Abstract
Higher education in Brazil has experienced a rapid expansion since the 1990s as a consequence of the government’s pliability in launching new programs and educational institutions. This expansion was mainly driven by the private sector. Despite this expansion, Brazil has not yet achieved the enrollment goal expected in the National Education Plan launched in 2010. Moreover, the demand for undergraduate programs, is presenting signs of reduction, characterizing a system with fast initial growth followed by stagnation. This paper presents the construction and application of a system dynamics model for analyzing long-term policies concerning undergraduate programs in Brazil at an aggregate level. The main objective of the model is to conduct scenario analysis given by the different behavior of several aspects related to the system, such as government regulation, demand, places, and the balance between public and private sectors. A scenario analysis was conducted, considering different policies regarding the nature of education and economic development. The results are highly promising, demonstrating the potential of this approach for both understanding the dynamic behavior of higher education, improving policies, and developing effective strategies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barlas, Y., Diker, V. G. (2000). A dynamic simulation game (UNIGAME) for strategic university management. Simulation Gaming, 31, 331–358.
Bell, G., Cooper, M., Kennedy, M., & Warwick, J. (2000). The development of the holon planning and costing framework for higher education management. In Proceedings of the 18th system dynamics conference, Bergen, Norway.
Carvalho, M. A. (2001). A system dynamics analysis of the higher level educational system in Brazil. M.Sc. Dissertation, State University of New York at Albany: Albany, NY.
Dahlan, S. F. M., & Yahaya, N. A. (2010). A system dynamics model for determining educational capacity of higher education institutions. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on computational intelligence, modelling and simulation, Bali, Indonesia.
Dalvi, C., Coutinho, L., Davel, R., & Braga, R. (2005). Sectorial analysis of private higher education in Brazil: Trends and perspectives 2005–2010. Hoper Editora: Foz do Iguaçu, Brasil. In Portuguese.
Elimam, A. A. (1991). A decision support system for university admission policies. European Journal of Operational Research, 50, 140–156.
Enserink, B. (2000). Building scenarios for the University. International Transactions in Operational Research, 7, 569–583.
Frances, C. (2000). Using system dynamics as a tool for decision making in higher education management- U.S. experience. In Kennedy M. (Ed.), Using system dynamics as a tool for decision making in higher education management. South Bank University Technical Report SBU-CISM-12-00, London, UK.
Frances, C., Van Alstyne, M., Ashton, A., & Hochstettler, T. (1994). Using system dynamics technology to improve planning higher education: Results in Arizona and Houston, Texas. In Proceedings of the 13th international system dynamics conference, Stirling, Scotland.
Franz, L. S. (1981). An adaptive decision support system for academic resource planning. Decision Sciences, 12, 276–293.
Galbraith, P. L. (1998). System dynamics and university management. System Dynamics Review, 14, 69–84.
Galbraith, P. L., & Carss, B. W. (1989). Strategies for institutional resource allocation: Insights from a dynamic model. Higher Education Policy, 2, 31–36.
Hartono, R. D., Cahyo, F. T. (2012). The Dynamics of an undergraduate study program: ‘limits to growth’. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on management of innovation and technology, Singapore, Singapore.
IBGE National Institute of Geography and Statistics. (2008). Síntese de indicadores sociais: Uma Análise das Condições de Vida da População Brasileira. IBGE: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. In Portuguese.
INEP, National Institute of Educational Research. (2010). Census of higher education 2009: Technical summary. http://download.inep.gov.br/download/superior/censo/2009/resumo_tecnico2009.pdf. Accessed on 27 July 2011. In Portuguese.
INEP, National Institute of Educational Research. (2013). Census of higher education 2011: Technical summary. http://download.inep.gov.br/educacao_superior/censo_superior/resumo_tecnico/resumo_tecnico_censo_educacao_superior_2011.pdf. Accessed 03 April 2013. In Portuguese.
Johnstone, D. G. (2004). The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education: comparative perspectives. Economics of Education Review, 23, 403–410.
Kassicieh, S. K., & Nowak, J. W. (1986). Decision support systems in academic planning: Important considerations and issues. Information Processing and Management, 22, 395–403.
Kennedy, M. (1998a). A pilot system dynamics model to capture and monitor quality issues in higher education institutions experiences gained. In Proceedings of the 16th system dynamics conference, Quebec City, Canada.
Kennedy, M. (1998b). Some issues in system dynamics model building to support quality monitoring in higher education. In Proceedings of the 16th system dynamics conference, Quebec City, Canada.
Kennedy, M. (2000). Towards a taxonomy of system dynamics models of higher education. In Proceedings of the 18th system dynamics conference, Bergen, Norway.
Kennedy, M., & Clare, C. (1999). Some issues in building system dynamics model for improving the resource management process in higher education. In Proceedings of the 17th international system dynamics conference, Wellington, New Zealand.
Levy, D. C. (2013). The decline of private higher education. Higher Education Policy, 26, 25–42.
McCowan, T. (2007). Expansion without equity: An analysis of current policy on access to higher education in Brazil. Higher Education, 53, 579–598.
Mizrahi, S., & Mehrez, A. (2002). Managing quality in higher education systems via minimal quality requirements: Signaling and control. Economics of Education Review, 21, 53–62.
Mok, J. K.-H. (2002). From nationalization to marketization. Governance, 15, 137–159.
Murthy, S., Gujrati, R. & Iyer, S. (2010). Using system dynamics to model and analyze a distance education program. In Proceedings of the international conference on information and communication technologies and development, London, United Kingdom.
Niculescu, M. (2006). Strategic positioning in Romanian higher education. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 19, 725–737.
Oyo, B., Williams, D., & Barendsen, E. (2008). A system dynamics tool for higher education funding and quality policy analysis. In Proceedings of the 2008 international conference of the system dynamics society, Athens, Greece.
Pohlmann, C. R. (2009). Proposal of a method to support the development of the strategic positioning of graduate programs based on system dynamics. M.Sc. Dissertation, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos: São Leopoldo, Brazil. In Portuguese.
Porto, C, & Régnier, K. (2003). Higher education in the world and Brazil: determinants, trends and scenarios for the horizon 2003–2025. Technical report. http://www.macroplan.com.br. Accessed 28 January 2010.
Restad, H. (2010). Implementation of international strategies in higher education: A system dynamics approach. M.Sc. Dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Technology: Trondheim, Norway.
Richardson, G. P., & Pugh, A. L., I. I. I. (1981). Introduction to system dynamics modeling with DYNAMO. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Productivity Press.
Rozada, M. G., & Menendez, A. (2002). Public university in Argentina: Subsidizing the rich? Economics of Education Review, 21, 341–351.
Saeed, K. (1996). The dynamics of collegial systems in the developing countries. Higher Education Policy, 9, 75–86.
Shaffer, S. C. (2005). System dynamics in distance education and a call to develop a standard model. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 6, 1–13.
Shoham, S., & Perry, M. (2009). Knowledge management as a mechanism for technological and organizational change management in Israeli universities. Higher Education, 57, 227–246.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Strauss, L. M. (2010). A system dynamics model for higher education analysis. M.Sc. Dissertation. Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul: Porto Alegre, Brazil. In Portuguese.
Turban, E., Fisher, J. C., & Altman, S. (1988). Decision support systems in academic administration. Journal of Educational Administration, 26, 97–113.
Vieira, L. R. (2003). Higher education expansion in Brazil: A preliminary approach of the public policies and perspectives for the undergraduate education. Avaliação—Revista da Rede de Avaliação Institucional da Educação Superior, 8, 81–97. In Portuguese.
Vinnik, S., & Scholl, M. H. (2005). Efficient decision support for academic resources and capacity management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 3416, 235–246.
Acknowledgments
We are indebted to the anonymous referees for very useful comments and criticism. This work was partially supported by CNPq, grant 300810/2009-1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: Mathematical representation of stock and flow diagrams
Appendix: Mathematical representation of stock and flow diagrams
There is more than one way to represent stock and flow diagrams. We adopted the notation used by Sterman (2000) in his classic book. Figure 17 presents a very simple stock and flow diagram to illustrate the related concepts. Stocks can change their state only through their flows, which, in turn, could have influences from other stocks or auxiliary variables. Some variables that represent information or status, or are external influences, are better modeled using auxiliary variables.
The simulation of the system behavior is made possible by the equations that characterize the behavior of flows and stocks in the system over time. Stocks are modeled with integral equations, as in Eq. (1), representing the accumulation from time t 0 to moment t. Inflows(t) and Outflows(t) represent the values of an input stream and an output stream at any time t.
Equivalently, the rate of change of any stock is the Inflow minus the Outflow defined by the differential Eq. (2) as follows:
In system dynamics, we transform the differential equations represented in (2) into the following difference equation:
Using SD nomenclature, we can describe the system presented in Fig. 4 by the four level equations and the six rate equations presented below. Since the preliminary CLD in Fig. 2 was not implemented (rather, we implemented the CLD in Fig. 3), we use f(.) to represent how involved variables are related. In several cases, this function is a probabilistic one defined by using historic data.
Level equation 1:
INFLOWS:
OUTFLOWS:
Level equation 2:
INFLOWS:
OUTFLOWS:
Level equation 3:
INFLOWS:
Level equation 4:
INFLOWS:
OUTFLOWS:
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Strauss, L.M., Borenstein, D. A system dynamics model for long-term planning of the undergraduate education in Brazil. High Educ 69, 375–397 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9781-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9781-6