Governance Assessment of Basic Education in Brazil

Anderson Soares Furtado Oliveira; André Nunes; Mariana Guerra

doi:10.51341/1984-3925_2021v24n3a10

Autores/as

Anderson Soares Furtado Oliveira Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6706-0401
André Nunes Universidade de Brasília https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9928-6245
Mariana Guerra Faculdade de Economia, Administração, Contabilidade e Gestão de Políticas Públicas – FACE/UnB https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5234-5172

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51341/1984-3925_2021v24n3a10

Palabras clave:

Education governance, Basic education system, Governance Analytical Framework, Assessment instrument.

Resumen

Objective: Bearing in mind the Sustainable Development Goals guidelines, the objective was to assess the governance process in Brazilian basic education by applying Oliveira, Nunes & Guerra’s instrument (2020).

Method: This study was based on 1) a factorial analysis of the dimensionality of an instrument by Oliveira et al. (2020), and 2) an empirical analysis of its application to a sample of 511 basic education leaders, managers, and board members in Brazil.

Originality/Relevance: This study reports on an empirical assessment of governance in Brazilian basic education. The findings both represent the reality of state and municipal managers included in the sample and contribute to validating an instrument that taps into the governance process in Brazilian basic education.

Results: The instrument was validated with 4 constructs, namely: institutionalization, participatory engagement, institutional design, and quality of participatory processes. Such constructs are consistent with the Governance Analytical Framework (GAF) and indicate factors that promote quality education in Brazil.

Theoretical/Methodological contributions: The survey answers showed that formal social norms explain the dynamics of the governance process in Brazil.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Anderson Soares Furtado Oliveira, Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e Comunicações

Mestre em Gestão Pública - Universidade de Brasília.

André Nunes, Universidade de Brasília

Doutor em Economia - Universidade de Brasília.

Mariana Guerra, Faculdade de Economia, Administração, Contabilidade e Gestão de Políticas Públicas – FACE/UnB

Doutora em Administração - Universidade de Brasília.

Citas

Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2010). Simple second order chi-square correction. Retrieved from https://www.statmodel.com/download/WLSMV_new_chi21.pdf

Brown, T. A. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. 2. ed. New York: Guilford Publications.

Bunar, N. (2011). Urban development, governance and education: the implementation of an area-based development initiative in Sweden. Urban Studies, 48(13), 2849–2864. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010391302

Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil [CF] (1988). Brasília. Retrieved from http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Constituicao/Constituicao.htm

Costello, A.B., & Osborne, J.W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868

Cortes, S.V. (2011). As diferentes instituições participativas existentes nos municípios brasileiros. In RR. Pires (Org.), Efetividade das instituições participativas no Brasil: estratégias de avaliação (pp. 137-149). Brasília: IPEA. Retrieved from http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/livros/livro_dialogosdesenvol07.pdf

Cunha, E.S.M., Almeida, D.C.R., Faria, C.F., & Ribeiro, U.C. (2011). Uma estratégia multidimensional de avaliação dos conselhos de políticas: dinâmica deliberativa, desenho institucional e fatores exógenos. In R.R. Pires (Org.), Efetividade das instituições participativas no Brasil: estratégias de avaliação (pp. 297-322). Brasília: IPEA. Retrieved from http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/livros/livro_dialogosdesenvol07.pdf

Dobbins, M., & Khachatryan, S. (2015). Europeanization in the “Wild East”? Analyzing higher education governance reform in Georgia and Armenia. Higher Education, 69(2), 189–207. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10734-014-9769-2.pdf

Dziuban, C.D., & Shirkey, E.C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81(6), 358-361. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036316

Faria, C.F., & Ribeiro, U.C. (2011). Desenho institucional: variáveis relevantes e seus efeitos sobre o processo participativo. In R.R. Pires (Org.). Efetividade das instituições participativas no Brasil: estratégias de avaliação (pp. 297-322). Brasília: IPEA. Retrieved from http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/livros/livro_dialogosdesenvol07.pdf

Hartong, S. (2016). New structures of power and regulation within ‘distributed’ education policy – the example of the US Common Core State Standards Initiative. Journal of Education Policy, 31(2), 213-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1103903

Hufty, M. (2009). Participation, conservation and livelihoods: evaluating the effectiveness of participatory approaches in protected areas. Retrieved from http://www.ruig-gian.org/research/projects/projectlgd4e4.html?ID=129

Hufty, M. (2011). Investigating policy processes: the governance analytical framework (GAF). In U. Wiesmann & H. Hurni (Ed.), Research for sustainable development: foundations, experiences, and perspectives (pp. 403.424). Switzerland: Geographica Bernensia. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2019005

Jolliffe, I. (2011). Principal component analysis. In M. Lovric (Ed.), International encyclopedia of statistical science (pp. 1094-1096). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Jöreskog, K.G. (1994). On the estimation of polychoric correlations and their asymptotic covariance matrix. Psychometrika, 59(3), 381-389. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296131

Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional [LDB]. (1996). Lei nº 9.394 de 20 de dezembro de 1996. Brasília. Retrieved from http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/LEIS/L9394.htm

Lorenzo-Seva, U., Timmerman, M.E., & Kiers, H.A. (2011). The hull method for selecting the number of common factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(2), 340–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.564527

Magalhães, A., Veiga, A., Ribeiro, F.M., Sousa, S., & Santiago, R. (2013). Creating a common grammar for European higher education governance. Higher Education, 65(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9583-7

Møller, J., & Skedsmo, G. (2015). Nova gestão pública na Noruega: o papel do contexto nacional na mediação da reforma educacional. Educação & Sociedade, 36(132), 779-800. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/es/v36n132/1678-4626-es-36-132-00779.pdf

Ng, S. W. Including parents in school governance: rhetoric or reality. (2013). International Journal of Educational Management, 27(6), 667–680. Retrieved from https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJEM-07-2012-0087/full/pdf?title=including-parents-in-school-governance-rhetoric-or-reality

Nórvoa, A., & Yariv-Mashal, T. (2003). Comparative research in education: a mode of governance or a historical journey? Comparative Education, 39(4), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006032000162002

Oliveira, A.S.F., Nunes, A., & Guerra, M. (2020). Construção de um instrumento de medida da governança na educação básica do Brasil. Revista Contabilidade Vista & Revista, 31(3), 170-192. 10.22561/cvr.v31i2.6034.

Ozga, J. (2009). Governing education through data in England: from regulation to self-evaluation. Journal of Education Policy, 24(2), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930902733121

Pasquali, L. (2009). Instrumentação psicológica: fundamentos e práticas. Porto Alegre: Artmed Editora.

Plano Nacional de Educação [PNE]. (2014). Lei nº 13.005 de 25 de junho de 2014. Brasília. Retrieved from http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2014/lei/l13005.htm

Schiersmann, C. (2014). Hybridity and governance changes in continuing education. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(11), 1464–1474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214534673

Tatagiba, L. (2002). Os conselhos gestores e a democratização das políticas públicas no Brasil. In E. Dagnino (Org.), Sociedade civil e espaços públicos no Brasil (pp. 47-103). São Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Tatagiba, L. (2005). Conselhos gestores de políticas públicas e democracia participativa: aprofundando o debate. Revista de Sociologia e Política, 25(s.n.), 209-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-44782005000200017

Timmerman, M.E., & Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2011). Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychological methods, 16(2), 209-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023353

Vaz, A.C.N. (2011). Da participação à qualidade da deliberação em fóruns públicos: o itinerário da literatura sobre conselhos no Brasil. In R.R. Pires (Org.), Efetividade das instituições participativas no Brasil: estratégias de avaliação (pp. 91-108). Brasília: IPEA. Retrieved from http://www.ipea.gov.br/portal/images/stories/PDFs/livros/livro_dialogosdesenvol07.pdf

United Nations [UN]. (2017a). Transformando nosso mundo: a agenda 2030 para o desenvolvimento sustentável: objetivos do desenvolvimento sustentável. Retrieved from https://nacoesunidas.org/pos2015/

United Nations [UN]. (2017b). Tier classification for global SDG indicators. Retrieved from https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/Tier_Classification_of_SDG_Indicators_22_May_2019_web.pdf

Vidovich, L., & Currie, J. (2011). Governance and trust in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 36(1), 43–56. 10.1080/03075070903469580

Woelert, P., & Millar, V. (2013). The ‘paradox of interdisciplinarity’ in Australian research governance. Higher Education, 66(6), 755–767. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10734-013-9634-8.pdf