OECD

Preliminary Background Report – 2017

Perspectives of the private and cooperative sector to the framework model in Portuguese higher education

 

Note: Although the evolution of higher education in the course of the publication of the RJIES (Legal regime of higher education institutions) has been registered, there are still constraints that prevent the potential development of the system, given the current installed capacity and available human resources.

 

1. There is currently a political forgetfulness of private universities and polytechnics, which can be seen in areas as diverse as the treatment provided to the sector or the information available, thus helping to widen the gap between the support given to state sector in the detriment of the private sector, and in the development of a more balanced system of higher education. (The situations are manifold, notorious and diverse, occurring both financially and institutionally. As an example, it should be noted that the various existing programs of international partnerships in S & T have not been extended to any institution that does not belong to CRUP – Council of Rectors of State Universities, see for example the Carnegie Mellon-Portugal Program that established a network involving only the 15 universities existing in CRUP council – see report p.189).

2. University autonomy (constitutionally guaranteed) has been seriously hampered by the imposition of a standard model from the A3ES, stipulating a pattern that removes the higher education system from institutional diversity. As an example, the institutional evaluation that will take place this year is described in this Report as:

The institutional evaluation focuses on the quality of performance of the higher education institution, considered globally, and on each of its organizational units, with a view to providing the general and integrated overview of the Institution and each of its autonomous organizational structures. The purpose of this exercise is to improve the quality of higher education institutions, provide informed information to society on the performance of institutions and contribute to the development of an institutional institutional culture of quality assurance.

When evaluating the quality of performance of higher education institutions, is measuring the degree of fulfillment of their mission by means of performance parameters related to their performance and the results thereof (article 3, DL 38/2007, of 16.08), that is, in addition to the constitutional right to have freedom of school creation (article 43, paragraph 4, CRP), the law allows higher education institutions to organize themselves freely and in whatever way they seem most appropriate to carry out their mission, as well as the specificity of the context in which they are inserted (Article 12 (2), RJIES). This has, however, been curtailed by the Agency’s activity.

 

2.1. On the other hand, the continuous and high costs of the processes submitted to the evaluation and accreditation of the A3ES have turned into a very heavy annual rate of maintenance of the institutions in the higher education system. If the State institutions have the necessary budget in the State Budget, inversely, private institutions only have the income paid by their students – where they have to withdraw a part for payment of taxes, some money from which they will serve the state institutions to pay the amounts required by the A3ES.

 

2.2 Problems related to the A3ES include others, such as those related to the members of the external evaluation committees, where we can find the lack of uniformity of criteria and quality, or problems of the system architecture itself, such as the only organ that the institutions can appeal belong to the A3ES organization.

 

3. It is true that the private higher institutions were built in educational institutions and that research is its pillar of support. However, this should not mean that all institutions have to be transformed into research institutions, even if those who wish to award 2nd and 3rd cycles have to organize themselves in the way of fostering and sustaining R & D activities – the core activity of these cycles.

However, research into private higher institutions lacks public financial support, either directly supporting existing research centers, either through the introduction of the ‘facility’ concept, or through a review of the funding model and frequency of applications to FCT.

4. Although the RJIES has taken a significant step towards approximating treatment among sub-sectors, especially regarding the operating requirements, it is certain that the “model” imposed for all institutions of higher education is that of the institutions of the State; That is, irrespective of the nature of the institution being private, cooperative or concordat, it is obliged to adopt the organizational model of the institutions of the State (eg article 52, or article 143, paragraph 2, or article 145 of RJIES). This situation, among other consequences, encourages the agents of the General Inspectorate of Higher Education not to take into account the diversity of institutional organization (enshrined in the general and guiding principle defined in article 12 of the RJIES). Reflect this inequality – precisely because they want a true oneness.

5. There are bureaucratic inefficiencies that must be eliminated in view of: the barriers to internationalization (eg imposition of quotas on international students, prohibition of enrollment in certain courses, particularly health, diplomatic action towards recognition of degrees and barriers to access to higher education (static placement of vacancies not permitting maladaptation depending on demand), the time taken to respond to changes in curriculum plans or the approval of Ctesp, or delays in the typify the specificity of the teaching and research contract of private institutions or facilitate transformations, mergers or acquisitions of institutional entities. In this last aspect, new bureaucratic formulas should be created to promote mergers, acquisitions, associations and consortiums between private institutions, accompanying the necessary adjustments in the educational network at national level. In this context, it is urgent to review the statutory legal frameworks of the institutional entities that allow greater flexibility in the transformation of their respective legal profiles.

5.1. Also regarding the delays in the publication of legislation also highlights the lack of legislation that regulates distance and online education in Portugal.

6. There still remains a huge opacity in the management of public funds in relation to funding, preventing Portuguese citizens from knowing, with a minimum of rigor, the true cost of students in public higher education, either by course or by institution, charging all the costs arising from real investments such as energy, buildings, infrastructures, laboratories and others; That the costs of education, the cost of research and the costs of other structures, such as museums, reception palaces and dependent or aggregate institutions, are separate and perceptible in the State Budget. Not only is it not possible to calculate all the financings of public institutions by the analysis of the State Budget, but there is also great difficulty in accessing the budgets of the Institutions themselves.

7. It is also noted in the preliminary document a certain inconsistency between the diagnosis made and the proposals presented. If, on the one hand: (1) it is stressed that it is necessary to increase the know-how and university attendance of those who did not reach Higher Education (or who left it); (2) that the Portuguese economy and companies do not find sufficient skills in these layers in order to be qualitatively more competitive, and, at the same time, (3) while at PhD and postdoctoral level, the country has progressed a lot, only regretting the fact that many of those in Portugal can not be retained, emphasizing that this is due to the lack of incentives and Companies and institutions. On the other hand, the proposed strategy is to increase even more investment in these Phd and “postdocs”, which companies do not absorb and will feed the emigration of brains. As a result, Portugal will invest to finance the more developed economies, while at the same time complaining that the stock of PhDs in Portugal remains low…

Their absorption capacity depends on the quality of the companies in Portugal and, like what is called the “investment ladder”, it is not logical to build the top step without having the others to get there; but rather to promote progress in the quality of training at the first and second university levels, without necessarily increasing the most advanced levels (we are not saying this in order to reduce the effort made so far). Only in this way will it be possible to increase, in a balanced way, the capacity of absorption of the various degrees of higher education in the economy and increase the country’s competitiveness.

8. The development of the school network throughout the country was disorderly, and irrational, without any planning based on demographic, prospective studies or that respected well defined national strategic interests.

There is an urgent need to restructure the current national network of higher education where not only the State takes into account the initiatives and private and cooperative establishments in the enlargement or in the adjustment of the network, with a view to rationalizing resources, using resources and quality assurance (art. 58 LBSE, no. 2), how conditions should be provided to private and cooperative institutions that allow greater speed of processes and means.

9. In conclusion, the preliminary Report is hugely unbalanced when considering the overall sector in Portugal – the private sector is virtually almost absent from the report – and is also strongly focused on research and leaves aside relevant issues related with teaching and organization.

On the part of the private sector, besides highlighting the contributions of this sector over the years namely in terms of research – with several fp6 and 7 and h2020 projects having been promoted with the active involvement of several by private Portuguese HEI – it is also relevant to mention the richness and diversity of the sector. The report is focused on the duality between universities and polytechnics and frames these last ones in the context of “regional” priorities. We believe it is time to overcome this duality that prevents the system from developing itself and open space to organizational models such as for instance the networks or consortiums that were foreseen in the past but never implemented.

The private sector is open to change and new opportunities but cannot accept to be looked at in a supplemental manner like it is done in this report. The inability of the sector in beneficiating of all those actors that play a role in it is not a positive way of discussing it’s future and one that should be avoided.

The report traces a grounded depiction of the evolution of the HE sector in Portugal it is to grounded on prejudices, namely on the role of the private sector and polytechnics and a more holistic vision incorporating all actors and contributions should be consider by the OCDE in its analysis

Portugal needs a strong, qualitatively attractive and differentiated higher education sector, in order to boost the country through the qualification of its human capital.

Deixe um comentário

O seu endereço de email não será publicado. Campos obrigatórios marcados com *