Banca de DEFESA: ANY KADIDJA DE MELO TAVARES PINHEIRO

Uma banca de DEFESA de DOUTORADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
DISCENTE : ANY KADIDJA DE MELO TAVARES PINHEIRO
DATA : 30/08/2018
HORA: 09:00
LOCAL: Auditório 04 - NEPSA II
TÍTULO:

META-EVALUATION OF THE INSTITUTIONAL EVALUATION OF THE FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO NORTE

PALAVRAS-CHAVES:

UFRN Institutional Evaluation; Meta-evaluation; Evaluation of the Evaluation; Democracy; Participation.

PÁGINAS: 280
GRANDE ÁREA: Ciências Humanas
ÁREA: Sociologia
SUBÁREA: Outras Sociologias Específicas
RESUMO:

The aim of this thesis is to develop a meta-evaluation study of the Institutional Evaluation of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, in particular, to observe the possibilities that permeate its Efficiency (WHOLEY, 1987). The evaluation of the Efficiency is, therefore, understood as an instrument of apprehension of Viability and Utility of the institutional evaluation of UFRN, our main evaluative categories. Our intention is that, from these, we can apprehend to what extent this evaluation is feasible and useful for meeting the evaluation demands of the academic community. The successive approaches to the theme were based on theoretical-methodological procedures based on qualitative research, such as: literature review (reports, Forums, official research sites, etc.) and documentary (laws, regiments, etc.) and techniques such as content analysis; speech analysis; the semi-structured interview and the focus group. With these we can understand the perceptions of the follow-up of the academic community: Rector, Teachers, Administrative Technicians and Students and the members of the Self Evaluation Commission, on the subject. These data were used to answer the central question of this work: How is the institutional evaluation developed at UFRN and what facilitates or hinders its use? Its relevance is to approach a topic that is not well explored in the scope of the evaluation of public policies, both for entering the universe of the meta-evaluation (SCRIVEN, 2015), and applied here to the evaluation of institutions, as for performing a re-reading of the checklist, Scriven, mediating it with the propositions of Wholey (1987) regarding the normative apparatus, access to material, human and financial resources and political viability, understood by this as necessary elements when we propose to verify the evaluation of an evaluation. This articulation enabled us to understand what, in the UFRN's institutional evaluation, hinders and facilitates its viability and usefulness in meeting the demands and interests of the Academic Community. Our hypothesis is that: In the institutional evaluation of UFRN, the facility varies according to the institutional structure and organization, and the difficulties arise from the lack of attention to the specific demands. To unveil this reality, we adopted as Specific Objectives: to apprehend the type of evaluation developed by UFRN and its relation with the different sectors; to know the evaluation approaches PAIUB and SINAES that base the evaluation of the UFRN; whether the results of the UFRN's institutional evaluation address the demands of the university community. This paper presents the following results: UFRN's institutional evaluation is a consolidated practice. It is important, given that it represents a space of possibilities for the development of more democratic and participatory evaluations, however, in the way that it is effective today, it presents great viability potential for meeting the evaluation demands of UFRN and MEC managers, is facilitated in all its subcategories, normative / legitimization and control; the availability of material, human and financial resources / (re) production conditions, and their political / political-ideological viability, since their actions are related to the interests that are priorities for decision-making spaces. As for the Academic Community, they show little knowledge about the institutional evaluation of UFRN and often confuse it with the specific evaluations, the performance of teachers and technicians. The participation of teachers and students in this process is limited to the moments in which the self-assessment of the courses takes place (activity directed to this end), the semester completion of the teacher evaluation questionnaires and self-assessment of the student / teacher, in addition to ENADE, for the student. For the technicians segment, the participation happens through the completion of a performance evaluation form, in a specific evaluation. This shows less viability to meet their specific demands and, consequently, makes institutional evaluation an instrument of little use to these groups. In view of this we confirm the hypothesis of this work.

MEMBROS DA BANCA:
Presidente - 1149332 - LINCOLN MORAES DE SOUZA
Interno - 1517561 - GABRIEL EDUARDO VITULLO
Interno - 1164161 - IRENE ALVES DE PAIVA
Externo à Instituição - DAYANE GOMES DA SILVA - IFPB
Externo à Instituição - MARIA DO PERPÉTUO SOCORRO ROCHA SOUSA SEVERINO - UERN