Medical students at Unicamp who use the Affirmative Action and Social Inclusion Program (Paais), implemented in 2005 by the University, present lower grades in the Entrance Exam than those obtained by those who are not covered by the initiative. However, throughout graduation this difference disappears. At the time of taking the exam to enter the Medical Residency, the discrepancy in performance between the two groups does not exist. The data are part of research developed for doctor Gláucia de Oliveira Moreira's doctoral thesis, still to be defended. The work supervisor is professor Eliana Amaral, dean of Undergraduate Studies at Unicamp.
Glaucia presented part of the results of her study (see related text) on the morning of this Thursday (24), during the seminar “Affirmative actions in Higher Education: for what and for how many?”, organized by the Higher Education Studies Laboratory (LEES). The researcher explains that she decided to investigate the relationship between Paais and the performance of medical students because the course is the most popular in the University Entrance Exam, registering around 220 candidates for each of the 110 places offered.
Students who enrolled between 2005 and 2008 and who completed the course by 2013 were considered. The confidence interval for statistical analyses, according to the doctor, is 95%. “What we were able to see was that, in the Entrance Exam, students who receive the Paais bonus obtain lower grades than those achieved by those who do not use the program. During the course, however, the performance of the two groups was equal. At the time of the exam to enter the Medical Residency, there is no difference between them”, he assures.
The author of the research notes that the Medicine course has its own characteristics. The difference in preparation between the first 500 candidates for the career, she says, is very small. “Even 400th place is very good. The difference in scores between one candidate and another is hundredths. This helps to explain why the discrepancies recorded in the Entrance Examination grades are eliminated during graduation.” In the study, Gláucia also evaluated the impact of granting scholarships on the performance of medical students.
According to her, scholarship holders perform better than non-scholarship holders throughout their studies. Scholarships, in this case, seem to encourage students to increase their dedication to academic activities. “In relation to the Medical Residency exam, the performance between those who received and those who did not receive scholarships was equivalent. It is important to highlight that scholarship recipients have a lower family income than non-scholarship recipients,” she concludes.
The researcher at the Center for Public Policy Studies (NEPP) at Unicamp, Cibele Yahn de Andrade, also participated in the seminar. In her speech, she highlighted that the affirmative action programs adopted by Brazilian higher education institutions contributed to increasing the presence of non-white and lower-income students at universities (see related text). “Still, it is a small proportion, given that these groups came out of a very large deficit. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider that a large part of this population is not covered by affirmative action programs because they do not even complete primary and secondary education”.
An important point to be considered, according to Cibele, is the need for greater diversity in higher education, which she considers should be treated as “post-secondary education”. “This type of teaching can have different durations and develop specific skills for different activities, as the target audience is very diverse. University, as we know it in Brazil, does not need to be the only way to continue studying and prepare for professional life. That’s why it’s important that we discuss this diversity as we continue our post-secondary studies,” she argues.
