The Latin American University Evaluation System (SILEU), promoted by the Latin American Council of Social Sciences (CLACSO) since 2014, proposes a process for evaluating and accrediting the comprehensive academic quality of undergraduate and graduate programs in the Social Sciences and Humanities. It is conceived as a phased implementation scheme that seeks to establish a specific evaluation framework for these disciplines, which will ultimately lead to the creation of a Certification and/or Accreditation Agency.

The criteria that guide the SILEU evaluation process are based on the following cross-cutting axes of analysis:

  1. Quality assurance from a situated approach referenced in the matrix of Latin American and Caribbean higher education
  2. The orientation towards learning processes and institutional improvement, with a focus on quality education with social relevance and inclusiveness regarding the plurality of current approaches, and on the encouragement of collaborative and open practices in the field of transmission, production and circulation of knowledge.
  3. The quantitative and qualitative assessment of all activities in the academic world, respecting the autonomy of institutions to prioritize diverse evaluation criteria in line with their mission project, as well as the perspective of the people and groups that are evaluated in their teaching, research, extension and/or linkage activities, among others.
  4. The pursuit of transparency in both evaluation processes and information systems in higher education, not only for the academic community as a whole, but also for the public.
  5. The participation of different institutional groups and, in particular, the representation of women in the evaluation instances and processes, at a minimum of parity.
  6. Strengthening the institution's relationship with its environment through specific articulations for the social sciences, humanities, and arts, whose interactions are key for any democratic society that aims to promote sustainable development and values ​​diverse cultures and multiple forms of knowledge, including those of indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples in the region.

The dynamics that develop throughout the entire evaluation process are based on the principles of exchange, dialogue, agreement and mutual recognition between the institution conducting the evaluation (CLACSO), the peer group, and the university being evaluated, so that the actions result from consent Between the parts.

Consequently, the purpose of the evaluation is to contribute to the development of a comprehensive diagnosis that combines internal and external perspectives, and improvement of university degrees in Social Sciences and Humanities, understanding the evaluation process in terms of accompanying the institutions and their academic community of the type non-punitive.

Evaluating the evaluation of scientific production

Diagnosis and proposals for a regional initiative

Declaration of principles: a new academic and scientific evaluation for a science with social relevance in Latin America and the Caribbean

The proposed device has five phases of development.

I. First phase: inter-institutional agreement

Based on dialogue and agreement with the institution/program being evaluated, the most relevant elements to be considered in the evaluation process will be defined, forming part of the criteria and instruments. This participatory methodology, based on transparency and consensus, aims to clarify the purpose of the evaluation—in terms of promoting improvement processes and providing support to the peer group—on the one hand, and the specific characteristics of the program's offering and the institution's place within the socio-political context, on the other. In other words, while a series of criteria that CLACSO considers central to the SILEU (Integrated System of University Evaluation) are defined for constructing a notion of quality in the Social Sciences and Humanities, these are complemented by the criteria that emerge from the dialogue with the institution.

II. Second phase: reflection of the university community

Information will be gathered from the institution, utilizing data collected for similar purposes (institutional self-evaluation or submission—whether mandatory or not—to evaluation and/or accreditation processes, be they national, regional, or international). Based on a guide document (evaluation instrument), the team responsible for the program's evaluation will prepare a self-evaluation report that includes analysis and reflection on the stipulated points, including the identification of areas for improvement. This process aims to engage as many university and community stakeholders as possible.

III. Third phase: dialogue with peers

Drawing on CLACSO's extensive and multidisciplinary network of researchers, a team of peers with distinguished track records in their fields of research and political/social engagement will be formed. For each program (degree), a team of peers from diverse national and institutional backgrounds will be assembled.

The first stage of the peer reviewers' work will consist of analyzing the self-evaluation report submitted by the university and preparing a preliminary report with emerging issues to be discussed during the visit to the institution.

In a second phase, the university will host the peer reviewers, who will tour the facilities (including field trips, if necessary) and meet with various university and community representatives (including administrators, faculty, students, graduates, administrative staff, local community leaders, etc.). The peer reviewers and the university community will have the opportunity to exchange perspectives and proposals aimed at improving quality.

The visit to the university will also include technicians and evaluation coordinators from SILEU's permanent staff.

IV. Fourth phase: evaluation report

Following the visit, the peer reviewers will prepare a final evaluation report, along with a draft opinion, for discussion. The university will have the opportunity to review, add to, supplement, and/or question points in the report, providing well-founded arguments to the peer review team and, if necessary, making short- and medium-term commitments to improve the areas identified as weaknesses.

Following this exchange, the final version of the report and opinion will be prepared, the latter being of a public nature.

V. Fifth phase: continuous improvement

In those cases where obligations for quality improvement have been undertaken within the stipulated time period, the university may request a new evaluation.

The tool proposes instruments for gathering information and guiding reflection within the institution and among university stakeholders. The self-evaluation process is expected to bring together the entire university community, including governing bodies, faculty representatives, students, graduates, administrative staff, and employers, along with social and/or community stakeholders with whom the university and its programs interact. The final self-evaluation document should be prepared collaboratively by all participants in this process.

FAQ

What is SILEU? The Latin American System for University Evaluation (SILEU) is a CLACSO tool for conducting a comprehensive academic quality assessment of institutions and undergraduate and graduate programs in the Social Sciences and Humanities. Based on a set of criteria developed by CLACSO and through dialogue with participating institutions, a thorough evaluation is carried out, including visits by expert peers.

All higher education institutions and undergraduate and postgraduate programs in the Social Sciences and Humanities, located in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The SILEU platform is open for applications year-round. If you are interested in registering, please contact us at the following email address: [email protected], where the steps to follow will be indicated

No. Any higher education institution and undergraduate and graduate programs in Social Sciences and Humanities can request evaluation within the framework of SILEU.
The costs of the evaluation process are shared between CLACSO and the participating institution.

The evaluators are distinguished members of the CLACSO research network, experts in their respective disciplines, and possess attributes similar to the principles that guide the SILEU evaluation process. CLACSO provides training to the members of the evaluation teams.

These peer reviewers form a pool of experts within the CLACSO network. Institutions reserve the right to challenge peer reviewers when they deem it appropriate.

For any questions, please contact us via email. [email protected]

Latin American Council of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities

Executive Secretary
United States 1168 | C1101AAX | City of Buenos Aires, Argentina
Tel. [54 11] 4304 9145 | [email protected] | clacso.org

Search on clacso.org

clacso.tv
Clacso bookstore
virtual library
CLACSO classroom
clacso_adheres_to_dora2

© Communication and Information Area | CLACSO 2026