Avaliação e regulação da educação superior: intenções e tensões na proposta de criação do Instituto Nacional de Supervisão e Avaliação da Educação Superior (INSAES)

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Lopes, Pedro Isaac Ximenes
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Brasil; UFRN; PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM EDUCAÇÃO
• Palavras-chave em Português: Educação superior; Avaliação; Regulação; Supervisão; INSAES; CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::EDUCACAO
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/27744

The main purpose of this study was the analysis about the construction of the proposal to create the National Institute of Supervision and Evaluation of Higher Education (INSAES), investigating the intentions and strains in the debates in the Chamber of Deputies about the evaluation, control, supervision and accreditation of higher education in Brazil. The theoretical and methodological framework were constructed with the support of the dialectical materialism, under an articulation of the categories of totality, contradiction and mediation. As for the technical-instrumental procedures, exploratory interviews were conducted with five subjects located in institutional contexts involved in the debate, besides the analysis of the speeches present in the documents produced in the Chamber of Deputies during the parliamentary procedure of the issue, making use of MAXQDA software in the organization and data analysis. The expository movement of the research started from the determinations and distincts relations about the concrete thought, with the intention to represent the phenomenon studied in its historical place. We realized that INSAES shows similarities with the regulatory agency format, already in force in other economic and social sectors, as a result of the Brazilian State Reform, that was mostly triggered in the 1990s. The bill number 4.372/2012, that proposed the INSAES, comprised the developmental program of the Government Dilma Rousseff. The Rousseff Government was grounded in a form of capitalism based on a planned and state-run market economy that began to invest in its managerial capacity, without breaking with the hegemony of big capital and, consequently, without impeding the privatization of the expansion of higher education and without promoting its nationalization. The Chamber of Deputies was the locus of concreteness of the decision-make strifes and tensions, evidencing the conflict of interests about the model of higher education and the project of society in dispute. Although the Anísio Teixeira National Institute of Educational Studies and Research (INEP) and the National Commission for the Evaluation of Higher Education (CONAES) have expressed concern about the possibility of relegation and dismantling of the evaluation already developed within the framework of the National System for the Evaluation of Higher Education (SINAES), defenders of education as a Commonweal were in favor of the Project. The bill opponents' block, however, was mainly composed of members of parliament and representative entities associated with the private-market sector. In general, the amendments aligned with the private sector demanded the suppression of supervision and necessity of prior authorization for transactions between educational companies (merger, acquisition, incorporation and others). The pressure caused the Government to cede, reducing rates and fines and ensuring the participation of the private segment in collegiate bodies. However, the Brazilian capitalist crisis and above all the crisis of the political form, installed between the Legislative and Executive Branches, caused the multiparty coalition, led by the Workers' Party (PT) and the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (PMDB) to disaggregate, removing the INSAES Project from the public agenda, not by merit, but by political decision. We have concluded that the deregulation of the supply deepens the precariousness in the conditions of teaching, research and extension, hindering the effective social right to education and contributing to a greater commodification of higher education.