Search results

This study aims to examine the evolution of three science, technology and innovation parks (STIPs) located in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from the perspective of the university–industry–government linkages.

This is a multiple case study organized in two stages: first, bibliographic and documentary research to develop a theoretical framework and description of the innovation environments; and second, interviews and forms filling with 13 managers and stakeholders, combined with participant observation. The analysis and assessment of the evolution of each environment are based on a tool named Amaral’s Model for Innovation Environment Management (AMIEM).

There are critical issues for the development of STIPs, namely, governance structure, government participation and the relationship with knowledge sources such as universities. The time of existence is not a significant factor in reaching evolution. Although common factors are present in all environments, local particularities, specific characteristics, regional vocations, management leadership and other elements have an impact on park performance.

AMIEM is an assessment tool and a technological product, useful in mapping and evaluating innovation environments.

STIPs are dynamic and maturing, requiring active management and engagement with government and companies.

The results allow a better comprehension of the evolution and management of the STIPs located in the state of Rio de Janeiro. Another contribution lies in the organization of information to design public policies.

This study aims to analyze the practices and relationships of companies established in Science and Technology Parks (STPs) as drivers of the quadruple and quintuple helix (QQH) and the determinants for aligning with the future vision of STPs.

The authors conducted a survey of companies associated with consolidated STPs and used the Structural Equation Model technique to predict such relationships.

The results showed a positive relationship between the QQH and the Future Vision of STPs, in addition to the relevance of collectives as representatives of the quadruple helix (QH).

Collectives are a recent phenomenon and require longitudinal studies on their performance in innovation environments.

Companies that are part of collectives are the actors of the QH.

The role of collectives in aligning with the future vision of STPs should be considered. Collectives reflect people’s vision and can help STPs from being a closed environment and expand their performance, with a key role in connecting innovation environments. The authors found that collectives are promising in practices related to sustainability, thus contributing to STPs with their ability to mobilize the ecosystem.

The research emphasizes the role of companies as agents of QQH in innovation environments, strengthening the increasing and distinct role of collectives in their relationships with STPs.

This study aims to focus on the entrepreneurial education and profile in undergraduate business administration programs in Brazil, particularly in the southern region of the state of Rio de Janeiro. Assuming that the entrepreneurial profile can be developed by teaching and learning processes.

The research performed qualitative approach through interviews and a quantitative approach using multiple criteria decision-making methods. Data were collected along 2015 in a survey with a population of 412 students from three high education institutions (HEIs) and analyzed using the analytic hierarchy process with ratings.

The study has found that the key entrepreneurial trait for all groups was the ability to “plan”. Other relevant dimensions were “self-realization”, “innovative” and “leader”. The dimensions “risk taking” and “sociability” were considered not important in the opinion of all groups.

The entrepreneurial profile does not seem to evolve over the four-year college period, thus suggesting a failure of the entrepreneurial education at the three surveyed HEIs to impact the overall perception of students about the requirements for creating and developing new ventures. Actions to revert this trend should be taken.

This research aims to identify differences in perception about the entrepreneurial profile among freshmen and senior undergraduates. The theme is relevant in a knowledge era where academy has to prepare students to be entrepreneurs. Similar studies were done around in Brazil and around the world but no one in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The work has a contribution by proposing and applying a method to compare students groups, programs, institutions and countries over time.

The chapter discusses Comparative and International Education (CIE) in Germany and reviews some recent developments that are seen to impact the field in important ways. The current state of CIE in Germany is characterized by three major developments. First, there are visible signs of intensified interest in comparative knowledge – both from policy and academic circles – as illustrated by external indicators such as publications, activities in academic-professional societies, etc. Second, there is an increasing diversification of CIE, with intercultural, international and development education attracting much attention. Finally, since the early 2000s, there has been growing significance and reception of large-scale international comparative assessment studies. The essay discusses these current developments in turn and poses questions as to their relevance and potential impact for CIE in Germany.

International rule-governed activity also includes nonstate actors on the national as well as on the international and transnational levels. This chapter first discusses the relationship between educational governance and regime theory, then some observations on the theoretical perspective and the analytical categories are outlined. Second, a concise discussion of regime theory is presented and a definition of an emerging international education regime (IER) is elaborated, including some of the key elements and features that illustrate the adopted theoretical framework. Third, the chapter addresses some methodological questions and presents one possible research design to discuss empirical implications of an emerging IER.

For the longest period of its history, the university was the guardian and transmitter – not the producer – of knowledge. This relatively recent change of transmitting canonical knowledge and generating new knowledge is normally associated with Wilhelm von Humboldt. Other highly influential university models were provided by France and Great Britain. The association of certain types of universities with particular countries is a strong indicator of the intricate link between nation-state and education. Hence, the history of tertiary education and its elite institutions, the research universities, must be considered in relation with a sea change in educational history – the gradual emergence of national education systems. Only under the conditions of the by now standard form of organizing modern societies as nation-states did education become a central institution (Meyer, Boli, Thomas, & Ramirez, 1997) collapsing individual perfectibility and national progress. The nationally redefined university was integrated into the education system as its keystone while also being considered the motor of societal development. From a social history perspective, the latter aspect in particular indicates the pragmatic (training professionals, imparting military and technical knowledge, etc.) and symbolic expectations, “myths” of the nation-state that have been so aptly described and analyzed in numerous macro-sociological neo-institutionalist studies (Meyer, Ramirez, & Soysal, 1992; Meyer et al., 1997; Ramirez & Boli, 1987). In a macro-phenomenological perspective, the term “myth” is used to denote a fundamental change in the self-description of European society which since the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries no longer views itself as consisting of separate collectivities divided from each other by social origin – as was the case under feudal conditions – with each collectivity providing itself the necessary education for its members or being provided for by others in the case of neediness. Instead, as a result of a number of material and immaterial changes, society now defines the individual as its key unit, with the nation being consequently the aggregate of individuals and not of collectivities and the state redefined as the guardian of the nation. This conception might be taken as a kind of overlapping area which includes different approaches, such as Michel Foucault's concept of the disciplinary society (Foucault, 1977), Balibar and Wallerstein's (1991) deliberations on the relation between race, class, and nation, and Benedict Anderson's (1991) description of nations as imagined communities. All these studies could be taken as sharing the notion of “constructedness” (cf. Berger & Luckmann, 1972) of modern society with the neo-institutionalist perspective. The concept of a “world polity” which encompasses the “myths” society is based on, the overall notion of a cognitive culture, which takes Max Weber's concept of rationality as a point of departure, is identified as the basis of isomorphic change in the organizational structure of modern education systems (cf. Baker & Wiseman, 2006). However, the strong emphasis on international, world system embeddedness of nation-states and their education systems is not to be taken as a unidirectional dependence on external forces. While modern nation-states originate from and remain tied to international dynamics and developments, they are conceived as unique entities. For most of their history, modern nation-states have been preoccupied with making themselves distinct from each other. Thus, while international competition has always been present, looking abroad traditionally meant reworking, adapting, and reshaping what was imported, or borrowed (Halpin & Troyna, 1995; Steiner-Khamsi, 2004). This is true for education as well as for other areas of society.

In October 2008, a group of international scholars met at Hohentuebingen Castle, in Tuebingen, Germany, to discuss issues of international governance in education. At that time, governance as an analytical concept was just beginning to be more widely discussed in German educational science. These discussions were primarily in the context of new forms of organizational steering and with regards to a changing embeddedness of national education systems attributed to processes of globalization and fiscal austerity. In addition, a large interdisciplinary research project located at the University of Bremen, TranState, was already exerting considerable international influence with a decidedly comparative perspective on those areas of German educational science. However, in this early phase, the debate on international governance in education was limited and focused heavily on emerging theories of governance, among colleagues at the University of Tuebingen, both at the Institute of Education as well as in other parts of the faculty. To me, Frank-Olaf Radtke was the key person who had first drawn my attention to educational governance, and I was especially grateful for having had the opportunity to continue our previous exchanges in the context of the Tuebingen meeting.

S. Karin Amos is professor of education with a special emphasis on comparative and multicultural education at the Eberhard Karls University at Tuebingen. Her research interests include the role of education in the construction of societal membership, transnational educational governance, and cultural studies and education.