Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

16 Days of Activism: The role of universities in transcending from activism to action

27 November 2023 Photo KALEIDOSCOPE

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

The 16 Days of Activism Against Women and Child Abuse campaign has over the years raised valuable awareness around the pervasive scourge of gender-based violence that continues to plague our country in general – and our institutions of higher learning in particular. But, as with any campaign around an issue of such importance, it is vital that awareness evolves into real action. And in the higher education sphere, there is much that universities can do to make a real difference, says Prof Francis Petersen.

South Africa’s levels of violence against the more vulnerable sectors of our society remain alarming. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) recently expressed grave concern over the latest crime statistics released by the South African Police Service. It revealed that more than three children and twelve women were murdered daily in South Africa over a 90-day period between October and December last year – while another 21 434 women and children suffered attempted murder or grievous bodily harm.

Such staggering levels of abuse can simply never be accepted as the norm. On our university campuses in particular, the rate of gender-based violence remains unacceptably high. As university authorities, it is essential that we never lose the impetus to combat this, and that we keep on dedicating resources, time, perspectives, skills, and insights to help bring about real change.

Creating safe spaces

It starts by ensuring that our campuses constitute physically safe spaces for our students – with all the necessary security measures in place to ensure a living and learning environment free from risk or fear. Here, special attention should be paid to ensuring safety at on-campus and off-campus accommodation, and while commuting to and from them. Policies around gender-based violence need to be developed and regularly reviewed, and the necessary support structures should be established and empowered – not only to provide aftercare, but also to work towards prevention. Universities should treat all incidents of gender-based violence in a serious light, consistently responding with swift and thorough investigations and appropriate disciplinary action. The ultimate aim is to create environments where all students and staff feel secure and respected, regardless of their gender and sexual orientation.

But our campuses should also be intellectually safe spaces, where students feel free to speak out about issues that concern them, and where archaic ideas around masculinity can be exposed, challenged, and contested without fear of humiliation or retribution. Platforms for discourse and discussion need to be deliberately created for this, with the university leadership setting the tone by speaking out against issues that work against a culture of social justice on our campuses.

Creating a safe, caring environment for our students includes listening to them, responding in an appropriate and timely way, and working with them towards co-creating real workable solutions. An important part of this is to include students in university governance structures, where they can actively influence policy and decision making around issues that affect them.

Changing harmful gender stereotypes

As centres for innovation, research, dissemination, and application of knowledge, it is essential that universities use their society-focused role to speak out against harmful gender stereotypes and outdated perceptions around gender roles. In the process, we play an important part in influencing a new generation of leaders and helping to reshape societal norms and expectations. Our curricula should include a comprehensive focus on principles of gender parity, incorporating GBV awareness and prevention – which is why curriculum renewal remains so important. And why curricular and co-curricular programmes should all be underscored by a value system of equity, care, and social justice.

As microcosms of what an ideal society should look like, it is of course equally essential that this equity is reflected in universities’ own human resources policies, staff complements, and hiring procedures.

Mental health support

Universities are ideally placed to provide professional mental health support to victims of abuse – many of whom would otherwise not have easy access to it. This support extends to cultivating assertiveness and resilience in our students. Through individual therapy, as well as the various self-awareness programmes offered on our campuses, we empower potential victims to realise their own worth. It also equips them with knowledge on how to avoid an abusive situation, and how to act when they find themselves in it.

Combating economic abuse

Economic abuse is a manifestation of gender-based violence that is too often overlooked. This silent and insidious form of abuse traps women in a cycle of dependency and can prevent them from pursuing employment prospects and attaining personal growth. Education remains one of the most potent weapons in the fight against economic abuse. But it needs to go even further than that. As hubs of research and critical thinking, universities should use their resources towards understanding the dynamics of economic abuse – its prevalence, consequences, and the most effective interventions to address it. As part of our society-focused role, we should also use our knowledge and skills to provide counselling, legal aid, and economic advice.

Harnessing technology to fight abuse

The digital sphere has become a critical battleground in the fight against gender-based violence. Not only does it provide access to online platforms where survivors of gender-based violence can speak out, share experiences, and create a support network – it also enables counsellors and caregivers to reach victims who would otherwise not be able to make use of their services.

On top of that, online platforms offer a safe and discreet way for survivors to report incidents and access legal and other aid. Part of our teaching and learning as well as our community engagement functions as universities is to educate our staff and students and also the wider community about these possibilities, equipping them with digital competencies, and helping to facilitate access to online resources.

Driving a collaborative approach

I believe it is abundantly clear that institutions of higher learning have an important and meaningful role to play in the fight against gender-based violence on a variety of fronts. It is a role we should embrace, develop, and refine with growing determination. What is equally clear is that it is a fight we cannot win on our own. A collaborative approach by higher education, the private and business sector, and government is needed – to reinforce anti-abuse discourse from various angles and to escalate it into real, sustainable, and effective action.

Creating a culture of responsibility

This much remains clear: The responsibility of preventing gender-based violence lies not only with the potential victims, but with every member of society. Universities should establish clear and mandatory reporting protocols for staff and students who witness or are aware of instances of abuse. But even more important – create a culture of responsibility, where information sharing, support, and assistance are a natural outflow of a caring, cohesive institution.

Establishing such united university communities, based on equity, inclusivity, and social justice, is the only way we can hope to eradicate gender-based violence from our campuses – and in turn, from our society as a whole.

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

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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