Peculiarities and Paradoxes of Neoliberal Higher Education in Kazakhstan

Authors

  • Douglas Robertson Florida International University
  • Nazgul Bayetova Florida International University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v13iSummer.3183

Keywords:

higher education, Kazakhstan, neoliberalism, paradox, policy analysis

Abstract

This article discusses the expression of neoliberalism in Kazakhstan’s emerging higher education system. The central tenets of neoliberalism are briefly articulated. Noted is the phenomenon that the general political-economic paradigm of neoliberalism differs in its specific implementation depending on the particular countries and cultures in which it is manifesting. In Kazakhstan, neoliberalism’s expression in the former Soviet Republic’s emerging higher education system presents five paradoxes: (a) nationalistic globalism, (b) regulated non-regulation, (c) giving as a means to getting, (d) communal individualism, and (e) developmental demise. This article explores each of these five paradoxes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Douglas Robertson, Florida International University

Ph.D., Professor of Higher Education, Department of Educational Policy Studies, Florida International University.

Nazgul Bayetova, Florida International University

Ph.D. student in Higher Education

Teaching Assistant

Ms. Ed in Higher Education

Recipient of Prestigious International Scholarship "Bolashak" 

References

Altbach, P. (2015). The costs and benefits of world-class universities. International Higher Education, 33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2003.33.7381

Azimbayeva, G. (2017). Comparing post-Soviet changes in higher education governance in Kazakhstan, Russia, and Uzbekistan. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1-18

Bayetova, N., & Robertson, D. (2019). Privatization and higher education system in Kazakhstan. Inside Higher Education. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/nazgul-bayetova-and-douglas-robertson

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. A practical guide through qualitative analysis. SAGE publications.

Charmaz, K. (2011). Constructivist grounded theory analysis of losing and regaining a valued self. In F. J. Weltz, K. Charmaz, L. M. McMullen, R. Josselson, R. Anderson, & E. McSpadden (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry (pp. 165-204). Guilford Press.

Del Sordi, A. (2017). Sponsoring student mobility for development and authoritarian stability: Kazakhstan’s Bolashak program. Globalizations, 15(2), 215-231

Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.

Kabayeva, Z., Zamanhankyzy, B., Mussabaev, S. & Madalieva, Z. (2018). The formation way of independent Kazakhstan from the individualism and collectivism perspective. Opción, 34(85-2), 1-15.

Keynes, J. M. (1936), General theory of employment, interest and money. Macmillan.

Kromydas, T. (2017). Rethinking higher education and its relationship with social inequalities: past knowledge, present state and future potential. Palgrave Communications, 3(1), 1-12.

Kucera, J. (2014). Can a homegrown university in authoritarian Kazakhstan incubate reform? Aljazeera America. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/20/kazakhstan-s-audaciousnazarbayevuniversity.html

Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Education” 2007. (July 27, 2007). https://www.gov.kz/memleket/entities/edu?lang=en

Maksutova, K. (2004). A comparative study of higher education reforms of the three Central Asian countries: Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan. Master’s Capstone Project. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1143&context=cie_capstones

Nazarbayev, N. A. (March 16, 2005). Presidential speech – 2005. www.akorda.com

Nicholson-Crotty, S. & Carley, S. (2016). Effectiveness, implementation, and policy diffusion: or “can we make that work for us?” State Politics and Policy Quarterly, 16(1), 78-97.

Ralph, N., Birks, M., & Chapman, Y. (2014). Contextual positioning: using documents as extant data in grounded theory research. SAGE Open, 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014552425

Sagintayeva A. & Kurakbayev. K. (2015). Understanding the transition of public universities to institutional autonomy in Kazakhstan. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(2), 197-210.

St. John, E. P., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-Chapman, K. M. (2018). Public policy and higher education: Reframing strategies for preparation, access, and college success (2nd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis.

Simola, H., Rinne, R., Varjo, J., & Kauko, J. (2013). The paradox of the education race: how to win the ranking game by sailing to headwind. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 612-633.

Silova, I. (2004). Adopting the language of the new allies. In G. Stener-Khamsi (Ed), The global politics of educational borrowing (pp. 75-87). Teachers College Press.

Silova, I. (2009). Varieties of educational transformation: The post-socialist states of Central/Southeastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. In R. Cowen & A. M. Kazamias (Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 295-320). Springer international handbooks of education, vol. 22. Springer.

Smith, A. (2005). The theory of moral sentiments. (6th ed.). MetaLibri. Original work published 1759

Smith, A. (2017). The wealth of nations. Global Classics. Original work published 1776

Steger, M. B., & Roy, R. K. (2010). Neoliberalism: Avery short introduction. Oxford University Press.

Thatcher, M. (1987). The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-quotes

Downloads

Published

2021-08-03

How to Cite

Robertson, D., & Bayetova, N. (2021). Peculiarities and Paradoxes of Neoliberal Higher Education in Kazakhstan. Journal of Comparative &Amp; International Higher Education, 13(Summer), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.32674/jcihe.v13iSummer.3183

Issue

Section

Essay/Review