Smart Diagnostics in the Management of Interinstitutional Agreements for University Educational Quality
Keywords:
intelligent assessment, management of agreements, educational quality, artificial intelligenceAbstract
Introduction: Collaboration and cooperation among universities are among the ways to promote shared global well-being. To achieve this, universities must take a proactive role in managing inter-institutional agreements so that they contribute to educational quality
Objective: To demonstrate the contribution of an intelligent assessment, mediated by artificial intelligence and grounded in a systemic-historical-cultural approach, to the management of inter-institutional agreements in order to enhance the quality of university education.
Method: This research followed a mixed-methods approach that was descriptive and propositional in nature, with a qualitative focus. Theoretical methods were used to construct the conceptual and epistemological framework of the proposal, including synthetic-analytic, inductive-deductive, and theoretical modeling approaches. Additionally, a literature review was conducted. Journals from Scopus, Web of Science, SciELO, Redalyc, Dialnet, DOAJ, institutional repositories, and specialized sources on Artificial Intelligence and education were consulted, covering the time period 2000–2025. The literature review process was organized into three stages: initial exploration, in-depth analysis, and systematization and integration.
Results: The analysis conducted made it possible to characterize the management of agreements, the limitations of traditional assessment, the role, applications, and ethical principles of Artificial Intelligence as a mediator in such management, and a proposal for its three phases to enhance the quality of higher education.
Conclusions: It is concluded that intelligent assessment contributes to educational quality through five mechanisms: strategic alignment, data-driven management, predictive capacity, ethical and social strengthening, and institutional learning. The proposal represents a significant step forward in transforming the management of agreements into a driver of quality and social change.
Downloads
References
Abreu, J; Rubio, I; Martínez, M. (2019). Hacia el fortalecimiento de relaciones interinstitucionales para la cooperación y el desarrollo de la gestión universitaria. REDIPE, 8(3):96-105. https://revista.redipe.org/index.php/1/article/view/697
Aguilar, L. E. (2013). Políticas de cooperação interinstitucional e seus impactos no desenvolvimento e consolidação da pós-graduação. Educação Unisinos, 17, 178-183. https://doi.org/10.4013/EDU.2013.173.01
Algañaraz, V., Prado, F., & Rossomando, M. P. (2023). Indicators of research circulation: Localization and internationalization under scrutiny—The Cuyo Manual and its exploratory case study in Argentina. Quantitative Science Studies, 4, 283-305. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00229
Arias, G. (1999). El diagnóstico en la educación. La Habana: Pueblo y Educación.
Bertalanffy, L. von. (1976). Teoría general de los sistemas. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Borgatti, S., & Halgin, D. (2011). On network theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168-1181. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0641
Broström, A., Feldmann, A., & Kaulio, M.A. (2019). Structured relations between higher education institutions and external organisations: opportunity or bureaucratisation? Higher Education, (78), 575 - 591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-0359-1
Castillo-Leyton, A., Guzmán-Sanhueza, D., y Betancourth-Zambrano, S. (2021). Cooperación Internacional: Un desafío en la Educación Superior Pública y Regional. Entramado, 19(1), e-9673. https://doi.org/10.18041/1900-3803/entramado.1.9673
Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). (2026). Artificial Intelligence Ethics Charter. https://curia.europa.eu/
Davenport, T., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business School Press. https://search.worldcat.org/es/title/1007384188
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4279003
Enríquez, F., Amaro, A., Juárez, P., Rodríguez, R., & Soni, E. (2024). El diagnóstico como base de la intervención educativa. Revista Científica Biológico Agropecuaria Tuxpan, 12(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.47808/revistabioagro.v12i1.538
European Union. (2024). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child sexual abuse material and replacing council framework decision 2004/68/JHA (recast) (COM/2024/60 final). EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52024PC0060
Fernández, Y., Pérez, O., & Caballero, Y. (2024). Transformación digital de las universidades cubanas, una estrategia para el diagnóstico académico con inteligencia artificial para la sostenibilidad formativa. Anales de la Academia de Ciencias de Cuba, 14(4), e1662. https://revistaccuba.sld.cu/index.php/revacc/article/view/1662
Fernández, Y., Pérez, O., Rodríguez Á, Y., & Caballero, Y. (2023). Sistema inteligente para el diagnóstico pedagógico estudiantil. Revista Cubana De Transformación Digital, 4(4), e229. https://rctd.uic.cu/rctd/article/view/229
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Pitman.
Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. https://www.journalsuchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/225469
Greebon, D. (2026). Artificial Intelligence in Education Evidence Synthesis and Use in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (A working paper prepared for the Building Evidence in Education (BE²) Working Group). BE² Secretariat. https://doi.org/10.53832/be2.0001
Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293930180102
Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model development guide. W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2011). Stakeholder theory: Issues to be solved. Journal of Management and Strategy, 2(1), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111109133
Mazzeo, D., & Baudo, J. (2021). La internacionalización en las relaciones interinstitucionales. Revista ES, 1(1 y 2), e028. https://doi.org/10.24215/27186539e028
Mendoza, M; Benitez, L; Gonzalo, V; y Sáenz-Rico, B: (2024). Reimaginar juntos nuestros futuros. Un nuevo contrato social para la educación. Revista Salud Y Desarrollo, 8(3), e743. https://doi.org/10.55717/NRHV8567
Mex, D., Perera, E., Ortiz, N., y Gutiérrez, J. (2023). Construcción de indicadores del sistema institucional de seguimiento de convenios. Multidisciplinas de la Ingeniería, 7(10), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.29105/mdi.v7i10.227
Montesinos, C. (2023). La internacionalización de la educación superior y la cooperación interuniversitaria como motor de cohesión social y desarrollo sostenible. DOCENCIA Y DERECHO, (15), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.21071/redd.vi15.16566
Moreno, R., Esteban, B., & Martín, A. (2025). Retos en educación y sociedad para la Agenda 2030. Pedagogía Social Revista Interuniversitaria, (47), 09–11. https://doi.org/10.7179/PSRI_2025.47.00
Mückenberger, E., Togashi, G., Pádua, S., & Miura, I. (2013). Gestão de processos aplicada à realização de convênios internacionais bilaterais em uma instituição de ensino superior pública brasileira. Production, 23(3), 637–651. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-65132012005000076
Nieves, L. (2000). El diagnóstico como proceso de evaluación-intervención: una nueva concepción. En Educación de alumnos con necesidades educativas especiales. Fundamentos y actualidad (pp. 30-44). La Habana: Pueblo y Educación.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press. https://academic.oup.com/book/52097
OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 Results: Creative Minds, Creative Schools. Vol. III. OECD publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-iii_765ee8c2-en.html
Pratt, J., Matthews, S.P., Nairne, B., Hoult, E.C., & Ashenden, S.J. (2011). Collaboration Between Universities: An effective way of sustaining community-university partnerships? Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, (4), 119-135. https://doi.org/10.5130/IJCRE.V4I0.1773
Roque, H. (2025). Hacia un nuevo contrato social en educación. Simbiosis, 5(9), 206-211. https://doi.org/10.59993/simbiosis.V.5i9.75
Stensaker, B. (2018). University Alliances: Enhancing Control, Capacity, and Creativity in Dynamic Environments. Educational Studies, (13), 132-153. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2018-1-132-153
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2020). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709
Vallaeys, F., De la Cruz, C., & Sasia, P. M. (2009). Responsabilidad social universitaria: Manual de primeros pasos. https://academic.oup.com/book/52097
Vigotsky, L. S. (1987). Historia del desarrollo de las funciones psíquicas superiores. La Habana: Científico-Técnica.
Weiss, C. H. (1995). Nothing as practical as a good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives. En J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, & C. H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts (pp. 65-92). The Aspen Institute.
Whitley, R. (2012). Transforming Universities: National Conditions of their Varied Organisational Actorhood. Minerva, (50), 493 - 510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-012-9215-5
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Transformación
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
