Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023 1
ABSTRACT: e marketization and nancialization of higher education in
Brazil can bring severe social and economic consequences. is research aimed
to understand how the faculty body of a public university in Brazil perceives the
reforms of the public higher education system, which are currently undergoing
political approval. e results of the analysis of variance test suggest that there is a
signicant dierence between professors aligned with neoliberal values and those
who are not, in the direction that the alignment to neoliberal values undervalue
the importance of the public higher education system to society. Also, professors
aligned with neoliberal values are more likely to give away administrative autonomy
to external stakeholders, focusing more on meeting students’ expectations, and
seeking private sponsorship to raise funds.
Keywords: Higher education. Educational policy. Commercialization. Public
education. Financialization.
COMPETIR PARA QUÊ? PERCEPÇÕES DOCENTES SOBRE
AS REFORMAS DO ENSINO SUPERIOR PÚBLICO NO BRASIL
RESUMO: A mercantilização e nanceirização do ensino superior no Brasil
podem trazer graves consequências sociais e econômicas. Esta pesquisa teve como
objetivo compreender como o corpo docente de uma universidade pública no
Brasil percebe as reformas do sistema de ensino superior público, que estão sob
aprovação política. Os resultados do teste análise de variância sugerem que há
uma diferença signicativa entre os professores que são alinhados aos valores
neoliberais e aqueles que não são, no sentido de que o alinhamento aos valores
neoliberais subestima a importância do sistema público de ensino superior para
a sociedade. Além disso, professores alinhados aos valores neoliberais são mais
COMPETE FOR WHAT? FACULTY PERCEPTIONS OF THE PUBLIC
HIGHER EDUCATION REFORMS IN BRAZIL
R S G B,
M C P
A V C D
H L B
https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.260231 ARTICLES
1. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil. E-mail: renatasg@face.ufmg.br
2. Rotterdam Business School – Rotterdam, Netherlands.
3. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – Department of Production Engineering – Belo Horizonte (MG), Brazil.
E-mails: ceciliaufmg@gmail.com; anaval@ufmg.br
4. Instituto Federal de Minas Gerais – Department of Administration – Ouro Branco (MG), Brazil. E-mail: haroldo.brito@ifmg.br
Section editor: Nelson Cardoso do Amaral
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
2
Introduction
T
he Brazilian public higher education (HE) is recognized by its excellence in research and teaching. Even
if most of the HE institutions in Brazil are private (2,306 versus 302 public ones–INEP, 2021), among
the 13 Brazilian universities that appear between the thousand best in the Times Higher Education’s
World University Ranking 2021, 11 are public (eight federal and three state-owned), and only two are private.
A study from the Brazilian Academy of Science showed that researchers from public Higher Education (HE)
institutions are responsible for 95% of all the national scientic publications (MOURA, 2019). Moreover,19public
universities are among the 20 largest patent applicants in the HE sector in Brazil (INPI, 2018). Allied to these
data, Brazilian public universities are recognized for their quality in research, teaching, and service, with their 45
university hospitals conducting more than ve million medical appointments per year (INEP, 2021).
is fact, however, failed to stop former president Jair Bolsonaro from expressing his disregard
for the public education system since he took oce (XIMENES etal., 2019; SILVA JR.; FARGONI, 2020;
LEHER, 2021). Even though his tenure came to an end following his defeat in the 2022 election, his ideas
about HE in Brazil had already gained a momentum in the society, nding resonance among various sectors.
For example, a former federal minister of Education under his administration declared that Brazilian public
universities have low performance and their campi foster an atmosphere of revelry (KER, 2020). Based on
these arguments and enjoying substantial popular support, the Ministry of Education cut 30% of the funds
allocated to all federal HE institutions, also reducing scholarships and investments in research (BRASIL,
2019). is narrative quickly permeated social media platforms, serving as a launchpad for sustained pressure
on universities and catalyzing substantial cuts to their nancial resources until 2022.
propensos a ceder autonomia administrativa a stakeholders externos, focando
mais em atender às expectativas dos alunos e na obtenção de recursos privados
para arrecadar fundos.
Palavras-chave: Ensino superior. Política educacional. Comercialização. Educação
pública. Financeirização.
¿COMPETIR PARA QUÉ? PERCEPCIONES DE LOS DOCENTES SOBRE
LAS REFORMAS DE LA EDUCACIÓN SUPERIOR PÚBLICA EN BRASIL
RESUMEN: La mercantilización y nanciarización de la educación superior (ES)
en Brasil puede traer graves consecuencias sociales y económicas. Esta investigación
tiene como objetivo comprender cómo el cuerpo docente de una universidad pública
de Brasil percibe las reformas del sistema público de educación superior, que se
encuentran bajo aprobación política. Los resultados de la prueba ANOVA sugieren
que existe una diferencia signicativa entre los docentes que están alineados con
los valores neoliberales y los que no, en el sentido de que el alineamiento a los
valores neoliberales subestima la importancia del sistema de educación superior
pública para la sociedad. Además, es más probable que los docentes alineados con
los valores neoliberales cedan la autonomía administrativa a actores externos,
centrándose más en cumplir con las expectativas de los estudiantes y obtener
nanciamiento privado para recaudar fondos.
Palabras clave: Educación superior. Política educativa. Comercialización.
Educación publica. Financiarización.
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
3
In this context, the Ministry of Education launched in 2019 a program (named Future-se) designed
to reform the HE system in Brazil. e law project assures that it aims to strengthen the public universities’
autonomy by focusing on three areas: research, technological development, and innovation; entrepreneurship;
and internationalization. e Future-se Program proposes that public universities sign contracts with
foundations created within the universities themselves, without the need for prior recognition from the Ministry
of Education. e nal text of the bill, besides changing the possibilities of contracts between universities and
social organizations, also changes the principles and guidelines of the agreements signed. e currently contracts
have, as a clause, performance goals that will need to be evaluated through a list of indicators. e program
represents the so-called marketization and nancialization of the Brazilian public HE (SILVA JR.; FARGONI,
2020; LEHER, 2021), something that has already happened in Europe, the United States, and Australia.
In the United Kingdom, for example, the HE marketization and nancialization started in the late
1980s and were consolidated in the 1990s. England replicated the American and Australian discourse that the
costs of maintaining HE were too high and expensive for the government to keep (INGLEBY, 2015). HE that
was initially founded by taxpayers became entirely funded by the students, leading the educational system
to market values. ese changes brought consequences for the HE, such as student consumer-like behavior,
competition, and intensication of social inequality (RAAPER, 2017).
Consequently, students began to see HE as a transaction cost, in which knowledge could be bought,
and the university was seen as a simple service provider (JABBAR etal., 2018; NIXON; SCULLION; HEARN,
2018). Also, universities started to compete among themselves for resources, in a relationship in which they
would barely survive (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009). Raaper and Olssen (2015) state that the stress and
sickness among faculty increased, exemplifying that a senior researcher of the Imperial College committed
suicide because he failed to get funding for his research. Furthermore, the marketization of HE increased
social dierences because students from wealthy families were at a clear advantage. Jabbar etal. (2018) found
evidence that students who were not previously academically qualied to enter top universities had their
access granted because of their capacity to pay.
Germany, on the other hand, turned back educational reforms. Some universities that charged fees in
2006 and 2007 retreated shortly thereaer (HÜTHER; KRÜCKEN, 2018). Such a decision was based, among other
things, on the increasing dropout rate–restraining equal opportunities–and the worries of falling behind at the
global competition in both aspects of innovation and knowledge development excellence (JABBAR etal., 2018).
e consequences of HE marketization and nancialization in Brazil can be even more devastating.
e economies of developing countries are more dependent on market values than welfare. Furthermore,
in these countries, market has little or no interest in investing in HE as a public good (MARGINSON,
2006). Some even have argued openly that the Brazilian HE system should focus on training laborers for the
market instead of preparing them academically (ADMINISTRADORES.COM, 2014). Besides threatening
the Brazilian scientic development, the marketization of the public HE would reduce the quality of working
conditions in HE institutions, and increase overall social inequalities (SOUSA; COIMBRA, 2020).
Given these arguments, one could argue that professors in Brazil would struggle against projects
such as Future-se. On the other hand, besides being a heterogeneous group, the spread of neoliberal values
might aect how faculty perceives the reforms. Professors may agree to the ongoing reforms and support
them, thereby eliminating the need to discuss and rethink the changes.
In this sense, Taylor (2017) argues that the notion that public HE should be run like a business is
spread throughout all social spheres, and the collective thinking is that the “fact that colleges were not run
like a business meant they were inecient and in need of market reforms including a less collaborative, more
rigid top-down corporate management structure” (TAYLOR, 2017, p. 113). In addition, Brazil might be going
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
4
through the same process as the UK, in which the lack of information and passivity of the faculty while facing
the changes made room for the implementation of the reforms; when they realized the magnitude of the
change, it had already been made. In the UK, changes started smoothly “or at least not easily understood or
recognized by unsuspecting and largely uninformed academics” (RAAPER; OLSSEN, 2015, p. 151).
is research sought to understand how the faculty body of a public HE institution in Brazil
perceives the HE reforms. is study was conducted at the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG).
UFMG has more than 30 thousand students, and three thousand professors spread across four campi and
two hospitals. It is the best federal university in Brazil and the h best in Latin America, according to the
Times Higher Education’s World University Ranking 2021.
is research intended to contribute to the discussion on marketization and nancialization in
HE. Nixon, Scullion and Hearn (2018) state that the literature on marketization in HE lacks empirical
evidence since the eld is lled with a growing rich and critical set of theoretical works. Raaper (2017) draws
attention to the importance of the context of public policy development. For this author, further investigation
is necessary to understand how the HE public policies are implemented and how they may redene the
faculty subjectivity. Gunn and Mintrom (2016, p. 253) ask for more empirical evidence on the eectiveness
of public policy development, investigating “whether governments will pursue impact agenda in a positive,
developmental way, or in a more punitive, narrow-minded fashion” Jungblut and Vukasovic (2018) claim
that the introduction of market elements in HE is related to dierent political preferences and ideologies in
political agendas, including strongly market-oriented, and welfare states.
To practitioners, this research has the potential to support and stimulate the discussion about the
public HE ongoing reforms by understanding what the faculty body thinks about the changes and how they
perceive these changes from a broader perspective.
eoretical Foundation
In this section, we present neoliberalism as embedded values of individualism and marketization
that supposedly assure the well-functioning society. Later, we point out how neoliberal practices changed the
public HE system, establishing market values in research and teaching. Finally, we discuss the role of public
HE focusing on the Brazilian context.
Neoliberal Practices in Public Higher Education
Neoliberalism stands that the rationale which supports private companies’ management would
benet society due to a “trickle-down eect” that would emerge from prots obtained by private companies,
which should therefore focus only on shareholder values and prots (FRIEDMAN, 1970). More than that,
this rationale should be adopted by the society as a whole, becoming a “new world rationale” (DARDOT;
LAVAL, 2016), to be embraced by private companies and the remaining public institutions and companies, as
well as by individuals in their daily activities. is rationale benets from the propositions of agency theory
(JENSEN; MECKLING, 1976), which criticizes bureaucratic management as managers (“agents”), would not
fully meet the owner’s (“principal”) interests; for instance, managers would try to conciliate the owner’s and
workers’ interests in order to avoid conicts that would damage the rms’ daily performance.
In the long run, however, this behavior would damage the “value of the rm” (JENSEN; MECKLING,
1976) as, in capitalism, workers’ interests should be subordinate to the owner’s interest. erefore, the
“principal” should control the “agent” and set up “accountability and transparency” within management by
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
5
means of new forms of governance, and, at the same time, foster “desirable” behaviors through incentive
schemes that tie “agent’s” and “principal’s” interests.
In this sense, public services, even if not privatized, become more dependent on economic authorities
(CHATELAIN-PONROY etal., 2018), which would be best “managers” since, as representatives of markets
(the “principal”), economic authorities would know better how to allocate capital. Public services were also
“colonized” by neoliberal practices, which is reected in the so-called “new public management” (NPM) or
“managerialist” practices in public administration. NPM arose during the 1980s in the United Kingdom and
consolidated itself as one of the traits of the “new labour” party in the 1990s. Among its main aspects, NPM
proposes the employment of professional managers in the top of the public sector, who are “free to manage;”
these managers would act with greater responsibility towards public agents, typically by focusing on explicit
standards and performance measures; a focus on output control rather than procedures; greater competition in
the public sector; greater discipline in the use of resources, especially focused on cost reduction (HOOD, 1991).
NPM introduced managerial practices in public services such as health (BEVAN; HOOD, 2006)
and education (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009; DIXON; HOOD, 2016; FISHER, 2020). NPM principles and
practices in education spread out worldwide, as pointed out by Van Houtum and Van Uden (2022) in the
Netherlands, Kalfa, Wilkinson and Gollan (2018) in Australia, Chatelain-Ponroy etal. (2018) in France, and
Carlotto and Garcia (2017) in Brazil. NPM practices work as an “isomorphic tendency” (CZARNIAWSKA;
GENELL, 2002, p. 463) that allows institutions from around the world, despite dierent contexts, to be
comparable among each other.
In HE, NPM usually means that academic labor becomes more quantied, standardized, and
controlled (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009), thus introducing a “neoliberal discipline” (DARDOT; LAVAL, 2016).
Universities must raise funding from public or private entities in a competitive way, aiming at self-nancing
(CZARNIAWSKA; GENELL, 2002). HE rankings are established in order to help those entities to decide where
to allocate their capital (DIXON; HOOD, 2016). Rankings are fed by performance measurement systems
(PMS), which are designed to quantify all academic activities such as teaching, researching, and participating in
universities’ administrative activities (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009; KALFA; WILKINSON; GOLLAN, 2018).
Considering public HE, both rankings and PMS aim at fullling aspirations of transparency, accountability, and
societal control over public investments (GUNN; MINTROM, 2016), therefore achieving legitimacy.
Along with these governance practices, HE reforms show a tendency to focus on research and
publishing results rather than teaching (KALFA; WILKINSON; GOLLAN, 2018; VAN HOUTUM; VAN
UDEN, 2022). Within the “knowledge economy” rhetoric, universities are considered one of the most
important loci of “producing knowledge,” i.e., producing “value” through research. Nevertheless, not any
knowledge is judged to be “useful” or “relevant,” in the sense that applied, or STEM research tends to be valued
in detriment of basic or humanities research (GUNN; MINTROM, 2016). In addition, focusing on publishing
may be explained by the existence of a publication industry. Commercial publishers created rankings, which
allegedly would oer transparency and accountability for academic work, and over time converted publishing
in the sole legitimate form of knowledge dissemination (VAN HOUTUM; VAN UDEN, 2022).
On the other hand, when teaching activities are taken into account, their assessment is built
over a representation of students as consumers (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009; INGLEBY, 2015; NIXON;
SCULLION; HEARN, 2018; FISHER, 2020). Reecting neoliberal values, students as consumers are
considered as “individual choosers” (NIXON; SCULLION; HEARN, 2018), whose needs or desires such as
“employability” or “obtaining the right set of skills for the job market” should be satised. Evasion should be
avoided not necessarily due to societal concerns, but because students are sources of funding by means of
tuition fees and universities compete globally to attract them (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009).
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
6
e Role of Public Higher Education in Brazil
Education is supposed to support knowledge about the social spaces that guides individuals, as well
as about their own reality, in order to provide freedom of thought and a critical perspective. In HE, knowledge
that is centered on the holistic development of the individual towards society is even more critical because
students are now mature enough to understand their role in the community as individuals and professionals.
Providing access to HE is also related to the reduction of social inequalities (DELORS, 2010).
In Brazil, HE follows the Federal Constitution, specically the Law of Guidelines and Bases for
National Education, enacted in 1996. is law establishes that HE not only trains individuals with a scientic
spirit, but also aims to solve contemporary problems (national and regional) by promoting cultural knowledge
and a reection within a humanistic perspective. Brazilian HE institutions can be public or private regarding
ownership and can also be research-centered or teaching-centered, being accredited as a college, university
center, or university. Universities are characterized by the association between teaching, research, and extension.
Most universities in Brazil are public, and most colleges are private. Public universities are nanced, almost
entirely, by the government, and students do not pay tuition or fees (FRIGOTTO, 2009; OLIVEIRA, 2009).
Discussing the role of public HE implies dening the meaning and concept of public and the nature
of the “public good,” for which universities may have a central role (WATTS, 2017). Ghanem (2004) explains
that appropriate education should strive for a balance between knowledge in favor of community interests
and production of “public good.” Moreover, a public good is any product or service that can be consumed by
any number of people without being depleted and can be consumed by everyone in the same way. Based on
this concept, knowledge as a public good cannot be marketed as a “product of education,” eliminating the
notion of education as a commodity (MARGINSON, 2006; 2011).
University education is a public interest insofar as its core practices, such as teaching and research,
are conducted to promote reasoning and engagement in the knowledge puzzles (WATTS, 2017). erefore, to
accomplish their role, public HE demands managerial autonomy and freedom of thought, including freedom
for teachers to dene their class content and research focuses (GAPPA; AUSTIN; TRICE, 2007). e activity
of the university is not xed, as the production of knowledge is diverse and incapable of being encapsulated,
transported, and commercialized (MIDDLEHURST; ELTON, 1992). In other words, HE activity is not a
product, and, besides being guided by public policies, education is temporal and based on social practices
(GRAY; O’REGAN; WALLACE, 2018). Another argument that helps to understand the public importance
of HE is its importance in economic, cultural, and social development areas (DELORS, 2010).
Public Higher Education Reforms
In Brazil, the discussion about the role of public higher education is inserted in the international
discourse of the commodication of education (FRIGOTTO, 2009; OLIVEIRA, 2009; KLEES, 2017; ALBA,
2019; MARTINS, 2021). ere is a tendency on the political arena to reduce public HE to an institution
aimed to meet market demands, like training professionals according to the market needs and researching
according to market interests (WATTS, 2017).
Regarding the role of the government, there are pressures from the nancial sector to reduce the
state’s participation in HE (ALBA, 2019). Mundy (2002), Klees etal. (2012), and Leher (2021), among other
authors, discuss this notion within the scope of the World Bank’s actions that reassures its responsibility in
disseminating the neoliberal agenda in education at developing countries, thereby trying to position itself
as a “knowledge bank.” In the 1980s, the World Bank assumed the position of the largest international aid
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
7
agency and lender for education. Privatization in public HE has been seen as an eort to diminish public
control over university nance and rely on private business know-how.
As a result, political interpretations and actions based on a utilitarian and neoliberal logic, linked
to the geopolitics of knowledge, turned education into an economic issue (SANTOS, 2020). In the Brazilian
context, reports show the expansion of private HE institutions with the creation of colleges and university
centers that do not need to engage in research activities (OLIVEIRA, 2009). e presence of large corporations
in the Brazilian educational sector, along with the expansion of distance learning, contribute to the movement
of commodication and privatization of HE (COSTA; SILVA, 2019).
e neoliberal values of competence, employability, and meritocracy reinforced the idea of
transforming HE into a market, to meet the demands and imperatives of the economic order (HURSH,
2016). e strategy of privatizing HE in Brazil is based on the concept of “public good,” and manipulates the
discourse in the direction that university produces a public good that can be transformed into a “private good”
to be sold as a product to consumers (students and business groups) and/or nancialized in the stock market,
therefore beneting the whole society. According to Banerji (2018), the nancialization of HE contributes
to inequalities in income and wealth, as the nancial system continuously reproduces the capital logic by
controlling process to make a prot.
To analyze the marketization and nancialization of HE sector in Brazil, it is necessary to understand
the context from several perspectives, especially the faculty’s role, since they are supposed to have power and
knowledge to critically step in. In this sense, how do professors perceive their role in HE and the university’s
one as well? Watts (2017) explains that professors still see their role as agents of critical thinking and value the
free forms of knowledge produced at the university. Most academics think of public HE as a means to achieve
social and economic development. In addition, professors are not willing to lose autonomy in teaching and
research, indicating a contradiction between the perception of the professors and the political and economic
agenda. At the heart of these contradictions, there is the daily practice of the HE, constantly questioned under
the concepts of eciency and governance (LIMA, 2021).
However, neoliberalism values in the form of the NPM practices such as performance systems may
change the ethos of academic work, especially in the case of public HE (CHATELAIN-PONROY etal., 2018),
and values such as collegiality may be exchanged for competition and individualism (KALFA; WILKINSON;
GOLLAN, 2018). Consequently, these new governance practices may generate “autoimmune” eects, leading
to results which are opposite to the very ones aimed by these practices, thus reducing quality, academic
freedom, and societal contribution (VAN HOUTUM; VAN UDEN, 2022).
ese NPM practices are present in Brazil, as shown by the Future-se Program. e program reects
what Costa and Silva (2019) characterize as the new academic neoliberalism in Brazil. e assumption is that
HE should cease to meet societal needs and that those who go to public universities should pay, freeing the
government from investing and nancing public HE (SILVA JR.; FARGONI, 2020). is logic reformulates
the investments in public education consolidating the commodication of education (OLIVEIRA, 2009;
CASTRO; ALMEIDA, 2020). In practice, the program is an attempt to seek nancial autonomy for the public
HE by reducing and later removing the nancial obligation of the Ministry of Education. It is the rst step
to withdraw HE from the federal budget, releasing the State from nancing public HE.
Upon the argument that public universities are expensive, bureaucratic, and inecient, the HE
reform emerges as an alternative to transfer the responsibility for seeking funding for their activities to
the universities (WEGNER, 2020). It also moves managerial responsibilities to external entities, social
organizations, and foundations. e Future-se Program proposes that public universities sign contracts
with social organizations–which are private associations–, making them responsible for managing ordinary
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
8
expenses, teaching activities, research agenda, and service programs. ese contracts are subjected to
performance evaluation. Besides, these reforms propose the creation of a management committee and an
investment fund to support and manage the expenses of the public HE institutions.
Research Hypotheses
As previously discussed, neoliberalism is more than an economic model, as its practices spread over several
aspects of society. It became a “general rationale” which “colonized” elds other than economy, such as HE. erefore,it
is expected a global alignment with neoliberal values, even in the public HE sector in Brazil. However,due to the
critical nature of the public universities, we expected a diversity of opinions and values regarding the neoliberalism
from the faculty body because they are dedicated to research and critical thinking. Our rst hypothesis stated that
professors of public HE are not a homogeneous group regarding the neoliberal values and beliefs:
• e global alignment to neoliberal values tends to be heterogeneous between professors of public HE.
e general media and the government politicians try to justify the proposed reforms by convincing
the society that public universities in Brazil are failed institutions because they are not managed as private
organizations. However, those who work and study in public universities in Brazil tend to question this
discourse because they are aware of the university functioning and quality of their outcomes. Even with all
the political and nance sector pressures to impose neoliberal values, those who work at public universities
still think that public HE actively contributes to economic development, and it is a way to reduce social
inequalities. erefore, the hypothesis 2 is posed:
• Professors of the public HE system in Brazil tend to agree that public universities are important to
society because it fosters economic development and reduces social inequalities.
e process of commercialization and nancialization of public HE does not happen without
struggles, even in developing economies. Public universities in Brazil are one of the few sectors that still
cultivate a dierent ethos from the neoliberal rationale. e “colonization” process accomplished by
neoliberalism produces new forms of governance, norms, and routines. e proposed reform in Brazilian
public HE brings several losses disguised under the discourse of autonomy and eciency. Universities are
expected to lose government nancial resources and seek for money elsewhere; autonomy and be ruled by a
committee run by market professionals; and research/teaching freedom and follow the committee regulation.
On the other hand, professors who believe and defend neoliberalism are comfortable with the changes in
public HE governance proposed by the reforms. erefore, the third hypothesis is:
• Professors aligned with neoliberal values are more likely to support university governance ruled by
market norms.
Methodology
Sample
e UFMG is located in the Southeast region of Brazil. Its academic community includes 3,189
faculty, 4,272 technicians and administrative employees, 32,332 undergraduate students, and 11,707graduate
students. ere are 20 colleges spread across four campi in three dierent cities.
is research was rst submitted to the approval by the Research Ethics Committee of the university.
With the ocial approval, we sent an informative e-mail to the dean’s oce of the main colleges, the president
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
9
of the Faculty Union, and key professors. In this e-mail, we attached an invitation letter to participate in this
research and we asked for their support in forwarding it to the faculty. e invitation letter had the questionnaire
link with an explanation of the objective of this study. We also ensured the independence of the research and
stated the participation was voluntary and anonymous. We used the Google Docs platform to collect the data.
A total of 105 professors answered the questionnaire. e results of the power analysis, performed in
the G*Power soware, indicated the power of 82%, for a medium eect size and signicance level of 5%, which
is sucient to test the proposed hypotheses. e power analysis is a statistical technique useful to dene the
minimum number of respondents sucient to run the statistical test because it includes the sample size, the eect
size, and the signicance error to compute the probability of do not incur in a type II error (BORGES etal., 2020).
Most of the participants of this research are from the Engineering School (56%) and Social Sciences
(32%). We also had responses from Medicine and Biomedicine Schools (12%). All the 105 participants are
professors at UFMG, with an average age of 49 years old. e youngest respondent is 30 years old, and the
oldest one is 73. e average membership is 16 years, with admission year varying from 1977 to 2020.
Instrument Development
e questionnaire is composed of four sections. In the rst section, we asked about global concepts
of society functioning regarding eciency, individualization, competition, and “marketization” of education.
is section measures how well the respondent agrees to the neoliberal thinking, in a Likert type scale varying
from 1 to 5, in which ve represents total alignment.
In the second section, we assessed the participants’ perceptions of the role of public HE in society
as a tool to promote economic development and reduce social inequalities. e items were measured in a
5-point Likert scale, in which 5 indicates that the respondent strongly agrees that public HE is important to
promote economic development and reduce social inequalities.
In the third section of the questionnaire, we asked about the governance of the university concerning
administration and autonomy, objectives of the university, and nancial resources. e items were measures in a
5-point Likert scale, in which 5 presents that university administration should be professionalized, aim for teaching,
and prepare students for the market, and use private money to invest only in research with nancial return.
Finally, the fourth section addressed occupational and demographic characteristics.
We employed conrmatory factor analysis in R soware to assess the consistency and adequacy
of the measurement instrument. Table 1 shows the standardized loadings, standard error, average variance
extracted, and composite reliability for each variable. All the results exceed the threshold indicated in the
literature suggesting that the instrument is adequate to measure what it was designed to (HAIR etal., 2018).
Table 1. Measurement model parameters.
Variab l e Item Standardized
loadings
Standard
error AVE Composite
reliability
Neoliberal thinking
– alignment
Eciency 0.935* 0.08 0.53 0.82
Individualization 0.602* 0.05
Competition 0.704* 0.07
Marketization 0.632* 0.06
Public higher
education and society
Economic development 0.758* 0.05 0.61 0.76
Social inequalities reduction 0.801* 0.08
University
governance
Administration and autonomy 0.897* 0.07 0.53 0.77
Objectives 0.549* 0.06
Financial resources 0.698* 0.06
N = 105; *p < 0.001; AVE: average variance extracted. Elaborated by authors.
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
10
e correlation between variables was lower than the square root of the average variance extracted
for each variable, indicating good discriminant validity. e t indexes of the estimated measurement model
were also satisfactory [χ2(36) = 334.20, p < 0.001]. e t parameters, including the comparative t index
(CFI= 0.934), goodness-of-t index (GFI = 0.916), and the approximation error (RMSEA = 0.08), all exceeded
the threshold.
Findings
e descriptive statistics of the overall data show that most of the respondents are not aligned with
neoliberal thinking regarding the poor eciency of public administration (mean–M = 2.37, standard deviation–
SD = 0.97), individualization of the outcomes (M = 2.51, SD = 0.62), competitiveness as a positive value
(M=3.30, SD = 0.81), and “marketization” of public HE system (M = 1.65, SD = 0.65). e participants also
agree that public HE is an important tool to promote economic development (M = 4.57, SD = 0.54) and reduce
social inequalities (M = 4.20, SD = 0.86). Also, the professors think that the university should be administrated
with autonomy (M = 2.55, SD = 0.75), aiming to balance teaching with research and prepare students not only
for the market (M = 2.79, SD = 0.67), and funded mostly with public resources (M = 2.59, SD = 0.65).
To test the hypotheses, we ran the analysis of variance test in R soware. First, the data were divided
into two groups: respondents who are aligned with neoliberal values–ranging from 3 to 5–; and respondents
less aligned with neoliberal values–those who scored 1 to 2.99 in the rst section of the questionnaire.
eresults indicated that 20% of the participants agree with neoliberal thinking (M = 3.32, SD = 0.31),and
80% of the professors disagree with the neoliberal values of eciency, individualization, competition,
and“marketization” of HE (M = 2.24, SD = 0.40).
Leven’s test determines whether the variance across both groups is equal. e results indicated a
lack of homogeneity of variances for the global alignment variable [F(1,103) = 2.43, p = 0.12). Moder (2010)
explains that, in the case of dierences in variances, several solutions are recommended, such as employing a
robust method capable of controlling the type I error. e author concludes that the Welch test, for example,
is suitable for handling the lack of homoscedasticity for a small number of factor levels. erefore, the results
suggested that there is a signicant dierence between the group of professors aligned with neoliberal values
and those who are not aligned [F(1,37.62) = 153.06, p < 0.001]. As result, hypothesis 1, which stated that the
body of professors tends to be heterogeneous concerning neoliberal values, was supported.
Hypothesis 2 posits that professors in the public HE system in Brazil tend to agree that public
universities are important to society. So, we tested how the two groups think regarding the role of public HE
in society as an important tool to foster economic development and reduce social inequalities. Levene’s test
showed that the assumption of the homogeneity of variances was not violated [F(1,103) = 0.483, p = 0.489].
e overall data suggested that professors agree that HE is important to society (M = 4.38, SD = 0.61), thus
supporting Hypothesis 2. However, the result of the analysis of variance indicated that there is a signicant
dierence between groups [F(1,103) = 9.69, p < 0.01], in the direction that professors who are less aligned with
neoliberal values are more positive regarding the importance of public HE system to the society (M=4.47,
SD = 0.54) when compared to those professors who are more aligned with the neoliberal thinking (M= 4.02,
SD = 0.47).
About the university governance, Levene’s test indicated homoscedasticity [F(1,103) = 0.256,
p=0.614]. e results indicated that professors aligned with neoliberal values are more likely to give away
administrative autonomy to external stakeholders, focusing more on meeting the students’ expectations, and
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
11
obtaining private sponsorship to raise funds (M = 3.19, SD = 0.38). In contrast, professors with low alignment
with neoliberal thinking tend to disagree that the university should be governed following market norms
and targets (M = 2.50, SD = 0.44). e ndings supported hypothesis 3, indicating that there are dierences
between both groups regarding university governance [F(1,103) = 42.171, p < 0.001].
Discussion and Implications
e Brazilian federal government has proposed HE reforms guided by neoliberal values.
esereforms assert that public universities should be run like a business, reducing the government’s
participation in nancing the HE system and changing the governance of public universities (TAYLOR,
2017). Under the idea of eciency, public HE institutions should give up autonomy and be ruled by an
external committee of stakeholders (HARVIE; DE ANGELIS, 2009; KALFA; WILKINSON; GOLLAN, 2018).
What is happening in Brazil had already happened in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United
States of America under the NPM guidance as part of a political agenda in the 1980s (JUNGBLUT; VUKASOVIC,
2018). e HE reforms open a new and protable market to the private sector, consolidating the marketization
and nancialization of education, and transforming public HE into a commodity (DARDOT; LAVAL, 2016).
e results are well-known and not encouraging. Indeed, Germany already noticed that universities competing
for resources aggravated social inequality and made their HE system public and free again.
In this context, this study sought to understand how professors of a public HE institution in Brazil
perceive the ongoing HE reforms. Our hypotheses were that neoliberalism values are so imbricated in
society functioning that some professors agree with the marketization and nancialization of the public HE
system in Brazil. However, we also hypothesized that the faculty body is not homogeneous because some
areas still cultivate a dierent ethos from the neoliberal rationale. Our ndings indicated that professors
are a heterogeneous group, with the majority (80%) disagreeing with the neoliberal values of eciency,
individualization, competition, and marketization of education. However, this heterogeneity also shows that
20% of the respondents are aligned with the marketization view of education. is may indicate a tendency,
even in public HE, to meet market demands and transform HE into a product, as claimed by Klees (2017),
Watts (2017), and Alba (2019).
Our ndings also indicated that the participants are aware of their role in the society in the sense
that public HE contributes to economic development and reduces social inequalities, as pointed out by Delors
(2010). ose professors who are less aligned with neoliberal values are the ones who have the strongest
perception of the relationship between HE education and positive income and wealth. As Watts (2017) has
pointed out, professors’ perceptions are still critical regarding their role and the universities’ role in the society,
even in the face of social, economic, and political pressures to prove otherwise.
Finally, our ndings showed that professors more aligned with neoliberal values are more likely
to accept public HE to be managed like a business. Despite being outnumbered in this sample, professors
aligned with neoliberalism are willing to adopt eciency, individualization, and competition values in the
university governance by focusing on results and letting the committees formed by stakeholders decide about
academic, administrative, and nancial goals. ey also believe that universities should prepare students for
the market and should be funded by the private sector.
is rationale aligns with the overall political discourse (replicated by the general media) that
universities are expensive, inecient, and only those students who directly benet from public HE should
pay for it (WEGNER, 2020). is could bolster proposals, such as the Future-se Program, which focus on
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
12
improving nancial eciency in public universities, undermining their social role. Additionally, as previously
discussed, the introduction of new neoliberal governance practices in public service may change the ethos of
public work; therefore, one may ask if workers not aligned with neoliberalism could change in the long run,
becoming supporters of neoliberal rationale and practices, especially if the new governance practices succeed
and if those professionals who adhere to the rules of these new practices also succeed in their careers, to the
detriment of those who resist.
e major contribution of this research is to provide empirical evidence on how public HE faculty
perceive reforms and think about their roles. is contribution adds to the ongoing discussion on the
marketization and nancialization in higher education, thereby addressing the gap pointed out by Nixon,
Scullion and Hearn (2018). is research intends to shed the light on the importance of professors’ involvement
in the political agenda on education, drawing attention to the nature of the proposed reforms–whether
they are narrow-minded or developmental, as discussed by Gunn and Mintrom (2016); the ideological
preferences, as posited by Jungblut and Vukasovic (2018); and the importance of the context of the public
policy development because it can redene faculty subjectivity, as claimed by Raaper (2017).
is research brings important implications for practice. Our sample indicated that most professors
are not aligned with neoliberal values, believe in the social role of public HE, and are not willing to give up
autonomy and freedom. Currently, the Brazilian public HE reform lies quietly in the House of Representatives
due to a change in the political party in power. However, there is a political agenda in Brazil nanced by the
private sector to promote the nancialization and marketization of the public HE.
Additionally, one h of the respondents in our sample appeared to support this agenda, even being
part of the public HE environment. is is not an insignicant gure, and, if new governance practices being
employed contribute to professors’ professional success, this number may increase. Without transparency
and opportunity to debate the reforms, it is challenging for civil society to organize and defend their interest.
Our ndings suggest that most HE professors are against this agenda. Politicians and labor unions have
signicant work to do if they want to raise professors’ awareness on this subject. One possibility is to publicize
previous research ndings about the HE reforms in developed countries, translating them into simpler and
comprehensive materials.
Limitations
is research also has some limitations. Our rst limitation refers to the sample. Despite its relevance
and size, we focused on only one public university. Future research should expand the sample to other public HE
institutions in Brazil and include various geographic locations to investigate whether these ndings hold across
diverse samples. e second limitation is the cross-sectional nature of this study. We believe that longitudinal
research may capture signicant changes over time regarding faculty rationale. e third limitation is related
to the COVID-19 pandemic, during which public universities in Brazil played a critical role in supporting local
government facing challenges. ese universities were the only facilities in Brazil equipped with laboratories,
trained labor forces, and infrastructure (such as super freezers) capable of rapidly producing knowledge and
facing the pandemic. Our assumption is that society in general might have changed its opinion about public
universities, especially regarding eciency. Future research may investigate if the professors’ perceptions ofthe
universities’ social role changed due to the pandemic event. Finally, the fourth limitation is associated with
thesample size and the survey method. Future research should increase the number of participants and include
other colleges from the same university in the analysis. Future study may also conduct qualitative research to
gain in-depth insights into how professors think about the proposed reforms.
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
13
Conclusion
is research aimed to understand how the faculty body of a public HE institution in Brazil perceives
the proposed educational reforms by assessing their perspectives on neoliberal values, the role of public HE,
and university governance. e ndings indicate that most professors who are not aligned with neoliberal
values believe that the university has a critical role in promoting economic development and reducing social
inequalities. ey also advocate in favor of the university’s freedom of though, and governance. However, the
concerning results pertain to professors aligned with neoliberal values, as they believe public HE should be
run like a business. ey are also willing to give away autonomy, governance, and resources.
Author’s Contribution
Problematization and Conceptualization: Borges RSG, Pereira MC, Dias AVC; Methodology:
Borges RSG, Pereira MC, Brito HL; Analysis: Borges RSG, Pereira MC, Dias AVC; Revision: Borges RSG,
Pereira MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL.
References
ADMINISTRADORES.COM. Foco da universidade do futuro deve ser o mercado de trabalho, aponta
pesquisa. Administradores, João Pessoa, Jun. 11, 2014. Available at: https://administradores.com.br/
noticias/foco-da-universidade-do-futuro-deve-ser-o-mercado-de-trabalho-aponta-pesquisa. Accessed
on: Dec. 10, 2021.
ALBA, R. P. Mercantilização da educação no Brasil: da proposta do Banco Mundial à incorporação nos Planos
Nacionais de Educação. 163f. Dissertation (Masters in Education) – Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Paraná, Cascavel,
2019. Available at: http://tede.unioeste.br/bitstream/tede/4461/5/Rogeria_Alba_2019.pdf. Accessed on: Sept. 16, 2021.
BANERJI, A. Financialization of higher education: interest swaps and their consequences. Journal of
Collective Bargaining, v. 0, art. 15, 2018. https://doi.org/10.58188/1941-8043.1758
BEVAN, G.; HOOD, C. What’s measured is what matters: targets and gaming in the English public health care
system. Public Administration, v. 84, n. 3, p. 517-538, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2006.00600.x
BORGES, R. S. G.; DUARTE, R. G.; PEREIRA, M. C.; MIURA, I. K. Manual expresso para redação de TCC
na área de gestão. Jundiaí: Paco Editorial, 2020.
BRASIL. Ministério da Educação. Instituições de ensino superior empenharam só 28,9% do orçamento
não obrigatório de 2019. Portal MEC, Brasília, May 16 2019. Available at: http://portal.mec.gov.br/ultimas-
noticias/212-educacao-superior-1690610854/76111-instituicoes-de-ensino-superior-empenharam-so-28-9-
do-orcamento-nao-obrigatorio-de-2019. Accessed on: Oct. 8, 2021.
CARLOTTO, M. C.; GARCIA, S. G. Novos saberes, novas hierarquias: disputas contemporâneas em torno da
prossão acadêmica. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, São Paulo, v. 33, n. 96, e339604, 2017. Available
at: https://www.scielo.br/j/rbcsoc/a/8dDyxmKG48RfPz94drLzmHs/?lang=pt#. Accessed on: Oct. 8, 2021.
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
14
CASTRO, S. O. C.; ALMEIDA, F. M. Public policies for access to private higher education and their eects
on the quality of Brazilian education. Education Policy Analysis Archives, Tempe, v. 28, n. 93, p. 1-24, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.28.5054
CHATELAIN-PONROY, S.; MIGNOT-GÉRARD, S.; MUSSELIN, C.; SPONEM, S. Is commitment to performance-
based management compatible with commitment to university “publicness”? Academics’ values in French
universities. Organization Studies, v. 39, n. 10, p. 1377-1401, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617717099
COSTA, C. F.; SILVA, S. M. G. Novo neoliberalismo acadêmico e o ensino superior no Brasil. Revista Eletrônica
de Administração, Porto Alegre, v. 25, n. 3, p. 6-35, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-2311.251.89569
CZARNIAWSKA, B.; GENELL, K. Gone shopping? Universities on their way to the market. Scandinavian
Journal of Management, v. 18, n. 4, p. 455-474, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(01)00029-X
DARDOT, P.; LAVAL, C. A nova razão do mundo: ensaio sobre a sociedade neoliberal. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2016.
DELORS, J. (ed.). Educação: um tesouro a descobrir. Relatório para a Unesco da Comissão Internacional
sobre Educação para o século XXI. Brasília: Unesco, 2010.
DIXON, R.; HOOD, C. Ranking academic research performance: a recipe for success? Sociologie du Travail,
Paris, v. 58, n. 4, p. 403-411, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soctra.2016.09.020
FISHER, M. Realismo capitalista. São Paulo: Autonomia Literária, 2020.
FRIEDMAN, M. e social responsibility of business is to increase its prots. e New York Times Magazine, p.17,
Sept. 13, 1970. Available on: http://websites.umich.edu/~thecore/doc/Friedman.pdf. Accessed on: Sept. 14, 2021.
FRIGOTTO, G. A polissemia da categoria trabalho e a batalha das ideias nas sociedades de classe. Revista Brasileira
de Educação, Rio de Janeiro, v. 14, n. 40, p. 168-194, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782009000100014
GAPPA, J.; AUSTIN, A.; TRICE, S. Rethinking faculty work: higher education’s strategic imperative. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2007.
GHANEM, E. Educação escolar e democracia no Brasil. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica/Ação Educativa, 2004.
GRAY, J.; O’REGAN, J. P.; WALLACE, C. Education and the discourse of global neoliberalism. Journal of
Language and Intercultural Communication, London, v. 18, n. 5, p. 471-477, 2018. https://doi.org/10.108
0/14708477.2018.1501842
GUNN, A.; MINTROM, M. Higher education policy change in Europe: academic research funding and the impact
agenda. European Education, v. 48, n. 4, p. 241-257, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2016.1237703
HAIR, J. H.; BABIN, B. J.; ANDERSON, R. E.; BLACK, W. C. Multivariate data analysis. 8. ed. United
Kingdom: Cengage Learning EMA, 2018.
HARVIE, D.; DE ANGELIS, M. Cognitive capitalism and the rat-race: how capital measures immaterial
labour in British universities. Historical Materialism, London, v. 17, n. 3, p. 3-30, 2009. https://doi.org/10.
1163/146544609X12469428108420
HOOD, C. A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, v. 69, n. 1, p. 3-19, 1991. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
15
HURSH, D. The end of public schools: the corporate agenda to privatize education. New York:
Routledge, 2016.
HÜTHER, O.; KRÜCKEN, G. Higher education in Germany: recent developments in an international
perspective. Cham: Springer, 2018.
INGLEBY, E. e house that Jack built: Neoliberalism, teaching in higher education and the moral objections.
Teaching in Higher Educ ation, London, v. 20, n. 5, p. 518-529, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1036729
INSTITUTO NACIONAL DA PROPRIEDADE INDUSTRIAL (INPI). Indicadores de Propriedade
Industrial 2018. Rio de Janeiro: INPI, 2018. Available at: https://www.gov.br/inep/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/
dados-abertos/sinopses-estatisticas/educacao-superior-graduacao. Accessed on: Oct. 30, 2023.
INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE ESTUDOS E PESQUISAS EDUCACIONAIS ANÍSIO TEIXEIRA (INEP).
Sinopse Estatística da Educação Superior 2019. Brasília: Inep, 2021. Available at: https://download.inep.gov.
br/educacao_superior/censo_superior/documentos/2020/Press_Kit_Censo_Superior_2019.pdf. Accessed
on: Oct. 20, 2021.
JABBAR, A.; ANALOUI, B.; KONG, K.; MIRZA, M. Consumerization in UK higher education business
schools: higher fees, greater stress and debatable outcomes. Higher Education, Berlin, v. 76, n. 1, p. 85-100,
2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0196-z
JENSEN, M. C.; MECKLING, W. H. eory of the rm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and
ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, v. 3, n. 4, p. 305-360, 1976. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X
JUNGBLUT, J.; VUKASOVIC, M. Not all markets are created equal: re-conceptualizing market elements in higher
education. Higher Education, Berlin, v. 75, n. 5, p. 855-870, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0174-5
KALFA, S.; WILKINSON, A.; GOLLAN, P. J. e academic game: Compliance and resistance in
universities. Work, Employment and Society, Durham, v. 32, n. 2, p. 274-291, 2018. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0950017017695043
KER, J. (2020). Os ataques de Weintraub às universidades da balbúrdia. Terra, Educação [s.l.], Feb. 19, 2020.
KLEES, S. J. World Bank and education: Ideological premises and ideological conclusions. In: KLEES, S.
J.; SAMOFF, J.; STROMQUIST, N. P. (Eds.). e World Bank and education: critiques and alternatives.
Rotterdam: Sense, 2012. p. 49-65.
KLEES, S. J. Beyond neoliberalism: reections on capitalism and education. Policy Futures in Education,
v.18, n. 1, p. 9-29, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210317715814
LEHER, R. Universidade pública federal brasileira: Future-se e “guerra cultural” como expressões da autocracia
burguesa. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas, v. 42, e241425, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.241425
LIMA, L. C. Democracia e educação: Dewey em tempos de crise da educação democrática. Arquivos
Analíticos de Políticas Educativas, Tempe, v. 29, n. 154, p. 1-16, 2021. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5881
MARGINSON, S. Dynamics of national and global competition in higher education. Higher Education,
Berlin, v. 52, n. 1, p. 1-39, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-7649-x
Compete for what? Faculty perceptions of the public higher education reforms in Brazil
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
16
MARGINSON, S. Higher education and public good. Higher Education Quarterly, v. 65, n. 4, p. 411-433,
2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2011.00496.x
MARTINS, B. Reconguração do ensino superior em temos de globalização. Educação & Sociedade,
Campinas, v. 42, e241544, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.241544
MIDDLEHURST, R.; ELTON, L. Leadership and management in higher education. Studies in Higher
Education, London, v. 17, n. 3, p. 251-264, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079212331382527
MODER, K. Alternatives do F-test in One Way ANOVA in case of heterogeneity of variances (a simulation study).
Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, Vienna, v. 52, n. 4, p. 343-353, 2010. Available at: https://www.
psychologie-aktuell.com/leadmin/download/ptam/4-2010_20101218/01_Moder.pdf. Accessed on: Aug. 26, 2021.
MOURA, M. Universidades públicas respondem por mais de 95% da produção cientíca do Brasil. Academia
Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro, Apr. 15, 2019. Available at: http://www.abc.org.br/2019/04/15/universidades-
publicas-respondem-por-mais-de-95-da-producao-cientica-do-brasil/. Accessed on: Oct. 18, 2021.
MUNDY, K. Retrospect and prospect: Education in a reforming World Bank. International Journal of Educational
Development, Amsterdam, v. 22, n. 5, p. 483-508, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-0593(02)00008-1
NIXON, E.; SCULLION, R.; HEARN, R. Her majesty the student: marketised higher education and the
narcissistic (dis)satisfactions of the student-consumer. Studies in Higher Education, London, v. 43, n. 6,
p.927-943, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1196353
OLIVEIRA, R. P. A transformação da educação em mercadoria no Brasil. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas,
v. 30, n. 108, p. 739-760, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-73302009000300006
RAAPER, R. Tracing assessment policy discourses in neoliberalised higher education settings. Journal of
Education Policy, London, v. 32, n. 3, p. 322-339, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1257160
RAAPER, R.; OLSSEN, M. Mark Olssen on neoliberalisation of higher education and academic lives: An
interview. Policy Futures in Education, v. 14, n. 2, p. 147-163, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210315610992.
SANTOS, E. Da geopolítica das potências à geopolítica do conhecimento: nanceirização e epistemologias
de mercado na educação superior brasileira. Revista Lusófona de Educação, Lisbon, v. 48, p. 135-150, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.24140/issn.1645-7250.rle48.09
SILVA JR., J. R.; FARGONI, E. H. E. Future-se: O ultimato na universidade estatal brasileira. Educação &
Sociedade, Campinas, v. 41, e239000, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.239000
SOUSA, A. P. R.; COIMBRA, L. J. P. Future-se: um golpe contra a democratização do ensino superior. Jornal
de Políticas Educacionais, Curitiba, v. 14, n. 12, e69548, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5380/jpe.v14i0.69548
TAYLOR, A. Perspectives on the university as a business: the corporate management structure,
neoliberalism and higher education. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, Northampton,
v.15, n. 1, p. 108-135, 2017.
TIMES HIGHER EDUCATION (THE). World university rankings 2021. Times Higher Education, 2021.
Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2021/world-ranking#survey-
answer. Accessed on: Oct. 18, 2021.
Educ. Soc., Campinas, v. 44, e260231, 2023
Borges RSG, Pereia MC, Dias AVC, Brito HL
17
VAN HOUTUM, H.; VAN UDEN, A. e autoimmunity of the modern university: How its managerialism
is self-harming what it claims to protect. Organization, v. 29, n. 1, p. 197-208, 2022. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1350508420975347
WATTS, R. Public universities, managerialism and the value of higher education. Melbourne: Palgrave
Critical University Studies, 2017.
WEGNER, R. C. Ensino superior no Brasil: descaminhos propostos pelo “Future-se”. Revista Docência e
Cibercultura, Rio de Janeiro, v. 4, n. 1, p. 281-297, 2020. https://doi.org/10.12957/redoc.2020.50100
XIMENES, S. B.; PINO, I. R.; ADRIÃO, T.; ALMEIDA, L. C.; ZUIN, A. A. S.; MORAES, C. S. V.; FERRETTI,
C. J.; GOERGEN, P.; SOUZA, S. M. Z. L. Rearmar a defesa do sistema de ciência, tecnologia e ensino
superior público brasileiro. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas, v. 40, e0230375, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1590/
ES0101-73302019230375
About the Authors
R S G B is a PhD in Business Administration from Southern Illinois University,
as a Fulbright scholar. She is a bachelor in Control and Automation Engineering at the Pontifícia Universidade
Católica de Minas Gerais. Currently, she serves as a senior lecturer at Rotterdam Business School. She also has
held the position of associate professor in the Department of Business Administration at the Universidade
Federal de Minas Gerais. Her research interests include innovation and entrepreneurship, corporate culture,
organizational change, and knowledge transfer.
M C P is a PhD in Administration Sciences from the Universidade Federal de Lavras,
and bachelor of Administration. She is currently an associate professor in the Department of Production
Engineering at the School of Engineering at the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Her main research
themes are: competence in organizations, innovation, and learning in organizations.
A V C D is a production engineer, PhD in Production Engineering at the Universidade
de São Paulo, with studies at the École Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, France, and an invited researcher at
the Université de Bordeaux IV, from 2018 to 2019. She is currently an associate professor in the Department
of Production Engineering at the School of Engineering of the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
Her main research themes are: work organization, innovation management, organization for innovation,
nancialization of production and innovation, and private and public services management.
H L B is a PhD student in Technological Innovation at the Universidade Federal de
Minas Gerais, masters in Administration at the Fundação Pedro Leopoldo, and bachelor of Administration.
He is currently a professor at the Instituto Federal de Minas Gerais, in the Administration department. His
main research themes are: innovation, entrepreneurship, production management, and circular economy.
Received: Jan. 20, 2022
Accepted: Sept. 26, 2023
