Search

Higher education is a key economic and social priority in the global arena. Many countries have sought to advance reforms aimed at increasing access, promoting greater educational quality, and ensuring financial responsibility and sustainability. Often, strategies for achieving these aims are informed by experiences elsewhere. However, transporting education policy reforms can be problematic. Kazakhstan, a signatory of the Bologna Process, offers an example of a country seeking to improve student access and success and promote greater fiscal efficiency to advance the overall quality of its higher education system (Merrill in Int High Educ 59:26-28, 2010 (See CR23)). A key strategy for achieving these goals is through reforms in university governance. In Central Asia, policy makers advance education reforms in order to accomplish several goals, including meeting 'the new demands of ethnic nationalism, a globally competitive economy, and a labour market freed from administrative control' (Anderson and Heyneman 2005 (See CR38), p. 361). In Kazakhstan, policy makers have concluded that a system predicated on decentralized control with greater institutional autonomy (and accountability), along the lines of the US system, offers a promising strategy for improving the overall quality of its higher education system. This research collected on-site data on Kazakhstani higher education and presents the most recent data since efforts from OECD and World Bank in 2006 [OECD in Higher education in Kazakhstan (reviews of National Policies for Education). OECD, Paris 2007 (See CR25)]. This research utilized semi-structured interviews with senior higher education administrators (53), members of the Ministry of Education and Science (6), a representative from the government (1), and experts from the World Bank (2) for a total of 62 participants. The results of the study show that academic leaders in Kazakhstan want greater autonomy. However, there is no clear consensus about what level of fiscal and academic autonomy is desirable and whether all institutions are prepared to manage themselves without Ministerial oversight. The roles of key constituents in academic governance have also not yet been clearly defined., Author(s): Matthew Hartley[sup.1] , Bryan Gopaul[sup.2] , Aida Sagintayeva[sup.3] , Renata Apergenova[sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2) Warner School of Education [...]

While studies have examined a myriad of issues in doctoral study, much of this research has not employed the tools of major social and cultural thinkers to the dynamics of doctoral education. This paper explores the use of Bourdieu's notion of field to render visible the practices and contexts of doctoral education that produce inequalities across doctoral students. This qualitative study with 15 doctoral students in Engineering and in Philosophy demonstrated that these inequalities related to conflicted and codified rules of success within doctoral study, and students' struggle to understand these rules, and then act in ways that enable students' success in doctoral education., Author(s): Bryan Gopaul[sup.1] Author Affiliations: (1) Warner School of Education and Human Development, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, USA Introduction Scholars and policy makers have demonstrated sustained interest in [...]