Avaliação de rede de ensino superior: uma análise da abordagem de gêneros nas questões discursivas do ENADE

Abstract

This dissertation was drafted during the Master’s course in Linguistics as the Universidade Federal da Paraíba (Brazil) and addresses discourse genres in discursive issues that constitute the specific component of the National Student Performance Exam (NSPE) given to students in courses of Administration, Psychology and Executive Secretariat in 2006. The aim of the analysis was to determine whether the genres solicited are the most relevant to the professionals educated in these courses. We believe that this analysis is important, as communicative success in different social situations, including those related to the work setting, also depend on knowledge regarding the discourse genres through which individuals carry out their discursive projects. Considering the importance of undergraduate courses in enabling students to adequately build this knowledge, we judge it relevant that official assessment instruments such as the NSPE carry out a pertinent approach to this issue on their tests, as it may affect choices related to undergraduate curriculum. The theoretical foundation of this study consists of work by Bakhtin (2000), Bazerman (2005, 2006), Brait (2007), Bronckart (1985, 1999), Dias Sobrinho (2003), Flairclough (1989, 2001), Hoffmann (2005) and others. We also perform an analysis of the discursive issues present in the specific component of the tests directed at students in the aforementioned courses and carry out a survey with professionals in these areas regarding the most often used discursive genres in communicative practices in these fields in order to determine whether the genres solicited on the NSPE are the most important for these professionals in communicative activities in their fields of work. The results of the study indicate discrepancies between what is asked of the students on the NSPE and what is necessary for the professionals to effectively engage in communicative practices specific to their fields. We also noticed that the drafting of this exam was guided by an inconsistent theoretical concept, as it gives greater importance to knowledge regarding genres for the Executive Secretariat course in detriment to the other courses analyzed. We disagree with this, because we believe it is not scientifically sound to choose a test that is more consistent with the genres of one or another course. It is not possible to measure the degree of importance that language will have for each type of professional, as all individuals need to act discursively in communicative practices specific to their fields. We therefore suggest a review of the theoretical and methodological concepts necessary for pertinent work with discourse genres.