Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 May 2024 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Nelia Oosthuizen
iKudu
The conference also provided each consortium university with the opportunity to showcase and celebrate their strengths and achievements in the project. This was done through an interactive drumming session that added to the celebratory nature of the event.

The Office for International Affairs at the University of the Free State (UFS) recently hosted the iKudu closing conference, celebrating the past five years of achievements of the iKudu project, as well as the start of the future iKudu network.

Welcoming delegates to the international gathering of ten consortium universities, external advisers, and the core project working groups, was Prof Vasu Reddy, Deputy Vice-Chancellor: Research and Internationalisation. He said that collaboration is key to internationalisation, as it is evident from international gatherings like this, showcasing how higher education can break silos between institutions and people.

He remarked, “At this closing conference, closing is not about closure; it is also a space to reflect, to think deeply about not only the past and the present, but also the future of this initiative. The project was carefully designed to develop a South African concept of internationalisation of the curriculum, which integrates collaborative online international learning (COIL) as a tool within the discourse of transformation and decolonisation. Transformation is not a tick-box exercise, but a continuing, unfinished business.”

Inclusive internationalisation

Prof Reddy believes key to this project is the concept of inclusive internationalisation. He is of the opinion that it is fundamentally about recognition, providing staff and students the opportunity to develop international intercultural competencies by engaging with students and colleagues from abroad on their home campuses. Students who are differently abled, in a disadvantaged financial position, or located in geographically diverse areas, are not excluded. “In a project like this, one would have found capacity building, deep synergies, and connections across diverse spaces. Our synergies often override major differences,” he said.

According to Prof Reddy, this project has much do to with a sense of belonging. “In many ways it is about celebrating different ways of being and knowing,” he commented.

Referring to the journey of the past five years starting in 2019, he commented on the parties involved who steered this project, acknowledging the changes they made to see it through. “You as consortium members have shown resilience and a deep commitment to succeed. What you promised, you delivered, and in many ways probably exceeded these milestones.” He expressed his appreciation not only for the commitment and dedication but also for those who were forward thinking.

A highlight of this conference was the symbolic journey through the different stages of the project. Delegates walked together through the timeline, beginning in 2019 and culminating in the recent closing conference. Milestones included overcoming the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic; engaging in round-table discussions on decolonisation of the curriculum; reconceptualising key concepts based on the understanding of South-North collaboration, including transformation and internationalisation of the curriculum; developing considerations for guidelines on internationalisation of the curriculum; discussing shared virtual collaborative curriculum practices; and refining the internationalisation strategies.

In the discussions that followed, the focus was on preserving and intensifying the relationship between individuals and consortium universities that had been created over the past five years. Attendees also actively collaborated on plans for the iKudu universities to continue working together and to become a network that impacts beyond the project.

Participants engaged in short, to-the-point presentations titled ‘Where did it begin?’, ‘Becoming COILers through COILing’, ‘I am because we are’, ‘How to internationalise the curriculum’, ‘What does COIL look like’, ‘Spreading the word’, ‘Listening to students, ‘Putting the IoC and COIL together’, and ‘Making the project work’.

Established networks and interconnectedness

One notable aspect of the project lies in the community of practice within the iKudu consortium. During the discussion of 'I am because we are', Valeria Baloyi (Univen) and Alun de Winter (Coventry University) emphasised the ancient African concept of ubuntu, which underscores the interdependence of humanity. They highlighted that humans rely on connections, community, and mutual care; our existence is inherently tied to one another. They said, "I am because we are," illustrating how this concept resonates within the iKudu consortium through established networks and interconnectedness. The Southern context, and the philosophy of ubuntu in the project has perpetuated inclusivity, equality, and demystified patriarchal systems in knowledge production and bearing. COIL promotes global citizenship among practitioners and students. In the Northern context, while ubuntu may not be widely known, it intersects with principles of equality, diversity, collaboration, global citizenship, environmental sustainability, and social justice, fostering cohesion between humans and nature.

Prof Alessandra Viviani (University of Siena) and Prof Lynette Jacobs, Acting Head of the Office for International Affairs at the UFS and conference convener, delivered another thought-provoking presentation titled ‘Internationalisation of the Curriculum: Why and how?’ Particularly noteworthy was the emphasis on inclusivity, reflecting a core aspect of the project. According to Prof Jacobs, an important aspect of this project is for students to appreciate themselves and feel that they are as much part of the world and belong as others. She said, “In curricula, students need to get the opportunity to understand that diverse perspectives and knowledge exist; become aware of cultural biases and how these are shaped; and get the opportunities to critically engage with different knowledge systems and what they are based on.”

Achieving personal and professional milestones

At the gala dinner, Prof Francis Petersen, UFS Vice-Chancellor and Principal, addressed delegates. He attended the first iKudu meeting five years ago, as well as the most recent one, reflecting on the remarkable journey. He commended the delegates for the collaboration that underpinned the iKudu journey. “COIL gives us the opportunity to potentially engage all students in international collaboration,” he said.

Prof Petersen also congratulated the delegates for their determination to make a success of this initiative, especially during a very challenging time, and praised the passion that the project exuded – a passion that he believes was integral to its success. He also expressed his excitement about building on what has been achieved through the iKudu network.

Chevon Slambee, responsible for Strategic Projects and Virtual Engagement and the iKudu Project Manager in the Office for International Affairs, also shared insights with delegates at the gala event. Reflecting on the symbolism of the kudu, she highlighted its spiralling massive horns as a representation of strength and power, likening it to the project's ability to navigate challenges. Slambee celebrated the project's resilience and surpassed goals, achieving 57 COIL projects.

She then emphasised the kudu's eyes and large ears, illustrating the project's appreciative enquiry approach. This method allowed recognition of local strengths and the creation of a space valuing all universities. Lastly, she drew parallels to the kudu's long legs, symbolising agility and strength in distress. She noted the project's significant progress, both in meeting deliverables and personal growth. “Looking at where we started and where we are now, we have made massive leaps and bounds in terms of not only meeting our project deliverables, but also achieving personal and professional milestones,” she said. In conclusion, she added, “Through this project, I no longer focus on the challenges on the continent, but I appreciate that we have a valuable and essential contribution to make in the world.”

News Archive

Institutional research culture a precondition for research capacity building and excellence
2004-11-16

A lecture presented by Dr. Andrew M. Kaniki at the University of the Free State Recognition Function for research excellence

16 November 2004
The Vice Chancellor, Prof. Frederick Fourie
Deputy Vice Chancellors, Deans
Awardees
Colleagues and ladies and gentlemen

It is a great pleasure to be here at the University of the Free State. I am particularly honoured to have been invited to present this lecture at the First Annual Recognition Function for Research Excellence to honour researchers who have excelled in their respective fields of expertise. I would like to sincerely thank the office of the Director of Research and Development (Professor Swanepol), and in particular Mr. Aldo Stroebel for facilitating the invitation to this celebration.

I would like to congratulate you (the UFS) for institutionalizing “celebration of research excellence”, which as I will argue in this lecture is one of the key characteristics of institutional research culture that supports research capacity building and sustains research excellence.

Allow me to also take this opportunity to congratulate the University of the Free State for clocking 100 years of existence.

Ahmed Bawa and Johan Mouton (2000) in their chapter entitled Research, in the book: Transformation in higher education: global pressures and local realities in South Africa (ed. N. Cloete et. al Pretoria: CHET. 296-333) have argued that “…the sources of productivity and competitiveness [in the knowledge society and global economy] are increasingly dependent on [quality] knowledge and information being applied to productivity”. The quality knowledge they refer to here is research output or research products and the research process, which (research) as defined by the [OECD] Frascati Manual (2002: 30) is:

“…creative work undertaken on a systematic basis in order to increase the stock of knowledge, including knowledge of man, culture and society, and the use of this stock of knowledge to devise new applications”

The South African Government has set itself the objective of transforming South Africa into a knowledge society that competes effectively in the global system. A knowledge society requires appropriate numbers of educated and skilled people to create quality new knowledge and to translate the knowledge in innovative ways. To this end a number of policies and strategies like the Human Resource Development [HRD] Strategy for South Africa, the National Plan for Higher Education (NPHE) and the South Africa’s Research and Development [R&D] Strategy, have highlighted human resource development and the concomitant scarce skills development as critical for wealth creation in the context of globalization. The key mission of the HRD Strategy for instance is:

To maximize the potential of the people of South Africa, through the acquisition of knowledge and skills, to work productively and competitively in order to achieve a rising quality of life for all, and to set in place an operational plan, together with the necessary institutional arrangements, to achieve this.

The R&D Strategy emphasizes that maximum effort must be exerted to train the necessary numbers of our people in all fields required for development, running and management of modern economies. Higher education institutions like the University of the Free State have a key role to play in this process, because whatever form or shape a university takes, it is expected to conduct research (quality research); teach (quality teaching – and good graduates); and contribute to the development of its community! Thus the NPHE states that the role of higher education in a knowledge-driven world is threefold:

Human resource development;

High-level skills training and

Production, acquisition and application of knowledge.

Quality research output or knowledge which as argued is critical in determining the degree of competitiveness of a country in the knowledge economy is dependent upon quality research (process). Both the process of producing quality research and its utilization cannot and does not happen in a vacuum. It requires an environment that facilitates the production of new knowledge, its utilization and renewal. It requires skilled persons that can produce new knowledge and facilitate the production of new skills for quality knowledge production. Such an environment or in essence a university must have the culture that supports research activity. Institution research culture (that is a conducive and enabling institutional research culture) is a precondition to research capacity building. Without an institutional research culture that facilitates the development and nurturing of new young researchers it is difficult, if not impossible for a university to effectively and efficiently generate new and more quality researchers. Institutional research culture is also necessary to sustain quality research and quality research output or research excellence. It facilitates the development and sustenance of the institutional and people capacities required to do research produce quality research and generally attain research excellence!

We do recognize that the patterns of information and knowledge seeking, and knowledge generation vary among field or disciplines. For example, we know that in the humanities knowledge workers often work individually, and not as collaboratively as do those of the sciences, they all however, require supportive environments – institutional research culture to achieve and sustain research excellence. An institution does not simply attain a supportive research culture, but as Patricia Clements (English Department, University of Alberta, Edmonton) in her presentation Growing a research culture argues, research culture has to be grown [and maintained]. It unifies all natural and engineering scientists; medical researchers, humanists, and social scientists.

I therefore am of the view that Institutional Research Culture is critical to research capacity building and research excellence. I therefore want to spend a few minutes looking at the characteristics of research culture. To be effective, institutional research culture has grown and sustained not only at the institutional level, but also at the faculty, school and departmental levels of any university.

What is Research Culture?

In the process of researching on institutional research culture I identified several characteristics. Many of these overlap in some way. I want to deal with some of these characteristics; some in a little more detail while others simply cursorily. In the process what we should be asking ourselves is the extent to which an institution, like the University of the Free State, and its faculties, individually and severally, is growing and or sustaining this culture.

Institutional Research Strategy: As a plan of action or guide for a course of action, the institutional research strategy must spell out research goals that a university wants to achieve. It must be a prescription of what the university needs to be done with respect to research. As a strategy it is neither an independent activity nor an end in itself, but a component part and operationalization of the university policy or mission. ( Related to this is the Establishment of Institutional research policies)

Includes and makes public the targets, e.g. achieve so many rated scientists and make sure that every year we have so many SAPSE publications. That way people keep an eye on research agendas of the university and nation.

The UFS is obviously on its way, having launched its own Research strategy (A Strategic framework for the development of research at the University of the Free Sate. August 2003). Note that this strategy refers specifically to the “Culture of research” Fig 1

A set of administrative practices to support and encourage research. Patricia Clements (English Department, University of Alberta, Edmonton) in her presentation Growing a research culture argues that that research activity and output within the her Faculty (Arts) were very low and, in spite of the numbers of staff, with no Associate Dean for Research in the Faculty as though they had accepted that research belonged to Medicine and Science and Engineering, and teaching, separated from inquiry, belonged to the Arts. With the change in the thinking about research and development of research culture, it became clear that there was a major role for research support in a faculty her size (now about 360 full time continuing academic staff). The faculty developed a support system for research and began to address the SSHRC issues.

Reduce the bureaucracy system and micromanagement of research! This however, also implies that there is capacity and policies and procedure to manage and guide research processes

Establishment of Intellectual Property regulations and assistance

Research ethics policy and safeguarding by research administration

Focused, applied and suitable nature of the delivery mode (an institution open to new methodologies for conducting research

Programmes suited both full and part-time study particularly at graduate level (Mainly at Faculty/school and department level, and depending on what’s manageable)

Hiring senior academics to engage in, teach on and supervise postgraduate students to facilitate exchange of and transfer ideas and most importantly mentorship especially in view of declining numbers of researchers in particular fields

Quality instruction and facilitation in learning about research processes

A high retention rate of students maintained by the supportive and challenging learning environment and the use of online facilities to support collaboration and in-class learning

Availability of research grants: and awareness of sourcing funds from external sources like the National Research Foundation; Water Research Commission; Medical Research Council, private philanthropies and others outside the country. For example an institution should be able to assess how much of the slice the available funds (NRF etc) its able acquire and possibly top slice from institutional budget.

Adequacy of the financial reward system to encourage university staff members to do research (General Celebration of achievement for research excellence and achievement. This ranges form Annual reports mention; celebratory dinner. At Alberta researchers were given lapels. I don’t know of any academic who do not feel a sense of achievement to get into print or recognised. Access to research facilities within and outside the institution

Provision of infrastructure to support university-based research (e.g. equipment, admin support, etc.) – but also awareness of publicly funded and available research facilities and equipment!

Internet connectivity and changes in the bandwidth of the internet to download articles

Subscription to related bodies by the library so that researcher can download articles

Facilities and resources to attend international conferences to keep one updated

Number of visiting professors/speakers targeting senior scholars and invite them to lunch to ask them to participate and to encourage their best graduate students to do so within the institution and across institutions

Research training seminars for research students including young academics

Participation of staff/students in delivering research papers to national and international conferences

Establishment of research groups to provide interaction frameworks to achieve critical mass of research-active staff

Facilitation for more research time: Targeting new scholars and giving them reduced teaching loads in their first year or two for the purpose of developing their research programs. For the purpose of helping new colleagues to see the shape of South African research support, personalizing it, and creating research community

Take research to the community and argue its necessity, and utility

And, finally celebrating excellence. We must recognize achievement - parties and public recognition for colleagues who achieve splendid things in their research.

In conclusion, I want to reemphasize that research culture has to be grown it does not simply exist in an institution. If it is grown it needs to be nourished, nurtured and sustained. An institution cannot simply leave on borrowed reputation and expect to remain research excellent. It is on this basis that instruments like the National Research Foundation rating system recognizes excellence within a given period of time and not necessarily for a life time! This it is believed encourages continued research excellence.

THANK YOU and best wishes

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