Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
09 June 2025 | Story Tshepo Tsotetsi | Photo Tshepo Tsotetsi
Broadening Curricula Debate
Debaters from the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences’ 2025 Broadening Curricula Debate.

In an engaging and thought-provoking session, the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences (EMS) at the University of the Free State hosted its Broadening Curricula Faculty Debate Series under the motion: The current Economic and Management Sciences curricula, pedagogical approaches, and research endeavours perpetuate colonial legacies. Held on the Bloemfontein Campus on 3 June 2025, the debate brought together academics and, for the first time, students – making space for dynamic, intergenerational dialogue on the transformation of teaching and learning in higher education.

 

Creating space for critical pedagogical reflection

Annari Muller, manager of Teaching and Learning Manager in the faculty, said the aim was to provide a platform for constructive, sometimes challenging, engagement. “We create a platform for staff to debate these things and ultimately inform our practice, policy, pedagogy, and what we teach and how we teach,” she said.

For the first time, students were formally included in the debating teams, following feedback from previous events. “It is very important to include student perspectives as well,” Muller noted. “We want to continue these discussions, take them forward into our research practices and learning and teaching committees, where we will dissect them and act on the next step.”

This inclusion added new layers to the debate. Elda Nhalunga responsible for master’s student administration, said the topic immediately resonated with her. “When I saw decolonisation and curriculum in one motion, I found it very interesting and decided that this was something I wanted to be part of. I also wanted to hear what other scholars were saying.” She added: “Through these small initiatives, we are working towards transformation. And it’s important that students be there so that their voices are heard.”

 

Towards a more inclusive and just Academic Project

Prof Frans Prinsloo, Vice-Dean for Learning and Teaching, Innovation and Digitalisation,  believes that debates of this nature play a vital role in shaping inclusive academic spaces. “Debates, such as the one on decolonisation, enable us to engage with and reflect deeply on complex issues and to challenge existing assumptions. Through this process, the faculty can enhance its teaching practices and curriculum development.”

According to Prof Prinsloo, this kind of engagement is just the beginning. “The debate is but the start of the faculty’s plan to ensure that its Academic Project is decolonised. Research is currently in process to gather perceptions of staff and students on the topic. This research will drive action.”

Lukhanyo Lekeno, Economics master’s student, echoed this sentiment, calling the topic timely and essential. “We’re living in a world where there are certain standards and norms that, in most cases, exclude and marginalise people,” he said. “When we start having conversations about decoloniality, we are taking a step closer to actually dismantling certain legacies and ideologies that keep people constrained within a mindset.” Lekeno encouraged others to engage in such conversations, describing it as an ‘exchange of knowledge, systems, and perspectives’, which contributes to both personal growth and academic transformation.

Previous sessions in the series, such as the 2024 debate on socio-environmental sustainability, have prompted internal curriculum reviews, underscoring the faculty’s intention to link dialogue with institutional reflection.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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