JU - PAlmost a year since the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic in Brazil, the scenario is still uncertain regarding the resumption of academic activities in person, in its various segments. How can we face this reality without putting the health of students, teachers and staff at risk and, at the same time, preserve the progress of teaching, research, assistance and administration activities?
Tom Joe - Conducting academic activities during the Covid-19 pandemic requires the University administration to continually monitor local, regional and national epidemiological dynamics. In addition to this constant scenario analysis, effective communication with the entire community is necessary, in view of practically real-time decision making. Unpredictability and uncertainty require organized, coordinated action with representativeness endorsed by the spirit of dialogue, without losing sight of the quality of Unicamp's core activities.
Remote teaching activities undoubtedly bring losses compared to in-person ones. Even in theoretical subjects, where much of the content can be worked remotely, the student's experience at university, especially at graduation, presents a much broader training and social perspective. The in-person experience allows students to be more fully immersed in everything the University offers in terms of cultural diversity, opinions and forms of professional activity. The knowledge transmitted in the various disciplines is consolidated through the exchange of ideas and experiences, through the formation of a network of contacts, preparing the student in a more comprehensive way for their future professional life and in society.
However, in the current epidemiological situation, the use of remote teaching activities presents itself as a possible alternative and with a better compromise between results, safety and costs, despite the inherent losses and limitations. To ensure that this strategy is minimally successful, it is necessary to qualify everyone involved, by offering a broad structure of technological and pedagogical support. The responsible sectors, such as coordination and deanships, must open easily accessible communication channels to quickly detect and resolve detected problems.
It is clear that not all activities can be remote. There are disciplines and research that are eminently practical, or that use equipment and inputs that cannot be replaced by a video demonstration or a computer simulation. The development of certain professional skills or attitudes requires working in practice scenarios with mentoring. In these cases, a hybrid model must be adopted, which combines remote activities with in-person activities in a safe way, ensuring distance and a rotation between students, teachers and researchers to avoid crowds. These solutions must take into account the realities of students who may have difficulty traveling, for example through temporary living arrangements. When possible, solutions such as the use of large amphitheaters or outdoor activities can be sought. It is necessary to adapt the university's infrastructure and its physical spaces with creative solutions and a sustainable perspective, including signage about distancing and prevention rules. Alcohol gel, surface disinfectants and personal protective equipment (PPE) should always be widely available.
Teaching, research and service activities in the hybrid modality require planning and organization of the work process, coordination between the administrative support and information technology sectors and, above all, effective communication between the different sectors of the academic community. An institutional guideline is needed that outlines structuring guidelines to conduct this process, taking into account the need for investment in information technology and the reality of human resources available in the different units. Finally, the systematic pedagogical training of teaching staff to use new technologies is a fundamental requirement for qualified and professional remote teaching.
Facing the pandemic requires effective communication, which guarantees the participation of the university community in prevention measures, understanding the risks, and using health services and available resources as members of a globalized community. Safe and sustainable coexistence, distancing, the use of masks, hand hygiene and concurrent disinfection must be incorporated into everyone's consciousness. This communication must go far beyond the limits of Unicamp. In fact, as a center for the production and dissemination of knowledge, Unicamp must prospect creative, sustainable and participatory initiatives to combat the pandemic and its effects on different sectors of Brazilian society. The University must also act as an effective center to combat rumors and fake news. In short, Unicamp can contribute to articulating and integrating different actors in the community and beyond (eg Education and Health Departments of municipalities and the State), also sharing its experiences with other Higher Education Institutions in the country.
The details of the plan for resuming in-person activities must be dynamic, appropriate to the competing epidemiological situation and in line with state plans. Symptomatic cases must be quickly identified and their contacts traced. To achieve this, it is necessary to ensure, expand and speed up the laboratory diagnosis of cases. The pandemic has contradicted many predictions, in such a way that We must maintain surveillance of the local epidemiological scenario, in close integration with the municipal, regional and state health surveillance spheres. Vaccination is a top global priority and there is a need for Brazil to guarantee access to vaccines in a broader, more agile and planned way.
The pandemic brought enormous challenges, but also opportunities, by forcing us to adopt technological solutions for remote interaction. In many cases, remote interaction is worse than face-to-face interaction, and has been adopted due to the lack of another safe alternative. In some cases, however, remote interaction can be more effective and productive than those adopted before the pandemic. In other cases, the combination of different strategies, remote and in-person, allows for successful outcomes. These opportunities must be carefully analyzed and improvements incorporated. The resulting decisions must be the result of a broad dialogue involving the teaching, student and staff community of the University.
Finally, so that Unicamp can truly play a leading role in this and other emerging situations in contemporary society, the University must induce research and extension projects on related topics in different areas of knowledge: health, teaching modalities, economics, new technologies and social behavior, raising resources from development agencies, civil society entities and the productive sector.
JU - The pandemic also drastically affected the economy, with a reduction in economic activity and a consequent drop in ICMS collection, the main source of resources allocated to public universities in São Paulo. The economic recession, which was already significant before this scenario, worsened even further. How to preserve the quality of teaching, research and services provided by Unicamp to the community, especially in the health sector, in a context of deepening budget restrictions?
Tom Joe - Brazil has been experiencing a profound economic and social crisis since 2015, which was aggravated, but not caused, by the Covid 19 pandemic. The worsening of the crisis was due to the adoption of mistaken economic policies that went against the policies adopted in the world's main economies. In the period 2016-2020, the accumulated variation in GDP was negative 2,9%. However, it is important to note that the behavior of ICMS in São Paulo did not directly follow the evolution of GDP. In the same period, São Paulo's ICMS grew by 21,4% in nominal terms and 5,6% in real terms (deflated by IBGE's IPCA). Even in the chaotic year of 2020, ICMS collection in São Paulo grew 2% in nominal terms and fell, in real terms, by 1,3%, due to the acceleration of inflation (IPCA of 4,52%).
It is indisputable that, due to the long crisis, Unicamp and the other public universities in São Paulo present a worrying picture of financial fragility, caused by a mismatch between the evolution of State treasury revenues (RTE) and the evolution of expenses, especially personnel. , which required the use of part of strategic financial reserves. It is important to highlight that the financial reserves were created during the period of economic expansion and RTE, with the strategic objective of ensuring the financing of the University in critical moments of contraction or stagnation of revenues, as observed in the period from 2015 to 2020. As we stated in the management program, our guidelines are of social and institutional responsibility. We understand that, in order to value research, teaching and extension activities, it is essential to value the working conditions and well-being of the entire academic community. What made and makes Unicamp a university of excellence are, above all, the qualifications, dedication and professionalism of its employees.
Our scenario for 2021 is not one of deepening budget restrictions. We do not agree with the pessimistic scenario foreseen in the 2021 Budget Guideline Proposal (PDO), prepared by the current administration. It is important to highlight that the 2020 PDO also outlined a pessimistic scenario, which ended up not materializing. Even in the PDO's second budget review, carried out in August 2020, a pessimistic scenario was still maintained with a forecast deficit of R$ 263,4 million (R$ 379,6 million if the resources committed in previous years were used) to the 2020 financial year. However, 2020 ended with stable revenues and balance in the accounts. The construction of excessively pessimistic scenarios to support austerity policies does not contribute to efficient management of the University with a focus on a strategy of professional development for the academic community.
The management "Unicamp: building tomorrow” will adopt realistic and constantly updated scenarios, involving the entire community, to discuss and define the intensity and speed with which policies on career progression, staff hiring, salary replacement, student access and retention conditions and of investments in infrastructure. The current critical moment, with many uncertainties, requires a lot of transparency, dialogue, sensitivity and competence from the university's top managers.
Therefore, our program adopted short and medium-term scenarios for the University's financing conditions and for the implementation of professional development policies. In the short term, there are legal restrictions imposed by Complementary Law No. 173. In this sense, our commitment is to take assertive action within the scope of Cruesp to reverse or mitigate the restrictions imposed by Law No. 173 and, as quickly as possible, resume the policy of professional development.
In a very realistic scenario for 2021, it is possible to achieve a financial balance between income and expenses. This scenario is different from that foreseen in Unicamp's 2021 Budget Guidelines Proposal (PDO), which projects a deficit of R$208 million (or R$79 million, if expenses committed in previous periods are excluded). Our scenario for 2021 considers, on the one hand, the negative effect on the economy and ICMS collection of the likely end or reduction of emergency aid and, on the other, the positive effect of the increase in ICMS rates in the State of São Paulo. The good results of ICMS collection in January 2021 corroborate this argument. The Central Bank's Focus bulletin for December 2020, more updated than the São Paulo Finance Department's PLOA forecast for September 2020, projects a GDP growth rate of 3,46% and inflation (IPCA) of 4,38 .2021% for 2021. The Secretary of Finance of São Paulo projected, in an interview with the newspaper Valor Econômico in February 5, a growth rate of 7,5% for the state of São Paulo. Based on these indicators and information, our expectation is a nominal expansion rate of XNUMX% of state treasury revenues (RTE). Therefore, nOur realistic scenario for 2021 is not one of deepening budget constraints.
In the medium-term scenario, the academic community's pent-up demands for the return of professional career progression, staff hiring and salary adjustment policies should be progressively met in the 2022-2024 three-year period. Within a realistic scenario that projects an expansion of revenues of 2,5% in real terms (7% in nominal terms) based on the behavior of the four-year period 2016-2019, it would be possible to meet the following demands: 1) progression in at least one career level of all teachers in the period 2022-2024; 2) allocation of an equal volume of resources for the progression of servers; 3) hiring 150 to 200 teachers and researchers during the period to partially replace retirements; 4) allocation of an equal volume of resources to hire employees, especially in the health area; 5) salary replacement in the face of inflation; 6) readjustment of food vouchers; and 7) resumption of investments in infrastructure in the HC, in the FOP, in the maintenance of student housing and in teaching units, among others.
In this medium-term scenario, the financing of all Unicamp activities, in addition to the professional development strategy, even in the face of a real increase in revenue in 2022, must rely on a contribution of resources from strategic financial reserves in the order of 20% to 25%. In the 2023-2024 biennium, it is now possible to project a more positive scenario, with improvements in financing all university activities and the intensification of the professional development policy – including recomposing part of the strategic financial reserves. We therefore believe that, with social and institutional responsibility, it will be possible preserve the quality of teaching, research and services provided by Unicamp to the community.
JU - Universities and Science have been harshly attacked by sectors of society aligned with denialist positions with an ideological bias. In your opinion, how should Unicamp position itself in the face of these attacks and what role should it play in defending its purposes?
Tom Joe - As an important starting point, it is necessary to recognize that not only the University, but also all institutions linked to science, information and knowledge have been suffering denialist attacks with an ideological bias, with deleterious effects for the country, with regard to its cultural life, the formation of youth and, consequently, national development in its various aspects. That said, it is important that the University takes an active stance in defending its purposes, which, as we understand, involves joint action on two main fronts, both guided by an unconditional defense of the autonomy and public character of the University.
A first aspect to be considered is communication with society. Although very important, it is necessary to go beyond one-way communication in which the important scientific results obtained at the University are basically reported to society. Obviously, we have to be present in the media and in political spheres, showing the importance of Unicamp, but it is also necessary to act more localized, with greater involvement of the University in local and widespread actions, such as, for example, in public schools in cities that receive our campuses. It is through closer contact that a more precise vision of the University's role is built and consolidated. Our strategy of making ourselves known must be able to reach society in its various segments. In addition to the important means of communication that are already established at the University, it is necessary to implement more dynamic mechanisms, capable of dialoguing with people who are completely unaware of our activities. The best way to combat misinformation is to use an efficient, broad and widespread communication strategy, and we must spare no effort in this regard.
A second front concerns bringing audiences to the University that we do not reach in our undergraduate and postgraduate courses. For example, now that we have the lato sensu modality regulated, we are able to establish free courses aimed at less privileged populations and professional segments such as small and micro-entrepreneurs. The presence of an audience that has not historically been directly impacted by our actions can be an important multiplier in publicizing our activities and our contribution to society. Actions of this sort can be carried out through partnerships between interested units, without any harm to the maintenance of our academic excellence. On the contrary, Unicamp will continue to be a "research University", where as much or more conventional scientific research will be carried out and, at the same time, where new lines of research will be initiated, to a greater extent than currently, in areas motivated by the demands social, health and industrial, as happens in the most advanced economies.
With regard to communication with society, it is worth highlighting that one of the guiding principles of the management program “Unicamp: building tomorrow” points to "A university that embraces and allows itself to be embraced by society". This principle underpins a series of concrete actions and proposals that aim to highlight the institutionality of the University as a public good and share the impact of its actions in the areas of teaching, research, extension, culture, art, innovation and inclusion. For society to truly welcome us, it must be able to recognize our irreplaceable role in training people and generating knowledge, of which this same society is the legatee.
It is also worth highlighting that, concomitantly with communication and integration efforts with society, we cannot fail to act strongly with decision makers in the public and private spheres. One aspect that stood out in the pandemic is that, faced with the concrete threat, even in the midst of controversy, a large part of the population pressures political agents for a solution based on science, such as vaccines. This opens up an interesting opportunity for the University to communicate with the different social actors involved, disseminating its values, assuming mediation positions and highlighting the raison d'être of science, in all its areas of knowledge, as a "friend of the truth ".
JU - In recent years, a significant number of teachers and staff have reached retirement. At the same time, budget restrictions resulting from the economic situation make it difficult to replace staff at the same pace. How to minimize damage and maintain quality?
Tom Joe - As we commented in the answer to the second question, it is essential to value the working conditions and well-being of the entire academic community. Furthermore, the sustainable growth of the institution and the guarantee of its excellence also involve replacing its staff, which must be guided by social and institutional responsibility. We believe, however, that recruiting qualified staff is not just an item on a financial spreadsheet. It requires an institutional effort to make the teaching career attractive in its different aspects, that is, from the material and economic to the symbolic, cultural and political. In this sense, it is worth remembering that, on several occasions in this campaign, we cited the words of the founder of Unicamp, Professor Zeferino Vaz, who said that the three priorities for a University were brains, brains and brains. It was imbued with this certainty that Zeferino Vaz sought out and brought to Unicamp the best talents he could find in the country and abroad. We cannot lose this pioneering spirit, regardless of the era and the difficulties inherent to it. Based on these principles, we would like to divide the answer to this question considering three aspects: our current situation, the main challenges that arise, and our proposed solutions in short and medium-term scenarios.
A positive situation is that, thanks to the recent replacement policy, Unicamp has teaching and non-teaching staff, with a significant number of people with less than 10 years of experience. For these people, and for the environment that surrounds them, it is essential that the budget policy clearly shows the possibility of progression in their careers, as we commented in the answer to the second question.
At the other end, we have people who have already acquired, or will soon acquire, the right to retirement. For example, among teachers, according to the S-Integra system, we currently have 1.949 permanent teachers and 28 temporary teachers. There are 428 teachers who have already reached the integrality rule with parity, which represents 22%. We also have another 63 teachers who obtained the retirement rule without parity, that is, 3,2% more. Regarding employees, we have 3.173 Esunicamp employees, of which 449 (14%) are entitled to full retirement with parity and 145 (4,5%) without parity. It is concluded that, in total, 25,2% of current teachers and 18,5% of current employees may retire, and it is unnecessary to emphasize the terrible effect that this would have on our core activities.
For those who are faced with the possibility of retiring, it is essential that Unicamp presents itself as a welcoming and collaborative environment so that, regardless of the formal decision to retire or not, the institution does not lose, from one moment to the next, these people: their brains, their talents and their history.
The main challenge comes from expenses with inactive employees, which grows rapidly due to new retirements, reaching 42,5% in 2019. There is no prospect of a reduction in this growth and, in general, such retirements require replacement to guarantee the quality of the activities provided. The share of expenses with part-time pay and additional salary for length of service on the payroll has also been increasing and reached 23,6% in 2019.
Added to these concerns is the stagnation or reduction of non-budgetary revenues. In 2019, these revenues were in the order of R$798,4 million, with emphasis on the support agencies Fapesp (R$175,9 million), Capes (R$86,4 million) and CNPq (R$56,7 million), in addition to resources from SUS (R$ 230,9 million). Funding agencies have been subjected to significant budget cuts, which compromises transfers to universities. Furthermore, the failure to readjust the amounts transferred by the SUS also compromises the financing of health activities, which is aggravated by the current critical moment of increased demand for services and rising expenses.
Finally, the tax reform being discussed in the National Congress should unify indirect taxes, including ICMS, which is the basis for universities' revenue. Diligent action is imperative to ensure the existence of compensatory mechanisms that avoid discontinuity in University funding.
Given the shorter-term scenario already described in the answer to question 2, and taking into account the restrictions imposed by Law No. 173, our candidacy sees the year 2021 as a valuable opportunity to agree with the teaching community to carry out effective actions to enhance their careers, including the discussion on replacing staff. We specifically propose the creation of discussion forums that, obviously, do not exclude or replace the important participation in councils established at the university. On the contrary, we believe that sharing ideas in such forums contributeswill to raise awareness and awaken interest, especially among younger teachers and staff, in institutional life. It is worth highlighting the importance of the presence of the representative entities, ADUnicamp and STU, in legitimizing and enriching these forums. In summary, we reiterate the relevance of a collective renegotiation of decision-making relations at Unicamp, which is reflected both in the procedures for prioritizing career progression and in discussions and solution proposals aimed at replacing staff.
For the medium-term horizon, corresponding to the period 2022-2024, as also mentioned in the answer to question 2, our proposal is clearly placed in the management program "Unicamp: building tomorrow":
- Hire 150 to 200 teachers and researchers during the period to partially replace retirements, an investment estimated at R$25 million.
- Allocate an equal volume of resources to hire technical-administrative employees.
We believe that the above measures are strategic to enhance the professional practice of the entire community and to guarantee the sustainable growth of the University. To implement them, together with the resumption of progressions, will It is necessary to count on a contribution of resources from strategic financial reserves of around 20 to 25%, given the expansion of expenses and investments greater than revenue in 2022. For the 2023-2024 biennium, it is possible to project a more positive scenario than that of 2021-2022, including foreseeing a recomposition of part of the strategic financial reserves.
JU - One of the most sensitive issues for technical-administrative employees concerns the career framework in different segments. How can we handle this topic in a way that reduces internal tensions?
Tom Joe - One of the guiding principles of the management program “Unicamp: building tomorrow" point to "A university that values, encourages and empowers its staff", because, as we have repeated countless times in our campaign, we believe that Unicamp's greatest asset is its human resources: its people. Valuing people implies valuing their work, which goes through decent remuneration, a consistent career plan, and the affirmation of their autonomy and the possibility of professional growth. Thus, simple projects, such as making the work environment healthier and more pleasant, to more complex ones, such as formulating a A solid career and salary policy will be part of our administration's priorities.
The current economic scenario, already discussed in previous questions, impacts people management policies and this impact, if poorly managed, can lead to internal tensions. In a similar way to what was mentioned in the previous question, our stance will be one of dialogue and a call for participation. We propose that, at the beginning of management, a Seminar be held, using forms of communication consistent with the reality of the moment, including all segments to level information about the PAEPE Career: history, concepts, legal aspects, expectations and future perspectives. Debates and discussion forums will be organized, as many as necessary, seeking to obtain the maximum possible participation and involving the STU and other leaders, such as representatives on the University councils.
Resources allocated to progression must be debated and deliberated when defining the university's annual budget. As pointed out in the answer to question 2, we propose to allocate, in the period 2022-2024, a volume of resources for the progression of technical-administrative employees equivalent to that allocated to teachers, this being such that it guarantees the progression of all teachers in at least one level.
The aspirations of our future management go beyond reducing tensions, and aim to recognize the leading role of male and female employees in the institution's destinies, as we believe that it is from this recognition that a management policy based on placing the person at the center is built. In this way, we give each professional a work purpose, so that they see themselves as protagonists and capable of creating new solutions with each other, for each other and for the community.
It is based on this foundation that our management program sets out several concrete, well-defined proposals aimed at: encouraging and promoting the training and improvement of the University's staff; promote improvements and advances that are necessary for the PAEPE career; ensure and promote the well-being of the staff, including, among others, actions with the GGBS; encourage positive behaviors in the work environment, with preventive actions to curb abusive practices; etc.
We will act to consolidate a lasting career, with permanent updating mechanisms and solid foundations for recognizing merit, the constant search for professional improvement and the personal effort and dedication of employees. Merit assessment, considering performance results, should be one of the pillars for Career progression. Engagement and commitment to work and results must be proposed and encouraged. In short, performance and professional qualifications should be the driving force for career growth.
By its very nature, the University must stimulate the search for new knowledge, improvement in work and the educational development of people. It is coherent, therefore, that, in its evaluation criteria, it promotes and recognizes these same characteristics in its workers. This helps employees to have guidance for their actions, greater security of fair assessments, which will necessarily lead to a climate of greater concord and serenity in the work environment.
JU - On a global scale, the emphasis in research quality assessments has been shifting from mere attention to productivity to questions of impact and relevance. How should Unicamp respond to this cultural change?
Tom Joe - In recent years, Brazilian and international funding agencies have widely used the per capita measurement of published scientific articles as a way of evaluating research. This metric, however, was not necessarily linked to the quality of the research carried out, still stimulating competition in university environments around the world. Merit assessments began to be based, almost exclusively, on the number of publications per researcher's activity time, which does not necessarily prioritize the quality and social relevance of the research. A negative consequence of this strategy was also the emergence of several low-quality journals, which also contributed to a change in the commercial model of publishers who began to charge for the publication of scientific works (open access).
Research results must be disseminated, scientific production is a consequence of good research and brings prestige to the researcher's institution. It is therefore important to publish. But without a doubt, the most important thing is publishing with quality, impact and relevance, which necessarily requires a certain period of gestation and maturation of the research. Unicamp has, in its origins, a clear vocation for research, which must be permanently renewed in its purposes and strategies. A University like ours must be guided by research ambition and this involves the search for the new, the relevant, that which generates social impact.
Unicamp is a young institution, but it has already reached a quality standard in research that places it well above the Brazilian average standard, in all areas of knowledge. New challenges arise from this level already reached and we believe that it is the role of the University administration to promote discussions aimed at developing and, subsequently, signaling directions on quality and relevance in research. To achieve this, it is also important to pay attention to two aspects that are not contradictory, as they may seem at first, more superficial glance, but that complement each other: social relevance in view of the country's needs and cutting-edge themes in priority in large international centers .
Unicamp must also occupy a prominent position in research policies. At the same time as it internally stimulates quality, it must occupy important spaces with state and national funding bodies to contribute, with its institutional personality, to the definition of parameters and criteria for evaluating research and postgraduate programs. Unicamp also has the historical vocation of seeking to "make a difference" in academic life and in the well-being of society. It is by persevering in this disposition that you will more naturally reach new levels of scientific relevance, and consequent prestige, in all your areas of activity.
One of the ways to increase the impact and relevance of research developed at Unicamp is to increase its degree of interdisciplinarity and internationalization. For this to happen, it is necessary to stimulate interaction between different areas of research at Unicamp based on challenging themes whose solution requires this interaction. Another essential point are the international mobility actions for all professional categories of the university (undergraduate and postgraduate students, employees, teachers and researchers) and the institutional search for collaborations on a global scale, identifying strategic areas and respecting the particularities and the interests of the units.
These two themes are very expensive for the ticket Unicamp: building Tomorrow and we intend, if elected, to work to implement more focused programs of internationalization and interaction between teaching and research units, seeking cross-fertilization that leads to an increase in the quality and relevance of research for all involved. In short, we understand that Unicamp must embrace the commitment to lead the development of relevant and quality research that meets the desires of the communities that surround us, in the State of São Paulo, in Brazil and in international partnerships.
JU - Still within the scope of research quality assessment, are the usual impact and relevance measures the most appropriate, considering Unicamp's mission?
Tom Joe - Not entirely, as an important part of research quality assessments has a more focused focus on productivity measured by the number of publications per capita. As previously mentioned, this does not necessarily take into account the quality of the research and the impact of its results on the communities, whether local, national or international, in which the university is located. It is worth noting that, in the context of current measures, Brazil in general and Unicamp in particular have evolved a lot in recent years, with Brazil already accounting for 2% of the total volume of articles published in the world. It is positive data, without a doubt, but it does not reflect the impact of Brazilian research on the destinations of those carried out around the world.
Another important aspect is that many of these usual impact and relevance measures are based on parameters that do not explicitly consider differences between areas of knowledge. This leads to a tendency to relegate to a position of lesser importance the areas of knowledge whose research relevance is less measurable by these models. In this way, some researchers are necessarily attracted to research themes that are not necessarily linked to the country's interests, but rather to those developed in countries with a greater scientific and technological tradition. The ranking resulting from these evaluation methodologies generates frustration in part of the academic community, as it lists some research as very important and others as not so relevant, roughly based on the citation indexes of the articles. This directly impacts, in turn, the definitions of access to research funding.
Despite an undeniable historical role in the evolution of scientific activity, in Brazil and around the world, this now classic model of research quality metrics also presents flaws and injustices. A current example was the neglect with which messenger RNA research was treated for many years. This basic research, considered unimportant and of low relevance, allowed the development of high-performance vaccines against the coronavirus, in just 10 months, and should allow the world to emerge from a pandemic that has already caused the loss of thousands of human lives. . In the near future, the results of this basic research will be used to develop treatments for numerous illnesses.
The research carried out at a quality public university, such as Unicamp, is diverse in origin: it ranges from basic science, focused on fundamental questions about our existence on the planet, to the most sophisticated research. These include those that can be used to solve specific problems in different industrial sectors; or the proposal of public policies in the areas of health, education, transport, food, security, management of urban spaces; or many other topics relevant to generating quality of life on a local, national and global scale.
Global research has evolved a lot in the last 50 years and, in general, the most relevant and impactful problems require answers that involve the involvement of many areas of knowledge. We have observed very often that the more challenging the question to be answered, the greater the level of intertwining of several different areas of knowledge, and the greater the intertwining of different areas of knowledge, the better the quality of the research results and the greater its impact. Scientific production at a public university must lead to greater knowledge of society and reflection on the varied processes that characterize it, and the appropriate metrics for its evaluation must reflect this purpose.
One of the proposals embraced by the ticket Unicamp: Building Tomorrow aims to stimulate academic interaction between the various areas of research at Unicamp. We intend to implement a research program that encourages interdisciplinarity, internationalization and that contributes to increasing the impact of research developed by Unicamp. Greater joint activity between researchers from different units will naturally lead to a broader understanding and mutual appreciation between research areas, expanding their horizons of action. With this, we also intend to stimulate internal discussions with a view to developing an institutional evaluation model that allows measuring the relevance and quality of research developed at Unicamp, respecting the particularities of each research area and its own social impact, and including items that allow it to be mirrored with international models. The fundamental objective is to help Unicamp maintain its leading role as a generator of knowledge and manager of scientific policy with local, national and international impact.
JU - What should be the role of the Rector in situations of conflict in the internal community, involving students, staff and teachers, taking into account the history of occupation of the Rectorate in the recent past?
Tom Joe - Although this question seems out of context, since the conjunction of factors that occurred in the recent past of 2016 cannot be repeated, it is an essential question, which allows us to expose how we consider institutional responsibility and political leadership for the resolution of internal problems.
The rector has a clear institutional responsibility for ensuring the functioning and integrity of the University, and it is his political leadership that will result in the successful solution of possible conflicts and problems. This is a basic principle from which we reaffirm that, under the imperative of university autonomy, dialogue and coordination with unit directors, as well as the integration of teachers, staff and students, through their representatives, will be the ways management priorities of our rectory.
The university has clear rules of conduct for professors, staff and students, set out in its General Regulations, and maintains resource bodies that guarantee the rights of each body in the community: these must be the basic guidelines present in each possible situation. In turn, if the rectory cannot avoid the legal responsibilities that the position and the institution impose, we make it clear here that there is no place for repression in our decisions, if conflicts that are difficult to resolve occur. Unicamp's history is characterized by managing moments of crisis through dialogue and approaches and, above all, by finding balance and respect for institutionality within the University, without external interference.
It is worth mentioning that this past year, strongly affected by the pandemic, has put fundamental current problems on hold, such as salary issues and student retention issues. The health crisis showed everyone a university that we don't like and don't want, with empty classrooms and buildings, without coexistence and without face-to-face interaction. It is to be expected, with serenity, that old and new problems will emerge when we resume face-to-face daily life on campus. The demands of sectors of the community are part of public management and, given this, management “Unicamp: building tomorrow” will be defined and characterized by dialogue, as is typical of university life and civilizing coexistence. The solution to problems and conflicts that may arise begins with their prevention, through transparent debate regarding management possibilities regarding any issues placed on a negotiation table.
Finally, this response includes an attitude of hope and optimism, which are good characteristics for calm and dynamic management. Our program is focused on the future of Unicamp, as expressed in our slogan. It was designed and built by many professionals from the University and we can categorically say that all areas and segments participated and are included in our project. In our campaign we have already demonstrated, with words and postures, that the management we want is open and driven by dialogue. Recent events in our country demonstrate the need for this spirit of dialogue to be manifested beyond the walls of the University, and it is Unicamp's responsibility to promote it in all sectors of external society in which it is institutionally present.
In particular, in our management program, we recognize the role of the rector in leading this process, with responsibility, presence, discernment, involvement and wisdom. Not only do we learn from the facts of the past, but we have a clear idea of the reality that surrounds us and what Unicamp can do in favor of our civil society, which so lacks tolerance and respect for differences.
JU - The State government's recent relationship with the academic community has been tumultuous, with threats of cuts to institutions' budgets, which required great mobilization to avoid measures that, if approved, would put teaching and research activities at risk. In your opinion, how should the rectory behave in the face of these threats and what is its policy on interaction with the state government?
Tom Joe - The solution to this complex problem lies in a more assertive political position external to Unicamp and an improvement in the University's communication flows with society. It is indisputable that today there is a position on the part of some political authorities within the executive, but also the legislative, judiciary and control bodies, that is contrary to, and even hostile in some cases, towards public universities in São Paulo. This position has been constructed in part due to a lack of knowledge of the diversity and importance of the activities carried out by public universities.
In the opposite and hostile position there are also ideological motivations and private interests that would like the State to minimize its activities in the areas of education, health and scientific research. This was the case with the establishment of the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPI) by the Legislative Assembly of the State of São Paulo (Alesp) to investigate suspected irregularities in the management of public universities in São Paulo, which ended with the preparation of a fragile and inconsistent report, which also shows a high lack of knowledge by part of state deputies on the role, relevance and challenges of public, free and quality universities.
One of the biggest damages of distorted or limited information is what contributes to a portion of the media and society in general forming a distorted or mistaken opinion about the public university. It is necessary to broaden the understanding of citizens, who finance the university, about the importance that public universities and research institutes have in their lives. Therefore, as proposed by our management program “Unicamp: building tomorrow” It is essential to build bridges with society and improve the flow of external communication.
Some of the proposals included in our program are: a) taking Unicamp radio and TV to a new level of protagonism, as relevant institutional partners for the dissemination of content; b) improve the dissemination and scientific dissemination of ongoing research at Unicamp, in all areas of knowledge; c) offer content of a denser cultural, socioeconomic and political nature, with the participation of members of the University and social agents (decision-making bodies, social movements, scientific entities, artists, etc.); d) create the “Get to Know Unicamp” program to disseminate information about the University’s activities, with brief interviews with Unicamp professors about academic research and its interest for society; e) make institutional media accessible to the visually and hearing impaired.
In the same line of argument, Unicamp should expand communication on social networks, including the Unicamp Portal and tools such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Youtube, to: a) publish periodic clippings on cultural and academic events, as well as University research for different audiences; b) facilitate access to all Unicamp online collections; c) improve the dissemination of university extension courses, services and joint actions, through short promotional videos and other resources; d) create the podcast “Unicamp explica”, covering topics of general interest such as health, climate, food, culture, human rights, etc.; e) carry out research regarding the social perception of Unicamp, as a basis for improving our communication policy.
Furthermore, it will be necessary to promote communication through actions in physical spaces, such as a) encouraging the inclusion of University matters in local and regional press vehicles, based on actions integrated with society; b) periodically hold artistic events for the general public on Unicamp campuses, in partnership with the region's City Halls, or with other public and private bodies: theater, concerts and exhibitions, possibly taking advantage of the University's public spaces; c) create the “Science around the world” program to develop integrated scientific dissemination methods, focusing on Unicamp’s interinstitutional partnerships; d) create, in partnership with Comvest, the “Unicamp in public schools” program, aiming to take Unicamp students graduating from public education to conversations in schools in the Campinas region; e) develop the “Unicamp na Rua” project, which will seek to take teachers and students to strategic points in the Campinas region, to disseminate knowledge produced at Unicamp to society, as well as listen to people about their demands and how the University can contribute to serve them; f) strengthen partnerships and communication with different segments of society: public authorities, media, business, scientific societies, social movements, educational sector, health bodies and international organizations.
In a period of prolonged economic crisis in the country with negative impacts on public accounts, which are reflected in tax and fiscal difficulties, it is natural that the dispute over public resources between different segments of society will intensify. It is within this context that the threats of loss of university autonomy and/or cuts in the already tight budget of public universities must be understood, which involve the significant amount of resources of 9,57% of the State of São Paulo's share of the ICMS. And there are other risks and threats just as important, such as an imminent tax reform, which should merge the ICMS with other indirect taxes, which will bring to the university the need to ensure transition mechanisms for its financing, without the loss of university autonomy. . These are political challenges that will demand a much more assertive position from the public university.
Therefore, greater dialogue with political actors and society as a whole is essential. As analyzed in our program, Unicamp has, in its organizational chart, the São Paulo Office, subordinate to the Rector's Office. In the times we live in, in which public universities - including state universities in São Paulo - suffer attacks, often based on misinformation and a misunderstanding of our activities, it is essential that we make use of institutional channels to improve communication with public representatives. We must value the role of the São Paulo Office, creating more effective conditions for contact, discussion and dissemination of the university's activities, with a focus on the highest level public and business sector. We will also study the possibility of creating a similar office in Brasília, with a view to the same ideas of valuing Unicamp, but within the political community and the federal public sector.
In short, it is essential to convey to society that the public University of São Paulo is part of the solution, not the problem, for the social, economic and scientific development of the State and Brazil.
JU - How do you assess the importance of affirmative action and social inclusion policies at Unicamp and how to deal with the challenge of retention and student support policies, taking into account the growth of students with lower income?
Tom Joe - The University's primary vocation is to train the human person and generate knowledge in line with a human rights policy. This leads the institution to reconfigure its values to accommodate a greater plurality of cultures, knowledge and individual expressions. On the one hand, the internal community needs to recognize the richness of this idea of diversity; on the other hand, external events provoke a deep reflection on the role of the university in society. In view of the above, this is the time to create structure and invest without fear, and with clarity, in what is understood as a citizen university, which recognizes and wants people's rights to be present and active within and outside its limits. We understand affirmative action policies in this context and with an important role in guaranteeing the constitutional principle of equality.
Historically, Unicamp has always been attentive to democratic struggles for equal rights and opportunities. The entrance exam, since it became a responsibility of the institution, has always had a clear orientation: to allow access to candidates with an academic profile open to society's main challenges. The writing test was notable for its varied set of themes and skills, in tune with society's dilemmas. This gave Unicamp invaluable symbolic capital and projected it as one of the institutions most sensitive to the spirit of the time. The entrance exam bonus programs, the implementation of ethnic-racial quotas and the indigenous entrance exam are a clear sign of the university we want and the diversity we hope to see in our community. We are at an important moment of consolidating and expanding these policies, which need to be considered at the level of students, staff and teachers. To achieve this, we need the participation of our community and society as a whole. Through this interaction, with the support of our administration, we will take Unicamp to a new level. In partnership with the Executive Directorate for Human Rights (DEDH), we can expand and support the black and indigenous community, as well as improve accessibility and permanence conditions. To achieve this, it is urgent to invest in a structure, with personnel and a specific budget, that makes DEDH's operations viable.
Article 206 of the 1988 Federal Constitution ensures equal conditions for students' access and permanence. It is then up to the public university to develop mechanisms and projects for access and permanence, inquiring into how to carry out in spirit what is in the letter of the law.
The challenges for a low-income student to remain at Unicamp are enormous and, often, invisible to the community. Many students leave their families and friends in their hometown and carry with them their dreams, their personal life stories and their expectations regarding higher education. This entire symbolic universe can quickly enter into crisis if there is not, specifically in our institution, the capacity to listen, welcome and forward the demands brought by these young people.
The first sign of welcome is to guarantee each of them a healthy, peaceful and respectful space for socializing with personal and cultural differences. Student Housing has fulfilled this role for decades. Having a secure space to live and knowing that, after an exhausting day, I can enjoy my privacy in the company of my friends is an inalienable right. Guaranteeing access to meals, transportation and other assistance that contributes to the economic maintenance of each student in vulnerable conditions is to fulfill the requirement of article 206 of the Constitution. However, the significant increase in students in situations of social vulnerability, and we must include not only low-income students, but indigenous, lgbtq+ and black students, imposes new challenges and requires concrete answers to questions such as:
1. Should we resume the new housing construction project? Isn't the benefit to the institution as a whole greater than its cost?
2. If we defend respect for differences and individual choices, couldn't we have more than one housing program model? For example, wouldn't it be worth increasing the amount of housing assistance in order to accommodate personal decisions?
3. Should conserving and renovating housing infrastructure be a priority for the main bodies responsible for such services in our institution?
4. Could a community security model, based on rules agreed upon by all residents, be implemented in effectively democratic management?
One of the most important institutional spaces in the history of Unicamp is the SAE. In the figure of its social workers, SAE shows that the defense of a policy that reduces social and economic inequalities among our students requires reliable mediators with proven expertise. A management "Unicamp: building tomorrow" understands that ensuring conditions and resources for SAE's operations is an effective measure to contribute to the success of affirmative action policies. Furthermore, with regard to the evaluation and scholarship granting policy, the inclusion of student representatives in the SAE board is a student demand that needs to be evaluated. SAPPE, another important institutional space for student stay, carries out exemplary work in attention and care for students' mental health, but has been overloaded. Therefore, we believe it is crucial to promote the expansion of its actions. The importance of partner and integrated action between central administration, SAPPE, SAE and the units is reinforced here.
Another essential aspect for permanence is academics. The difficulties that students face in following subjects can lead to course withdrawal or unsatisfactory training, both of which are critical for inclusion policies: failure by these graduates can corroborate prejudices and increase anxieties, leading to a consequent weakening of these policies. A singular perspective that takes into account the diversity of profiles and knowledge levels of new entrants is an effective way of supporting retention. Rethinking the Academic Support Program, bureaucratic in its current form, aligning it with other actions, such as offering alternative trajectories at the beginning of courses, also contributes to student retention. Particular attention must be paid to indigenous entrants. The discussion and construction of ways for these students to integrate into the rhythm of campus life and their social environment, different from those they bring, is important for controlling dropout rates.
