(Entry by Maria
Helena de Magalhães Castro)
PROPHE Summary:
Hoping to improve access to higher education, Brazil is giving tax
incentives to private universities that provide scholarships to needy
students, with added incentives for those who are indigenous or Afro-Brazilian.
The University for All Program, known as ProUni, finished selecting
its first batch of students this year. Of Brazil's 1,442 private higher-education
institutions, 1,142 are participating. Those universities must give
at least one scholarship for every 10 students enrolled, although that
proportion will drop to 8.5 percent next year. Eligibility to ProUni
requires that the applicants have attended either public schools or
private schools with a full scholarship, or have a disability. Also,
they must meet income requirements and compete for the scholarships
by their scores on a national exam (ENEM). To remain in the program,
students must maintain a B average in their courses.
Access to higher education will also be eventually increased through
the education ministry plans to expand the public federal higher-education,
which is free of charge. Such plans, however, will not satisfy demand
soon, because of the cost of expanding public colleges.
For the full story (shown with permission), see The Chronicle of
Higher Education, April 8, 2005. "Brazil Offers Incentives
for Private Universities to Give Scholarships to Needy Students,"
by Mike Ceaser.
PROPHE Observation:
Given that Brazilian higher education remains heavily private in
enrollment (74%), one cannot consider matters such as system coverage
and access without paying major attention to the private sector. The
new scholarships created with the "University for All" program
can be seen as a clever response to problems of social equity (in a
highly privatized higher education system) and of idle capacity in the
private higher education sector in 2004. Living with 30% unfulfilled
vacancies and a 20% default rate from their students, the private institutions
are pleased to gain modest tax relief and thereby be able to fill more
slots. Importantly, the ProUni benefits a social stratum that was unable
to meet the requirements of Brazil's regular financial aid program.
Critics of ProUni argue that [1] inequity in education is to be
fought at its source, in the elementary school; [2] the Program should
have linked the scholarships (which are financed by taxpayers) to some
kind of social return/responsibility/commitment on the part of the grantees;
and [3] the opening of higher education's front door to needy students
must be accompanied by the provision of adequate conditions to enable
all of them to graduate. The scholarships covering tuition fees are
not sufficient to allow grantees to face other expenses (from transportation
to meals, study materials, and wages they were bringing home before).
On the other hand, many of the grantees need extra academic attention.
Also, a key controversy has concerned race and color and how they correlate
with poverty.
A last remark is that the true figure for higher education coverage
in Brazil is larger than has been said (including in this Chronicle
article). This is because so many students are a few years older than
the counted 18-24 range due to the longer time spent to complete the
previous education levels. The gross enrollment ratio (regardless of
age) grew from 14% in 1996 to 20% in 2002, while the net enrollment
ratio declined from 11% in 1996 to 9% in 2004, due to the growing presence
of older students, thus lowering the percent of those students who are
in the designated age group. The older students are new high school
graduates who are older than 24 years olds or adults who already hold
higher education degree and are heading back to school to improve their
chances in the job market, etc.
