Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

UFS AT LOW RISK OF NOT COMPLETING 2020 ACADEMIC YEAR

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

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.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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