Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
31 August 2020

Statement by Prof Francis Petersen, Rector and Vice-Chancellor

The university’s executive management is aware of the statement on COVID-19 alert Level 2 measures in the post-school education and training sector delivered by the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Innovation, Dr Blade Nzimande, on 26 August 2020.

During the statement, Dr Nzimande indicated that the University of the Free State (UFS) is one of six universities that is deemed to be at medium risk of not completing the academic year. The statement was surprising and disappointing, since through an engagement between the Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET) and the UFS almost a week ago to understand the university’s approach to the completion of the 2020 academic year, as well as the interpretation of specific information provided by the university in its COVID-19 Responsiveness Multi-modal Teaching and Learning Programme to the DHET, the DHET was clear that the UFS was not at a medium risk, but indeed at a low to very low risk of not completing the academic year.

Since the statement by Dr Nzimande, I received a letter from the Deputy Director-General: University Education at the DHET, Dr Di Parker on 28 August 2020 confirming that the university’s risk rating has been adjusted to a low risk rating. The DHET also recognised the good work done by the UFS towards successful completion of the academic year. 

Let me explain why the DHET delegation expressed its opinion that the UFS was at a low to very low risk of not completing the academic year. The UFS has taken an evidence-based approach to managing the impact of the pandemic. Within the first weeks of the national lockdown, the Special Executive Group (SEG) was formed, which meets weekly to discuss various aspects of the institution’s operations and to forecast and plan the impact of the pandemic. As the university’s COVID-19 nerve centre, the SEG has several task teams, one of which is the Teaching and Learning Management Group (TLMG).

The core function of the TLMG was to ensure that teaching and learning could continue to help staff and students to successfully complete the academic year. The first step in the evidence-based response was to conduct a survey among UFS students to assess their access to devices and data. Altogether 13 500 students responded to the survey. The results showed that 92% of students had an internet-enabled device, 70% could get access to the internet off campus, and 56% had access to a laptop.

Based on this evidence, we immediately initiated the purchase of 3 500 laptops to be distributed to NSFAS- and Funza Lushaka-funded students and students with disabilities. In addition, the Keep Calm, #UFSLearnOn, and #UFSTeachOn campaigns have been launched. These campaigns are aimed at creating the best possible support for academic staff and students, respectively by adapting existing support and practices most suited to an emergency remote-learning environment. The departure point of both campaigns was to design a response for the constrained environments of our students.  

The #UFSLearnOn campaign for students creates materials that students can download on their cellphones and that would provide them with skills and ideas on how to get connected and create an environment where they could study at home. The #UFSLearnOn website has been viewed by 77 000 students to date; the resources were shared with other universities to support a collaborative approach to addressing the COVID-19 challenge. In addition, 177 000 Facebook users have been reached by #UFSLearnOn materials.

The #UFSTeachOn campaign focused on supporting staff to transform their materials and teaching approach to a new reality. Altogether 1 409 staff members attended training sessions, which all ran overtime due to the commitment of staff to create the best possible response. Both the #UFSLearnOn and #UFSTeachOn campaigns are continuing, with an overwhelmingly positive response from our staff and students. 

However, these campaigns would become two of the 16 strategies the university has developed to manage the risks created by the pandemic. Creating responses is, however, not enough – evidence is needed to make a difference. Therefore, the Centre for Teaching and Learning (CTL) was tasked with creating a monitoring system using data analytics. To date, 26 reports have served at the weekly TLMG meetings. The reports monitor the number of staff and students on the Learning Management System, how much time they are spending on learning, and whether they are completing assessments. 

During the peak of the first semester, 90% of students were supported online by academic and support staff. The average performance of students per faculty per campus has been monitored. The use of data analytics allowed us to identify students who were not connecting, as part of the No Student Left Behind initiative. Out of the 41 000 students at the UFS, 989 students were identified who had not connected with learning. These students were contacted individually and to date, 80% of these students have been helped to connect. Additional plans are being developed to support the other 20% to plan for the successful continuation of their studies. The success of our approach is not only borne out by quantitative evidence, but also by qualitative feedback such as the following quote received by an academic adviser on 24 August 2020:

“Thank you so much [advisor’s name]; if it wasn't for you, I would have dropped out, deregistered, or even committed suicide during this pandemic. I want to say that I have passed all my modules with distinctions, all thanks to you. After all the difficulty of learning I have experienced during this period. Please continue your great work to others (you were truly meant for this job), and God bless you.”

There are hundreds more quotations like these that testify to the inspiring efforts of our students and staff to finish the academic year successfully with very low risk. 

The UFS will continue with its project management and risk-adjusted management approach and is fully committed to ensure that no student is left behind and that the 2020 academic year is successfully completed.

News Archive

Protection of Information bill- opinions from our experts
2011-11-28

Prof. Hussein Solomon
Senior Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of the Free State. 

In recent years, given their failure to effectively govern, the ANC has become increasingly defensive. These defensive traits have become particularly acute in light of the various corruption scandals that members of the ruling party involve themselves in.
 
Given the fact that for now they are assured of an electoral majority (largely on account of their anti-apartheid credentials), coupled with the fact that they have managed to make parliament a rubber stamp of the executive as opposed to holding the executive accountable, it is the media which has increasingly held the ruling party to account by exposing such corruption and incompetence in government.
 
The passing of the information bill, therefore, is not merely an attack on the media, but an attack on the pivotal issue of accountability. Without accountability, there can be no democracy.
 
By defining national interest broadly, by refusing to accept a public interest clause in the bill, the ANC increasingly shows its disdain to South Africa's constitution and its citizens.
 
More importantly, as former Minister of Intelligence and ANC stalwart Ronnie Kasrils pointedly makes clear, the ANC is also betraying its own noble struggle against the odious apartheid regime. It was the media which played a key role in exposing apartheid's excesses, it is the same media which is coming under attack by the heirs of PW Botha's State Security Council - Minister of State Security Siyabong Cwele and his security apparatchiks whose mindsets reflect more Stalin's Gulag's than the values of the Freedom Charter.
 
The passing of this bill is also taking place at a time when journalists have had their phones attacked, where the judiciary has been deliberately undermined and parliament silenced.
 
Democrats beware!

 
Prof. Johann de Wet
Chairperson: Department of Communication Science 
 
The ANC’s insistence on passing the Protection of State Information Bill in its current form and enforcing it by law, means that the essence of our democratic state and the quality of life of every citizen is at stake.
 
Yes, our freedom as academics, researchers, mass media practitioners and citizens comes into play. Freedom implies the right to choose and is, along with equality, an underlying principle which helps make democracy happen. While the South African state needs to protect (classify) information which could threaten its security and/or survival, the omission of a public interest clause in the Bill at this stage effectively denies a citizen the right to freedom of information.
 
 Freedom of information, along with press freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and religious freedom, are essential to democracy. These freedoms are granted because they conform to basic liberal ideas associated with (Western) democracy and which resonate with South Africa’s liberal constitution, such as (1) belief in the supreme value of the individual (and thus not of the state); (2) belief that the individual has natural rights (rights which belong to all human beings by nature – such as the right to life and to control government)) which exist independently of government, and which ought to be protected by and against government; and (3) recognition of the supreme value of the individual. 
 
One wonders how many cases of South African government corruption and mismanagement would have been uncovered by investigative journalists over the past number of years if this Bill in its current form was on the statute books. This Bill represents a backward step from the promise of democracy of having an informed public. The former National Party government had similar laws in place and one does not want to go there again. The infamous Information Scandal in South Africa of some thirty years ago, or Muldergate as it has come to be known, reminds one of what governments can do when it works clandestinely.
 
What South Africans need, is more information on what government structures are doing and how they are doing it with taxpayers’ money, not less information. While information in itself does not equal communication or dialogue, it is an indispensable part thereof, and the need for dialogue based on verifiable information is urgent for meeting vexed challenges facing South African communities. Academics in all fields of specialisation are constantly in need of untainted information to pursue answers and/or offer solutions to where South Africa should be moving in all spheres of life.

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