Destruction, construction, reconstitution: The dynamics of structural reform and the creation of new higher education institutions in the former Soviet space.

• Introduces a typology of higher education institutions (HEIs) created in Central Asia after the Soviet collapse in 1991. • Classifies new HEIs as 'external', 'hybrid', 'bi-national' and 'neo-Soviet' based on structure, founding actors, and funding. • In Kazakhstan, most new HEIs were private. New external norms showed efforts to create a different kind of higher education. • A blend of Soviet and external structures/norms in Kyrgyzstan is partly due to dependence on non-state sources of funding. • In contrast, institutional entrepreneurs in Tajikistan reduced uncertainty by modelling new HEIs on the Soviet-era template. Across the former Soviet space, governments have grappled with fundamental questions around how to build or re-form sovereign nations, how to deal with the legacies of the preceding Soviet era, and how to navigate intense globalization processes that were further stimulated with the collapse of the communist bloc in 1991. Structural reforms have extended to all aspects of society, particularly to social institutions such as higher education that had historically been very closely linked to the state. One response to change has been the massive expansion of higher education systems. The dramatic growth of the ex-Soviet higher education systems and the impact of the path-altering events of 1991 lead to the research questions this paper explores, which are, 1) To what extent did HEIs created between 1991 and 1996 represent a break from the Soviet past? and 2) How do patterns in the emergence of new HEIs compare across the former Soviet space? Using the cases of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, drawing theoretically from sociological institutionalism and methodologically from a comparative case study including in-depth interviews with 36 faculty members, this paper sets out a novel typology of four distinct patterns in the new HEIs that emerged in the first five years following the Soviet breakdown. These are classified as 'external', 'hybrid', 'bi-national' and 'neo-Soviet', each being distinguishable in terms of their organization, founding actors, and funding model. Through this comparative investigation, the paper elaborates on the dynamics of structural reforms in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]