Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 October 2025 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs
Skills Festival
Lutho Xamlashe – a third-year Bachelor of Administration student – from ACCESS, showing Bokamoso Makae how to crochet. Makae says she wants to learn as much as possible at the Learning Festival.

Held under the theme Building self-reliance, self-sufficiency, self-sustainable livelihoods for responsible societal futures, the Directorate Community Engagement at the University of the Free State’s Learning Festival this year created a space for lively interaction and practical learning. With about 150 people taking part each day, the atmosphere was alive with energy, a will to learn, and a real sense of people helping one another to live more independently and make the most of what they have.

Bishop Billyboy Ramahlele, Director of Community Engagement, captured the spirit of the event perfectly: “Self-reliance begins when we share what we know and use what we have. Together, we can transform communities from the ground up. With an unemployment rate of about 33,2%, and 40,1% of the population on social grants, the Learning Festival is a contribution towards helping individuals and communities make a shift from charity and unemployment to taking responsibility for their own sustainable livelihoods.”

“Self-reliance refers to the ability to depend on oneself for support and fulfilment, without relying on others. It involves acquiring knowledge and skills to access and use resources to make a living. On the other hand, self-sufficiency refers to the ability to meet one's own needs without external assistance. It involves the ability to provide for oneself in terms of food, shelter, and other necessities.”

From worm farming to furniture making, steel manufacturing, food security, herbal and cosmetic manufacturing, and even a Mend-a-Thon, participants gained hands-on experience in turning everyday resources into opportunities.

 

A celebration of practical learning

The line-up of workshops and demonstrations showed just how many ways there are to make the most of what we have. The ACCESS UFS student organisation led sessions on Worm Farming and Eco-Vernacular Architecture, teaching participants how to build with eco-bricks and run small-scale worm farms as income-generating projects.

Golukisa Trading Construction hosted a Furniture Manufacturing workshop, equipping local artisans with carpentry skills. These skills have already sparked success stories, such as that of Katlego Mpoihi, who launched his business after attending a previous learning festival.

Benjamin Nhlapo from Seotlong Agriculture and Hotel School in Phuthaditjhaba trained attendees about poultry farming, while Jurie Nel from JG Electronics introduced participants to printing, needlework, and bag manufacturing. Using state-of-the-art, yet affordable equipment, participants learned how to start small businesses through creative printing and design, inspiring a new generation of social entrepreneurs.

Thomas Tsintsing from The Engineered Movement shared skills on how to design and manufacture metal products, including fireplaces.

Another highlight was the Mend-a-Thon, facilitated by Doretha Jacobs from the Department of Sustainable Food Systems and Development and supported by ACCESS students. This session taught hand needlework, crochet, and denim repair, breathing new life into old clothes and celebrating the joy of making something by hand. Participants beamed with pride, many saying, “I can’t believe it. I made this myself!”

 

Innovation and inspiration

From presentations to hands-on demonstrations, the festival was full of fresh ideas and practical inspiration. Willem Ellis, Research Associate in the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, explored how social innovation fuels community transformation through empathy, creativity, and collaboration. Matseliso Achilonu from Devoni Natural shared how herbs can be turned into market-ready cosmetics, proving that nature and business can grow hand in hand.

Nutrition also took centre stage, with Ermi Spies from the Department of Nutrition and Dietetics highlighting the important link between well-being and sustainable living. Honours students from the Department of Psychology presented their Well-being in Action infographics, promoting mental and social wellness in community spaces.

Thabo Olivier of Let’s Grow Food © captivated audiences with practical sessions on establishing sustainable food security through self-reliance, showing how small backyard gardens can feed families and help communities thrive together. Robert Mitchell, founder of Robs Handyman Services, demonstrated how wooden pallets can be repurposed into creative, sellable products – an inspiring example of social entrepreneurship in action.

The festival also featured exhibits such as Daniel Moloi’s Agape Foundation stall, showcasing the health benefits of rosehip juice, and the Itemoheleng Soy Project from Qwaqwa, which demonstrated soy-based food products for better nutrition. Meanwhile, the UFS Library Makerspace wowed visitors with robotics and creative design tools, inspiring a new wave of innovation.

And just when visitors thought they had seen it all, creativity took another turn. The stall of Corne Thomas from Puzzles of Impact showed how developing practical and life skills can help people find purpose and belonging by repurposing old videotapes into crochet items as a creative example.

The 2025 festival introduced a more interactive format than previous years, with more parallel workshops and matchmaking sessions between government departments, communities, and organisations. It was in these conversations and hands-on moments that the true impact of the festival came to life. One participant summed up the impact beautifully: “I have learned that my skills as a public speaker will change: from now on, my ‘voice’ will have an ‘invoice’.”

 

Empowering communities through knowledge and practical skills

Dr Karen Venter, Assistant Director and Head of Service Learning, added that the festival aligns with the broader goals of the Directorate for Community Engagement: “It perfectly mirrors the directorate’s mission to promote engaged scholarship and collaborative community development. By connecting the university’s academic expertise with local community needs, it fosters innovation, inclusivity, and sustainable impact, embodying the UFS’ commitment to social responsibility and partnership building.”

According to Dr Venter, the event left a lasting impact on participants and their communities. “Attendees left equipped – not just with new skills, but also with partnerships, ideas, and confidence to implement self-sustaining initiatives in their communities for socially responsible futures,” she says.

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

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