Rethinking post-soviet legacy in education of Central Asia: focus on Kazakhstan

ICCEES IX World Congress in Makuhari, JapanAugust 3 ~ 8, 2015

Panel Session IV-3-6“Education Reform in Post-Soviet Russia and Central Asia”

(August 7, 2015, 16:30 ~ 18:00)

Rethinking the “Post-Soviet” Legacy in Education of Central Asia:

focus on Kazakhstan

Kuanysh Tastanbekova

University of Tsukuba

[email protected]

Contents

• Neoliberal Education Reforms in Central Asian countries after independence: implementation of post-socialist education reform package

• Modern education system of Kazakhstan

• Problems in education after independence

• Education Reforms in Kazakhstan: what has been changed in education? And how?

• ADB’s education development assistance and its consequences

• Positive and negative aspects of neoliberal reforms or “post-soviet” legacy in education of Kazakhstan

The post-socialist education reform package(based on Silova, I. et al,2008）

Reduction of public expenditure on education

Increase of private spending on education

Decentralization of education finance and governance

Rationalization of school staff and reorganization of schools

Increase of internal efficiency by reducing “wastages” and leakages

3

Education reform package for post-soviet states

4

•Extension of general education curriculum to realign the former socialist educational system with the Western education standards.

Education extension to eleven or twelve years

•Shift from remembering facts (Soviet style education of knowledge acquisition) to understanding and applying learned material (competency based).

Curriculum standards (OBE)

•Measure to curb corruption in education. Shift from traditional practice of oral examinations administered by individual educational institutions to a more transparent assessment of students’ knowledge and skills.

Standardized assessment system (centralized university entrance exam)

•The goal is breaking away from old, centralized system of textbook provision, increasing the quality of textbooks by de-monopolizing the authorship, stimulating competition between publishers, and providing choice of textbooks and teaching/learning materials for students, teachers, and schools.

Market-driven textbook provision

•Signal to retreat from state monopoly over education.Increased educational choice

(private schools)

•The introduction of student-centered learning considered to signal “democratization” of teaching and learning in classroom level, to soften the traditional teacher-led approaches common to Soviet education practice.

Student-centered learning

Modern Education SystemIn 2014-2015 school year

• 49% of children age 0-6, and 73% of age 3-6 (727,478 in total) are enrolled in pre-primary education in 8,467 kindergartens and pre-school centers (1,260 private)

• 2,685,063 children in general secondary education in 7,563 schools (99 private）. 77% of all schools are rural; 58% of rural schools are “ungraded schools”

• 531,453 students are enrolled in secondary vocational education in 820 colleges and professional lycees(353 private）

• 477,387 students are enrolled in 126 universities (71 private）.University enrollment rate 45%

Pre-primary Education

Primary Education

4 years

Lower Secondary

Education 5(6) years

Upper Second. Edu.2 years

Second.Voc.Edu.(Colleges, Lycees)

2～4 years

Higher EducationMagistrate, 2 y.

Baccalaureate, 4y.

Post-Higher

Edu.Doctorate, 3 y.

※ Gradual shift from 11 years to 12 years general secondary education is in process

Problems in education after independenceResignation of teachers from schools, increasing side-job (such as shuttle

(or tourist) trading) due to salary reduction and pay pauses (or payment in kind) led to significant deterioration of teacher’s profession and social status.

Aging educational facilitiesPractice of regular maintenance of school buildings and equipment has

stopped for a while due to lack of financing from local budgets (mostly maintenance was supported by parents)

Lack of clear teaching guidelines and difficulties with provision of textbooks The urgent need for revision of curriculum and textbooks of socio-

humanitarian disciplines (e.g. “history”)

Background of public spending on education

-11.0

-5.3

-9.2

-12.6

-8.2

0.5 1.7

-1.9

2.7

9.8

13.5

9.8 9.3 9.6 9.7 10.78.9

3.31.2

7.3 7.55.0 6.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

AN

NU

AL

%

GDP growth

0.0

2,000.0

4,000.0

6,000.0

8,000.0

10,000.0

12,000.0

14,000.0

16,000.0

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

CU

RR

ENT

USD

GDP per capita

Source: World Bank www.worldbank.org

Public spending on education

4.0

3.3

2.3

2.6

2.8

2.6

3.1

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

% G

DP

Teachers’ salary

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

REA

L (2

00

5)

KZT

Education Country average

International donors in Kazakhstan

International Organizations

• 1992 World Bank, IMF, EBRD

• 1994 ADB

Official Development Assistance by foreign governments

• 1992 USAID

• 1994 KOICA

• 1995 JICA

• 1996 GTZ

International NGOs

• 1995 Soros Foundation “Open Society Institute”

• 2000 Aga Khan Foundation

Education development assistance by ADB(based on Asanova, 2006, 2007）

Educational loans for implementation of education reforms

• 1994 $20 millions

• 1997 $45 millions

Technical assistance grant, TA

• 1997 $100,000 TA for the Education Rehabilitation and Management Improvement

• 1995 $850,000 TA for Education and Training Sector Study

• 1997 $600,000 TA for Strengthening Education Administration and Management at Central and Recipient Levels

ADB’s policy recommendations and their results(based on Asanova, J., 2006)

Policy recommendation:

Operation of school in “soviet style” is inefficient. Rationalization policy called for integration of schools in rural areas to reduce administrative, maintenance, and instructional costs.

Results:

In 1997 alone 335 schools were shut down and as a result 26,900 eligible children did not attend schools.

Policy recommendation:

Restructuring the education system in accordance with international standards

Results:

Educational structure inherited from soviet system (family education, early childhood and pre-school education, general secondary education, out-of-school education, professional and technical education, secondary vocational education, higher education, post-higher education, training and professional development of cadres, further (adult) education) was restructured following ISCED1997（pre-primary, primary, lower secondary, upper secondary, post-secondary non-tertiary, first stage of tertiary, second stage of tertiary).

State programs of education development

2000• Rationalization of education

administrative and financial costs, restructuring of the system, quality enhancement in education, improvement of teachers’ social status, advancement of educational facilities

2005~2010• Enhancement of the

number of pre-school education facilities, extension of general secondary education to 12 years, reform of higher education according to Bologna process, development of competency based curriculum, promotion of trilingualism (Kazakh, Russian, English)

2011~2020• Achievement of universal

pre-primary education, completion of switch to 12 years general secondary education system, improvement of the results of PISA, TIMS , participation in PIRLS (in 2016), establishment of the new internationally competitive university and school for gifted youth and children (Nazarbayev University and Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools)

Positive and negative aspects of neoliberal education reforms in Kazakhstan

Some scholars (Ishkanian, 2006) argue that Central Asian countries due to long history of being dependent on thick social packages provided by central governments, did not appreciate the principles of individualism and self-responsibility in new social reforms, and as result did not implement them properly. Others say that in education neoliberal reforms were “exploited” and “hijacked” (Silova, 2005; Silova, 2009a). And particularly in Kazakhstan’s case the governments officials and international donors failed in mutual understanding and cooperation in meeting real needs in education (Asanova, 2006)

Positive aspects

• Rationalization of public spending on education; restructuring the system and making it more flexible and transferable (interpretable into international context).

• Increasing variations of choice; widening the authority of educational organizations.

Negative aspects

• Commodification of education (from “right” to “commodity”, from public good to commercial resource)

• Rapid implementation in short period of time

• Lack of public discussion of education reforms (on annual August conferences of teachers, in professional media, in local departments of education, and schools)

• Lack of scrupulous analysis of the soviet education legacy (insufficient number of scholarly works and research)

• Quantity over quality (race for prestige at expense of equity)

“Post-Soviet” legacy in education of Kazakhstan

Education reforms based on principles “do more with less”, “sooner the better” lead to consequences of “pour new vine into old bottles”.

New reforms implemented in ignorance and negative perception of soviet education’s achievements (institutional, didactical, methodological), as well as inefficient use of accumulated resources have led to deterioration of students’ performance and teachers’ professionalism.

Coupled with corruption and amateurism of educational authorities, new reforms contribute to further widening of gap between various social groups (urban and rural, rich and poor, majority and minority ethnic groups) and increase of inequality.

References (papers cited in this presentation are hilighted)

Anderson, K.H, Heymenan, S. (2005), Education and Social Policy in Central Asia: The Next Stage of the Transition, Social Policy and Administration, Vol.39 No.4, pp.361-380.

Asanova, J. (2006), Emerging regions, persisting rhetoric of educational aid: The impact of ADB in educational policy making in Kazakhstan, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol.26, pp.655-666.

Asanova, J. (2007), Seeing Near and Far: Balancing Stakeholder Needs and Rights in Kazakhstan’s Educational Reform, Canadian and International Education, Vol.36 Issue 2, pp.71-90.

Bridges, D. (ed) (2014), Educational Reform and Internationalization. The Case of School Reform in Kazakhstan, Cambridge University Press.

Chapman D.W., et al (2005), The search for quality: A five country study of national strategies to improve educational quality in Central Asia, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol.25, pp.514-530.

Ishkanian, A. (2006), Social Policy and development in Central Asia and Caucasus, Central Asian Survey, Vol.25 No.4, pp.373-385.

Silova, I. (2002), Manipulated Consensus: globalization, local agency, and cultural legacies in post-Soviet education reform, European Educational Research Journal, Vol.1 No.2, pp.308-330.

Silova, I. (2005), Traveling Policies: hijacked in Central Asia, European Educational Research Journal, Vol.4 No.1, pp.50-59.

Silova, I., Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2008), How NGOs React. Globalization and Educational Reform in Caucasus, Central Asia and Mongolia, Kumarian Press.

Silova, I. (2009a), Variteis of Educational Transformation: The Post-Socialist States of Central/Southeastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, Cowen, R.,Kazamias, A.M. (eds), International Handbook of Comparative Education, pp.295-320.

Silova, I. (2009b), The Crisis of the Post-Soviet Teaching Profession in the Caucasus and Central Asia, Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol 4 No.4, pp.366-383.

Steiner-Khamsi, G.(ed) (2004), The Global Politics of Educational Borrowing and Lending, Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Steiner-Khamis, G., et al (2006), Liberalism liberally applied. Educational policy borrowing in Central Asia, Farrel, L., Fenwick, T. (eds), World Yearbook of Education 2006: Education, Research and Policy: Steering the Knowledge-based Economy, Routledge, pp.217-245

Steiner-Khamsi, G., Waldow, F. (eds) (2012), World Yearbook of Education 2012: Policy Borrowing and Lending in Education, Routledge.

Takala, T., Piattoeva, N. (2012), Changing conceptions of development assistance to education in international discourse on post-Soviet countries, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol.32, pp.3-10.

References in Russian

Кусаинов, А., Качественное образование в мире и в Казахстане, АНОО «Издательский центр ИЭТ», Москва, 2014

Нуртазина, Р.А. Образовательная политика Республики Казахстан в условиях глобализации, НИЦ «Гылым», Алматы, 2004.

References in Japanese

関啓子『コーカサス中央アジアの人間形成ー発達文化の比較教育研究』、明石書店、2012年。

嶺井明子・川野辺敏『中央アジアの教育とグローバリズム』、東信堂、2012年。

Legislation

Закон Республики Казахстан от 18 января 1992 года №1153-XII «Об образовании»

Закон Республики Казахстан от 7 июня 1999 года №389-1 «Об образовании»

Закон Республики Казахстан от 27 июля 2007 года № 319-III «Об образовании»

Концепция содержания образования общеобразовательной школы Республики Казахстан. Разработана Министерством образования РК, 8 апреля 1993 года.

Концепция развития среднего образования Республики Казахстан. Разработана Министерством образования РК, 14 июня 1997 года.

Концепция развития образования Республики Казахстан. Одобрена Правительством Республики Казахстан 24 февраля 2004 года, протокол№3.

Государственная программа «Образование». Утвержденая Указаом Президента Республики Казахстан №448 от 30 сентября 2000 года.

Государственная программа развития образования в Республике Казахстан на 2005-2010 гг. Утверждена Указом Президента Республики Казахстан № 1459 от 11 октября 2004 года.

Государственная программа развития образования в Республике Казахстан на 2011-2020 годы. Утверждена Указом Президента Республики Казахстан № 1118 от 7 декабря 2010 года.

Online sources:

Ministry of National Economy of the Republic of Kazakhstan Committee on Statistics www.stat.gov.kz,Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Kazakhstam www.edu.gov.kz, World Bank www.worldbank.org/en/country/kazakhstan, Asian Development Bankwww.adb.org/countires/kazakhstan/main