KZBlog

As Kazakhstan is reforming its system of education in order to join the Bologna Process and to boost its economy, the approach they are taking is potentially controversial. There is a great emphasis on introducing new technology–Kazakhstan will build a number of high-tech classrooms in schools and vocational schools throughout the country and also work on an Internet database for science and research. There is also an emphasis on centralizing authority more, and on matching university education with the needs of the economy, and making education even more specialized (in higher education). While high technology is all well and good, it is interesting to ask what else they might do with the presumably large investments that will go into this new tech. How many more teachers could they train? How many more books could they purchase? How many foreign professors could they hire to come and teach?

As for the other measures–centralization and specialization–some people are pointing out that world experience shows that the best education systems in the world are decentralized and prepare students, not only for a job, but also for world-citizenship by giving them a broad-range of skills and knowledge. Now the theory that a broad liberal arts education is the best in the world, is not without its critics. But one interesting thing to look at is the model of Harvard, which many Kazakhstany students would kill to get into. If this is the case, that Harvard really is the greatest university in the world, then why isn’t Kazakhstan looking to emulate the Harvard model of education?

Recently, after years of debate, Harvard has announced its new core-curriculum, which will prepare undergraduate students in eight areas such as Aesthetic and Interpretive Understanding, Culture and Belief, Ethical Reasoning, and Mathematical Reasoning. These don’t sound like areas of competitiveness in the world market or ways to increase your nation’s rank in the WEF Competitiveness Index!

According to a Kazakhstan-based blog of an English tutor and university placement consultant, Harvard’s new curriculum appears to balance both economic needs and general knowledge. However, instead of preparing workers by forcing them into specialized curricula by field of study or emphasizing specific skills, the curriculum prepares students with a base of fundamental skills like math literacy, logic and basic understanding of science. And in parallel teaching more general skills like cultural literacy and ethics. Specialized training of course comes with the choice of a major, although US universities typically give their students choice, with the assistance of an advisor.

And to the extent that one believes the US education system overall is a world leader, we might note that Harvard is quite the exception for having a core curriculum. Many universities only have one or two required classes, or may have broad areas defined, in each of which students must take one or two classes. So why is Kazakhstan moving away from the US model?

That being said, Kazakhstan is moving toward a European model in many ways, including transferring to a tutor-system wherein students are graded based on independent work with the professor-tutor, as opposed to classwork. They are phasing that in now by requiring students to see their professors outside of class; hopefully after a few years students will be accustomed to going themselves and not need to be forced. Kazakhstan has also finalized the model of higher education so that there are three stages: bachelors, masters and PhD, whereas before there was a 5-year specialist degree and PhD candidates often did not need a masters; they started straight after undergraduate work.

I don’t want to get into a debate about whether the European system or the American system is better at preparing students–I think both are strong. So Kazakhstan may simply have chosen to emulate Oxford and La Sorbonne instead of Harvard, a reasonable choice. Although while European education tends to be more centralized in Europe than in the US, most universities still have a lot more independence than they do in Kazakhstan.

Overall, I suppose my main complaint is that I don’t see a focus on what really matters in the announced changes in education: good teachers, excellent text-books, and well-trained students who know how to learn.