Resumo

Título do Artigo

PREDATORY COMPETITION, STUDENT EXPECTATIONS, UNCLEAR PURPOSE: UNIVERSITY LEADERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE FUTURE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN BRAZIL
Abrir Arquivo
Ver apresentação do trabalho
Assistir a sessão completa

Palavras Chave

Higher education
University Management
Nniversity Leaders

Área

Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração

Tema

Planejamento de Ensino (cursos, programas, disciplinas, aulas e avaliação)

Autores

Nome
1 - Marcello Romani-Dias
UNIVERSIDADE POSITIVO (UP) - Ecoville - Curitiba (PR)
2 - Gabriela Fracasso Moraes
UNIVERSIDADE POSITIVO (UP) - Ecoville
3 - Aline dos Santos Barbosa
Instituto de Desenvolvimento Educacional FGV/IDE - São Paulo
4 - Fernando Eduardo Kerschbaumer
UNIVERSIDADE POSITIVO (UP) - Ecoville
5 - Danielle Denes dos Santos
UNIVERSIDADE POSITIVO (UP) - PPGA - Universidade Positivo

Reumo

The new millennium has seen factors increasing competition among higher education institutions worldwide. In Brazil, where the first university was established in 1920, it ranks fourth globally in student enrolments. Among Brazilian universities, 89% of new students attend private institutions. The higher education market in Brazil is oligopolistic, with nine private groups holding over 58% of the market share. This intense competition has led to predatory practices, posing significant challenges for university managers.
This study investigates the impact of predatory competition, student expectations, and unclear institutional purposes on the main management challenges in Brazilian universities. By exploring the experiences, perceptions, and recommendations of rectors and academic directors, the research addresses these key questions: 1. What are the main factors influencing the future management of higher education? 2. How can these factors be related to current and future higher education management? 3. What recommendations can help universities focus their management on the future?
Studies investigating the future of higher education have made important conceptual and practical contributions. However, few studies deal with the future of higher education management by diagnosing the present. Research on higher education is scarce in exploring the future, and the few studies that do exist have unexplored different analysis levels or stakeholders. Furthermore, empirical investigations incorporating the views of countries from the Global South, such as Brazil, are limited. This study aims to address these gaps by focusing on the perspectives of university managers in Brazil.
This study is integrated with a broad set of studies on university management. We conducted a qualitative investigation using 42 in-depth interviews with university rectors and directors. The interviews generated more than 482 pages of transcripts and dealt with the perception of individuals regarding uncertain and complex social phenomena. This study adheres to the precepts of Bardin for content analysis: organization of material, exploitation of material (data encoding), and derivation of categories.
Drawing on the narratives of the study participants, we present the main findings of their perceptions regarding the future challenges of university management in Brazil, focusing on macro (predatory competition), meso (student expectations), and micro (unclear purpose) level analysis. The interview data revealed numerous challenges in Brazil’s complex academic environment, highlighting issues such as intense competition, varied student expectations, and a lack of clear institutional purpose.
The study reports that managers, especially those working in more recent private universities and not part of large educational groups, may face the highest management challenges in the future. The results indicate a complex academic environment characterized by predatory competition, multifaceted student expectations, and unclear institutional purposes. This study provides insights for supporting future research on the perceptions and recommendations of university managers in similar contexts.
A comprehensive list of references used in the article, including works by Abdullah (2023), Altbach et al. (2013), Arantes (2021), Avelar et al. (2022), Bansal et al. (2018), Carayannis and Morawska-Jancelewicz (2022), Carvalhaes et al. (2023a, 2023b), Cavallone et al. (2022), Doidge and Doyle (2022), Guyottot and Thelisson (2023), Hart and Rodgers (2023), Hofstede (2024), Kay and Young (2022), Langley et al. (2023), Lincoln and Guba (1985), Locke (2001), Milićević et al. (2021), Moscardini et al. (2022), Parry (2020), Peixoto & Silva (2022), Petruzziello et al. (2023), Robinson (2019).