ATÉ QUE PONTO A INOVAÇÃO MELHORA OS RESULTADOS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES DE ENSINO SUPERIOR NO BRASIL?

Selma Regina Martins Oliveira; Bruno Ribeiro de Freitas Machado; Edson Walmir Cazarini

Selma Regina Martins Oliveira Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0591-4955
Bruno Ribeiro de Freitas Machado Instituto Federal de Ciência e Tecnologia do Tocantins (IFTO) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0497-377X
Edson Walmir Cazarini Universidade de São Paulo (USP) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8925-1719

Palavras-chave: Práticas Educacionais Inovadoras. Performance. Indicadores. Processo de Ensino e Aprendizagem. Ensino Superior. Universidades Brasileiras.

Resumo

O objetivo deste artigo é examinar até que ponto as práticas educacionais inovadoras impactam os resultados das instituições de ensino superior (IES) no Brasil. O cenário empírico envolve as instituições públicas e privadas. Um questionário do tipo escalar/Likert foi aplicado aos gestores desta IES. As técnicas de estatísticas de Mineração de Dados, Correlação de Spearman e Regressão Ordinal foram aplicadas. Os cálculos foram desenvolvidos usando o software R. As descobertas sinalizam a relevância das práticas educacionais para a performance dos resultados, com destaque para a satisfação pessoal dos envolvidos. As práticas que mais afetam os resultados são: “uso da internet e dispositivos móveis no processo de ensino-aprendizagem”, “adoção de práticas visando o aprendizado colaborativo” e “abordagem pedagógica baseada na solução de problemas ou projetos”. A hipótese do estudo foi confirmada: as práticas têm impactos positivos nos resultados das IES no Brasil. Este estudo preenche uma lacuna na literatura e apresenta implicações para os gestores, governos e acadêmicos.

Biografia do Autor

Selma Regina Martins Oliveira , Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF)

Pós-Doutorado, Faculdade de Engenharia e Ciências, Universidade de Aaborg, Dinamarca. Doutorado pela Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos/USP. Docente Associada da Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Volta Redonda, Departamento de Ciências Contábeis.

Bruno Ribeiro de Freitas Machado, Instituto Federal de Ciência e Tecnologia do Tocantins (IFTO)

Mestre em Modelagem Computacional e Sistemas pela Universidade Federal do Tocantins/UFT. Docente do Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Tocantins/IFTO.

Edson Walmir Cazarini, Universidade de São Paulo (USP)

Doutor em Engenharia Mecânica pela Universidade de São Paulo. Docente, pesquisador e orientador de mestrado e doutorado no Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia de Produção da Escola de Engenharia de São Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo,

Referências

AHMAD, T. Preparing for the future of higher education. On the Horizon, Vol. 23, Nº 4, pp. 323-330, 2015.

ASHTON, C. Measures of best practices. Measuring Business Excellence. Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. Nº 2, pp. 36-41, 1998.

ATHANASSOPOULOS, A. D.; SHALE, E. Assessing the Comparative Efficiency of Higher Education Institutions in the UK by the Means of Data Envelopment Analysis. Education Economics, Vol. 5, Nº 2, pp. 117-134, 1997.

BECKER, S. A. et al. NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. The New Media Consortium. Austin, Texas, p. 56. 2017.

BOULOS, M. N. K.; WHEELER, S. The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Information & Libraries Journal, Vol. 24, Nº 1, pp. 2-23, 2007.

CASTELLS, M. A sociedade em rede. 8. ed. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 2000.

CHENG, M. M. H., CHAN, K., TANG, S. Y. E., e CHENG, A. Y. N. (2009). Pre-service teacher education students' epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of teaching. Teach. Teach. Educ. Vol. 25, pp.319–327.

CHESBROUGH, H.; ROSENBLOOM, R. S. The Role of the Business Model in Capturing Value from Innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation’s Technology Spinoff Companies. Industrial and corporate change, Vol. 11, Nº 3, pp. 529-555, 2002.

CRAWFORD, C. M. Developing webs of significance through communications: Appropriate interactive activities for distributed learning environments. Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol Nº 2, pp. 68-72, 2001.

CHRISTENSEN, C. e RAYNOR, M. (2013) The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston.

DEMIRASLAN, Y.; USLUEL, Y. K. ICT integration processes in Turkish schools: Using activity theory to study issues and contradictions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 24, Nº. 4, pp. 458-474, 2008.

DEMIRTAS, Z. Teachers’ job satisfaction levels. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 9, pp. 1069-1073, 2010.

DOUGLAS, J.; DOUGLAS, A.; BARNES, B. Measuring student satisfaction at a UK university. Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 14, Nº 3, pp. 251-267, 2006.

ELLIOTT, K. M.; HEALY, M. A. Key Factors Influencing Student Satisfaction Student Satisfaction and Retention. JOURNAL OF MARKETING FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, Vol. 10, Nº 4, pp. 1-11, 2001.

GARCÍA-PEÑALVO, F. J., GARCIA DE FIGUEROLA, C., MERLO, J. A.: “Open knowledge management in higher education”; Online Information Review, Vol. 34, Nº 4, pp. 517-519, 2010.

HALL, B. H.; JAFFE, A. B. Measuring Science, Technology, and Innovation: A Review. Annals of Science and Technology Policy, Vol. 2, Nº.1, pp. 1-74, 2018.

HANOVER RESEARCH. Trends in higher education marketing, recruitment, and technology. HANOVER RESEARCH, 2014. Disponivel em: <http://www.hanoverresearch.com/media/Trends-in-Higher-Education-Marketing-Recruitment-and-Technology-2.pdf>. Acesso em: 08 Abril 2018.

HASSAN, K. E. The construct validity of a measure of the benchmarks of measure of the benchmarks of. Quality Assurance in Education, Vol. 21, Nº4, pp. 372-386, 2013.

HE, W.; YANG, L. Using wikis in team collaboration: A media capability perspective. Information & Management, Vol. 53, Nº 7, pp. 846-856, 2016.

IGNAT, A. A.; CLIPA, O. Teachers’ satisfaction with life, job satisfaction and their emotional intelligence.. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 33, pp. 498-502, 2012.

JAGER, J. W. D.; JAN, M. T. A structural equation modelling approach to investigating the impact of academic, ict and management related factors on customer satisfaction in higher education. ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF ECONOMICS, Vol. 2, Nº. 176, pp. 358-368, 2016.

JAMAL AL-LAIL, H.R. e MOHAMED, E.A.A. (2019), Innovation in the Quality Life Cycle of Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Effat University ", Visvizi, A., Lytras, M.D. and Sarirete, A. (Ed.) Management and Administration of Higher Education Institutions at Times of Change (Emerald Studies in Higher Education, Innovation and Technology), Bingley, pp. 99-116.

KLASSEN, R. M.; CHIU, M. M. Effects on Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction: Teacher Gender, Years of Experience, and Job Stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 102, Nº 3, pp. 741-756, 2010.

KUH, G. D. The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, Vol. 141, pp. 5-20, 2009.

KULARBPHETTONG, K.; KEDSIRIBUT, P.; ROONRAKWIT, P. Developing an Adaptive Web-based Intelligent Tutoring System Using Mastery Learning Technique. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 191, pp. 686-691, 2015.

MAINARDES, E.; ALVES, H.; RAPOSO, M. Using expectations and satisfaction to Using expectations and satisfaction to public universities. Tertiary Education and Management, Vol. 20, Nº 4, pp. 339-353, 2014.

GARCIA-MELON, M.; Aragonés-Beltrán, P.; González-Cruz, M.C., 2008, An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study, Omega, Vol. 36, Nº 5, pp.754-765, 2008.

NUNES, C.; MADUREIRA, I. (2015) Desenho Universal para a Aprendizagem: Construindo práticas pedagógicas inclusivas. Invest. Práticas. Vol.5. Nº.2. Lisboa. set.2015.

OECD. Measuring Innovation in Education: A New Perspective. Oecd Publishing. Paris, p. 332. 2014.

OECD/EUROSTAT. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data. 3. ed. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2005.

OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY. Teaching with Technology. OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 2018. Disponivel em: <https://tech.ed.gov/netp/teaching>. Acesso em: 08 Abril 2018.

RICCOMINI, F.E.; CIRANI, C.B.S.; PEDRO, S.C.; GARZARO e KEVIN, Innovation in educational marketing: a study applied to Brazilian private higher education institutions, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 2021.

ROBST, J. Cost Efficiency in Public Higher Education Institutions. Journal of Higher Education, Vol.72, Nº 6, pp. 730-750, 2001.

SCHEERENS, J.; LUYTEN, H.; RAVENS, J. V. Perspectives on Educational Quality. SpringerBriefs in Education, Vol. Nº 1, p. 3-33, 2011.

SERDYUKOV, P. (2017), Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it?, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 4-33.

SHI, X., BOADU, F. e DU, Y. (2020), “Post-entry growth in scope and scale among Chinese multinational enterprises: a structural embeddedness explanation”, Cross Cultural and Strategic Management, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 235-264.

SIMONS, R. J.; LINDEN, J. V. D.; DUFFY, T. New Learning: Three Ways to Learn in a New Balance. New Learning, Dordrecht, Vol. 1, pp. 1-20, 2000.

THANASSOULIS, E. E. A. et al. Costs and efficiency of higher education institutions in England: a DEA analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 31, Nº. 4, pp. 358-367, 2011.

USHER, M.; BARAK, M.; HAICK, H. Online vs. on-campus higher education: Exploring innovation in students' self-reports and students' learning products, Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 2, 2021.

VIELUF, S. E. A. et al. Teaching Practices and Pedagogical Innovation: Teaching Practices and Pedagogical Innovation: Evidence from TALIS. OECD Publishing. [S.l.]. 2012.

WALDER, A. M. Pedagogical Innovation in Canadian higher education: Professors’ perspectives on its effects on teaching and learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 54, pp. 71-82, 2017.

WALLIS, J. Cyberspace, information literacy. Library Review, Vol. 54, Nº 4, p. 218-222, 2005.

WEI, Z., SONG, X. e XIE, P. (2020), How does management innovation matter for performance: Efficiency or legitimacy?, Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 275-296.