• Nenhum resultado encontrado

Higher Education Teaching and Learning Support Areas Differences in England and Brazil: A Case Study / Áreas de Apoio ao Ensino e Aprendizagem no Ensino Superior Diferenças na Inglaterra e no Brasil: um estudo de caso

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "Higher Education Teaching and Learning Support Areas Differences in England and Brazil: A Case Study / Áreas de Apoio ao Ensino e Aprendizagem no Ensino Superior Diferenças na Inglaterra e no Brasil: um estudo de caso"

Copied!
22
0
0

Texto

(1)

Higher Education Teaching and Learning Support Areas Differences

in England and Brazil: A Case Study

Áreas de Apoio ao Ensino e Aprendizagem no Ensino Superior Diferenças

na Inglaterra e no Brasil: um estudo de caso

DOI:10.34117/bjdv6n2-271

Recebimento dos originais: 30/12/2019 Aceitação para publicação: 26/02/2020

José Carlos Redaelli

(Ph.D. ongoing) jcredaelli@gmail.com http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1511-0846

State University of Campinas-Unicamp, FEC-School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Design, LALT-Learning Laboratory of Logistics and Transport

Rua Saturnino de Brito, 224

Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz – Barão Geraldo Campinas - São Paulo

CEP: 13083-889

Juliana Ferreira de Vales

(M.Eng. ongoing) julianadevalles@gmail.com https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6821-4510

State University of Campinas-Unicamp, FEC-School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Design, LALT-Learning Laboratory of Logistics and Transport

Rua Saturnino de Brito, 224

Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz – Barão Geraldo Campinas - São Paulo

CEP: 13083-889

Orlando Fontes Lima Jr.

(Professor) oflimaj@fec.unicamp.br https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4283-8245

State University of Campinas-Unicamp, FEC-School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Design, LALT-Learning Laboratory of Logistics and Transport

Rua Saturnino de Brito, 224

Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz – Barão Geraldo Campinas - São Paulo

CEP: 13083-889

Júlio Cesar Ferreira dos Passos

(M.Eng.) julio.ferreira.passos@gmail.com https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5248-9835 Centro Universitário Max Planck-UniMax

Av. Nove de Dezembro, 460 - Jardim Pedroso, Indaiatuba - SP, 13343-060

ABSTRACT

Teaching and Learning processes have been relevant in higher education institutions. There have been a wide range of skills provided by the universities teaching and learning support areas. This paper shows a comparative analysis of these areas from University of Bath and the State University of

(2)

Campinas-Unicamp. To show the strengths and weaknesses of each university, this paper shows their ranking data used within The Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Data gathered from both universities websites show their support areas with specific skills. While the University of Bath has high scores in international outlook and citations, Unicamp has its strength in teaching, research, and industry income. Unicamp has more than the double of students. Similar teaching and learning support areas in both universities are shown. Most skills listed for the University of Bath are present in the State university of Campinas-Unicamp. Three support areas under the School of Civil Engineering from Unicamp are shown. Data from other league tables were not considered. These support areas exist to help academic and professional staff when teaching, and planning to teach, and students when learning to learn. It might be relevant to run some scales, questionnaires, surveys among the undergraduate and graduate students, concerning motivation, procrastination, learning strategies, learning styles, and feedback from them about their needs and solutions they believe could help. These might lead to reinforcement or upgrade of these teaching and learning support areas bringing a more appropriate range of skills needed by the students and staff.

Keywords: learning and teaching development; higher education teaching; learning support areas;

center for teaching and learning; faculty development

RESUMO

Os processos de ensino e aprendizagem têm sido relevantes nas instituições de ensino superior. Existe uma ampla gama de habilidades fornecidas pelas áreas de apoio ao ensino e à aprendizagem das universidades. Este artigo mostra uma análise comparativa dessas áreas da Universidade de Bath e da Universidade Estadual de Campinas-Unicamp. Para mostrar os pontos fortes e fracos de cada universidade, este artigo mostra seus dados de classificação usados no The Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Os dados coletados nos sites das duas universidades mostram suas áreas de suporte com habilidades específicas. Embora a Universidade de Bath tenha pontuações altas em perspectivas e citações internacionais, a Unicamp tem força em ensino, pesquisa e renda da indústria. A Unicamp tem mais que o dobro de alunos. Áreas semelhantes de apoio ao ensino e aprendizagem nas duas universidades são mostradas. A maioria das habilidades listadas para a Universidade de Bath está presente na Universidade Estadual de Campinas-Unicamp. São mostradas três áreas de apoio da Escola de Engenharia Civil da Unicamp. Dados de outras tabelas de classificação não foram considerados. Essas áreas de apoio existem para ajudar a equipe acadêmica e profissional no ensino e o planejamento para ensinar, e os alunos quando aprendem a aprender. Pode ser relevante executar algumas escalas, questionários, pesquisas entre estudantes de graduação e pós-graduação, sobre motivação, procrastinação, estratégias de aprendizagem, estilos de aprendizagem e feedback deles sobre suas necessidades e soluções que eles acreditam que possam ajudar. Isso pode levar ao reforço ou aprimoramento dessas áreas de apoio ao ensino e à aprendizagem, trazendo uma gama mais apropriada de habilidades necessárias aos alunos e funcionários.

Palavras-chave: desenvolvimento de aprendizagem e ensino; ensino superior; áreas de apoio à

aprendizagem; centro de ensino e aprendizagem; desenvolvimento do corpo docente

1 INTRODUCTION

There must be a reason why teaching and learning have had a special attention in higher education institutions all over the world. John Dewey more than one century ago stated that it was not possible to continue teaching in the same way as before (John Dewey 1915). Institutions have been trying to improve their teaching and learning processes either to retain the students (W.A Clark 2005), or to draw more students, or to have better students, better professionals (Smith, Smith et al.

(3)

2018) and for other reasons. These might lead them to increasing their revenues (Louis Soares 2016), convincing funding agencies to fund their projects, continuing their work properly (UK 2017), among others.

This paper aims to describe some similarities of teaching and learning support areas between The Brazilian State University of Campinas, Unicamp, and the English University of Bath. Both were created in the same year of 1966. While Unicamp is a public university, funded by the state of São Paulo, which means no tuition fees are necessary, the University of Bath is a private one. This paper uses The Times Higher Education World University Rankings to make a comparison between both universities, using five core areas with 13 performance indicators. These go beyond teaching and learning, which can help the reader understand the overall performance of each university. While the University of Bath has high scores in International Outlook and Citations, Unicamp has its strength in Teaching, Research, and Industry Income.

Similarities in different support areas for teaching and learning present in each university are shown. This paper adds three support areas specific for the School of Civil Engineering of Unicamp. The Structuring Teaching Nucleus (NDE) deals with the undergraduate students, the PubliqFEC program deals with publishing incentives for undergraduate and graduate students and staff, and LALT, which is the Learning Laboratory in Logistics and Transport.

Most faculties, teachers, tutors, and staff coming outside the educational or pedagogical areas have no or few pedagogical skills. This happens all over the world. This explains the importance of such areas as teaching and learning support.

Literature Review

The teachers’ knowledge base should not be concentrated only on their own subject, and include a comprehension of learning theories and knowing how to implement the new skills in practice (Gibson 2009). This is done in primary and secondary education, where the teachers have opportunities to learn how people learn. This has become increasingly clear that this should take place in higher education as well (McAleese 2013). As sir Ken Robinson contended, knowing the contents is essential but not enough (Robinson and Aronica 2015). Many factors can contribute to teaching excellence. The education and experience in the subject matter should be added by the enthusiasm before the students, by the ability to lead to the suitable level for the student to understand, and by taking risks to help the teaching to become learned (Gibson 2009).

The teacher education has been through many different waves of pedagogical approaches to the preparation of teachers in the last half-century. Each wave has been closely connected to conceptual issues of the time concerning the comprehension of teaching and learning. In the 1960s

(4)

and 1970s, teaching research was based on a behavioral model of learning. Teacher education ruled by competences and microteaching pedagogy rose (McDonald, Kazemi et al. 2013). In the 1980s, the research on teaching changed from behavioral psychology into cognitive psychology. The researchers moved their focus from teachers’ behaviors to teachers’ thinking and knowledge. This made it possible to see teaching not as a gathering of behavioral competencies, but as judgments of knowledge about instructional goals, students and discipline (S. Shulman 1987).

The Council of the European Union concluded that the higher education sector, with its core activities including research and innovation should then search for excellence and become worldwide reference in quality (Union 2004). The Modernization Agenda of Higher Education (Commission 2011) at the European Union level set the goal of developing the quality and relevance of teaching and learning through activities like mandating a High-level Group on the modernization of higher education. This group produces key advice concerning the teaching and learning quality and encourage the European collaboration to assure the quality in higher education and the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (Relevance 2018). Furthermore, the OECD studied successful teaching quality initiatives and developed institutional practices to encourage peer learning, with the project called ‘Supporting Quality Teaching in Higher Education’ and UNESCO underlines in its mission that it helps improve quality education (United Nations Educational 2014). Many changes have been started within universities because of that attention, such as the creation of Centers for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, funded on the national level to improve the quality of teaching and learning. In Germany, the ‘Quality Pact for Teaching’ program has the objective to develop the study conditions, the quality of teaching and mentoring in higher education by funding important initiatives at higher education institutions. The funding plan is a joint program of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the federal states (Innovation 2018).

The Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) initiated Centers for Excellence in Teaching and Learning to improve the learning and teaching status in higher education (HEFCE 2003).

The most relevant mission of a CTL is to engage in educational or faculty development (Forgie 2018) and one of its objectives is to improve the quality of teaching and learning seeking for excellence within their universities (Lemmens-Krug 2015).

Although the first CTLs were created to support teachers to use strategies and to supply suggestions to educators to raise students’ learning is relevant goals, the roles that a CTL should perform have increasingly diversified since the 1960s. The focus on individual teachers has shifted from remediation to support and quality improvement on a larger scale. CTLs have been using

(5)

evidence-informed approach to carry teaching and learning. They have done research on the impact of these interventions to feed continuously this environment towards improvement (Forgie 2018).

It is relevant to place the work of a CTL within the institutional context, responding to its culture and the teachers and administrators’ needs. The CTLs will have freedom to design specific programs with the highest impact on teaching and learning in case they have an alignment with the institution priorities (Gray 2009).

The CTLs have their right to exist and to act as change agents (Gosling and Turner 2015). The university leadership and the CTLs attempts to guide the teachers’ academic behavior to improve their academic practices and develop their teaching methods. Every CTL is unique – they vary from their structure, their maturity and the variety of jobs they do (Lemmens-Krug 2015).

It is vital to know the CTLs faculty development program impact. Despite the vast amount of alternative methods on literature, surveys studies have demonstrated that the most frequently used measure are the participant satisfaction and the number of attendees (Hines 2009, Kucsera and Svinicki 2010). Alternative methods go further participant attendance and satisfaction. It evaluates the impact of CTL program on teaching practices and students learning (Gibbs and Coffey 2004, Hines 2009, Kucsera and Svinicki 2010).

Some European countries have gone further and legislated the formation of CTLs; for example, Belgium’s Article 83 promotes student success through the establishment of a higher learning center to advise, coach, and train teachers; the Republic of Slovenia has a National Higher Education Program (2011-2020) (McAleese 2013).

Methodology

This paper starts with general information about both universities. There is a comparison between them considering five performance indicators from The Times Higher Educational World Universities Rankings. Teaching and learning support areas, which serve both universities, and the ones specific for the School of Civil Engineering of Unicamp are shown. Comparative analysis is done along the paper and it ends with some conclusions and recommendations. See figure 1 for the design of this paper methodology.

(6)

Analysys of University of Bath and State University of Campinas-Unicamp:

Teaching and Learning

General Information University of Bath Core Areas (Performance Indicators) - Teaching - Research - Citations - International Outlook - Industry Income General Information Unicamp Core Areas (Performance Indicators) - Teaching - Research - Citations - International Outlook - Industry Income

General Comparative Analysis The Times Higher Educational World Universities Rankings - 2018 Comparative Analysis University of Bath vs

State University of Campinas Unicamp

Teaching and Learning Support Areas

University of Bath

Teaching and Learning Support Areas

Unicamp

Teaching Learning Teaching & Learning

Comparative Analysis

University of Bath

vs

State University of Campinas Unicamp

Conclusions and Recommendations School of Civil Engineering - Unicamp

NDE, PubliqFEC and LALT GW4 Alliance – University of Bath

Fig. 1. The Paper Methodology

Comparative Analysis of Unicamp and the University of Bath The State University of Campinas-Unicamp

The city of Campinas is the place of the main campus of the State University of Campinas (Unicamp). It stays in the state of São Paulo, which is one of the most important state of Brazil, just 100 km away from the capital also named São Paulo. Unicamp is a multi-discipline university and has some other campuses in nearby cities as Limeira and Piracicaba. Unicamp was founded in 1966 and is one of the youngest institutions of the country. It started as a primary medical and scientific research center. As part of this, R&D in Unicamp produces a vast amount of patented material. A relevant breakthrough was accomplished in 2003 when Unicamp scientists licensed a patent for genetic death detection, and recently developed a test for Zika virus detection. The National Synchrotron Light Laboratory located also in Campinas has a strong working relationship with Unicamp. This institute is very important for the students studying physics and nanotechnology. This institute is also the home to the only particle accelerator in South America. Apart from the sciences, students at Unicamp may take a great variety of undergraduate courses, such as Dance and Communication Studies. To study in Unicamp International, the undergraduate students will need to

(7)

sit an exam for the right acceptance. This requires a strong understanding of the Portuguese language. As Unicamp is a public university, both Brazilian and international students do not pay tuition fees. The most common airport for international students to fly into is the Guarulhos International Airport, located around 135km from the Campinas campus. There are some famous alumni of Unicamp including actor Petrônio Gontijo, historian and gay rights activist Luiz Mott, and economist Paulo Renato Souza (Unicamp 2018).

Regarding undergraduate courses, Unicamp selects only 3,320 applicants from over 75,000 yearly. Vast amounts of courses are offered, including medicine, dentistry, several engineering majors, basic natural and human sciences, applied sciences, education and arts (Undergraduate 2018). Regarding graduate courses, they cover most fields of knowledge. UNICAMP has placed special emphasis on graduate education, with about half its students body composed of graduate students. A balance is searched between recruiting the best students and those within social inclusion coming from public school and ethnic minorities (Graduate 2018).

The University of Bath

The University of Bath, founded in 1966, is located in the south west of England, in what is commonly regarded as one of the most beautiful cities in the UK, Bath. Bath was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1987. It is home to many of historic sites, museums and theatres. One can find the Jane Austen museum, which celebrates the life of the author in her hometown. Bath is also famous for the Georgian architecture and green space. The university is comprised of four faculties: engineering and design, humanities and social science, management and science. For the research development, the university has gained particular recognition in 2014 by the Research Excellence Framework (REF). It was graded 87% meaning Bath’s research activities as ‘world leading/internationally excellent’. The University of Bath has one of the best sports facilities in the UK. Several Olympic medal-winners in the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games trained at the university as Bath hosted a range of international teams. Students representing 100 nationalities represent more than o quarter studying in the university, with more than 15,000 students enrolled. The students are offered work placements in every degree and the emphasis is on practical, ‘real life’ skills that employers value. The rates of employment are higher than the average. The University of Bath has active partnerships with a comprehensive range of commercial organizations, including Rolls Royce, L'Oréal, The World Bank, Nike, Airbus and Ford. Some alumni include the founder of the Center for Statistics in Medicine Professor Douglas G Altman, television producer Ash Atalla and rugby player Steve Borthwick. The courses offered by the University of Bath are accredited by the HEA that recognize the commitment to the teaching and learning in higher education. The

(8)

University of Bath has obtained the Gold Status in the Government’s Teaching Excellence Framework-TEF (Bath 2018). Regarding undergraduate, the University of Bath offers vast amounts of courses, including Architecture, several engineering majors, Biosciences, Computer Science, and sport-related studies. Regarding the graduate courses, the University of Bath is a leading UK university for research. The faculties and the Doctoral College supply a variety of graduate programs at masters and doctoral level. The research areas are science, engineering, humanities and social sciences, among others (Study 2018).

Comparative Analysis

Although both universities have the same age, created in 1966, Unicamp has more than the double of students. Being Unicamp a public university with no obligations for tuition fees might explain that difference. For an international student to come to study in Unicamp they will need to sit an exam of Portuguese language. As the English language is known and spoken in almost all countries, this leads the international students to preferring to study in an English speaking country. Anyway, in the University of Bath, they will have to sit an English examination. Both universities have vast amounts of faculties and departments providing different courses. Unicamp has Medicine, which is not present in the University of Bath, and Unicamp does not have sport-related studies, which is present in the University of Bath. The city of Bath is a historical and famous city. It was founded by the Romans as a thermal spa and it was inscribed by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site in 1987. In such a cultural and historical place, the students from the University of Bath, native and mainly the international will be able to practice and use not only the regular but also the academic English, which is universal. Communicating in English, they will be able to attend international congresses, give lectures, have real experience in placements or work in multinational companies, and have a wider range of, not only academic, but personal and professional possibilities, than the Brazilian students.

The Times Higher Education World University Rankings

Founded in 2004, The Times Higher Education World University Rankings aims at supplying a list of the world's best universities, assessed through teaching, research, international outlook, reputation and more. The data of Times Higher Education (THE) is trusted by governments and universities and is a relevant resource to help students choose where to study. These rankings are the only one to judge research-intensive universities through all their core missions: teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook. There are 13 carefully calibrated performance indicators, to supply the most comprehensive and balanced comparisons. The methodology applied

(9)

for this year’s rankings (2018) is similar to the one applied in 2011 – 2012 tables, but there are important changes to the underlying data sources notably deriving bibliometrics from Elsevier’s Scopus database from 2015 – 2016 onwards. The performance indicators are comprised of 13 items within five core areas, and 11 subjects are analyzed. Figure 2 shows the 13 performance indicators in five core areas (Education 2018).

The subjects analyzed for the scores are the following (Education 2018): A&H: Arts & Humanities

Social: Social Sciences

Bus & Eco: Business & Economics Clinical: Clinical, Preclinical & Health

Life: Life Sciences

Phys: Physical Sciences

E&T: Engineering & Technology

Comp Sci: Computer Science

Psycho: Psychology

Law: Law

Educ: Education

Fig. 2. Performance Indicators in Five Core Areas – data from (Education 2018)

See table 1 for the percentage of performance indicators for each subject including the overall score (Education 2018).

(10)

Table 1. Performance Indicators Percentage for each Subject – data from (Education 2018)

Besides the overall scores, there are the specific ones by area, as A&H (Arts and Humanities), Social (Social Sciences), Bus & Eco (Business & Economics), Clinical (Clinical, Preclinical & Health), Life (Life Sciences), Phys (Physical Sciences), E&T (Engineering and Technology), Comp Sci (Computer Science), Psycho (Psychology), Law, and Educ (Education).

The explanations of the 13 performance indicators are in the following lines (Education 2018). • Citations is the research influence meaning how much knowledge and new ideas are spread

expanding the borders of understanding.

• Industry Income from industry & commerce per Academic Staff is the knowledge transfer and the institution’s capability to work with innovations and inventions within the companies. This category purpose is to capture the knowledge-transfer activity through observing how much research income an institution makes from industry, considering the number of academic staff it employs.

• T Rep, the Reputation Survey in Teaching, has the aim to recognize prestige of institutions about teaching

• SSR is the Academic Staff-to-Student Ratio.

• PhD/BA is the Doctorates awarded-to-bachelor’ degrees awarded ratio.

• PhD/Staff is Doctorates awarded-to-academic staff ratio, and it gives a feeling of how committed an institution is to encouraging the next generation of academics.

• Income/Staff is the Institutional Income / Academic Staff, and it presents an institution’s overall status and produce a wide sense of the infrastructure and facilities available to students and staff.

• Rep is the Reputation Survey in Research, and it is the most relevant indicator in this category and it observes the institution’s reputation for research excellence among its peers.

• Income is the Research Income / Academic Staff.

Indicator Overall A&H Social Bus & Eco Clinical Life Phys E&T Comp Sci Psycho Law Educ

Citations 30.00% 15.00% 25.00% 25.00% 35.00% 35.00% 35.00% 27.50% 27.50% 35.00% 25.00% 27.50% Industry Income 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 5.00% 5.00% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% T Rep 15.00% 25.30% 21.10% 21.10% 17.90% 17.90% 17.90% 19.50% 19.50% 17.90% 21.00% 20.00% SSR 4.50% 3.80% 3.30% 3.30% 2.80% 2.80% 2.80% 3.00% 3.00% 2.80% 4.50% 4.50% PhD/BA 2.25% 1.80% 1.60% 0.00% 1.40% 1.40% 1.40% 1.50% 1.50% 1.40% 0.00% 0.00% PhD/Staff 6.00% 4.60% 4.80% 4.90% 4.00% 4.00% 4.00% 4.50% 4.50% 4.00% 4.90% 6.00% Income/Staff 2.25% 1.90% 1.60% 1.60% 1.40% 1.40% 1.40% 1.50% 1.50% 1.40% 2.30% 2.20% Rep 18.00% 30.00% 22.80% 22.80% 19.30% 19.30% 19.30% 21.00% 21.00% 19.30% 21.00% 20.00% Income 6.00% 3.80% 4.90% 4.90% 4.10% 4.10% 4.10% 4.50% 4.50% 4.10% 4.90% 4.90% Papers/Staff 6.00% 3.80% 4.90% 4.90% 4.10% 4.10% 4.10% 4.50% 4.50% 4.10% 4.90% 4.90% Students 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% Staff 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% Collaboration 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% 3.00% 2.50% Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

(11)

• Papers/Staff is the Publications / Staff (Academic Staff + Research Staff). It is the Research productivity and shows a sense of the institution’s capability to have papers published in quality peer-reviewed journals. The quantity of papers published in the academic journals indexed by Elsevier’s Scopus database per scholar is counted.

• Students is the International-to-Domestic-Student Ratio.

• Staff is the International-to-Domestic-Staff Ratio. It is the capability of an institution to bring undergraduates, postgraduates and faculty from the whole planet.

• Collaboration is the International co-authorship (International Publications / Publications Total). It means the International collaboration, the ratio of an institution’s total research journal publications that have at least one international co-author rewarding higher volumes.

The Ranking Comparisons by THE – Times Higher Education

Ranking Comparison: State University of Campinas vs University of Bath

The Ranking positions since 2012 of both universities until the present time in shown in figure 3 (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018). Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath Unicamp Univ. Bath 301-350 251-275 276-300 276-300 251-300 251-300 251-300 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 276-300 251-275 301-350 301-350 351-400 401-500 401-500 2012 2013

Fig. 3. Rankings of Both Universities – data from (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018)

The overall and core areas scores of both universities are shown in figure 4 (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018).

(12)

Univ. Bath Univ. Bath Univ. Bath Univ. Bath Unicamp Unicamp Unicamp Unicamp Unicamp Unicamp International Outlook 67.3 36 88.3 31.7 45.5 27.1 Research 31.7 Citations Industry Income 40.0 35.0 - 39.9 Overall Teaching Univ. Bath 33.9 43.5 Univ. Bath 45.2-48

Fig. 4. Scores of Both Universities – data from (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018)

The following figure 5 shows some key statistics of both universities (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018).

Information Unicamp Univ. Bath

Ranking Position 401-500 251-300

Number of Students 26,811 12,513

No. of students per staff 14.3 16.3

Percentage of International Students 4% 32%

Student Ratio of Females to Males 47 : 53 45 : 55

Fig. 5. Some Statistics of Both Universities – data from (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018)

Comparative Analysis

Showing a rate of 32%, against 4% of international students, this might explain a much higher score in international outlook for the University of Bath (88.3 vs 27.1). Being in an English spoken country, having to write papers with professors in English, it might explain the higher score in citations for the University of Bath (67.3 vs 31.7). Although there have been incentives for Brazilian universities to write papers in English, there has not been a good number yet. The majority of Brazilian universities classes are in Portuguese, which increase the gap regarding the academic importance of the English language in this environment. Although the citations indicator score of 30%, in the University of Bath being higher, Unicamp has a higher score in Research, reaching 30%. As the research area is divided into research reputation, research income per academic staff, and publications per staff, Unicamp might have had a higher quality in the sum of the research reputation and research income. Unicamp did not improve in the rankings after 2014. The University of Bath has always had similar ranking position. It has kept the same ranking since 2015.

(13)

Teaching and Learning Support Areas in Unicamp

The following are some areas in Unicamp, which support the teaching and learning environment regarding the student and the staff serving equally all faculties and institutions.

EA2-Support Space for Teaching and Learning

EA2 is an agent under the undergraduate Rectory, which aims the improvement of the undergraduate teaching in the university. There are ten different programs developed by EA2 linked to the teaching and learning process, including the following: reception of new academic staff, help for teaching first year students, and for teaching assistant, curricular innovation event every two years, Availability of a collection of pedagogical tools, and improvement of teaching activities in Unicamp (Learning 2018).

GGTE- Educational Technologies Management Group

GGTE develops and implements projects regarding educational technologies. It has been involved more recently in distance learning projects, involving relevant areas of the university like, undergraduate, and graduate Pro-rectory among others (Group 2018).

SAE- Services for Students' Support

SAE is the main agent of the university student support and assistance. It concerns lodging, transport, culture the first year student, besides support in the educational, social and legal areas. Courses, lectures and workshops are also offered by SAE (Support 2018).

SAPPE- Psychological and Psychiatric Assistance for Students

SAPPE, under the Undergraduate Pro-rectory is responsible for psychological and psychiatric assistance to the undergraduate and graduate students. It also develops prophylactic programs to help students (Students 2018).

CEL – Language Center

CEL is a center responsible to deliver different languages in the university. It also applies English language certification required by graduate courses applications (Center 2018).

WS - Writing Space

Writing Space is a strategic project from Research Pro-rectory concerning actions to raise the internationalization of research in the university. It aims to support and encourage the international publishing of papers in indexed journals, or books. It regularly offers lectures and courses on Scientific Communication for the whole university, in all knowledge areas aiming to develop academic skills (Space 2018).

DERI – International Relations Office

DRERI is the International Relations Office, which takes care of International exchange for undergraduate and graduate students, researchers and staff (Office 2018).

(14)

CL - Central Library

The Central Library was created in June 1989 and has many objectives apart from lending books. It is comprised by other 24 libraries in Unicamp. It has a relevant role in the support for teaching and research. It offers different kinds of lectures and courses concerning database for publishing, reference management software, among others (Unicamp 2018).

PubliqFEC – Publishing Academic Papers Program

PubliqFEC is a program created by the School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Design (FEC) department oriented to help students publish qualified papers (PubliqFEC 2018).

NDE – Structuring Teaching Nucleus

It is a teaching and learning area from the School of Civil Engineering aiming to work with the undergraduate course (Unicamp 2018).

LALT – Learning Laboratory in Logistics and Transport

The Learning Laboratory in Logistics and Transport is linked to the School of Civil Engineering and has objectives to develop teaching and learning skills for the students (Transport 2018).

Teaching-Learning Support Areas in the School of Civil Engineering-Unicamp

The School of Civil Engineering of Unicamp has its own teaching and learning support areas, described ahead.

The Structuring Teaching Nucleus (NDE) is oriented to work in the conception and maintenance of the pedagogical project and syllabus of the civil engineering undergraduate course. It is a steering committee compounded of at least five professors. Some faculties and departments in Unicamp have their own NDEs, which is allowed by Unicamp since 2012 (Unicamp 2018).

The Academic Paper Publishing Program (PubliqFEC) was created by the School of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Design (FEC) department to encourage the School researchers, academic staff and students to publish qualified papers in relevant national and international journals. Writing high-qualified papers is crucial for Unicamp and all Brazilian universities because it can determine whether the graduate studies (master and doctoral courses) will continue to exist. The quality of the papers determine scores that are assessed every three years by an agency called CAPES- Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (PubliqFEC 2018).

Teaching and Learning Support Areas in the University of Bath

The following are some areas in the University of Bath, which support the teaching and learning environment regarding the student and the staff serving equally all faculties and institutions. ASP – Academic Skills Program

(15)

ASP is accountable for the support for academic skills, which includes courses, workshops, one-to-one support and drop-ins. That involves academic writing, reading, presentations skills, English language improvement, and British studies (Programme 2018).

FLC – Foreign languages Center

FLC supplies different language courses managing the resources through the Language Learning Zone. A peer assisted learning (PAL) for languages is also available to help the individual develop their language and intercultural skills (Center 2018) .

MASH - Mathematics Resources Center

MASH provides support for the students regarding mathematics and statistics. It is possible to have a drop-in session, or access all the online resources and obtain some help for project work, including final year projects or research projects. Workshops are also available for the students (MASH 2018). SAS – Statistics Advisory Service

This area also helps the students in need of their project statistics including final year projects (Service 2018).

CLT – Center for Learning and Teaching

The CLT supports the academic staff in teaching and learning. Opportunities of development for those who teaches and researches, developing skills, managing careers as educator and researcher, gaining Fellowship of the HEA-Higher Education Authority (Teaching 2018).

CL – Central Library

The library helps the staff and the students in their research and academic skills among a wide variety of academic skills (Bath 2018).

SU – Student Union

The Union delivers many different kind of support to the students covering personal, housing and academic issues, among others.

TEF – Teaching Excellence Framework

TEF is an assessment backed by the government of the teaching in the undergraduate courses of England and in some institutions of Scotland and Wales (Framework 2018).

RDF – Researcher Development Framework

It is a tool to help the doctorates in their research (Vitae 2018).

GW4 Alliance – University of Bath

The University of Bath takes part in a highly relevant program called GW4 Alliance. It is a collaborative partnership among four British universities: University of Bath, University of Bristol, Cardiff University, and University of Exeter. These regions cover what is called Great Western. GW4 develops research addressing major global challenges generating innovative solutions. The brightest

(16)

and the best researchers have been building a highly skilled workforce. This can strengthen the regional economy and it connects these universities with major businesses, decision makers and communities of these areas to defend research and innovation. This region is home to the strongest aerospace in the UK, highly productive economy in the UK, the world’s first Compound Semiconductor cluster, high climate and nuclear power expertise. The programs are highly collaborative with academic and non-academic partners taking part, such as National Research Organizations, industries, businesses, among others. There is the sharing of facilities and expertise, with great benefits for doctoral students and staff development, creating new generation thinkers, and bridging the existing gaps. The doctoral students take part in events about motivational talks, goal setting and strategies for writing fast and well, among others (GW4 2018).

Comparative Analysis between Teaching and Learning Support Areas from both Universities

Based on the elements shown above in the Teaching and Learning Support Areas from both University of Bath and Unicamp, and considering other specific programs outside these institutions, a comparative table 2 has been structured.

The Learning Laboratory in Logistics and Transport (LALT) is one of the almost 40 laboratories linked to the School of Civil Engineering. Besides research on Urban Logistics, Supply Chain, IoT, and Living Lab Innovation, LALT runs a Teaching & Learning Project with researchers in master and doctoral programs. These researchers are committed to improving teaching and learning processes under the School of Civil Engineering and be a model for the other laboratories from the School. Experimental research has been developed in undergraduate, graduate and specialization classes and interventions have been held showing different learning strategies as well as active methodologies, and put into practice the use of Personal Response Systems as Socrative and Kahoot in blended classrooms. These have been shown and discussed constantly by LALT researchers in national and international congresses and papers. These processes and skills have become part of LALT, which bring its recognition before the other laboratories of the School of Civil Engineering and Unicamp University. This paper is part of this commitment of LALT having all its authors as researchers of this laboratory (Transport 2018).

(17)

Table 2. Teaching and Learning Support Areas

What University of Bath Unicamp to Whom

Moodle CLT GGTE Students,Staff

Higher Education Teaching Start CLT EA2 students,Staff

Academic Practice CLT EA2,SAE,GGTE students,Staff

Y1 - Year One ASP EA2 students,Staff

Foreign Language Course FLC CEL students,Staff

Language Studies Resource FLC CEL students,Staff

Language Peer Assisted Program FLC CEL students,Staff

Personal and Professional Development CLT students,Staff

MOOC Creation CLT EA2 students,Staff

Learning and Teaching Hub CLT EA2 students,Staff

Student Survey Guide CLT students

Learning Skills ASP EA2, SAE students

Learning Languages FLC CEL students

English for Employment ASP CEL students

Mathematics and Statistics Skills MASH,SAS students

Preparation Course Pre-sessional Program students

FY - Final Year ASP students

Personal Help SU SAE, SAPPE students

Exchange/Visiting Students ASP DERI students

International Exchange International Office DERI students

British Studies ASP students

Erasmus Studies ASP students

Career Development ASP,CL SAE students

Technology Enhanced Learning CLT GGTE students

Teaching & Learning Organisations List CLT students

Student Engagement CLT, SU EA2,SAE students,Staff

Student Engagement, Course Syllabus NDE,LALT civil eng. students

ASP,FLC,SU CEL students

PubliqFEC, LALT civil eng. students

ASP,FLC CEL students

LALT civil eng. students

ASP,CL EA2, SAE,WS,CL students

PubliqFEC,LALT civil eng. students

ASP EA2,SAE students

LALT civil eng. students

CLT EA2 students,Staff

NDE,LALT civil eng. students

Virtual Environment for Teaching CLT GGTE Students,Staff

Teaching Peer Review CLT EA2 Academic Staff

Teaching Skills TEF EA2 Academic Staff

TA-Teacher Assistant ASP EA2 Doctoral Students

Doctorates Skills RDF,ASP EA2 Doctoral Students

Academic Skills in Writing, Reading in English

Presentation, Publishing Skills in English Tutoring, one-to-one support (skills) Learning and Teaching Skills Speaking in English Skills

General Comparative Analysis

In the University of Bath, The Academic Skills Program area (ASP) has the broadest range of teaching and learning skills available for the students, and staff. The Center for Learning and Teaching (CLT) has the second broadest range. These might be explained by the quantity of foreign students who might be in more need for language skills practice and British culture. In the State University of Campinas-Unicamp, the Support Space for Teaching and Learning (EA2) has the

(18)

broadest range of teaching and learning skills available for the students, and staff. The Services for Students' Support-SAE area has the second broadest range. The Student Union of the University of Bath shows to be more involved in the teaching and learning processes than the student union in Unicamp.

As shown before, the school of civil engineering with its own teaching and learning support areas like NDE, PubliqFEC and LALT, this was not found in similar faculty or school in the University of Bath.

The Center for Learning and Teaching-CLT in the University of Bath does not concentrate all teaching and learning skills as almost all other centers in the world. There are other support areas as Academic Skills Program, Pre-sessional Program and Foreign Language center. Unicamp does not have any Center for Teaching and Learning, but there are the various support areas, as seen before. The University of Bath has a special program that does not exist in Unicamp. The Pre-sessional Program is a course, which lasts 5 to 10 weeks and aims to prepare exclusively the future student for the university. This course allows the students to know not only their future course, but also the British and the university culture. The university might have this program to avoid losing international students during their studies.

Discussion and Conclusions

Some of these teaching and learning skills in both universities are run in more than one support area showing their independence. Most skills listed for the University of Bath are present in the State university of Campinas-Unicamp, and this might be true for many other universities all over the world. Higher education institutions with similar needs might work together in a collaborative perspective. The teaching and learning issues are endless due to new generation students coming with different demand, learning styles, and at a digital time. A special care should be taken for the first year undergraduate students. What is working today might not be working properly tomorrow. Sharing experience could be profitable for all universities. One question remains as to how the private institutions can work in collaborative ways without being afraid of losing their current and future student for their partners.

It might be relevant to run some scales, questionnaires, surveys among the undergraduate and graduate students, concerning motivation, procrastination, learning strategies, learning styles, and feedback from them about their needs and solutions they believe could help. These might lead to reinforcement or upgrade of these teaching and learning support areas bringing a more appropriate range of skills needed by the students and staff members.

(19)

It might be interesting to research more comparisons involving Brazilian universities, and British universities. A new research could categorize the skills developed by the teaching and learning areas in a similar way. A table similar to table 2 could be created with two columns showing the British universities and the other the Brazilian universities. It could highlight the existence of a Center for Teaching and Learning in these institutions. This may exist with different names as the following: CTSI-Center for Teaching Support and Innovation, CTL-Center for Learning and Teaching and CRLT-Center for Research on Learning and Teaching.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), under Grant number 140282/2017-3

REFERENCES

Bath, C. L. U. o. (2018). "Central Library - University of Bath." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/library/.

Bath, T. H. E. U. O. (2018). "Explore Rankings Data for the University of Bath." Retrieved March

01, 2018, from

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/university-bath#ranking-dataset/629337.

Center, F. L. (2018). "Foreign Languages Center - University of Bath." Retrieved March 10,2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/professional-services/foreign-languages-centre-flc/.

Center, L. (2018). "Language Center - Unicamp." Retrieved March 10,2018, from https://www.cel.unicamp.br/.

Commission, E. (2011). "Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament."

Retrieved February 10, 2018, from

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/com/com_com(2011)0681_/com_c om(2011)0681_en.pdf.

Education, T. H. (2018). "Methodology for Overall and Subject Rankings for The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2018 " Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/sites/default/files/2018-wur-methodology-pwc.pdf.

Forgie, S. E., Yonge, O., & Luth, R. (2018). "Centres for Teaching and Learning Across Canada: What’s Going On?" The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9.

Framework, T. E. (2018). "TEF-Teaching Excellence Framework-Vitae." Retrieved April 10, 2018, from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/teaching-excellence-framework-tef-results-2017.

(20)

Gibbs, G. and M. Coffey (2004). "The Impact Of Training Of University Teachers on their Teaching Skills, their Approach to Teaching and the Approach to Learning of their Students." Active Learning in Higher Education 5(1): 87-100.

Gibson, J. (2009). "The five ‘Es’ of anexcellent teacher." The Clinical Teacher 6(1): 3-5.

Gosling, D. and R. Turner (2015). "Responding to contestation in teaching and learning projects in the Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in the United Kingdom." Studies in Higher Education 40(9): 1573-1587.

Graduate, I. R. O. (2018). "Graduate - Unicamp." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.internationaloffice.unicamp.br/english/teaching/graduate/.

Gray, T. S., Susan E. (2009). "Launching or Revitalizing a Teaching Center: Principles and Portraits of Practice." The Journal of Faculty Development 23(2): 5-12.

Group, E. T. M. (2018). "Educational Technologies Management Group - Unicamp." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.ggte.unicamp.br/ggte/.

GW4. (2018). "Delivering Globally Competitive Reaearch Together." Retrieved May 13, 2018, from http://gw4.ac.uk/.

HEFCE. (2003). "Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning: Formal consultation." Retrieved

September 10, 2018, from

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100303203041/http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/200 3/03_36/03_36.pdf.

Hines, S. (2009). "Investigating faculty development program assessment practices: What's being done and how can it be improved?" The Journal of Faculty Development 23(3): 33-45.

Innovation, E. C.-R. (2018). "Research & Innovatin: Germany Analysis." Retrieved September 10, 2018, from https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/country-analysis/Germany.

John Dewey, E. D. (1915). Schools of To-morrow. New York, E. P.Dutton & Company.

Kucsera, J. and M. Svinicki (2010). "Rigorous Evaluations of Faculty Development Programs." The Journal of Faculty Development 24(2): 5-18.

Learning, S. S. F. T. a. (2018). "Support Space for Teaching and Learning - Unicamp." Retrieved January 10 2018, from https://www.ea2.unicamp.br/institucional/.

Lemmens-Krug, Katharina. (2015). "Centres of excellence in teaching and learning (CETL) as governing instruments in universities in England and Germany." Retrieved September 10, 2018,

from

https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/centres-of-excellence-in-teaching-and-learning-cetl-as-governing--2.

Louis Soares, P. S., Lindsay Wayt (2016). Evolving Higher Education Business Models: Leading with Data to Deliver Results. Washington, DC, American Council on Education.

(21)

MASH, M. R. C. (2018). "Mathematics Resources Center-MASH - University of Bath." Retrieved April 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/professional-services/mathematics-resources-centre-mash/.

McAleese, M., Bladh, A., Berger, V., Bode, C., Muehlfeit, J., Petrin, T., Schiesaro, A., Tsoukalis, L. (2013). Report to the European Commission on improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions. Luxembourg:Publication Office of the European Union. McDonald, M., E. Kazemi and S. S. Kavanagh (2013). "Core Practices and Pedagogies of Teacher Education:A Call for a Common Language and Collective Activity." Journal of Teacher Education

64(5): 378-386.

Office, D. I. R. (2018). "DRERI – International Relations Office - Unicamp." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from http://www.internationaloffice.unicamp.br/.

Programme, A. A. S. (2018). "ASP-Academic Skills Programme - University of Bath." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/professional-services/academic-skills-programme-asp/. PubliqFEC. (2018). "Incentives to Qualifying Publishing." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from http://www.fec.unicamp.br/itf/index_1.php?pg=631.php&secaoGeral=20.

Relevance, E. C.-Q. a. (2018). "Quality and relevance in higher education." Retrieved September 10, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/higher-education/quality-relevance_en.

Robinson, K. and L. Aronica (2015). Creative Schools: The Grassroots Revolution That's Transforming Education, Viking

S. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harvard-GraduateSchool of education, Harvard Education Publishing Group.

Service, S. S. A. (2018). "SAS-Statistics Advisory Service - University of Bath." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/services/statistics-advisory-service-sas/.

Smith, N. M., J. M. Smith, L. A. Battalora and B. A. Teschner (2018). "Industry&2013;University Partnerships: Engineering Education and Corporate Social Responsibility." Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 144(3): 04018002.

Space, W. (2018). "Writing Space - Unicamp." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from https://www.prp.unicamp.br/pt-br/espaco-da-escrita.

Students, S. P. a. P. A. f. (2018). "SAPPE- Psychological and Psychiatric Assistance for Students - Unicamp." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.sappe.prg.unicamp.br/.

Study, P. (2018). "Postgraduate Study - University of Bath." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/study/pg/graduate-schools/.

Support, S. f. S. (2018). "Services for Students' Support - Unicamp." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://www.portal.sae.unicamp.br/index.php/pt/.

(22)

Teaching, C. f. L. a. (2018). "Center for Learning and Teaching - University of Bath." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.bath.ac.uk/professional-services/centre-for-learning-teaching/. Transport, L. L. L. i. L. a. (2018). "LALT-Learning Laboratory in Logistics and Transport - Unicamp." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from http://lalt.fec.unicamp.br/.

UK, U. (2017). "The undergraduate funding system in England." Universities UK Parliamentary Briefing.

Undergraduate, I. R. O. (2018). "Undergraduate - Unicamp." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from http://www.internationaloffice.unicamp.br/english/teaching/undergraduate/

Unicamp, C. L. (2018). "Central Library - Unicamp." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from http://www.sbu.unicamp.br/bccl/index.php?link=50.

Unicamp, P. G. (2018). "NDE-Structuring Teaching Nucleus." Retrieved February 10, 2018, from https://www.pg.unicamp.br/mostra_norma.php?id_norma=3190.

Unicamp, T. H. E. (2018). "Explore Rankings Data for State University of Campinas." Retrieved March 01, 2018, from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/state-university-campinas#ranking-dataset/629337.

Union, C. o. t. E. (2004). "“Education & Training 2010” The Success of the Lisbon Strategy Hinges on Urgent Reforms. Joint interim report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the detailed work programme on the follow-up of the objectives of education and training systems in Europe." Retrieved September 9, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/soc-prot/soc-incl/final_joint_inclusion_report_2003_en.pdf.

United Nations Educational, S. a. C. O. (2014). "UNESCO Education Strategy 2014–2021." Retrieved September 10, 2018, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002312/231288e.pdf. Vitae. (2018). "Researcher Development Framework." Retrieved March 10, 2018, from https://www.vitae.ac.uk/about-us.

W.A Clark, W. W. C. (2005). "Personalising the transition experience: induction, immersion or intrusion?" University of Auckland.

Imagem

Fig. 2. Performance Indicators in Five Core Areas – data from (Education 2018)
Table 1. Performance Indicators Percentage for each Subject – data from (Education 2018)
Fig. 3. Rankings of Both Universities – data from (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018)
Fig. 4. Scores of Both Universities – data from (Bath 2018, Unicamp 2018)
+2

Referências

Documentos relacionados

Em escala mundial, vários países, inclusive o Brasil, conheceram momentos de reconhecimento dos direitos individuais (civis e políticos) e sociais, da pessoa idosa, tais

Além do dever de fundamentação da recusa, e sempre que esta ocorra, é ainda obrigatório o pedido de parecer prévio à CITE, nos cinco dias subsequentes ao fim do prazo

Se somarmos número de ocorrências de hipotermia leve e moderada para as cirurgias de grande porte (31 casos) e de médio porte (25 casos), observa-se uma maior ocorrência de

financeiras, como ainda por se não ter chegado a concluo entendimento quanto à demolição a Igreja de S. Bento da Ave-Maria, os trabalhos haviam entrado numa fase

Figura 1: Tocha de quartzo e o gradiente de temperatura do plasma [20]...5 Figura 2: Sistema de detecção para a leitura do sinal analítico nos modos de observação axial e radial em

É neste contexto que surge a necessidade do desenvolvimento deste trabalho, que pretende investigar o conhecimento, envolvimento e quais as necessidades

Por outro lado, o programa é responsável por fazer a interface com os outros níveis de atenção, possibilitando a satisfação daquelas necessidades de saúde