Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
22 September 2021 | Story Prof Francis Petersen | Photo Sonia Small (Kaleidoscope Studios)
Prof Francis Petersen is Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the University of the Free State.


South Africa is in trouble. No matter what your political or ethical persuasion – this much is abundantly clear. And if some of the opinions expressed lately by prominent economists are anything to go by, many are losing faith in whether we can still turn around a downward economic trajectory. 

 

But before we make up our minds either way, it is important to first face a truth that lies at the core of it all:  It is impossible to build a thriving economy on the back of a divided society. This makes societal reform a logical departure point for any economic relief efforts.  

And here the higher education sector has a definite and vital role to play.

On the battlefield of unexpected calamities, the South African economy can be compared to a soldier who has taken too many hits.  First, the devastating impact on so many sectors of our society caused by COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions; followed by the question over misspent or missing pandemic support funds; and then the final agonising blow – the looting and destruction in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal in July, leaving a gaping hole of around 50 billion rand in damages

Equally heart-breaking and disconcerting as the physical damages and loss of life, is the damage caused to our nation’s psyche, with racist and classist fault lines reappearing, fuelled by the divisive rhetoric of unscrupulous leaders.
Looming ominously over this crowded battlefield, are the murky clouds of corruption at the highest level and of the most disturbing kind, which have been systematically and painfully laid bare by the Zondo Commission over the past three years.

We truly find ourselves at a very low point as a nation. Financially, morally, and mentally.

And, like all other sectors of society, higher education needs to ask itself what it can do – if anything – to help fix what is broken. 

Changing role of universities

Universities used to have a rather narrow focus on education and the creation of new knowledge. This role has, however, evolved considerably over the past decade or two. Their function nowadays is very much a societal one, where the focus on using skills and knowledge to make a real difference in the societies they serve and draw their students from – the engaged university.  

Let’s be clear: Higher education cannot solve poverty and inequality. That is the domain of government, which needs to ensure that appropriate policies are in place that will constructively stimulate investment and assistance from the private sector and industry.

The higher education sector needs to focus on its strengths. And that is to do research; to offer advice and come up with possible solutions; to educate and to provide skills that will help uplift individuals, families, and communities.

In short: universities need to deliver graduates who will ultimately build a better society, and through engaged scholarship change the lives of people. 

What has become abundantly clear, though, is that education alone is not enough. The corruption implications and moral dilemmas that many of our highly qualified politicians and leaders are embroiled in, prove that more is needed than just academic aptitude. 

The purpose of universities should therefore not only be to deliver good workers or thinkers. Universities need to deliver good citizens. Citizens that possess unshakeable values and ethics, enabling them to become good leaders.

During a recent 2021 University of the Free State Thought-Leader webinar titled Is South Africa falling apart – where to from here? panellists stated that the role of universities is to create a culture of active citizenry, to play a part in the holistic transformation of society, to ensure the sharing of research and discoveries, and to ensure inclusive academic excellence. These are no small feats and something higher education institutions should strive for.  

Creating a new generation of leaders

While young people spend time on university campuses, it is vital that – along with academic knowledge – universities educate them about the norms and values that form the bedrock of a healthy, thriving society. Not only teaching these values of social justice, respect, tolerance, and care – but also demonstrating how they find practical application.   
Universities should be microcosms of an ideal society, where respect for human rights and diversity, equality, and care underpin all our policies, communication, and interactions.

Universities should consistently use discourse platforms to promote these values and to speak out against things that threaten them, such as corruption, injustice, and prejudice in any form.

But once again, it goes further than that. Not only do we need to teach and encourage our students to speak out. We need to educate them on how to speak out. 

Unfortunately, so many of the student protest actions on our university campuses often fall short in this aspect, as valid concerns and demands are regularly overshadowed by disrespectful rhetoric, accompanied by unwarranted destruction of property and endangering lives. 

Recently, the University of the Free State had the opportunity to host a book launch by Helen Zille, the Federal Council Chairperson of the DA. Among the guests was EFF leader Julius Malema.

Afterwards, some Political Science students remarked how surprised they were to witness the very civil interaction between Zille and Malema – in the light of their very public political spats and differences.

And here lies an important lesson for our young South Africans: that there is a level of maturity that needs to be displayed if we want to take our country forward together. 

We can differ from someone – and passionately express our differences – but retain an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect. Our young leaders of tomorrow need to understand that, in the absence of such an atmosphere, reasonable negotiations become impossible, and they run the real risk of thwarting the very cause they are fighting for. 

Interconnectedness of our society

As much as higher education has a clearly defined role, it can only fulfil this role effectively if it is part of a well-functioning, larger system. |

As higher education, government, private sector, and industry, we are interconnected and unable to function properly in isolation.

Universities can, for example, teach young people the value of entrepreneurship and equip them with the necessary skills to contribute to the economy. But without an enabling environment created by government, policies, and commitment, as well as buy-in and support from industry, it all falls apart.

As much as I cannot thrive if my neighbour is suffering, we cannot rebuild our economy if we don’t acknowledge our interdependence and find new, innovative ways to collaborate to move ahead together.  

The age-old principles of ubuntu need to find a renewed, modern application in South Africa today. 

Involving our youth

Whatever form economic rescue efforts take, it must involve the young people of our country. Making decisions that will profoundly influence our youth without involving them in the process, is downright irresponsible. 

We simply cannot afford to alienate our leaders of tomorrow and then expect them to be ready to take over the baton and not repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.

At the University of the Free State, our student participation in university governance structures was at an all-time high of 70% last year. We see this as an important accomplishment – we hope to build on and expand this even further. In most of my dealings with our young leaders of tomorrow, I certainly get the impression that they are keen to make a positive contribution to our country. But they yearn for guidance, encouragement, and opportunities.  

‘Nothing about us without us’, is a slogan used widely in various contexts nowadays, with its roots tracing back to South African disability advocates in the 1980s. It is equally applicable to young people in our current South African predicament.

Our youth needs to be turned from apathy to active involvement. Without them, no economic ‘rescue efforts’ will have long-term sustainability. 

After all: it is their future that is at stake.

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered
2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.  

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply.  What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations.  You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?) 

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@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