Journal of Hispanic Higher

Education
http://jhh.sagepub.com/

Ecuador's Efforts to Raise Its Research Profile: The Prometeo Program

Case Study
Hubert B. Van Hoof
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 2015 14: 56 originally published online 4 August
2014
DOI: 10.1177/1538192714543664

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jhh.sagepub.com/content/14/1/56

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journal of Hispanic Higher Education can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jhh.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jhh.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://jhh.sagepub.com/content/14/1/56.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Nov 28, 2014

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 4, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

543664
research-article2014
JHHXXX10.1177/1538192714543664Journal of Hispanic Higher EducationVan Hoof

Article
Journal of Hispanic Higher Education
2015, Vol. 14(1) 56­–68
Ecuador’s Efforts to Raise © The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
Its Research Profile: The sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1538192714543664
Prometeo Program Case jhh.sagepub.com

Study

Hubert B. Van Hoof1

Abstract
Ecuador’s government understands that capable research universities can help
in solving the country’s pressing socio-economic problems. However, research
capabilities and research productivity in its national universities have historically been
low, as professors primarily teach and often do not have the inclination, the ability,
or the time to do research. Through several initiatives, which have been both praised
and scorned, the government is attempting to instigate a new research culture among
its institutions of higher education. This article describes these initiatives and focuses
on the “Prometeo–Viejos Sabios” grant program from the perspective of a recent
participant. The program was created to attract international scholars to assist
Ecuador’s universities in their research and development efforts.

Resumen
El gobierno de Ecuador entiende que las universidades de investigación capaces
pueden ayudar en la solución de las problemas socio-económicos urgentes del país.
Sin embargo, la capacidad de investigación y productividad en la investigación de
sus universidades nacionales han sido bajos históricamente, ya que los profesores
enseñan principalmente, y muchas veces no tienen la inclinación, la capacidad o el
tiempo para hacer la investigación. A través de varias iniciativas, que han sido tanto
elogiadas y despreciadas, el gobierno está tratando de instigar una nueva cultura de
la investigación entre las instituciones de educación superior. En este artículo se
describen estas iniciativas y se centra en el programa de becas “Prometeo Viejos
Sabios-” desde la perspectiva de un participante reciente. El programa fue creado

1Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA

Corresponding Author:
Hubert B. Van Hoof, Pennsylvania State University, 201 Mateer Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Email: hbv1@psu.edu

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 57

para atraer académicos internacionales para ayudar a las universidades del Ecuador
en sus esfuerzos de investigación y desarrollo.

Keywords
Ecuador, Prometeo grant program, higher education Ecuador, 2010 higher education
law, research development

Introduction
As the world moves toward a global knowledge economy, higher education is increas-
ingly called upon to guide its socio-economic development and help solve its prob-
lems. Today, modern universities are expected to foster economic growth,promote
cultural diversity, disseminate knowledge and grow political democracy and economic
trade (Marginson, 2010). They are also asked to address urgent societal needs in the
area of sustainable development (Waal, Verbruggen, & Wright, 2010; Wright, 2004)
and to support nations’ globalization efforts as they open up to the outside world
(Scott, 1998). Research universities help countries and governments to understand
modern society’s growing complexities and assist them in dealing with growing popu-
lations that place enormous burdens on its limited natural resources and fragile ecosys-
tems (Rajendran, 2010; Steffen, Crutzen, & McNeill, 2007; Vörösmarty, Green,
Salisbury, & Lammers, 2000)
Higher education institutions have two principal responsibilities, teaching and
research, and South America’s universities are not commonly known for their research
productivity. Very few of them, for instance, are listed on any of the global university
research ranking systems such as the SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) World
Report (SCImago Research Group, 2013), a global listing of all institutions that have
published a minimum of 100 indexed papers annually over the past 5-year period. A
Latin American version of the report, the IberoAmericano Report (SCImago Research
Group, 2013) was created in 2009. In this report, the minimum threshold for inclusion
is one refereed article published during the past year of a 5-year, rolling period. This
lower threshold is indicative of the differences in publication levels and research out-
put that exist between global and South American universities. Research output is not
only measured in terms of refereed, indexed papers. Yet, as SCImago states “The only
goal of this report is to characterize research outcomes of organizations so as to pro-
vide useful scientometric information to institutions, policymakers and research man-
agers so they are able to analyze, evaluate and improve their research results” (http://
www.scimagoir.com).
Several reasons have been given for the overall low research output of South
America’s universities: a low number of university-educated graduates in relation to
the overall population, few research projects instigated and executed, low budgets
dedicated to science and technology, Latin American universities starting doing
research much later than their counterparts around the world, a lack of university

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

58 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

resources and research facilities and a limited supply of postgraduates to continue and
enhance the research effort (Ferrari & Contreras, 2008).
Recent years have seen somewhat of an increase in research output as measured by
the number of indexed articles; yet that growth can be attributed primarily to a few,
well-funded (and often private) universities in countries such as Brazil, Chile, and
Argentina. In the Latin American context, countries such as Venezuela, Colombia, and
Peru make up a middle group in terms of research output, with Ecuador (together with
the even lower ranked Bolivia) ranking as one of the countries that lags behind consid-
erably in terms of research output (Feyen & Van Hoof, 2013).
Ecuador is faced with considerable societal problems such as income inequality,
poverty, distinct population groups with distinct needs and environmental concerns
related to oil exploration in the Amazon basin. In moving the country from a primarily
agricultural society to a more balanced, modern mixed-economy and to a more promi-
nent global position, Ecuador’s government, as many of its global counterparts, is also
looking for its universities to take a more prominent role in addressing its societal
problems and in guiding its decision makers. Yet, ever since the first Ecuadorian uni-
versity was established in the mid-16th century, the country’s universities have focused
primarily on teaching. Very little research has been conducted, faculty research skills
are limited, and research output is low. As a result, Ecuador’s universities have not
been very successful in addressing many of the country’s pressing needs.
Fully aware of the important role universities can and should play in a society that
has tremendous needs, the Ecuadorian government recently implemented several rapid
and invasive changes to its universities’ funding structures, reporting lines, admission
policies, faculty qualifications, and research responsibilities. Both the speed with
which those changes were introduced and their dramatic impact are indicative of the
sense of urgency that existed in government circles about changing the role of higher
education in Ecuadorian society.
This article discusses those changes and their impact on Ecuador’s universities and
on their faculty members. Some of these changes came in the form of mandates, and
others were optional. Some met with scorn and resistance, and others were welcomed
wholeheartedly. Highlighted here is the “Prometeo–Viejos Sabios” grant program
because it was designed to attract foreign research expertise to the country to raise its
research output. The origins, intent, and guidelines of the program are discussed, and
some personal observations are included.

The Mandates: A New Constitution and the 2010 Higher

Education Law
Higher education in Ecuador is in need of tremendous change, and both university
insiders and government outsiders agree that it is time to make adjustments to the
system. Ecuador’s government launched two landmark initiatives in recent years, the
Constitution of 2008 and the 2010 Higher Education Law, which have greatly affected
Ecuador’s system of higher education. Both initiatives have met with considerable
resistance (Lloyd, 2010), have greatly raised anxiety levels among faculty members,

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 59

have university administrators in uproar, have caused universities to be closed and

faculty to retire, and have placed the government in charge of student admissions and
university budgets (Van Hoof, Estrella, Eljuri, & Torres, 2013). Yet, they have also
been welcomed as timely and necessary, and have raised expectations for all involved.
Whereas proponents and opponents agree it was high time for some of these changes
to occur, they do not necessarily agree on the execution of the changes and some of
their unforeseen consequences.
Ecuador’s Constitution of 2008 established people’s rights to free education for all
citizens. It seeks better educational opportunities for underserved population groups, a
higher accountability for the country’s universities, and a more active role of Ecuador’s
universities in the economic and social development of the country and its citizens
(Van Hoof et al., 2013). With this new Constitution, the central government took on a
much greater regulatory and budgetary role in the higher education system by abolish-
ing the tuition fee structure that had partially funded the country’s universities since
their origins. It also took away most of the universities’ autonomy, and the government
now controls student admissions. Universities are now expected to offer and fund
“leveling” courses for incoming students who are incapable of passing admission
tests.
Given that it has only been in place for 5 years, the impact of this new constitution
on higher education is difficult to assess. Post (2011) feels that the intended effect
(greater access for disadvantaged groups to higher education) has not occurred yet and
that it might not happen at all. For it to work, he advocates for greater expenditures and
enhancement of quality in basic education so that “more children from poor families
and with indigenous roots will persist to graduation and will be eligible for the benefits
of free public higher education” (p. 16). Estrella (2011) goes one step further and states
that the gap between poor and middle class children attending university has grown
larger rather than smaller in these initial years and that “the beneficiaries of ‘free’ uni-
versity education will necessarily come from the most-advantaged populations in
Ecuador, unless the quality of primary and secondary education improves” (p. 22).
The Constitution of 2008 set the tone in creating free access to higher education for
Ecuador’s population. The country’s 2010 Higher Education Law further increased the
regulation of its universities to align their research and teaching efforts more closely
with the country’s social and economic development needs. Several government
offices were created to oversee university administration, faculty qualifications were
more closely defined, faculty employment contracts were revised, and expectations
for universities’ research output were more clearly formulated. The law mandated that
all faculty members teaching in the university system after 2010 needed to have at
least master’s degrees. Professors were presented with a 7-year deadline to obtain
doctoral degrees, with the obvious expectation that better educated professors would
teach at a higher level, conduct more and better research, and thereby contribute to
solving some of the country’s problems and enhance Ecuador’s role on the global
platform (Van Hoof et al., 2013). Yet, in a country where less than 5% of the profes-
soriate holds a doctoral degree and many do not even have master’s degrees, that is a
tall order. There are virtually no opportunities to pursue PhD studies in the country

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

60 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

itself, so these mandates have raised anxiety levels among professors: If they act
according to the law, they have no choice but to go abroad for their doctoral studies at
considerable personal expense, and they can only do so at 1 of approximately 1,000
government-approved international universities.
The law also addressed faculty employment contracts. Whereas a regular faculty
workweek consisted of 30 hr and second jobs were common before the law was imple-
mented, faculty members are now expected to work full-time and many had to give up
their second jobs as a result. These new measures further exacerbated feelings of anxi-
ety and discontent among faculty members as many lost a second source of income.
University faculty members have lamented the government’s heavy handedness in the
process, yet Ecuador’s government hopes these measures will improve their produc-
tivity and the overall research output because professors are expected to spend the
extra 10 hr in their workweeks on research-related activities.
Besides these initiatives at the individual faculty level, the new law also included
an expectation that universities should enhance the quality and quantity of their
research output and the research qualifications of their professors. For a university to
be considered a “research” university by 2017, 70% of its professors must hold doc-
torates. For it to be recognized as a “research-teaching” institution, this benchmark
lies at 40% of all professors (Van Hoof et al., 2013). Again, given the low number of
doctorates in the system at present, these are tall orders and will most likely prove
insurmountable obstacles for most universities. Research was never a strong suit
among Ecuador’s teaching-oriented universities, and the system does not have ade-
quate means to support successful research: The physical research infrastructure is
dated or absent, there have never been many incentives for faculty members to do
research, there is a lack of appreciation about its value and importance, professors
lack an understanding of basic research methodology, and there is a chronic lack of
funding. University administrators are slowly starting to look into how to organize
resources and attract expertise around these mandates, yet they too are not always
familiar with research or know how to effectively incorporate it in the missions of
their institutions.

The Options: Study Abroad Grants and “Prometeo–

Viejos Sabios”
The above are some of the mandates that were recently put in place to force universi-
ties and their faculty members into greater research activity. They are bold in design
and will lead some professors to seek graduate degrees and others to rebel or just give
up and accept the consequences. However, there are also two programs put in place
that support faculty and universities in these changes and in meeting these demands: a
study abroad grant program and the “Prometeo–Viejos Sabios” program.
The new law first established a generous study-abroad grant program for Ecuadorian
citizens and faculty members to pursue graduate degrees at more than 1,000 pre-
approved foreign universities. Some 3,000 fully funded grants are available for faculty
to pursue graduate studies anywhere in the world (http://programasbecas.

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 61

educacionsuperior.gob.ec). Many have successfully applied so far; yet the admission

guidelines are very strict, and many of Ecuador’s professors have chosen not to study
abroad for personal reasons, thereby accepting the inevitable demotion and even
potential job loss in the future.
The law also established a program called “Prometeo–Viejos Sabios” through
Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación
(SENESCYT), Ecuador’s Secretariat of Higher Education. The program is intended to
bring foreign research expertise into the country “to promote and strengthen science,
innovation and technology transfer in strategic areas of the country through the incor-
poration of Ecuadorian and foreign scientists of the highest level” (SENESCYT, 2011,
p. 2)). It is one of the gentler and less invasive initiatives by means of which the gov-
ernment hopes to improve the quality and quantity of Ecuador’s research output and
stimulate faculty involvement in and appreciation of the research process.
Since its initiation in 2011, the program has attracted more than 100 scholars and
scientists to Ecuador’s universities who stay in the country anywhere from 3 months
to a year. Many of the initial “Prometeos” represented the bench sciences, engineering,
technology, and agriculture, all disciplines reminiscent of the country’s greatest devel-
opment needs. More recent additions have also come from the social sciences and
other fields of study.

Participant Qualifications
Researchers interested in becoming part of the Prometeo program

must have a long and recognized track record in scientific research that has generated
important contributions in the development of a determined field of science . . . [They
must have] exceptional abilities, new perspectives, practical experience, and the ability
to function in a diverse, multicultural environment . . . [and must be] committed to the
mission of contributing to the development of science in Ecuador. (SENESCYT, 2012,
p. 3)

More specifically, they need to have a PhD degree from a renowned university; show
proof of an extensive publication record in refereed publications; have a record that is
relevant to their admission proposal; and have experience as a principal investigator, or
project coordinator, of scientific research. In addition, successful applicants must have
received awards and/or recognition related to their scholarly work and must be living
outside Ecuador at the time of application. They can be nationals of any country and can
be Ecuadorian scholars working abroad.

Incentives for Foreign Scholars

The incentive structure that was created to attract foreign scholars needed to be com-
petitive in the global marketplace to entice foreign candidates to apply. Besides a cost
of living stipend, the program provides support for housing, airfare, health, and life
insurance in Ecuador; an amount for research supplies and materials; some funds for

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

62 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

scientific visits to destinations of the researcher’s choice; and a visa for up to a year for
the Prometeo scholar and his or her spouse. By Ecuadorian standards, the stipends are
generous and are sufficient to attract scholars in the global marketplace.

Ecuadorian Host Institutions

Qualified Prometeo applicants are hosted by public or private universities and research
organizations, and the number of admissions is limited only by the capacities of the
institutions that host them and the qualifications of the applicants. Host institutions are
identified as “private and public universities, polytechnic schools, and public institu-
tions that carry out scientific research” (SENESCYT, 2012, p. 2). These organizations
can encourage foreign-based scientists to apply for the program, yet applicants can
also indicate the type of institution that meets their personal and professional needs
and criteria. In this case, the department of higher education will assist in establishing
a connection between the two parties. It is even possible for applicants to choose from
work proposals that are in line with their particular research interests and submitted by
potential host institutions. In practice, most candidates decide to apply because of
previous personal or professional connections, and they have established contacts with
a potential host institution prior to submitting their applications. Stipends and reim-
bursements run through the administration systems of the host institutions that are also
responsible to provide the Department of Higher Education with evaluations of a
researcher’s performance by means of reports on technical advancements during his or
her stay.

Program Benefits
In its early stages, the program was initiated to strengthen scientific and scholarly
research in all regions and sectors of the country, yet with a particular focus on the
areas with the greatest needs: natural resource management, sustainable agricultural
development, natural environment management, health, technology, and risk manage-
ment. In the following years, its scope was widened considerably, and now, scholars
and scientists from virtually all disciplines are welcomed to apply. The Department of
Higher Education identifies the following as specific benefits for the host institutions
in Ecuador:

•• Shared indexed publications in prestigious journals worldwide;

•• Improving the quality of instruction and compliance with the new National Law
of Higher Education;
•• Direction of student theses;
•• Access to international training methodology;
•• Professional advice on the creation of master and doctoral programs;
•• Academic support;
•• The building of scientific networks worldwide (SENESCYT, 2011)

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 63

What Did It Look Like in Reality?

For those considering participation in the program, the following are some personal
observations about the author’s admission into the program and his 1-year stay at the
University of Cuenca. This first-person account is more personal in nature than the
previous discussion in the hope of enticing others to seek admission into the program
as well.
I was the 36th Prometeo accepted into the program in Fall 2011. My involvement
started with a personal contact, which is, most likely, the way many other grant recipi-
ents came to be involved in the program. While looking for a place to spend my
upcoming sabbatical, I felt strongly that it should be a time for me to leave my com-
fortable surroundings and make a professional contribution in a different environment
than my own. A colleague at the University of Cuenca, who had spent a year at my
home university in the United States, had made me aware of the program and per-
suaded me to apply and work in the Facultad de Ciencias de la Hospitalidad at the
University of Cuenca, Ecuador.
What initially appealed to me was the program’s mission of attracting foreign
scholars and scientists to assist Ecuadorian institutions of higher education in develop-
ing and growing their research portfolios and to help them in their long-term strategic
development efforts. The vision behind the program was unique, it was supported at
the highest levels of government, and I felt that my efforts could make a difference. It
was nice to learn that the program would provide for a comfortable living while in
Ecuador, but that was not its biggest appeal. What counted for me personally was that
my efforts could have an impact and that the scope of the program was broad enough
for me to do the things I liked. It fit my academic profile, my administrative experi-
ence, and my personal interests.
My area of teaching interest is in strategic management for the hospitality and tour-
ism industries, with a publication record that primarily addresses issues in higher edu-
cation. My professional background combines program administration (I served as
assistant dean and school director for 15 years) and faculty appointments at several
U.S. and international universities. What was different about my application, and at
the same time, characteristic of the broadening scope of the Prometeo program, was
that I proposed to work in an applied field and that my charge would be partially
research-based and partially related to academic program development. My efforts
were to be focused on assisting faculty colleagues at the Facultad de Ciencias de la
Hospitalidad with the development of a research portfolio and in helping them develop
several strategic development initiatives and create a new strategic plan. Whereas the
former was related to my personal research background, the latter was in recognition
of my experience as an administrator.
When I arrived in Cuenca at the end of June 2012, I found a faculty that was eager
to start doing research but unfortunately also unqualified to do so. Of the 32 professors
in the college, no one had a PhD degree and about half of my colleagues held master’s
degrees. Yet, none of those degrees were research-based, and only three of the profes-
sors held government-approved master’s degrees. This meant that most of the other

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

64 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

faculty members were scrambling to find alternatives, because not having an approved
master’s degree would mean future demotion or job loss. No one among the 10 people
who had been asked to work with me in a research nucleus had any formal research
background, and only 2 of them had published before in non-refereed journals.
This meant that the projects we were to engage in would have to be within their
realms of interest and comprehension. They could not be too time-consuming, as many
of my collaborators taught 24 to 26 hr per week, and they had to be closely related to
their personal and professional interests. We decided to focus our overall project on
curriculum development, student career perceptions, student reading behaviors, and
on the relationship between academia and the tourism and hospitality industries in
Ecuador. These were topics of interest to all the participants and were relevant to the
college and its strategic visioning process. Moreover, they were focused on study sub-
jects who would be willing and readily available, our students.
In some cases, we used designs and methodologies that I had used in studies at my
home institution and that we adjusted to the local setting. In other cases, we designed
the study from scratch, depending on the topic, the data needed, and the expertise and
availability of the participants. Studies were descriptive and comparative in nature in
order for us not to overextend. Yet, all felt strongly that the projects should make a
clear contribution to the limited literature on the various topics in the Spanish lan-
guage. All of us were acutely aware of the fact that we needed to get them published,
as both the government funding agency and the university were eager to see publica-
tions in indexed journals as tangible evidence of our efforts.
However, rather than designing studies and collecting data from the start, I initially
found myself delivering presentations on various aspects of the research process, as
both knowledge and experience were scarce. In weekly lectures, my colleagues and I
covered some of the material a basic graduate level research methods course might
cover. Once the university heard about the lectures, I was asked to repeat them for the
university faculty at large, and I was soon doing similar lectures and workshops at
universities around the country. Only afterward, once the basic steps had been dis-
cussed, did we engage in the actual studies.
Over the course of the second 6 months, we completed several studies with the core
research group and in collaboration with colleagues and graduate students at my home
institution. During my time in Ecuador, we submitted five manuscripts for review in
U.S. and Latin American refereed and indexed journals, and we were fortunate that
three of those were accepted for publication before I left. In all fairness, I did most of
the design, data analysis, and writing. Yet, all colleagues contributed to the process
through data collection, interviews, literature review, editing, and translations. In
doing so, they not only gained an understanding of the research process but also an
appreciation of its value and importance. By selecting attainable designs and methods,
by choosing topics that were close to the participants’ hearts and relevant to the
school’s strategic vision, by selecting study subjects who were readily available (stu-
dents), and by emphasizing a step-by-step approach, we had found a winning formula.
Rarely have I seen such dedication and collegiality in my 25 years in higher education,
given the heavy workloads and demanding administrative responsibilities of many of

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 65

my colleagues. For me, there was no better feeling than assisting colleagues, who had
never had a refereed publication before, in getting their efforts accepted and in print.
After I returned to the United States, we were able to continue our efforts for 5 more
months, and three additional studies are presently in their data collection stages. We
are awaiting the outcomes of two more review processes, and two refereed presenta-
tions have been scheduled at international conferences. Data from several studies are
being used in cross-cultural comparative follow-up studies with my own graduate stu-
dents at home.

Conclusion
The future of Ecuador’s university system is bleak if nothing is done about its lack of
research activity. Whereas universities are drivers of change in many societies and
play important roles in answering society’s burning questions, their role in Ecuador
still lies in educating undergraduates for future employment. It is certainly time for a
change, and nobody would argue otherwise. The burning question is how to bring that
change about.
Ecuador’s government has set some demanding and forceful objectives through its
most recent initiatives: If faculty members do not get doctorates, they risk demotion
and job loss; and if universities do not conduct research, they risk budgetary con-
straints, loss of status, or even closure. These mandates may lead to greater productiv-
ity but could also lead to greater resistance. Ecuador is moving from local university
autonomy to central government decision making, from tuition-based funding to cen-
tral government funding, and from a teaching emphasis to a teaching-research empha-
sis in its university system; and it is too early to tell whether the changes will have the
intended effect or whether they will become bogged down in inertia, anxiety, and
resentment.
The Prometeo program, however, is a shining light in this experiment and has found
its rightful place among these efforts to enhance the research productivity in the coun-
try. It is an innovative way to jump start research interest and productivity in Ecuador.
By importing foreign expertise, the Secretariat of Higher Education hopes to accom-
plish its goal of establishing research networks for the future. Foreign scholars and
scientists serve exemplary roles to their aspiring colleagues in Ecuador, and their
efforts will be of benefit to the scientific and economic development of the country as
joint research projects and publications will see the light of day. It is a small step, but
a small step in the right direction.
The Prometeo program’s goal is to attract 500 scholars and scientists to Ecuador by
the year 2015 (SENESCYT, 2012). There is little doubt that the goal will be reached,
as more and more Prometeo scholars go back to their home institutions and spread the
word about the program. The program recently broadened its scope and is now also
interested in attracting scholars and from disciplines beyond science, engineering, and
technology, in particular, the arts and the humanities. It is creating opportunities to
place Prometeo scholars with government entities such as ministries, hospitals, and
school boards, as the needs in the country are great and many institutions can benefit

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

66 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

from the support of a Prometeo scholar. It was understandable that its initial focus was
on some of the areas of the greatest perceived need; yet as the program’s reputation
grows and the number of Prometeos increases, one can only hope that this trend of
proliferation of disciplines continues. The scope and vision of the program are broad
enough to do so, and I encourage readers to investigate the possibilities the program
offers. It is an enormously enriching experience to be part of this experiment. Its chal-
lenges will be to continue the effort in the foreseeable future until Ecuador’s system of
higher education has enough internal expertise to create its own “Prometeos.” It may
be a process that will take several decades.
Many higher education institutions in developing and underdeveloped countries
have attracted international research expertise to assist them in growing their research
portfolios, making the experience reported here not unique in itself. What is unique
about this program are its national scope and central (government) coordination, its
ambitious time line in attracting 500 scholars to Ecuador by the end of 2015, the rela-
tively generous compensation package that enables the program to attract talent at a
global level, and the breadth of opportunities that it creates. Not only does it enable
foreign scholars to do research in their areas of expertise, but also, as was the case
here, it allows them to engage in other activities to the benefit of higher education in
the country.
In looking at my own experiences and the impact they have made, I feel that I have
been able to expose Ecuadorian faculty members in the hospitality and tourism area
to the research process by working with them on several research studies. Again, it
took a while before we could initiate our studies, as I first had to conduct several
seminars on the various components of the research process. Moreover, it became
apparent that once we had started, I could not expect too much from my local col-
leagues as they had not had any formal research education. Yet, at the end of the year,
several articles and presentations saw the light of day. By combining local interest
and (limited) resources, international experience and expertise, and some support
from my own graduate students at home who took care of some the data analyses, we
were successful. Even to this day, 6 months after my return to the United States, I am
working on writing up several data analyses of data sets that we collected as follow-
ups on the initial studies.
We published our findings in both the English and Spanish languages, which meant
that time and effort have to be invested in translation. In doing so, the project not only
exposed faculty members to reading and writing in English (which is not very com-
mon in academic circles) but also presented the University of Cuenca to leading pub-
lications in México, Chile, and Brazil, and enhanced its reputation accordingly.
There are some concerns: after my return to the United States, there was no one to
take my place and continue the project. I have tried to keep the effort going long dis-
tance; yet without a physical presence, it has proven to be very difficult to do so.
Faculty are too engulfed in their teaching responsibilities to dedicate time and effort to
research and still lack the expertise to design and initiate their own studies. This real-
ization is somewhat disheartening, yet, however, an even greater reason for others to
follow in the footsteps of the initial group of Prometeos.

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

Van Hoof 67

Many have asked me what was most important in my year in Ecuador at the
University of Cuenca. I could have mentioned cultural immersion, the opportunity to
travel, language acquisition, or working with new and enthusiastic colleagues in a dif-
ferent system. I certainly gained from the experience professionally as well; I pre-
sented at several conferences, gained value insights into higher education in Ecuador
and South America, and published several refereed articles over the past year and have
several more in the pipeline. All of those are true, yet what I keep coming back to as
the most important parts of the experience are the warmth of the people who I worked
with and the feeling of being appreciated.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

References
Estrella, M. (2011). Free public universities in Ecuador: Too much of a good thing? International
Higher Education, 65, 22-24.
Ferrari, C., & Contreras, N. (2008). Universidades en América Latina [Universities in Latin
America]. Nueva Sociedad, 218, 23-38.
Feyen, J., & Van Hoof, H. (2013). An analysis of the relationship between higher education per-
formance and socio-economic and technological indicators: A Latin American case study.
Maskana-Revista Cientifica, 4, 1-20.
Lloyd, M. (2010, June 6). Ecuadorian president’s push to improve higher education meets resis-
tance. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. 1-5.
Marginson, S. (2010). Higher education in the global knowledge economy. Procedia: Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 6962-6980.
Post, D. (2011). Constitutional reform and the opportunity for higher education access in
Ecuador since 1950. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 19(20), 1-21.
Rajendran, C. P. (2010). Challenges in earth sciences: The 21st century. Science, 99, 1690-1698.
SCImago Research Group (2013). SCImago Institutions Rankings Report 2013. Available from
http://www.scimagoir.com
Scott, P. (1998). Massification, internationalization, and globalization. In P. Scott (Ed.), The
globalization of higher education (pp. 108-129). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación [National
Secretariat for Higher Education, Science, Technology and Innovation] (2011, April).
Prometheus project: A national initiative to develop science in Ecuador. Presentation cre-
ated by the Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación,
Quito, Ecuador.
Secretaría Nacional de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. (2011).
Presentacion de Becarios: Convocataria Abierta 2011 [Presentation of Grant Recipients:

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014

68 Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 14(1)

Open Convocation 2011]. (2011, August) Presentation created by the Secretaría Nacional
de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Quito, Ecuador
Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., & McNeill, J. R. (2007). The Anthropocene: Are humans now over-
whelming the great forces of nature? Ambio, 36, 614-621.
Van Hoof, H., Estrella, M., Eljuri, M., & Torres, L. (2013). Ecuador’s system of higher educa-
tion in times of change. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12, 345-355.
Vörösmarty, C. J., Green, P., Salisbury, J., & Lammers, R. B. (2000). Global water resources:
Vulnerability from climate change and population growth. Science, 289, 284-288.
Waal, T., Verbruggen, A., & Wright, T. (2010). University research for sustainable develop-
ment: Definitions and characteristics explored. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 629-
636.
Wright, T. (2004). The evolution of environmental sustainability declarations in higher educa-
tion. In A. Wals & P. Corcoran (Eds.), Higher education and the challenge of sustainabil-
ity: Problematics, promise, and practice (pp. 7-19). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic Press.

Author Biography
Hubert B. Van Hoof is Professor of Strategic Management at the Penn State School of
Hospitality Management, where he was Director from July 2004 to June 2011. During the 2012-
2013 Academic Year, he was a Prometeo Grant Recipient and Visiting Professor at the
University of Cuenca, Ecuador.

Downloaded from jhh.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on December 1, 2014