Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 February 2024 | Story Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee | Photo SUPPLIED
Munita Dunn-Coetzee
Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee is Director: Student Counselling and Development, Division of Student Affairs, University of the Free State.

Opinion Article by Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee, Director: Student Counselling and Development, Division of Student Affairs, University of the Free State.

The discovery of two hidden rooms with disturbing images and materials at Wilgenhof Men’s Residence (Stellenbosch University) last month has rekindled conversations about hazing and hazing practices. Wilgenhof, with a manifesto emphasising it as a place of belonging where all are free to be themselves, is described as a ‘house of horrors’, as punishment was seemingly doled out to male students as determined by an informal disciplinary committee.

Hazing is an ancient, universal practice. In society, whether past or modern, the need to join a group is an aspect of humanity. Hazing in educational institutions tends to occur as part of the hidden curriculum and manifests in a cyclical nature, for example, at the beginning of an academic year. A number or practices are associated with joining groups – it may take the form of a rite of passage, a ceremony, hazing, or paying a fee. The goal of participating in hazing activities is to be admitted and accepted in the group. By participating, prospective members can also prove their commitment to the group. When people freely choose to undergo a difficult initiation, it often increases their commitment and group cohesion – they need to believe the price of membership was worth it. The whole point of hazing is to build solidarity between members of a group.

Successfully navigating intimate, reciprocal relationships

The cohort of students joining higher education in South Africa typically fall in the 18- to 25-year-old range, and thus within the developmental phase of emerging adulthood. Erik Erikson, a German American child psychoanalyst known for his theory on psychosocial development of human beings, emphasised that this stage of development is about successfully navigating intimate, reciprocal relationships with others. A developmental need at university is therefore to fit in, to belong to a group, and to be part of campus activities – it brings security and protection. Hazing, however traumatising or painful, fulfils a developmental need.

Research has shown that the length of time for young people to actually create a personal identity has increased to the mid-to-late 20s. Emerging adulthood in Western culture can therefore be a time of shifting identities. This brings about a continued risk of experimentation with unhealthy behaviour. They are no longer minors and are faced with two additional life challenges: increased adult responsibilities and decreased familial support. From the onset of puberty through age 25, the adolescent brain undergoes profound changes in structure and function. A core element in the journey to adulthood involves the attainment of autonomy – on an emotional and behavioural level – learning to make your own decisions and manage your own emotions. Another developmental need is thereby met through hazing practices. 

Psychological consequences of hazing

While a few hazing rituals may appear mildly risky, many rituals cross the line. It is believed that humans are psychologically wired to form social groups in response to a threat, and this is what makes hazing effective in creating group identity. Despite the fact that hazing is potentially fatal and emotionally damaging, it is also believed that new students should have the same hazing experience as their predecessors. The hazing culture is therefore reproduced and enforced.

The psychological consequences of hazing can be rife. The concept of hazing is built upon psychological manipulation, degradation, and humiliation. Negative consequences that might have lasting effects include sleep problems, difficulty forming relationships, difficulty trusting others, decreased self-esteem, depressive tendencies, anxiety, self-harming tendencies, as well as academic underperformance. Unfortunately, hazing can also consist of social isolation, forced exercise, excessive drinking, and activities with a sexual innuendo. This results in embarrassing, abusive, exploitative, and dangerous activities. 

A student who has experienced hazing might feel a loss of control and empowerment, feeling more like a victim than before the hazing. This may appear directly after the hazing or later. Students who might have experienced traumatic events prior to hazing are more at risk for negative psychological reactions to hazing. This also applies to students witnessing hazing. They may experience feelings of guilt and shame for not having intervened to assist the hazing victim. And ironically, those who initiate hazing are not horrible, malicious human beings. They may believe the actions are expected of them and that they are carrying on a tradition for their residence. Those who haze others may also experience some of the same psychological consequences. We need to also remember that these psychological consequences would be significantly exacerbated should a student pass away due to a hazing-related activity. 

Will you still send him?

The focus thus far has been on the student, but what about the student’s parents, caregivers, and support system? Within the South African education system, not all South Africans have access to higher education. As a student finishing Grade 12, your dream is to enter tertiary education and to become the one breaking the cycle of poverty. Despite claiming that a university is a welcoming community assisting students to optimise their potential, hazardous hazing activities – such as the current discourse on Wilgenhof’s ‘house of horrors’ – have far-reaching negative physical and psychological consequences for both parents and students. 

Joining any group or team should not mean sacrificing your psychological health and well-being. It should be optimising your sense of self and enriching you systemically. If your son has been accepted at Wilgenhof Men’s Residence for 2024, will you still send him?

News Archive

UFS study shows playing time in Super Rugby matches decreasing
2016-12-19

Description: Super Rugby playing time Tags: Super Rugby playing time 

The study by Riaan Schoeman, (left), Prof Robert Schall,
and Prof Derik Coetzee from the University of the Free State
on variables in Super Rugby can provide coaches with
insight on how to approach the game.
Photo: Anja Aucamp

It is better for Super Rugby teams not to have the ball, which also leads to reduced overall playing time in matches.

This observation is from a study by the University of the Free State on the difference between winning and losing teams. Statistics between 2011 and 2015 show that Super Rugby winning teams kick more and their defence is better.

These statistics were applied by Riaan Schoeman, lecturer in Exercise and Sport Sciences, Prof Derik Coetzee, Head of Department: Exercise and Sport Sciences, and Prof Robert Schall, Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Sciences. The purpose of the study, Changes in match variables for winning and losing teams in Super Rugby from 2011 to 2015, was to observe changes. Data on 30 games (four from each team) per season, supplied by the Cheetahs via Verusco TryMaker Pro, were used.

About two minutes less action
“We found that the playing time has decreased. This is the time the ball is in play during 80 minutes,” says Schoeman. In 2011, the average playing time was 34.12 minutes and in 2015 it was 31.95.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball and doesn’t want it. They play more conservatively. They dominate with kicks and then they play,” says Prof Coetzee, who was the conditioning coach for the Springboks in 2007 when they won the World Cup.

Lineouts also more about kicking
As a result, the number of line-outs also increased (from 0.31 per minute in 2011 to 0.34 in 2015) and the winning teams are better in this regard.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball
and doesn’t want it. They play a more conservative
game. They dominate with kicks and then they play.”

Schoeman believes that rule changes could also have contributed to reduced playing time, since something like scrum work nowadays causes more problems. “When a scrum falls, the time thereafter is not playing time.”

According to Prof Coetzee, rucks and mauls have also increased, (rucks from 2.08 per minute in 2011 to 2.16 in 2015 and mauls from 0.07 per minute in 2011 to 0.10 in 2015). “The teams that win, dominate these areas,” he says.

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