PRODUCTIVISM IN UNIVERSITIES: EVALUATION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NEOLIBERAL LOGIC IN HIGHER EDUCATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2024.v9i4.4637Keywords:
Academic Productivism, Higher Education Policy, Neoliberalism, Assessment PracticesAbstract
Objective: This study aims to explore the influence of academic productivism within the framework of Brazilian public Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) since the adoption of the new postgraduate evaluation policy by CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel) in 1977. It seeks to understand how neoliberal productive logic applied to universities as organizations correlates with the assessment policies in Brazil.
Theoretical Framework: The research is grounded in the concepts of productive and reproductive work, aiming to establish a connection between neoliberal productivist logic in universities and the close relationship with evaluation policies. Key theories and models explored include the knowledge society and market-oriented capitalist productivity within academic settings, providing a solid foundation for the study's context.
Method: The methodology involves a historical contextualization of the university as an object of study, supplemented by a bibliographic analysis. Data collection was based on an extensive review of literature pertinent to the evolution of university roles under neoliberal capitalism and the impact of quantitative assessment tools serving market-oriented educational paradigms.
Results and Discussion: Preliminary findings indicate a significant influence of market-driven productivity logic on academic environments, shaped by the assessment mechanisms perceived as instruments serving this logic. These results are discussed in relation to the theoretical framework, highlighting the implications and connections identified, with a consideration of potential discrepancies and limitations of the study.
Research Implications: The practical and theoretical implications of this research provide insights into how the findings might be applied or influence practices in the field of higher education management. These implications extend to areas impacted by neoliberal assessment policies and their effects on academic productivity.
Originality/Value: This research contributes to the literature by offering a historical perspective on the transformation of universities under neoliberal capitalism, analyzed through the lens of academic productivism and assessment policies. Its value lies in the elucidation of how these dynamics affect higher education in Brazil, offering implications for policy and practice in the sector.
Downloads
References
Alcadipani, R. (2011). A academia e a fábrica de sardinhas. Organizações & Sociedade (Impresso), 18, 345-348.
Alessio, F. (2002). Escolástica. In J. Le Goff & J.-C. Schmitt (Coords.), Dicionário Temático do Ocidente Medieval (Vol. 1, pp. 367-382). Bauru: EDUSC; São Paulo: Imprensa Oficial do Estado.
Bauman, Z. (2017). Capitalismo parasitário. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.
Bardin, L. (1979). Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições 70.
Bianchetti, L., & Sguissardi, V. (2017). Da Universidade à Commoditycidade ou de como e quando, se a educação/formação é sacrificada no altar do mercado, o futuro da universidade se situaria em algum lugar do passado. São Paulo: Mercado das Letras.
Costa, C. F. da, & Goulart, S. (2018). Capitalismo acadêmico e reformas neoliberais no ensino superior brasileiro. Cadernos Ebape.Br, 16(3), 396-409. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395157322
Dias Sobrinho, J. (2005). Dilemas da educação superior no mundo globalizado: sociedade do conhecimento ou economia do conhecimento? São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo.
Dias Sobrinho, J. (2008). Qualidade, avaliação: do SINAES a índices. Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior (Campinas), 13(3), 817-825.
Fraser, N., & Jaeggi, R. (2020). Capitalismo em debate: uma conversa na teoria crítica. São Paulo: Boitempo.
Gil, A. C. (2002). Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. São Paulo: Atlas.
Haskins, C. H. (2015). A ascensão das universidades. Santa Catarina: Danúbio.
Kantor, I., Maciel, D. A., & Simões, J. A. (2001). A escola livre de sociologia e política: anos de formação 1933-1953 - Depoimentos.
Kuhlmann Junior, M. (2015). Produtivismo acadêmico, publicação em periódicos e qualidade das pesquisas. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 45(158), 838-855. FapUNIFESP (SciELO).
Marx, K. (2017). O capital: crítica da economia política (2a ed., R. Enderle, Trad.). São Paulo, SP: Boitempo.
Marques, F. (2019). Avaliação em 5 dimensões. Revista Fapesp, (286), 28-31. Retrieved from https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/avaliacao-em-5-dimensoes/
Marques, F. (2021). Novas réguas para medir a qualidade. Revista Fapesp, (307), 47-51. Retrieved from https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/novas-reguas-para-medir-a-qualidade/
Mello, V. D. S. de, & Donato, M. R. A. (2011). O pensamento iluminista e o desencantamento do mundo: modernidade e a Revolução Francesa como marco paradigmático. Revista Crítica Histórica, 2(4), 248-264.
Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The case for qualitative research. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review (pre-1986), 5, 491.
Pereira, E. M. de A. (2009). A universidade da modernidade nos tempos atuais. Avaliação: Revista da Avaliação da Educação Superior (Campinas), 14(1), 29-52. FapUNIFESP (SciELO).
Schmidt, M. L. S. (2011). Avaliação acadêmica, ideologia e poder. Psicologia Usp, 22(2), 315-334. FapUNIFESP (SciELO).
Silveira, Z. S. da, & Bianchetti, L. (2016). Universidade moderna: dos interesses do estado-nação às conveniências do mercado. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 21(64), 79-99. FapUNIFESP (SciELO).
Souza, A. C. de, Fialho, F., & Otani, N. (2007). TCC: métodos e Técnicas. Florianópolis: Visual Books.
Verger, J. (2002). Universidade. In J. Le Goff & J.-C. Schmitt (Coords.), Dicionário Temático do Ocidente Medieval (Vol. 2, pp. 573-588). Bauru: EDUSC; São Paulo: Imprensa Oficial do Estado.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
