© Vice Chancellor

Dear colleagues and students

In recent weeks attention has been drawn in online debate and the public media to proposals under discussion relating to the establishment of a new school within the Humanities Faculty and, in particular, how this might affect the Centre for African Studies (CAS). The article in the Mail and Guardian last Friday, headlined “UCT in war over bantu education”, persuaded me that I needed to intervene, first, to set the record straight on the chronology and processes of developing the new proposals, and second, to clear up misunderstandings on the substance of the proposals themselves.

To start with, the M&G headline bears little connection with the article and is frankly mischievous, perhaps to persuade readers to read a plain article about a robust internal academic debate that lacks scandal. The reference to a “war” in the faculty or faculty board – and insinuations of abuse of the administrative process to drive a particular agenda “behind closed doors”, to be now (as the article claims) driven to the fore by students – is simply skewing the clear facts of the matter.

The facts are that from September 2009 a group of academics based in the Centre of African Studies, the African Gender Institute, the Department of Social Anthropology and the Linguistics section have been involved in discussions on the idea of creating a new school.  Six proposals were canvassed during these discussions. The one that was presented to a recent Faculty Forum for open discussion involved a two-stage process with the goal of creating a new school, currently referred to as the New School for Critical Enquiry in Africa. If this school were to be born, as the Dean has consistently said, it would be the second largest in the Faculty of Humanities, and would draw together cutting edge research and teaching about epistemologies and representations of Africa, heritage and public culture, archive studies, language and migration, indigenous knowledge systems, feminism and violence, land reform and democracy, and much more.

Colleagues from CAS have played a critical role in these discussions and have committed themselves to continue to do so. In order for such a new school to be formed (if this is what the faculty decides), all the participating units would need to be disestablished as departments, so as to become part of the new larger formation. Some units might continue as research groups within the new school. It has also been proposed that a version of CAS might continue as an umbrella forum across departments and faculties.

The process underpinning these discussions has been transparent, consultative and inclusive. It has involved a large number of very senior staff in the faculty. It included at least two full workshops and four working groups that met with a view to develop perspectives for discussion on the issue. A very open faculty forum discussion was held. A subsequent faculty board meeting strongly supported the process and has agreed to even broader discussion on the matter.

At the Faculty Board meeting on 9 March 2011, it was reported that the heads of the participating units remained committed to taking the discussion further, and the board strongly supported the decision thatProfessor Lungisile Ntsebeza should facilitate these ongoing discussions. Discussions are open to anyone interested, certainly including students, and will eventually require the support of the Humanities Faculty Board and Senate prior to placing it before Council.

The controversy about process derives from an anonymous “group” that has been active online to register their strong concern about “plans to close” CAS and who allege that they have not been consulted.  While we appreciate their commitment to CAS and have invited them (via their Facebook page) to participate fully in the discussions, they have chosen to remain anonymous. This makes the discussions they themselves urge somewhat more complex.

While anxiety about the “closure” of CAS is understandable, I believe the openly available facts on the matter confirm that a closure of the courses, programmes, research projects and exchanges in CAS has never been on the table. Nor are any jobs at risk. Similarly, the African Gender Institute will retain its unique identity as a research unit and all its teaching programmes would be offered through the new school.

I have no doubt that conversations about a host of pertinent issues – including what it means to be African, how appropriately to write about Africa, what constitutes “African studies”, and how to invigorate an interest in Africa at UCT – will continue as they should.   These issues ought to be of interest across the university at large, but the proposal for the new merger includes a commitment to foregrounding them.

I trust that the above will assist you in understanding the facts of the matter. I invite you to give any input you might have to Professor Ntsebeza. I have no doubt that whatever proposal the faculty arrives at, it will align closely with the values and mission of UCT.

Yours sincerely

Dr Max Price

Vice-Chancellor

Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:08 AM