The president of the National Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (Inep), Manuel Palacios, stated this Tuesday (20), in an interview with TV Brasil, that there is no error in the result of the first edition of the National Medical Training Assessment Exam (Enamed), which evaluated 351 medical courses across the country 
Of this total, around 30% performed unsatisfactorily, which occurs when less than 60% of students were considered proficient. The test result is used to calculate the institutions’ Enade concept, which varies from 1 to 5. Grades 1 and 2 are considered insufficient by the MEC.
Failure to achieve proficiency has been questioned by associations representing private colleges. They allege a discrepancy between the data reported to the system in December last year and the numbers released now, especially in relation to the total number of students considered proficient in the courses.
This divergence of information was recognized by Palacios, and occurred, according to him, in an internal communication via the system eMEC that colleges have access to validate information. The erroneous data regarding the number of students who achieved proficiency was corrected, based on the results achieved in the test, and would not have been used to classify the courses.
“The application of the number of students who accepted proficiency came out with divergent results. There was an error here at Inep in this quantity. But this data was not used for any calculation of the quality indicators of the courses. So, what happened was a publication restricted to institutions with a preview of the number of students with proficiency that came out with incorrect data”, stated the president of Inep.
Palacios explained that the bulletins received by participants, the results published for the courses and the Enade concept produced by Inep for all medical courses that were evaluated do not have any problems.
“The results are valid, they are correct and there are no complications in the publication of these results, both for those who participated and received the bulletin through the participant’s platform, and the recent publication of the results”, he stated.
According to him, what happened was an error in prior communication with the institutions, without an effect on the calculation of these indicators.
“The published indicators that show the number of participants are on the Inep website, there is the number of participants, the number of registrants, the number of students who achieved proficiency and the calculation of the Enade concept, they are all correct. There is nothing published by Inep that has been delivered to the public that has any error”, he continued.
Inconsistencies
In a note, the Brazilian Association of Higher Education Supporters (ABMES) highlights that the inconsistencies were recognized by the MEC itself and by Inep in the publication of Enamed results.
“After the administration of the tests and the dissemination of the results to students and institutions, Inep published successive technical notes — NT nº 40, between December 9th and 12th; NT nº 42, on December 22nd; and NT nº 19, on December 30th – changing and complementing methodological criteria after the closing of the exam and the deadline for appeals, which took place on December 17th. A measure as serious as the change in concepts that had been presented, in December, to higher education institutions. The data does not match those that were released yesterday (19) to the press. The MEC itself acknowledged the existence of inconsistencies in the information, increasing the scenario of doubts and regulatory insecurity for institutions”, says the entity.
This chain of administrative acts subsequent to the test compromises transparency, legal certainty and the correct interpretation of data, points out the association. “In addition to unduly exposing institutions and students to public judgments based on information that the MEC itself admits it needs to review.”
“In view of this, ABMES defends a careful investigation of the facts and reaffirms that, in the current context, it is impossible to guarantee that the concepts produced and published by Inep are correct. In fact, another point that corroborates this doubt materializes in the way in which the microdata were released yesterday, without the existence of any connection between the students and the institutions. This measure not only makes it impossible for institutions to check the data but also prevents them from correctly making their statements in relation to the published results”, continued the entity, in note.
Precautionary measures
The unsatisfactory Enade concept paves the way for the application, by the MEC, of so-called precautionary measures, which may include restricting places in medical courses and preventing new admissions.
Inep will open a five-day period, starting next Monday (26), so that institutions can clarify doubts and present their statements regarding the calculation of the course evaluation results.
