closed captions, and screen-reading software, and (where material is printed for distribution) different formats should be available, such as electronic text, Braille or enlarged font. The reason for this is that we all have different styles of learning and understanding; creating opportunities to cater for this variety serves to accomplish – instead of deterring – the ideal that the Integrated Transformation Plan (ITP) articulates as “a transformed university which strives for social justice in everything it does.”

To this end, the Centre for Universal Access and Disability Support (CUADS) at the University of the Free State has developed the Universal Access Checklist in an effort to equip and support the university community, as it continuously strives to create and cultivate a demonstrably inclusive culture. The Universal Access Checklist is a useful resource for planning a variety of in-person and virtual events and situations. It seeks to express, in a simple manner, the basic elements to achieve accessibility in our various endeavours – whether in the planning of events, communicating vital information, or creating resources. The Universal Access Checklist can therefore be used in a variety of situations. CUADS is also available to provide training and support on this document to faculties, divisions, and departments seeking it. Requests and enquiries can be sent to MoeraneMM@ufs.ac.za

CUADS contact information
Email: cuads@ufs.ac.za
Bloemfontein Campus: MirandaMH@ufs.ac.za / +27 51 401 3713
Qwaqwa Campus: ThuloTB@ufs.ac.za / +27 58 718 5189
South Campus: MotaungEG@ufs.ac.za / +27 51 505 1355
Facebook: Centre for Universal Access and Disability Support (CUADS)

CUADS offers academic support to students and staff with disabilities through services such as:

Disability Support Programme, which entails the provision of specialist and a holistic coordinated approach in student support, while also availing information for data collection and reporting purposes.  The aim of the programme is to create enabling environments that empower students with disabilities to participate equally.  
• Accessible Transport Programme, which includes the provision of accessible transport to students with disabilities between the Bloemfontein and South Campuses.
• Liaison, Awareness and Advocacy Programme for the development of awareness and advocacy for persons with disabilities across all three campuses. Partnerships here are the Centre for Teaching and Learning, Student Life, and Communities.
• Staff with Disabilities Programme to advance optimal support for staff members with disabilities, together with Human Resources.
• Staff Development and Training Programme in partnership with Human Resources, to develop an institutional knowledge-based culture of mindfulness regarding the diverse student population of the UFS.
• Accessibility Programme to ensure access to all buildings and facilities for all users according to the principles of Universal Access and Universal Design, together with University Grounds and Estates.
• Accessible Study Material Production Programme for the provision of academic support through the coordination and production of accessible learning material and lectures with academic departments and lecturers.
• Communication Access Programme for the provision of academic support through the facilitation and coordination of communication access together with Interpreter Services.
• Alternative Assessment Programme by facilitating and coordinating alternative assessment options together with the Examination Division and Student Development and Counselling.
• Student Academic Support Programme to move away from all academic support services to persons with disabilities predominantly being the responsibility of CUADS in collaboration with the Centre for Teaching and Learning – WriteSite, A_Step Programme.

News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger
2007-11-26

 

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

 
A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

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