LATIN AMERICAN CENTER OF
RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Artigo
Artigo: Vieira, A., Rodrigues, L. and Barbosa, M.-L. (2025), Measuring Change in Institutional Diversity in Higher Education in Brazil. Higher Educ Q, 79: e70022. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.70022
Artigo: Vieira, A., Rodrigues, L. and Barbosa, M.-L. (2025), Measuring Change in Institutional Diversity in Higher Education in Brazil. Higher Educ Q, 79: e70022. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.70022
Summary of the article
The study, published in the international journal Higher Education Quarterly, analyzes how the expansion of higher education in Brazil has transformed the dynamics of the institutions’ operations. The research is based on the idea that higher education institutions (HEIs) operate with different logics — for example, some are more focused on knowledge production and the public interest, while others are closer to the functioning of the market. Using a statistical technique called latent profile analysis and administrative data from all Brazilian HEIs in 2010 and 2019, the authors identified nine distinct groups of institutions based on their organizational and operational characteristics. The changes that have occurred in the Brazilian system during this period show that small private colleges are combining different operating models, mixing academic and market characteristics. At the same time, a smaller number of private for-profit institutions, but with a large number of students, have reinforced practices focused on the logic of the market, such as offering short and low-cost courses. On the other hand, research-oriented universities remain a more stable group with a well-defined identity. By taking a broad view of the role of higher education institutions, the study helps to better understand how the system has changed and become more diverse over time.
Results found
2. Reinforcement of market logic: A small number of private for-profit institutions, but with large enrollment volumes, have intensified practices geared towards market logic, such as the emphasis on offering short courses and distance education.
1. The main results highlight three trends: Hybridization of institutional logics: Small private institutions have been combining characteristics of different operating models, in response to regulatory changes and market demands.
3. Stability among research universities: Public and private universities with a more academic profile — those that more strongly integrate teaching, research and extension — make up a relatively stable group, but which has lost relative space in the system.
The data also show that most institutions created between 2010 and 2019 were classified in the group of “distributed and multifunctional institutions”, characterized by offering a wide variety of courses and academic activities, but with little presence of distance education.
Next steps for researchThe authors highlight the need to deepen the understanding of the relationship between different institutional profiles and indicators of quality, social inclusion and investment in science and technology. Among the main points to be developed are:
1. Investigate academic and socioeconomic selectivity among different institutional profiles
The article points out the limited public data that would allow for an accurate assessment of the degree of academic selectivity and the socioeconomic profile of students served by each group of institutions, including public and private institutions. With this data, it would be possible to better understand how different types of institutions contribute — or not — to the democratization of access to higher education and to social mobility.
2. Analyze in depth the role of for-profit educational conglomerates
The study identifies a small group of private, for-profit institutions that concentrate a large portion of enrollments in distance learning and reinforce market logic. However, the authors acknowledge that there is still a lack of more detailed knowledge about how these conglomerates operate — their internal heterogeneity, how they make decisions, what strategies they use and how they relate to public policies.
3. Relate the different institutional profiles to indicators of quality, science and inclusion
The current analysis focuses on the organizational and functional characteristics of institutions, but the authors propose to investigate how these characteristics relate to the concrete results of institutions. For example, do more hybrid institutions perform better in terms of teaching quality? Which profile invests more in research and innovation? And which contributes more to the inclusion of students from historically excluded groups?
Social impact of the results found
The research findings are highly relevant to the debate on the future of higher education in Brazil. By showing that the diversity of institutional types has grown over the last decade, the study reveals a more complex and multifaceted landscape in the sector. However, this diversity occurs in parallel with a process of strong concentration of enrollments in a few educational models — mainly in private, for-profit institutions that operate according to a market logic. This combination brings with it an important warning: the possibility of deepening inequalities in access to and quality of education, with direct consequences for the social mobility of students. The study also highlights the challenge of preserving the role of public and private universities focused on research — institutions that integrate teaching, science and social commitment — in a context increasingly marked by pressures for scale, cost and efficiency. These universities, although relatively stable, have been losing space in the system and run the risk of becoming exceptions, compromising the expansion of access to a more integrated model of education.
Furthermore, the analysis contributes important empirical elements for the design of public policies that value the plurality of functions of higher education institutions, respecting their specificities and the different missions they propose to follow. In this direction, the authors of the study are currently collaborating with the National Institute of Studies and Educational Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP) in a technical cooperation agreement to propose new efficiency indicators for the Brazilian higher education system. These indicators will allow us to understand, based on official public data, how the functioning of different types of institutions impacts student trajectories — from access to graduation, including aspects such as retention and dropout. Proposing these indicators is essential to answer central questions for planning public policies: which institutional models are more inclusive? How do different institutional structures influence students' trajectories in higher education?