Cátedra | CeLAPES

Carlos Hasenbalg Chair

FUTURES OF THE DIVERSE, INTERNATIONAL & DEMOCRATIC CELAPES UNIVERSITY

With the advent of modern society, education has become the most relevant social resource for positioning individuals in collective life. In more recent times, especially with the global expansion of higher education systems, universities have transformed to welcome new students. The new social demands made on science, particularly visible during the Covid pandemic, highlighted not only the importance of scientific knowledge but also strengthened respect for qualified words coming from members of the academic community, national and international.

The increase in the legitimacy of higher education systems raises the level of demands on institutional performance. In the inclusive dimension, making higher levels of diversification of students, teachers and staff, knowledge and teaching methods mandatory. In the governance dimension, intensifying capabilities for effective dialogue with a world of more mobile people who are more in need of competent institutional bases to manage this. On a democratic level, improving inclusion strategies and their translation into effective opportunities in a society undergoing accelerated transformation.

Therefore, we present this proposal that combines research, teaching, and extension work, seeking to innovate in the processes of democratization of higher education.

This proposal is the result of 12 years of collective work on the direction of higher education: initially focusing only on Brazil ( https://www.lapesbr.org/ ) and, from 2018, taking on a comparative nature between Latin American countries .

This accumulated work allowed the creation of CeLapes (Latin American Center for Research in Higher Education, focus and main agent of this proposal. Its institutionalization concentrates the efforts of the team of professors, researchers, technicians and students from the five countries (Brazil, Argentina, Chile , Peru and Uruguay).

AN INNOVATIVE RESEARCH, TEACHING, EXTENSION PROJECT

Introduction

Created in Europe in the 11th century, the university is an almost ancient institution, having spread across all continents. Born as a space for the production of knowledge where science and faith were mixed (BEN-DAVID, 1968), the university was able to change, recreate itself, adapt, through distinct institutional models throughout history, geography, and of the different social niches it served and serves. Thus, we reached the 21st century with universities that are parts of higher education systems that are very comprehensive in terms of the knowledge they cover and according to the social functions attributed to them. The answer to the question “What is the University for?” has become variable in recent times, when higher education stopped being the exclusive privilege of elites and became a more socially and technically inclusive space. There are new groups of students and there are also new training fields, far from traditional models. This variation in responses – there is an entire literature on the topic, which was the subject of a course offered by the researchers included in this project, whose webinars are available here ( https://www.lapesbr.org/home ) – opens up an immense field of research scientific, didactic experimentation and pedagogical-curricular innovation.

We then have a proposal for transversal and innovative academic action in four plans that allow us to envision feasible paths towards a more diverse, international and democratic future university.

First, innovate in the scientific analysis of institutional models of higher education by developing a typology that allows us to understand the social forces and agents in dispute over the definition of which higher education society wants.

Second, innovate in the didactic way of offering courses (undergraduate, postgraduate, extension) through the most effective articulation between scientific research and teaching, using a multinational and multidisciplinary team of teachers, with classes in Portuguese and Spanish, incorporating diverse experiences of research, technical-administrative work and collaboration with the community.

Third, innovate in the pedagogical and curricular format, offering these courses online, opening space for the participation of teachers from different institutions and countries, for students spread across different states and countries.

Fourth, innovate in the transparency of the university given that the proposed content – The institutional forms of higher education in Latin America – allows for accounting, on a greatly expanded scale, of how one of the most sought after institutions in the modern world works.

The CeLapes group has been analyzing Higher Education (HE) in Latin America, establishing the main characteristics of the institutional models in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Uruguay. It proposes to characterize the expansion of higher education in these countries by indicating its institutional variability, in the types of diplomas offered, in the careers or knowledge valued, in the processes of reproduction of elites and in the patterns of access, completion and results of graduates. Although the expansion of higher education is a general phenomenon, in recent decades, each national system has carried out in its own way - and with different timings - the increase in the number of its institutions, courses and HE students. In this study, the research question is to understand how these processes of expansion of higher education that have occurred in the region have been facing two challenges: on the one hand, including groups of young people who are traditionally excluded – due to inequalities of gender, social class, ethnicity, color, etc. – higher education in their respective countries; and, on the other, reproduce and/or renew its elites within expanded and supposedly more democratic higher education systems. Our hypothesis is that SES institutional models express social forces and collective agency, configuring different levels of system openness.

MOTIVATION AND PROBLEMATICS

In Latin America, higher education has been undergoing intense transformation. In the 1950s there were around 700 thousand students, in 1970 1.9 million, 8.4 million in 1990, 25 million students in 2011 and 30 million in 2019. (BRUNNER, 2014) (MARQUINA, ÁLVAREZ, et al. , 2022). The higher education systems in these countries are very varied. There are countries, such as Argentina, Chile and Uruguay that are universal (with a gross enrollment rate above 60%) and countries, such as Brazil and Peru, that are going through the massification process. The participation of the private segment is quite unequal. Argentina and Uruguay have high participation in the public sector, and Brazil, Chile and Peru, conversely, have a predominance of enrollment in the private sector. In Brazil and Chile, it was decided to maintain a relatively small and closed public system and make room for the private sector. Still between these two countries, in Brazil, unlike what occurs in Chile, the expansion took place mainly under the initiative of profit-making companies. In Argentina and Uruguay, the demand for higher education was met by the public segment (SCHWARTZMAN, SILVA FILHO and COELHO, 2021). Brunner (2014) suggests that a distinctive feature of Latin American higher education would be a transition from elite systems to mass and universal systems, with significant internal differences in expansion policies and institutional models between countries in the region. Dubet (2015) draws attention to the fact that, even with more vacancies and policies for access and retention, the democratization of access would also depend on the general structure of the educational system. They would tend to develop/strengthen a hierarchy of competencies that would translate into social hierarchies. How can we explain why the system remains so elitist in a context of expansion generated by economic and social pressures eventually translated into public policies? This would be the key that associates the SES institutional model with social inequalities on an empirical and analytical level.

The growing research on this topic indicates the strategies of elites (ALON 2009) and popular classes (BASTEDO et al 2011), but there would be a strong tendency to highlight the connections between institutional characteristics and unequal results in the labor market (GERBER; CHEUNG, 2008; VIEIRA 2021, RODRIGUES 2022). In this context, institutional factors would operate as barriers for students of popular origin. Shavit et al (2007) argue that segmentation of higher education systems allows a type of expansion that can “divert” non-elite students to the less privileged sectors of the system and with lower returns, “choosing” (BANGNALL, 2015) less prestigious areas and institutions that give rise to much lower social and economic returns. There is a strong presence of the so-called academic bias that designs a unique model for any higher education institution and that adds to the preference for a bachelor's degree. This model makes some paths in the school system less legitimate, having the effect of reducing the range of choices.

Our central hypothesis, in line with studies by Huisman and Fumasoli (2013), is that SES models combine public policies, regulatory frameworks and institutional actions to organize the processes of expansion and differentiation of higher education. In this way, the SES is inserted at the heart of social disputes about the meanings of this education, opening space for possible relationships between institutional types and the democratization of HE.

Considering the above, this research analyzes the connections between higher education policies in Latin America and the institutional models of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Uruguay in order to define bases for comparative analyses. The patterns of expansion, differentiation and diversification of higher education systems in these countries are analyzed, highlighting the dimensions that, alone or in combination, increase educational opportunities for different social groups. We characterize the expansion of the SES in these countries by indicating the variability of emphases in the different teaching, research or extension functions, in the types of diplomas offered, in the careers or types of knowledge valued, in the elite reproduction processes, explaining characteristics of the institutional types that can be associated with patterns of access, completion and results of graduates.

THE RESEARCH AND ITS RESULTS SO FAR

One of the objectives of this project is to create a typology of higher education institutions (HEIs) based on how they operate in practice. In Brazil, the formal structure of this teaching stage already suggests some classifications of institutions. The type of administrative category, for example, separates public institutions from private institutions. The academic organization provides for the classification of institutions into Universities, University Centers and Colleges, in addition to Federal Institutes and Federal Technological Centers. But, if we look at how HEIs work, what type of classification do we find? What are the similarities and differences between the typology based on operation and the one legally foreseen? Based on these questions, our analytical proposal intends to group institutions based on operating characteristics.

AS?

The first task is to identify which characteristics of HEIs we should consider for this classification. The specialized literature on the subject, in Brazil and other countries, indicates some main dimensions that characterize the functioning of institutions. From an extensive bibliographical review, we selected aspects related to six of these dimensions: governance, teaching, research, extension, inclusion policies and internationalization of HEIs.

These dimensions guided our look at the available public data and the selection of analysis variables. In practice, this means that, when looking at teaching staff, for example, it is important to select variables that indicate their role in academic management (governance), their education and work regime (teaching), whether and how they produce knowledge (research ) and what are its activities linked to the community in which it is located (extension). It is, therefore, a multidimensional approach to the functioning of institutions and the same exercise was carried out for the other information available for each HEI. In the first round of analysis we worked with around 60 indicators of the functioning of institutions.

The second task is the classification of HEIs. It is an operational challenge to classify the almost 2600 Brazilian institutions based on a diverse set of characteristics. This would imply comparing them one by one based on each selected variable and then separating them into groups (which, a priori, we do not know how many there are or their sizes). To do this, we use a grouping technique (Latent Profile Analysis) that allows classifying HEIs into distinct profiles considering all the information provided. As it is a statistical approach, the technique provides us with parameters to decide the number of groups and the probability of each HEI participating in each group. The result of this analysis is the HEIs grouped into distinct institutional profiles, that is, a typology of higher education based on operating characteristics.

WHAT DO WE HAVE SO FAR?

Preliminary results confirm our hypothesis: formal classification tells only part of the story of the functioning of institutions. This means that we have taken a correct step in the construction of instruments for analyzing higher education. Our typology manages to show more important elements that were missing in the initial vision.

In the groupings found, we identified which operational characteristics are capable of differentiating institutions within the same academic organization or type of management. That is: how some public sector institutions work in a similar way to private institutions. And vice versa. Prejudiced or pretentious judgments about one or another type of institution can be avoided.

Some characteristics have proven to be more relevant in distinguishing institutions, such as size, the offer of extracurricular activities and the diversity in the offer of courses and academic degrees. Other characteristics reveal trends in the educational system in recent years, such as the offering of distance learning courses, which has proven to be an important factor in the grouping of institutions. Also offering evening courses allows us to see some institutions from a new perspective: they are those where working people can have access to higher education. The same happens with distance learning courses, capable of reaching places that are difficult to access.

Although preliminary, the results indicate that the typology captures in an original way the complexity of the Brazilian higher education system, which has not yet been achieved by other theoretical approaches and analysis techniques. The typology can become an important reference for analyzes that seek to overcome, for example, the dichotomous classification between public and private systems. Furthermore, the results may contribute to debates about the differentiation of higher education organizations, their distinct functions and how we can evaluate them. Especially with regard to its openness to the entry of new social groups.

THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY AND TRANSVERSAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPOSAL

Education is clearly an object of research that demands an interdisciplinary approach. In addition to the Humanities, each area of knowledge needs the training of its specialists and also returns techniques and perspectives to educational activity, at all levels. If education is, in Durkheim's work, the genesis of the sociological perspective, Gary Becker and Jacob Mincer formalize the theory of human capital, bringing economists to the topic. Education is also constitutive of demography and history. Psychology is an obvious component of the analysis of the educational process, also bringing contributions from neurology. The different approaches are being refined and, with the increasing centrality of schooling and higher education for the organization of social life, the bibliography has grown dramatically, highlighting the multidimensionality of education. This is revealed in our proposal, in the understanding of the political, economic and social conditions of higher education, in the analysis of the different impacts of families on trajectories, in the explanations of the effects of institutional action, in the understanding of the different moldings of the technical division of labor scientific, in measuring the value of titles and credentials in the job market.

To achieve the proposed objectives, the proposal relies on an interdisciplinary team made up of Sociologists, Anthropologists, Historians, Economists, Managers from various teaching and research institutions in the country and abroad. These are professors and researchers from different areas of knowledge at different stages of the academic career (seniors and juniors) in addition to technical-administrative professionals with different experiences in higher education management.

The project foresees the articulation, since its formulation, of researchers with public managers, such as technicians from the National Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (Inep), who work with public policies for Brazilian Higher Education. It also provides for the participation of managers from higher education institutions in Latin America both in carrying out the research and in the courses offered

OUR PROPOSAL

Considering what was exposed about this work, we propose the institutionalization of the Latin American Center for Research in Higher Education, CeLapes, as a Chair of the COLÉGIO BRASILEIRO DE ALTOS ESTUDOS – CBAE.

CeLapes is formed by a network of Brazilian and international researchers with a high level of excellence and diverse experiences as teachers and managers of higher education institutions and government agencies. Our research work has already received funding from CNPq, Faperj and SRHE (Society for Research into Higher Education/UK).

We propose, in an innovative way, the combination of research activity with teaching and extension, offering courses that are also the development of scientific work and dissemination of the results achieved. In this way, by approaching themes related to the functioning of higher education in an interdisciplinary and transversal way, we contribute to greater integration of the university in the daily lives of students and other interested parties in the community, and to greater transparency of its actions.

We also propose, in an innovative way, dissemination, through an international seminar, aiming to make available to the community an analysis model that can be applied at other times or in other contexts. The objective is for the project to encourage innovations not only in theoretical approaches to higher education, but also in analytical strategies about the sector.

ABOUT THE SUBJECT TO BE TEACHED AND THE SEMINAR PROPOSAL

Disseminate conceptual and methodological advances in the analysis of institutional models through the typology of higher education institutions. In addition to publishing books and scientific articles, it is proposed to hold an international seminar with the participation of experts from other countries (in addition to those participating in the project), subjecting our study to the scrutiny of the international scientific community specializing in the topic. In addition to building a typology of higher education, the project will provide the community with an analysis model that can be applied at other times or in other contexts. The empirical evidence on which it is based will be offered to guarantee the process of replication of the analysis, in line with contemporary open science movements. This implies ensuring transparency in the data, forms of analysis and statistical models used. The objective is for the project to encourage innovations not only in theoretical approaches to higher education, but also in analytical strategies about the sector.
Proposed title: WHAT DEMOCRATIZATION? INSTITUTIONAL MODELS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES

Offer 4 15-hour courses, online on all social networks, for students, technical-administrative employees and managers, professionals from different areas. The organizing theme of the discipline is: INSTITUTIONAL FORMS OF HIGHER EDUCATION. In line with the research and innovation project of this proposal, the courses address some of the central analytical dimensions around which the debate on higher education systems, particularly Latin American ones, has been structured: (1) institutional organization of higher education; (2) teacher training for basic education; (3) production of science and technology; and (4) graduates’ labor market outcomes. Furthermore, the proposal for extension courses seeks to promote the social impact of higher education through interaction between HEIs and other sectors of society.

Course 1 – What is the university? What is the university for? In Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Uruguay, show how higher education systems work. In each country and with teachers from each country, identify the practical reasons that lead individuals and their families to invest in higher education
Course 2 – Does the university educate educators? In each country and with teachers from each country, analyze the institutional models of teacher training.
Course 3 – Does the university produce science and innovation? In each country and with teachers from each country, discuss how local scientific research work is organized and how much the results of this production induce improvements in the quality of life, health and education.
Course 4 – What is the value of the diploma? Does attending university help you get a better job? In each country and with teachers from each country, analyze the social and economic effects of going through higher education, comparing performances according to the social origins of students and the institutional models they went through, also considering the stratification caused by these different models .

Curso 1 – O que é a universidade? Para que serve a universidade? No Brasil, na Argentina, no Chile, no Peru e no Uruguai mostrar o modo de funcionamento dos sistemas de educação superior. Em cada país e com os professores de cada país, identificar quais são as razões práticas que levam os indivíduos e suas famílias a investirem na educação superior
Curso 2 – A universidade educa os educadores? Em cada país e com os professores de cada país, analisar os modelos institucionais da formação de professores.
Curso 3 – A universidade produz ciência e inovação? Em cada país e com os professores de cada país, discutir como se organiza o trabalho científico de pesquisa local e o quanto os resultados desta produção induzem melhorias na qualidade de vida, saúde, educação.
Curso 4 – Qual o valor do diploma? Cursar uma universidade ajuda a ter melhor trabalho? Em cada país e com os professores de cada país, analisar os efeitos sociais e econômicos da passagem pela educação superior, comparando os desempenhos segundo as origens sociais dos estudantes e os modelos institucionais pelos quais eles passaram, também considerando a estratificação provocada por esses diversos modelos.