The rapid massification of Portuguese higher education in the last decades has brought with it problems of retention / dropout and academic failure on a scale that forced the university to wonder about their teaching-learning-assessment regimes, among other things (Rodrigues, Peralta & Nunes, 2011). The research has suggested a paradigm shift, which the Bologna Process also endorses (Attard, Di Loio, Geven & Santa, 2010). In summary, it is argued a replacement of magistral teaching, centered on the teacher and on the subject, also known as traditional teaching/education (Hodge, 2010), a student-centered approach (González & Wagenaar, 2008) and active learning (Higgs & McCarthy, 2005), under the auspices of constructivism. Now this paradigm turn is expressed consistently in different domains of pedagogical and curricular work. It involves the planning, implementation and evaluation and reconfigures the roles for teachers and students within the teaching-learning-assessment process.

Recognizing the close relationship between teaching, learning and assessment activities (Fernandes, 2011; Shepard, 2000), the AVENA project (Fernandes, Rodrigues & Nunes, 2012), proposing deepen the understanding of their interrelationships in the real contexts where they take place, undertook a naturalistic multi-methods approach to study these phenomena in Portuguese and Brazilian universities (work financed by National Funds through Fundação para a Ciência a a Tecnologia, the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology, in the context of the project PTDC/CPE-CED/114318/2009). This communication focuses, however, on a survey in Portugal, country which, for nearly a decade, in the context of the Bologna Process, reformed its higher education to join the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

Since the questionnaire was built on the assumption of the existence of a paradigmatic articulation between teaching, learning and assessment, the first question to be answered is whether a multivariate data analysis shows an interrelation and what kind of relationships indicates. In fact, the expectation is to see if it mirrors a separation and eventual opposition between a paradigm more student-centered and another one more centered on the teacher and on the content.

On the other hand, although limited to the 1^st degree courses, the project covers all 1^st degree courses of the universities concerned, grouped in the following scientific fields: Health Sciences, Science and Technology, Social Sciences and Arts and Humanities. Recognizing the existence of different pedagogical and curricular traditions in different domains, also marked by diverse epistemological structures (Fry, Ketteridge & Marshall, 2009), the goal is to characterize teaching-learning-assessment in different scientific areas. So the second question that arises is whether there are similarities and / or differences in Portugal between distinct scientific fields in regard to teaching-learning-assessment. In the end, one seeks to know how the required educational paradigm change has been occurring in different scientific fields.

Attard, A., Di Loio, E., Geven, K., & Santa, R. (2010). Student Centered Learning An Insight Into Theory And Practice. Bucharest: Education International. Retrieved from http://download.ei-ie.org/SiteDirectory/hersc/Documents/2010%20T4SCL%20Stakeholders%20Forum%20Leuven%20-%20An%20Insight%20Into%20Theory%20And%20Practice.pdf Fernandes, D. (2011). Articulação da Aprendizagem, da Avaliação e do Ensino: Questões Teóricas, Práticas e Metodológicas. In M.P. Alves & J.-M. De Ketele (2011). Do Currículo à Avaliação, da Avaliação ao Currículo (pp. 131-142). Porto: Porto Editora. Fernandes, D., Rodrigues, P., & Nunes, C. (2012). Uma Investigação em Ensino, Avaliação e Aprendizagens no Ensino Superior. In C. Leite & M. Zabalza (Coords.), Ensino Superior: Inovação e Qualidade na Docência (pp. 932-944). Porto: Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Educativas da Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade do Porto. Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (Eds.) (2009). A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Enhancing Academic Practice (3rd ed.). New York & London: Routledge. González, J,. & Wagenaar, R. (Eds.). (2008). Universities’ Contribution to the Bologna Process. An Introduction (2nd ed.). Bilbao: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Deusto. Retrieved from http://www.unideusto.org/tuningeu/ Higgs, B., & McCarthy, M. (2005). Active Learning: from Lecture Theatre to Field-Work. In G. O’Neill, S. Moore, & B. McMullin (Eds.). Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching (pp. 37-44). Dublin: AISHE. Retrieved from http://www.aishe.org/readings/2005-1/collection.pdf Hodge, S. (2010). Student-Centred Learning in Higher Education and Adult Education. Paper 3, 2010 Occasional Papers on Learning and Teaching at UniSA, University of South Australia, Adelaide. Retrieved from http://www.unisa.edu.au/academicdevelopment/what/occasional.asp Maroco, J. (2010). Análise Estatística com Utilização do SPSS (2ª ed.). Lisboa: Edições Sílabo. Martins, C. (2011). Manual de Dados Quantitativos com Recurso ao IBM SPSS. Viseu: Edições Psiquilíbrios. Rodrigues, P., Peralta, M.H., & Nunes, C. (2011). Qualidade e Impacto da Avaliação da Aprendizagem: a Perspectiva de Alunos da Universidade de Lisboa. In J.C. Morgado, M.P. Alves, S.S. Pillotto, & M.I. Cunha (Orgs.). Actas do 2º Congresso Internacional de Avaliação em Educação. Aprender ao Longo da Vida: Contributos, Perspectivas e Questionamentos do Currículo e da Avaliação (pp. 969-993). Braga: Centro de Investigação em Educação do Instituto de Educação da Universidade do Minho. Shepard, L. (2000). The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture, Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.