Elaboração e revisão de itens de geografia no contexto das avaliações em larga escala promovidos pelo CAEd/UFJF: dificuldades e desafios de superação

Abstract

The present dissertation is developed within the scope of the Professional Master in Management and Education Evaluation (PPGP) and Federal University of Juiz de Fora’s Center for Public Policies and Education Evaluation (CAEd / UFJF). The management case discusses how CAEd / UFJF, as a proposing agent, can improve the reviewing process of items in Geography, considering reflection on fragilities and potentialities of this process. The general objective is to understand how the revision process occurs, identifying elements in the revision flow which appear in repeatedly retained items and may complicate the formation of CAEd / UFJF’s proposed Item Bank. Hence, it is sought to characterize the items’ elaboration process and its consequent revision based on technical and pedagogical criteria adopted by CAEd / UFJF. Therefore, this study is aimed at analyzing fragilities that possibly hinder the revision flow and, finally, measures are proposed to overcome this scenario. On that account, the processes of evidence collection are highlighted through documentary research and interviews, the choice of theoretical reference, based on the concepts of process management, knowledge and information, and the adoption of methodological instruments focused on documentary research and conversation. The research evidence points to the existence of a large number of constantly reviewed items because they do not meet the criteria set forth by CAEd / UFJF. Based on this, we hypothesize that developers face difficulty to take into account suggestions made by reviewers, as well as with item construction through different technical and pedagogical criteria adopted. Thus, process management, knowledge management and information management are used as theoretical basis to discuss the functioning of CAEd / UFJF’s organizational structure. To do so, case study is used as qualitative research methodology, through application of instruments such as data collection and semi-structured interviews, as well as dialogue circles. Confirming the hypothesis, the systematization of analyzed data points to the developers’ difficultness in overcoming problems pointed out by reviewers, whether due to training or access to tools and guidelines available for the construction of items. Therefore, an action plan was elaborated in order to restructure review processes carried out within the CAEd / UFJF through workshops of continuous training, revision of guiding documents and promotion of actions to assist in the construction and revision of items.