Innovation and Evaluation in the Brazilian Higher Education Culture: Interdisciplinary and General Education
Affiliation(s)
1 Faculty of Education, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil. 2 Center for Studies in Public Policy, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil. 3 Virtual University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
1 Faculty of Education, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil. 2 Center for Studies in Public Policy, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil. 3 Virtual University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to present partial results of the Interdisciplinary Higher Education Program (ProFIS) related to the interdisciplinary general education proposal, which represents an innovation in the Brazilian Higher Education culture. The general education provided by the program is concerned in preparing students with greater knowledge, critical sense by expanding their knowledge and culture, and makes them critical citizens and professionals. Besides curricular innovation, the course aims to establish a policy of affirmative action through the inclusion of public school students. Briefly, it presents the general education as curriculum emphasis adopted by universities in various parts of the world. Then, it presents the ProFIS proposal, its current development stage and the analysis of partial results of the evaluation process under development. The evaluation process is developed with teachers, students and course coordination.
The aim of this study was to present partial results of the Interdisciplinary Higher Education Program (ProFIS) related to the interdisciplinary general education proposal, which represents an innovation in the Brazilian Higher Education culture. The general education provided by the program is concerned in preparing students with greater knowledge, critical sense by expanding their knowledge and culture, and makes them critical citizens and professionals. Besides curricular innovation, the course aims to establish a policy of affirmative action through the inclusion of public school students. Briefly, it presents the general education as curriculum emphasis adopted by universities in various parts of the world. Then, it presents the ProFIS proposal, its current development stage and the analysis of partial results of the evaluation process under development. The evaluation process is developed with teachers, students and course coordination.
Cite this paper
Pereira, E. , Carneiro, A. and Gonçalves, M. (2014) Innovation and Evaluation in the Brazilian Higher Education Culture: Interdisciplinary and General Education. Creative Education, 5, 1690-1701. doi: 10.4236/ce.2014.518188.
Pereira, E. , Carneiro, A. and Gonçalves, M. (2014) Innovation and Evaluation in the Brazilian Higher Education Culture: Interdisciplinary and General Education. Creative Education, 5, 1690-1701. doi: 10.4236/ce.2014.518188.
References
[1] Bach, L. (2010). Frontiers of Evaluation: Europe. Internacional Seminary Evaluation Frontier, Campinas, SP, 18-19 November 2010.
http://www.ige.unicamp.br/fronteiras/palestras/18_930_LaurentBach.pdf [2] Bardin, L. (1991). Content Analysis. Lisbon: Edi??es, 70. [3] Aristotle (2005) Art Rhetoric and Poetics. (Trad. Carvalho, Antonio Pinto, 17th ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Ediouro. [4] Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary Courses and Team Teaching: New Arrangement for Learning. Phonix, AZ: American Council on Education and Dryx Press. [5] Fazenda, I. (1999). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Research (4th ed.). Campinas: Papirus. [6] Godoy, A. C. S. (2011). The University Teacher Professor as Trainer Human Capital Transformer. In A. M. G. Sperandio, & R. Pantano Filho (Eds.), The Promotion of Life Construction: An Exercise in Interdisciplinary Approach (pp. 97-116). Indaiatuba: Vitória Ltda. [7] Macdonald, B. (1982). A Political Classification of Evaluation Studies. In: M. A. A. Goldeberg, & C. P. Souza (Eds.), Evaluation of Educational Programs; Vicissitudes, Controversies, Challenges (pp. 35-48). São Paulo: EPU. [8] Morin, E. (1999). Transdisciplinarity and Complexity: The Reform of University and Elementary School. Natal: Editora da EDUFRN. [9] Newton, R. R. (2000). Tensions and Models in General Education Planning. Journal of General Education, 49, 165-181.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jge.2000.0023 [10] Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. Boston: Harvard University Press. [11] Pereira, E. M. A. (2002). Implications of Postmodernity for the University. Revista Avaliação, 7, 35-46. [12] Pereira, E. M. A. (2010). Curricular Reform at Harvard: The Centrality of General Education in the XXI Century. In E. M. A. Pereira (Ed.), University and Curriculum: Perspective of General Education (pp. 41-46). Campinas: Mercado de Letras. [13] Peterson, P. M. (2012). A Global Framework: Liberal Education in the Undergraduate Curriculum. In P. M. Petterson (Ed.), Confronting Challenges to the Liberal Arts Curriculum: Perspectives of Developing and Transitional Countries (pp. 1-23). New York and London: Routledge. [14] Repko, A. E. (2008). Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 416 p. [15] Zackiewicz, M. (2005). Trajectories and Challenges of Evaluation in Science, Technology and Innovation. PhD Thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Geociências.
[1] Bach, L. (2010). Frontiers of Evaluation: Europe. Internacional Seminary Evaluation Frontier, Campinas, SP, 18-19 November 2010.
http://www.ige.unicamp.br/fronteiras/palestras/18_930_LaurentBach.pdf [2] Bardin, L. (1991). Content Analysis. Lisbon: Edi??es, 70. [3] Aristotle (2005) Art Rhetoric and Poetics. (Trad. Carvalho, Antonio Pinto, 17th ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Ediouro. [4] Davis, J. R. (1995). Interdisciplinary Courses and Team Teaching: New Arrangement for Learning. Phonix, AZ: American Council on Education and Dryx Press. [5] Fazenda, I. (1999). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Research (4th ed.). Campinas: Papirus. [6] Godoy, A. C. S. (2011). The University Teacher Professor as Trainer Human Capital Transformer. In A. M. G. Sperandio, & R. Pantano Filho (Eds.), The Promotion of Life Construction: An Exercise in Interdisciplinary Approach (pp. 97-116). Indaiatuba: Vitória Ltda. [7] Macdonald, B. (1982). A Political Classification of Evaluation Studies. In: M. A. A. Goldeberg, & C. P. Souza (Eds.), Evaluation of Educational Programs; Vicissitudes, Controversies, Challenges (pp. 35-48). São Paulo: EPU. [8] Morin, E. (1999). Transdisciplinarity and Complexity: The Reform of University and Elementary School. Natal: Editora da EDUFRN. [9] Newton, R. R. (2000). Tensions and Models in General Education Planning. Journal of General Education, 49, 165-181.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jge.2000.0023 [10] Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. Boston: Harvard University Press. [11] Pereira, E. M. A. (2002). Implications of Postmodernity for the University. Revista Avaliação, 7, 35-46. [12] Pereira, E. M. A. (2010). Curricular Reform at Harvard: The Centrality of General Education in the XXI Century. In E. M. A. Pereira (Ed.), University and Curriculum: Perspective of General Education (pp. 41-46). Campinas: Mercado de Letras. [13] Peterson, P. M. (2012). A Global Framework: Liberal Education in the Undergraduate Curriculum. In P. M. Petterson (Ed.), Confronting Challenges to the Liberal Arts Curriculum: Perspectives of Developing and Transitional Countries (pp. 1-23). New York and London: Routledge. [14] Repko, A. E. (2008). Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 416 p. [15] Zackiewicz, M. (2005). Trajectories and Challenges of Evaluation in Science, Technology and Innovation. PhD Thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Geociências.