ID: 16107
Autoria:
Frederico Machado de Amorin.
Fonte:
Revista de Administração Pública, v. 2, n. 4, p. 167-210, Julho-Dezembro, 1968. 44 página(s).
Tipo de documento: Artigo (Português)
Ver Resumo
Most economic studies of the process of development not unly stress the basic importance of capital formation and the expansion of employment, but also the residual effect which skilled or trained labor has upon increasing national productivity. Thus, many economists consider the creation of educational programs which can provide modern technical instruction relevant to production as a major developmental goal. Professor Machado de Amorim in this article challenges this position and questions the wisdom of developing countries investing scarce national resources into such specialized educational programs. He offers sereval objections. First, the author suggests that unless the existing quality of industrial machinery and equipment within a developing country is consonant with the newly acquired technical skills of the working forces, increased productivity will hardy result. The implication is clearly that modern industrial machinery increases the level of national economic output in a much more direct and immediate way than the simple creation of a larger skilled labor force. Moreover, Professor Machado argues that in a relatively short time unskilled workers can be trained to run such machines and at a much lower cost in terms of consumption of national resources. Second, he notes that when the health and nutrition of a country's worker is poor this too will negatively affects his productive capacity. Thus, he also would consider that investment in social wellfare programs should take precedence over education. Third, the author maintains that in developing countries, such as Brazil, where the growth of population is outstripping the industrial growth of the society, and in turn creating labor surplus and vast unemployment, that available resources should be heavily concentrated on industrial growth activities which can profitably absorb the existing labor supply. If the educational system produces more skilled workers than there are opportunities available for them, Professor Machado notes that productivity is not served, since these men are merely forced into jobs well below their actual level of skill and training. Therefore, Professor Machado considers education to be an investment in development only when it actually prepares the individual to perform a specific productive function relevant to a particular moment of development. He considers education programs which aim at raising the general level of literacy in a country as economically consumptive. In analyzing the overall nature of the present Brazilian educational system, the author presents various statistical tables indicating the extent to which schooling is provided within Brazil as compared to other major nations. These tables indicate a significant decrease in the rate of illiteracy among members of the Brazilian population above the age of fifteen since the 1940 period. Yet, when this fact is considered in terms of its possible implications for the improved productive capacity of the Brazilian working force, Professor Machado notes that it must be balanced with the following data: in Brazil only 9 out of every 1,000 inhabitants actually complete higher level education. At the secondary level, only 27 out of a 1.000 finish, and at the primary level, only 162 out of a 1,000. Looking more closely at each level of the Brazilian educational system, the author begins with an investigation of primary instruction, which he feels is both a basic need and guarantee of the citizenry. First, he criticizes the failure of the present system to provi de primar education to an adequate segment of the population. Second analyzing the internal deficiencies of primary education, he points to the current lack of qualified teachers properly trained in the curriculum; the failure to provide adequately organized and effectual literacy programs; and the need for sufficient classrooms and schools to serve the present population. As exogenous factor prejudicing the quality of primary instruction, he cites the general low level of physical and mental health among Brazilian primary school age children; the low socio-economic level of most families which requires that the child be removed from school in order to work; the detrimental cultural environment; and the inaccessibility of most schools to large numbers of children. At the secondary level, many of the same problems as the above exist and vitiate its effectiveness. The author notes moreover that recent improvements within this area are mitigated by geographical disparities - for example more than half of the students enrolled in secondary education programs reside in the states of Guanabara, Minas Gerais and São faulo. In 1962, only half of Brazil's municipalities had secondary schools. Where students are enrolled, large number drop out during the year because of pressing economic needs. Those who remain receive inadequate trailling from poorly prepared teachers, only one fourth of whom have a teaching diploma according to studies by IPEA. Instruction in strategic developmental matters such as mathematics, science and social science is particularly inferior in quality. Finally, although the author feels that general academic high school studies are poor, he finds the commercial, industrial and technical courses even more inferior and more economically costly. Furthermore, although such technical-commercial instruction is ostensibly designed to prepare the student to enter the professional job market upon graduating large members of these students apply instead for admission to already overcrowded universities and enter with even less adequate preparation than regular high-school graduates. At the level of university instruction, the problems of Brazilian education continue and are multiplied. Geographical disparity persists; more than 80% of university students reside in shouthern states, although at present university attendance is growing faster in the northeast regions. Beyond such fundamental shortcomings as insufficient universities and unqualified professors, the author underscores the inadequacy of planning, the un economic use of present resources and facilities, and the failure to offer a full year of instruction. Moreover, although the natural and social sciences are more relevant to present developmental needs and goals, the author notes that major enrollment continues to be in the traditional area of Arts and Literature, draining away needed resources from these other areas. As for post-graduate studies, they hardly exist in Brazil. In the final part of his study, Professor Machado offers a brief historical review of the process of educational planning in Brazil from the 1961 Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional to the 1968 three-year Strategic Plan. He draws attendion to the fact that in Brazil's first ten-year plan, the approach to education departed from a statistically deficient, macro-economic level of analysis Educational goals were determined from ten year projections as to the needs for certain key professional and technical roles by 1970. Treated thus as economic variables, educational objectives were stipulated strictly in terms of productive output goals, and not in relation to equally relevant social-cultural needs. By 1968, this purely economic approach to education was abandoned by the authors of the three-year strategic plan. On the basis of more reliable statistical information about immediate problems and needs in the educational area, new short-term objectives were established. Uppennost among these are (a) universal primary education for all inhabitants between the ages of 7 and 14 years of age; (b) ample increase in the number of openings to University courses specializing in strategic developmental curricula; and (c) improvement in the salaries of university professors as an incentive to draw more highly qualified personnel. In his concluding over-view of the organizational structure of Brazilian education, Professor Machado points out that the 1961 educational reform act has brought about decentralization of education at the very time when most states and municipalities simply do not possess the resources or planning facilities necessary to resolve the major problems of educational growth. State educational councils have practically all the responsibility for educational policy but very little capacity for actually achieving the desired goals. The current emphasis on decentralization of the federal administrative sector will further remove the central government from a direct role in the execution of educational policy.
