Postgraduate students

Former students of the Graduate Program in Geography – UFC

Since its establishment, the Graduate Program in Geography at UFC has implemented a systematic policy for monitoring its alumni, in line with CAPES guidelines. To this end, the program maintains a continuously updated database, containing information provided by former students themselves as well as by qualified informants affiliated with the program.

The most recent survey was conducted in 2024, covering alumni who completed their degrees between 2020 and 2024. The information obtained was essential both to support the planning of strategic actions for the next four-year period and to meet the requirements of funding agencies, providing an overview of the perceptions, career trajectories, and professional integration of the graduates during this period.

The research included data on course modality, year of completion, current occupation, as well as questions regarding the impacts of the training, skills developed, evaluations of the program, and suggestions for improvement. In addition, the survey assessed the participation of doctoral alumni in academic careers. Figure 1 shows the distribution of these graduates working as faculty members at federal and state institutions in Brazil.

Figure 1 – Former doctoral students of PPGGeo serving as faculty members in Geography Programs in Northern Brazil.

 

In Graph 1, it can be observed that the largest proportion of completed programs corresponds to the Doctorate, representing 45.7% of the total. Following this, Master’s programs account for 42.4%. The smallest portion, equivalent to 12%, refers to alumni who completed both the Master’s and Doctorate within the program.

 

Graph 1 – Number of completed programs (Master’s and Doctorate).

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

 

Graph 2 shows the distribution of graduates by year of completion, from 2020 to 2024. In 2020, 17 students completed their courses, representing 18.48% of the total. The year 2021 recorded the lowest number of graduates in the period, with only 7 completions, equivalent to 7.61%. In 2022, there was a significant increase, totaling 21 graduates, corresponding to 22.83%. The highest number was recorded in 2023, with 26 completions, representing 28.26% of the total. Finally, in 2024, the number of graduates remained high, with 21 students, repeating the same percentage observed in 2022 (22.83%).

 

 

Graph 2 – Year of completion (2020 to 2024).

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

 

Graph 3 illustrates the distribution of professions held by PPGGeo graduates, revealing a strong concentration in the education sector, both at basic and higher education levels. The most prevalent profession is Basic Education Teacher, accounting for 26% (24 individuals) of the graduates.

Subsequently, 23.9% (22 individuals) work as University Professors in public institutions. The role of Technician in public institutions is also significant, comprising 11.9% (11 individuals). Additionally, 9.7% (9 individuals) of the graduates are engaged in other professions related to their training in the program, highlighting the breadth of professional engagement.

The categories “Others” and “Pursuing postgraduate studies” represent 7.6% (7 individuals) and 6.5% (6 individuals), respectively, the latter indicating that a portion of graduates chooses to continue their academic training at a higher level. Less prominent are Technicians in private institutions (5.4%) and University Professors in private institutions (4.3%). Notably, only one graduate (1.08%) reported not currently working, demonstrating a high employment and professional integration rate among the program’s alumni.

 

Graph 3 – Profession held by graduates.

 

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

 

Graph 4 presents the graduates’ perception regarding the impact of courses and other curricular activities on their academic and professional development. The evaluation was conducted on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 represents “Low Impact” and 5 corresponds to “High Impact.” The data indicate a predominantly positive perception, with 63.04% of respondents (58 individuals) assigning the maximum score, signaling a high impact on their training. Additionally, 28.26% (26 individuals) rated it as 4, indicating a considerable impact. Only 6.52% (6 individuals) attributed a medium impact (level 3).

The lowest ratings are anecdotal, each representing just 1.09% at levels 2 and 1, showing that the perception of low impact is virtually nonexistent among the graduates. These results reinforce the relevance and quality of the academic activities developed within the program.

 

Graph 4 – Impact of courses and other curricular activities promoted by PPGGeo on graduate training.

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

Graph 5 presents the graduates’ perception of the impact of internationalization activities, as well as participation in national and international events and exchanges, on their academic development. The evaluation was conducted on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 corresponds to “Low Impact” and 5 to “High Impact.”

The majority of respondents, 45.7% (42 individuals), assigned the maximum score, indicating that these activities had a high impact on their academic trajectory. Next, 19.6% (18 individuals) rated the impact as level 4, representing a moderately high effect.

Conversely, a significant portion of graduates, 26.1% (24 individuals), classified the impact as medium or neutral (level 3), signaling that, for this group, the activities were not decisive, although they still held some value.

Lower ratings were less frequent but notable compared to other assessed aspects: 5.4% (5 individuals) assigned a score of 2, and 3.3% (3 individuals) gave a score of 1, indicating a perception of low or very low impact.

These data reflect that, although most recognize the importance of these initiatives, challenges remain in expanding and consolidating internationalization opportunities within the program.

Graph 5 – Impact of internationalization activities, events, and national and international exchanges promoted by PPGGeo.

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

Graph 6 presents the graduates’ perception of the impact of interactions and activities developed within research groups on their academic and professional formation. The evaluation was conducted on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 represents “Low Impact” and 5 corresponds to “High Impact.”

The data indicate that participation in research groups plays a fundamental role in the graduates’ trajectories, being predominantly evaluated positively. The majority of respondents, 63% (58 individuals), assigned the maximum score, recognizing a high impact of these activities on their formation. Additionally, 18.5% (17 individuals) rated the impact as 4, indicating a moderately high effect.

Conversely, 12% (11 individuals) classified the impact as neutral or medium, suggesting that, for this group, participation in research groups was relevant but not decisive.

Low-impact ratings were rare and minor, with 4.3% (4 individuals) giving a score of 2, and only 2.2% (2 individuals) assigning a score of 1, corresponding to “Low Impact.”

These results reinforce the importance of research groups as essential formative spaces for the academic, scientific, and professional development of the program’s graduate students.

 

Graph 6 – Impact of interactions and activities in research groups established within PPGGeo.

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

Graph 7 presents the graduates’ perception of the impact of general and laboratory infrastructures provided by the program on their academic and professional formation. The evaluation was conducted on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 corresponds to “Low Impact” and 5 to “High Impact.”

The data show a predominantly positive perception, indicating that the infrastructure conditions offered contributed significantly to the graduates’ formation. Nearly half of the respondents, 48.9% (45 individuals), assigned the maximum score (level 5), signaling a high impact of the infrastructures on their academic trajectory. Additionally, 33.7% (31 individuals) rated the impact as 4, reflecting a moderately high perception of influence.

Conversely, 14.1% (13 individuals) gave a score of 3, indicating that, for this group, the impact of the infrastructures was perceived as medium or neutral—not decisive but still relevant.

Low-impact ratings were minimal and infrequent. Only 2.2% (2 individuals) assigned a score of 1 (“Low Impact”), and 1.1% (1 individual) indicated a score of 2, showing that negative perceptions of the infrastructures are practically residual among the graduates.

These results reinforce the importance of maintaining and continuously improving laboratory spaces and general facilities provided by the program as structural elements in the academic and scientific development of graduate students.

Graph 7 – Impact of general and laboratory infrastructures provided by PPGGeo.

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

Graph 8 presents the graduates’ perception of the impact of the bibliographic collection and digital research platforms, such as repositories and portals, provided by the program on their academic formation and research development. The evaluation was conducted on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 represents “Low Impact” and 5 corresponds to “High Impact.”

The data show that bibliographic and digital resources are considered highly relevant to the graduates’ formation. A significant majority of respondents, 65.2% (60 individuals), assigned the maximum score, indicating that these resources had a fundamental impact on their academic trajectories. Additionally, 23.9% (22 individuals) rated the impact as 4, reflecting a moderately high influence.

Conversely, 7.6% (7 individuals) gave a score of 3, indicating a neutral or medium perception of impact, suggesting that for this group, these resources were useful but not fully decisive in their formation.

Low-impact evaluations were almost negligible. Only 3.3% (3 individuals) assigned a score of 1 (“Low Impact”), and no graduate gave a score of 2, reinforcing the predominant perception of the importance and effectiveness of the bibliographic collections and digital platforms provided by the program.

These results highlight the central role of bibliographic and digital resources in supporting research activities and academic formation of graduate students, while also pointing to the need for their continuous updating and enhancement.

Graph 8 – Impact of the bibliographic collection and digital research platforms (repositories, portals, etc.) provided by PPGGeo.

Source: PPGGeo (2024).

Regarding the results of the subjective questions about skills acquired or refined during their academic and technical training in the program and their application in current professional activities, it stands out that graduates reported that the skills developed during their education were fundamental for their professional performance, both in academic environments and in technical and institutional settings.

In general, the main competencies developed include:

• Technical-scientific improvement, with strengthening of analytical skills, theoretical foundation, academic writing, and preparation of reports, opinions, and projects.

• Mastery of research methodologies, including field research, data analysis, application of questionnaires and interviews, as well as participatory and interdisciplinary methodologies.

• Skills in geotechnologies, with strong emphasis on the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS), remote sensing, digital cartography, and map production applied to socio-environmental analysis and territorial planning.

• Teaching-related capacities, such as improvement of didactic skills, preparation of teaching materials, leading study groups, supervising students, and developing public speaking and communication skills.

• Socio-interactive competencies, including leadership, engagement with different social actors, conflict mediation, teamwork, and strengthening of institutional ties.

• Project planning and management, both academic and technical, with emphasis on the design, monitoring, and evaluation of socio-environmental, territorial, educational, and extension projects.

• Critical analysis of public policies, especially in the context of work in the public sector, NGOs, consultancies, and private institutions, including current issues such as climate change, energy transition, and expansion of renewable energies.

• Ethical strengthening and professional posture, demonstrating social responsibility and commitment to academic, scientific, and community values.

• Expansion of academic and professional networks, through participation in research groups, laboratories, exchanges, and scientific events, which generated professional opportunities and recognition in the job market.

Although a minority of respondents reported that some of these skills are not directly associated with their current activities, the overall responses indicate that the PPGGeo program had a relevant and positive impact on the technical, academic, and professional qualification of graduates across various fields of activity.

Regarding the question about the development of social impact activities that graduates are currently engaged in—such as public policy development, consultancy, project design, advisory to social movements or similar entities, participation in councils or representations—a broad range of social impact activities stood out, including:

• Design and implementation of public policies, especially in environmental, urban, educational, and territorial areas.

• Technical and scientific consultancy, including preparation of environmental impact studies, management plans, zoning, land regularization, creation of protected areas, and restoration of degraded areas.

• Development and management of projects aimed at environmental education, agroecology, biodiversity conservation, food culture, and sustainable development.

• Engagement with social movements and traditional populations, through advisory services, support for territorial processes, rights defense, and strengthening local productive arrangements.

• Participation in councils, committees, and collegiate instances, contributing to public management, academic ethics, civil defense, and territorial planning processes.

• Extension, research, and teaching activities, including community projects, cultural workshops, film clubs, training sessions, teacher development, and support for low-income students.

• Use of geotechnologies and spatial analysis to support environmental management, urban planning, and development of technical solutions applied to socio-environmental problems.

Other activities mentioned include scientific dissemination, preparation of teaching materials, participation in research groups, and strengthening of academic and social networks. On the other hand, some respondents indicated that they are currently not directly involved in social impact activities due to market limitations, professional transitions, or work restricted to formal teaching.

Finally, a survey was conducted on other aspects and characteristics considered positive of the program, as well as additional relevant details for graduates. In this section, suggestions were also highlighted.

From the synthesis of responses regarding positive aspects and suggestions for PPGGeo, the following stood out:

Positive Aspects

• Qualified Faculty: Recognition of academic excellence and thematic diversity of professors.

• Solid and Updated Training: Good integration between theory, practice, research, and extension.

• Infrastructure and Support: Positive evaluation of laboratory availability, support for field activities, and academic events.

• Integration with Undergraduate Programs: Highlighting articulation between undergraduate and graduate levels.

• Contribution to Society: Program’s role in training professionals committed to socio-environmental and social issues.

Demands and Suggestions

• Increase in Scholarships and Duration: Strong criticism of reduced duration of doctoral scholarships (38 months)—requests alignment with CAPES standard (48 months).

• Internationalization: Request for more incentives, resources, and support for exchanges, joint supervision, sandwich PhDs, and language courses.

• Curricular Updates: Need for more technical courses, especially in geotechnologies, remote sensing, drones, Python, data analysis, and market-applied methods.

• Course Improvement: Suggestions to enhance quality, organization, and alignment of courses with contemporary demands.

• Expansion of Field Activities: More practical and external activities in graduate studies.

• Support for Mental Health: Proposals for discussion groups, lectures, and spaces for student support.

• Re-entry Policy: Creation of protocols allowing students dismissed for academic reasons to complete their research, avoiding waste of public investment.

• Greater Partnership with the Private Sector: Proposals to expand partnerships in R&D&I (Research, Development, and Innovation), meeting market and societal demands.

• Infrastructure Expansion: Need for more physical space, improvements in laboratories, and access to laboratory analyses.