This article has the premise that South Africa and Brazil spaces share contextual and geopolitical characteristics with a history of great inequalities, racial and gender discrimination and these and other related factors serve as barriers constraining education. Considering the remarkable expansion of higher education systems in both countries on the last 25 years, and its uneven effects, some questions are raised as a challenge in this article. Does this growth in enrolments create high quality or “world class universities” in these countries? Is it possible to find South African or Brazilian universities in the international rankings of institutional higher education? Has such expansion produced a full democratization of educational opportunities? Or, in other words, does any skilled and hardworking student, regardless of his/her social background, have equal chances of access to the best courses and universities? In order to try to answer these questions, we begin characterizing the expansion of higher education systems over the last two and a half decades in both countries. Regarding policies of access by poor students to higher education system, we taking in account and compare some initiatives in both countries, such as Reuni, Fies and Prouni in Brazil, and National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS), in South Africa. Our analysis, following the tradition of sociological research, understands that the mode of operation of higher education Changing Societies & Personalities, 2018, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 366–392 367 Introduction: Higher Education in Brazil and South Africa For two and a half decades the Brazilian system of higher education (HES) has expanded and diversified. New courses and new school paths were offered as well as different types of diplomas. Brazil went from 1.3 million students in 1980 to 8 million in 2015. Hundreds of thousands from working and so-called “popular classes” entered the university. Public policies such as quotas or scholarships ensured a significant expansion of access to tertiary education. In South Africa, in 1993 – before the end of Apartheid – there were 473,000 students HE students enrolled, this grew to 683,000 in 1996 and reached 2,000,000 in 2016. South Africa also moved to “promote equity of access and fair chances for success to all who are seeking to realize their potential through higher education, while eradicating all forms of unfair discrimination and advancing redress for past inequalities” (White Paper, 1997, 1.14) Does this growth in enrolments create high quality or “world class universities” in these countries? Is it possible to find South African or Brazilian universities in the international rankings of institutional higher education? Has such expansion produced a full democratization of educational opportunities? Or, in other words, does any skilled and hardworking student, regardless of his/her social background, have equal chances of access to the best courses and universities? The last is the key question for the sociology of social inequality: does expansion “reduce inequality by providing more opportunities for persons from disadvantage strata, or magnify inequality by expanding opportunities disproportionately for those who are already privileged”? (Arum et al., 2007, p. 1) The production of quality rankings includes, at least in countries like the USA, measures of social, gender and racial inequalities but it is mainly associated with scientific research and learning (Goastellec, 2008). For analysts of most diverse hues, the proper functioning of institutions of higher education – their economic, social, and scientific efficiency – has become an important element in the assertion of democratic principles and equality of institutions stands out as one of the key factors in the mechanisms and social conflicts that increase or reduce inequalities. Focusing on the basic distinction between public and private sector, for Brazil, and the persistence of distinction between historically black and white institutions, in South Africa, we try to show that both countries improved the access to higher education systems and managed to create some worldclass institutions. Even so, social and gender inequalities persist and there are too few such institutions, especially in Brazil.

中文翻译：

---

巴西和南非的高等教育，发展与不平等

本文的前提是，南非和巴西的空间共享背景和地缘政治特征，并具有严重的不平等，种族和性别歧视的历史，而这些和其他相关因素成为制约教育的障碍。考虑到过去25年中两国高等教育系统的显着扩展及其不均衡的影响，本文提出了一些问题作为挑战。入学人数的增长是否会在这些国家创建高质量或“世界一流大学”？是否可以在国际高等教育机构排名中找到南非或巴西的大学？这样的扩展是否使教育机会完全民主化？换句话说，任何熟练且勤奋的学生，不论他/她的社会背景如何，都有机会获得最好的课程和大学吗？为了试图回答这些问题，我们开始对过去两个半世纪以来两国高等教育体系的扩展进行描述。关于贫困学生进入高等教育系统的政策，我们考虑并比较了两国的一些举措，例如巴西的Reuni，Fies和Prouni，以及南非的国家学生资助计划（NSFAS）。根据社会学研究的传统，我们的分析认为，高等教育的运营模式正在变化的社会与人格，2018年，第1期。2，No. 4，pp。366–392 367简介：巴西和南非的高等教育在二十五年半的时间里，巴西的高等教育体系（HES）不断扩展和多样化。提供了新的课程和新的上学途径，以及不同类型的文凭。巴西的学生从1980年的130万增加到2015年的800万。成千上万的工作和所谓的“大众教育班”进入了大学。配额或奖学金等公共政策确保了获得高等教育的机会大大增加。在南非，1993年-种族隔离结束之前-招收了473,000名HE学生，1996年增加到683,000名，2016年达到2,000,000名。南非还采取了“促进人人享有平等机会和成功的公平机会谁正在寻求通过高等教育实现自己的潜力，同时消除一切形式的不公平歧视和对过去的不平等现象进行补救”（白皮书，1997年，1.14）。这种入学人数的增长是否在这些国家创造了高质量或“世界一流的大学”？是否可以在国际高等教育机构排名中找到南非或巴西的大学？这样的扩展是否使教育机会完全民主化？或者，换句话说，任何熟练且勤奋的学生，无论他/她的社会背景如何，都有平等的机会获得最好的课程和大学？最后是社会不平等社会学的关键问题：扩展是否通过为弱势阶层的人们提供更多机会来减少不平等，还是通过为已经享有特权的人不成比例地扩大机会来扩大不平等”？（Arum et al。，2007，p.1）至少在美国这样的国家，质量排名的产生包括社会，性别和种族不平等的测度，但它主要与科学研究和学习有关（Goastellec，2008）。 。对于大多数不同色彩的分析人员而言，高等教育机构的适当功能（即其经济，社会和科学效率）已成为主张民主原则的重要因素，而机构平等是其中的关键因素之一。增加或减少不平等的机制和社会冲突。着眼于巴西的公共部门和私营部门之间的基本区别，南非在历史上黑白机构之间的区别仍然存在，我们试图证明这两个国家都改善了高等教育体系的获取并成功建立了一些世界一流的机构。即便如此，社会和性别不平等现象依然存在，此类机构的数量太少，尤其是在巴西。