SDG
Country Evidence and PolicyCountry Recommendations Evidence and Uzbekistan in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan Ensuring lifelongEnsuring learning for all
Ensuring Lifelong Learning For All in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations UNESCO UNESCO Education Sector The Global Education 2030 Agenda Education is UNESCO’s top priority because UNESCO, as the United Nations’ specialized it is a basic human right and the foundation agency for education, is entrusted to lead on which to build peace and drive and coordinate the Education 2030 Agenda, sustainable development. UNESCO is the which is part of a global movement to United Nations’ specialized agency for eradicate poverty through 17 Sustainable education and the Education Sector provides Development Goals by 2030. Education, global and regional leadership in education, essential to achieve all of these goals, has its strengthens national education systems and own dedicated Goal 4, which aims to “ensure responds to contemporary global challenges inclusive and equitable quality education and through education with a special focus on promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.” gender equality and Africa. The Education 2030 Framework for Action provides guidance for the implementation of this ambitious goal and commitments.
Published in 2020 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France and UNESCO Almaty Office 303 Baizakov Street, Building 1, 050040 Almaty, Kazakhstan © UNESCO 2020 ISBN 978-92-3-100368-4
This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/) By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. Author: Arne Carlsen Project co-ordinators: Lina Benete and Meirgul Alpysbayeva Copy-editor: Aliénor Salmon Cover photo: Nickolai Repnitskii/Shutterstock.com Graphic design, layout and inside infographics: Warren Field
Printed by Ex Libris Printed in Kazakhstan Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES...... 3 ABBREVIATIONS...... 4 FOREWORD...... 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 7 1 INTRODUCTION...... 9 1.1 Global Context: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development...... 10 1.2 Conceptual Understanding of Lifelong Learning...... 13 1.3 Aims and Target Audiences of the Sub-regional Report...... 13 2 CONTEXT OF LIFELONG LEARNING IN CENTRAL ASIA...... 15 2.1 Impact of the Socio-economic and Political Context on Lifelong Learning...... 15 2.2 Transforming Education Systems into Lifelong Learning Systems...... 17 2.3 Key Drivers for the Development of Lifelong Learning...... 21 3 CURRENT POLICIES AND PRACTICES FROM A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE...... 23 3.1 Capacity of Education Systems...... 23 3.2 Pre-school Education...... 23 3.3 Primary and Secondary Education...... 24 3.4 TVET Systems...... 26 3.5 Higher Education...... 30 3.6 Adult Learning and Education...... 32 3.7 Online Provision and Blended Learning...... 37 4 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION FROM A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE...... 39 4.1 Training and Development of Adult Educators and Teachers...... 39 4.2 Gender Equality...... 41 4.3 National Qualifications Frameworks...... 43 4.4 Recognition, Validation and Accreditation of Non-formal and Informal Learning Outcomes...... 45 4.5 Transitions to the Labour Market...... 47 4.6 Career Counselling and Guidance...... 48 4.7 Financing...... 49 4.8 Governance...... 50 5 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO ENSURE LIFELONG LEARNING FOR ALL IN CENTRAL ASIA...... 53 5.1 Policy Recommendations and Education System Reform...... 53 5.2 General Recommendations for Sub-regional Collaboration...... 58 6 REFERENCES...... 61
2 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1 Sustainable Development Goal 4 Targets...... 11 Table 2 SDG 4 Global Indicators...... 12 Table 3 Key Socio-economic Facts and Figures...... 16 Table 4 Pre-school Education Enrolment (2018)...... 23 Table 5 Gross Enrolment Rate at Different Education Levels in Central Asia...... 24 Table 6 Initial TVET Providers in Central Asia...... 27 Table 7 Higher Education Systems in Central Asia (2017–2018)...... 30 Table 8 Range of Providers of Adult Education and Learning in Central Asia...... 33 Table 9 Percentage of Students in Upper Secondary Education Enrolled in Vocational Programmes by Gender (%)...... 42 Table 10 Expenditure on Education in Central Asia (% of GDP)...... 49 Table 11 Selected Policy Documents Setting the Legal Foundation for Lifelong Learning...... 52
Figure 1 Kazakhstan: Structure of the Education System ...... 17 Figure 2 TVET Formal, Non-formal and Informal Systems...... 26 Figure 3 Gross Enrolment Ratio and Gender at Tertiary Education in Kazakhstan...... 42 Figure 4 Gross Enrolment Ratio at Tertiary Education Level in Kyrgyzstan...... 42 Figure 5 Gross Enrolment Ratio at Tertiary Education Level in Tajikistan...... 43 Figure 6 Gross Enrolment Ratio at Tertiary Education Level in Uzbekistan ...... 43
2 3 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
ABBREVIATIONS
ACBS Academic Credit Bank System ADB Asian Development Bank ALE Adult Learning and Education BFA Belém Framework for Action CA Central Asia CLC Community Learning Centre DVV DVV International (German Adult Education Development Cooperation) EFA Education for All ЕTF European Training Foundation ЕU European Union FDI Foreign Direct Investment GIZ German Agency for International Cooperation HEI Higher Education Institution ICT Information and Communication Technologies ILO International Labour Organization ISCED International Standard Classification of Education KAAE Kyrgyz Association for Adult Education MELR Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations MNE Multi-National Enterprises NCE National Chamber of Entrepreneurs (Atameken) NFE Non-formal Education NIS Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools NGО Non-Governmental Organization NQF National Qualifications Framework NQS National Qualifications System OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development OER Open Educational Resources PPP Public-Private Partnership RVA Recognition, Validation and Accreditation TVET Technical and Vocational Education and Training SDG Sustainable Development Goals SES State Educational Standards UIL UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning UIS UNESCO Institute for Statistics UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization WB The World Bank
4 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
FOREWORD
In 2015, the United Nations adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. As part of this agenda, the global community committed to Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4), which aims to ensure inclusive and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all by 2030. As the lead UN agency for education, UNESCO supports countries to achieve SDG 4, as well as strengthen and reform their education systems at all levels – from early childhood through primary, secondary, and post-secondary to higher education. This also includes all education settings – whether formal, non-formal or informal – for all children, youth, and adults. UNESCO’s programmes and activities strive to support countries in ensuring equal opportunities, better access to education, and learning throughout life. Among its initiatives, it also offers expertise in the planning and management of education systems in order to improve the quality of education. This involves strengthening capacity at country level and offering technical support in the formulation and implementation of education policies that can respond to today’s challenges and socio-economic demands, as well as all aspects of life. Sound education strategies for lifelong learning play a vital role in developing sustainable societies, and in our case, a sustainable future for Central Asia. Ever since 1991, the four Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – have undergone significant socio-economic reforms. These countries also face a number of issues that have an inevitable impact on education, such as a diversity in languages, identities, cultures, and religions; varying levels of literacy, financial resources, and age; as well as uneven distribution between urban and rural locations. These issues have all led to increased demand for lifelong learning opportunities in order to improve the quality and readiness of the workforce. Significant educational reforms have taken place at all levels from pre-school to postgraduate education in recent decades. In the aim of proposing a systemic approach with regard to future education reforms, the UNESCO Cluster Office to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan (UNESCO Almaty) initiated this sub-regional study to provide a broader picture of lifelong learning, as well as evidence and policy recommendations in Central Asia. This publication draws upon the results of four country reports, as well as studies by various international organizations. It is also based on a review of education policies and practices with a lifelong learning perspective in order to provide an understanding of the current situation across different educational levels. The comparative analysis presented in this report intends to provide a systemic overview, while placing a special emphasis on Technical and Vocational Education and Training, Adult Education and Learning, and the different linkages and pathways between the different levels and sub-sectors of education. It also highlights the major challenges in achieving SDG 4, as well as best practices in building a lifelong learning system in the sub-region. It is my hope that the policy recommendations proposed in this report will contribute to providing lifelong learning opportunities for all in these four countries, as well as in the region of Central Asia as a whole.
Krista Pikkat Director of UNESCO Almaty Cluster Office and Representative of UNESCO in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan
4 5 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The UNESCO Cluster Office in Almaty for Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan gratefully acknowledges the time and effort spent by all those involved in preparing and producing the publication ‘Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations’. This sub-regional report was prepared under the overall guidance of Krista Pikkat, Director of UNESCO Almaty, with the direct supervision of Lina Benete, Education Programme Specialist, and coordination support of Meirgul Alpysbayeva, Education National Professional Officer. The report was written by Arne Carlsen, International Consultant and former Director of the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning, based on desk research and country reports. The country reports were prepared by Valentina Belosludtseva (Kazakhstan), Tatyana Tretyakova (Kyrgyzstan), Jamshed Quddusov (Tajikistan), and Nodir Rakhimov (Uzbekistan). The Erasmus+ National Office in Kazakhstan coordinated the preparation of the country reports as well as this sub-regional report. Our special thanks goes to DVV International (German Adult Education Development Coopera tion) for their cooperation in designing the research framework and reviewing the initial country findings at the 2017 DVV-UNESCO Central Asian Adult Education Forum entitled ‘Community Learning Centers: International Trends and Best Practices’, as well as their continuous guidance in the development of the report at its various stages. This work would not have been possible without the guidance of UNESCO experts who provided their inputs and participated as members of the peer review panel, namely Borhene Chakroun, Francesc Pedró, Hiromichi Katayama, Keith Holmes and Emma Rohan from UNESCO Headquarters; Raul Valdes Cotera, Rika Yorozu, Madhu Singh, Margarete Sachs-Israel, Alexandru Gaina, Rakhat Zholdoshalieva and Mo Winnie Wang from the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning; Eunsang Cho from UNESCO Bangkok; Bakhtiyor Namazov (UNESCO Tashkent); and Aisulu Sulaimanova (UNESCO Almaty). Peer reviewers from other organizations also brought valuable contributions in preparing this publication, namely Thekla Kelbert, Levan Kvatchadze, Ravshan Baratov, and Irina Razilova from DVV International in Uzbekistan, and Christine Hemschemeier from the European Training Foundation. We would like to express our gratitude for the crucial support from UNESCO Almaty colleagues, namely Gaukhar Yessentayeva, Education Programme Assistant, and Mingshun Xu, Education Programme Trainee, who provided administrative support and research assistance. This publication was edited by Aliénor Salmon, while Warren Field ensured the layout of the publication and designed the graphics.
6 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Lifelong Learning is at the heart of the Global Agenda for Sustainable Development. Adopted by the United Nations in 2015, it is made up of 17 Goals and 169 Targets, all to be achieved by 2030. Among these goals, Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 has the ambition to ‘Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.’ As the lead agency for education, UNESCO is mandated to support Member States in implementing SDG 4 through the Education 2030 Framework for Action. All four Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – are committed to achieving the SDGs by 2030, including SDG 4, and have taken several actions in this regard. With fast-paced socio-economic changes, as well as the constant need for upgrading skills and competencies for life and work, UNESCO Almaty and DVV International have taken the initiative to conduct a sub-regional study on lifelong learning within the framework of SDG 4. Given the high level of policy attention paid to pre-school, primary, and secondary education in recent years, this report has a special focus on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET), Higher Education, and Adult Education. A number of issues have been identified in terms of access, affordability and quality of these three areas of education. While most of these educational activities take place within the formal education system, individuals also acquire skills for life and work informally throughout life. This includes, for instance, informal settings and contexts such as through the family, community, and the workplace. Fundamental education reforms have taken place in Central Asia in recent years, and there is now an important need to improve the status of TVET to make it more attractive, as well as to ensure that it leads to qualifications at higher levels. These reforms have also sought to ensure that learners obtain the right qualifications in relation to labour market needs, especially in rural areas. Non-formal educational institutions not only provide community members with knowledge and practical skills, but they also organize educational, cultural, recreational, environmental, and other activities for urban and rural populations of all ages. Such institutions play a significant role in improving the quality of life for the local community based on their needs, the changing socio-economic situation, in addition to serving as a bridge to formal education. This study was developed based on an analysis of different policies and systems of lifelong learning in four Central Asian countries: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.1 This included a desk study as well as field research at country-level. Country reports were prepared to provide specific recommendations to strengthen lifelong learning in each country, and were then compiled into this sub-regional synthesis report to allow for comparative analysis. This report aims to identify priorities taking into account national, regional, and international development contexts, while also proposing monitoring and evaluation mechanisms. It also aims to provide policy recommendations that can transform education systems, so that they can better equip learners with transversal competencies,2 as well as respond to changing labour market needs. Overall, this report seeks to provide Member States with evidence and policy recommendations in order to strengthen lifelong learning in Central Asia.
1 References to ‘Central Asian countries’ throughout this report refer to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, based on their sub-regional grouping under the UNESCO Almaty Cluster Office. 2 The term ‘transversal competencies’ is used throughout this report. They are also known as non-cognitive skills, 21st century skills or soft skills. Transversal competencies include: critical and innovative thinking, inter-personal and intra-personal skills, global citizenship, media and information literacy, curiosity, initiative, perseverance, self-control, adaptability, leadership as well as social and cultural awareness.
6 7 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
This study analyzed various programmes and initiatives in relation to SDG 4 and the Education 2030 Agenda in Central Asia. It has also considered socio-economic forecasting and developments, as well as labour market and skills development for youth and adults. This sub-regional report has also built upon the four country reports to include regional and international surveys, trends, and statistical data. It recommends that Central Asian countries build upon their achievements in recent years to improve the quality of their education systems, and strive to transform them into holistic lifelong learning systems that can support sustainable socio-economic development. This requires integrating formal, non-formal and informal learning and education, with a special focus on sustainable development as outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In order to ensure the quality of a lifelong learning system, it must include transversal competencies in curricula at all levels and sectors of education, quality assurance mechanisms, competent teachers, a programme for the training of adult educators, National Qualification Frameworks (NQF) and systems for Recognition, Validation and Accreditation (RVA) of learning outcomes in non-formal and informal learning. It would also require partnerships between government, employers, and civil society organizations, in order to enhance the content of education programmes, funding mechanisms, and skills forecasts. In order for adult learners to better access all levels of the education system, improved Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) are needed to ensure distance-based education, more flexible programmes, and smooth pathways for the transition between education and work, as well as between sub- sectors of education. Inclusive and equitable access to education also requires a strategy for the inclusion of vulnerable groups, learners from rural areas, women, the elderly, and those with disabilities. The development of ‘Learning Cities’3 would also support the development of an inclusive and sustainable strategy for urban development through lifelong learning. Learning Cities promote lifelong learning for all within the framework of UNESCO’s Global Network of Learning Cities (GNLC) – an international policy-oriented network providing inspiration, know-how and best practice. Cities that join the network work to enhance individual empowerment and social inclusion, economic development, cultural prosperity, and sustainable development. At a national level, this report suggests that each of the four establish a ‘National Coordination Committee for Lifelong Learning’, with multi-stakeholder participation representing different ministries, local government, teachers, employers, employees, academia, and civil society organizations. The mandate of the Committee should be to make recommendations on developing national strategies that strengthen lifelong learning within the framework of SDG 4 targets and indicators, while also taking the other SDGs into consideration. UNESCO should play a supporting role, along with the involvement of other international organizations. At a sub-regional level, this report identifies common challenges faced by Central Asian countries. It also suggests regular sub-regional meetings for policy learning and continued cooperation . This would allow for the sharing of best practices, either at country or international level, as well as the consideration of common policy recommendations and frameworks, and potentially, a common programme for training of lifelong learning professionals.
3 UNESCO defines a learning city as a city that effectively mobilizes its resources in every sector to promote inclusive learning from basic to higher education, revitalizes learning in families and communities, facilitates learning for and in the workplace, extends the use of modern learning technologies, enhances quality and excellence in learning, and fosters a culture of learning throughout life. To learn more, see: http://uil.unesco.org/lifelong-learning/learning-cities
8 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
1 INTRODUCTION
Lifelong learning is of growing importance across the globe. The fast development of science and technology, the global value chain’s highly specialized industries and services, and increased competition have all led to changing global, regional and national labour markets, as well as their need for new and higher level skills. The demand for lifelong learning has also increased based on issues related to social cohesion and inclusion, leading to various international organizations in the field of education contributing to addressing this development. UNESCO published two landmark reports in the twentieth century – ‘Learning to Be: the world of education today and tomorrow’ in 1972 and ‘Learning: The Treasure Within’ in 1996 – that sought to anticipate the future needs of education systems. UNESCO, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU), each made significant contributions to developing lifelong learning policies in order to match socio- economic reforms in the 1990s. For instance the OECD and EU declared 1996 as the Year of Lifelong Learning, while the EU gave joint European education programmes the overarching title of ‘Lifelong Learning 2007–13’. The Asia-Europe Meeting of Ministers for Education (ASEM) have also been meeting regularly since 2008 and have chosen lifelong learning as one of their four joint education policy priorities. Since 2015, their work has increasingly focused on the SDGs and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The ASEM Education and Research Hub for Lifelong Learning was established in 2005 and organizes comparative research between Asian and European universities in five research networks dedicated to the following topics: 1) Development of ICT skills, 2) E-learning and the culture of e-learning in lifelong learning, 3) Workplace learning, 4) Professionalization of adult teachers and educators in ASEM countries, 4) National strategies for lifelong learning with regard to citizens’ motivation and barriers to continuous education and training, and 5) Lifelong learning core competencies (ASEM, 2018). The UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL) enlarged its focus from adult education to include lifelong learning in 2006. Its activities have since taken a new direction towards lifelong learning governance in the form of UNESCO’s Global Network of Learning Cities, inter-sectoral relationships between Adult Learning and Education (ALE) and health and well-being, as well as NQF and RVA for learning outcomes of non-formal and informal learning. UIL’s journal entitled ‘International Review of Education’ took the sub-title of Journal of Lifelong Learning in 2013 and opened up new research areas such as learning cities, measurement of lifelong learning, and inclusive education. In 2016 the journal also adopted a profile of lifelong learning within the framework of the SDGs. In 2013, the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) established the SEAMEO Regional Centre for Lifelong Learning, and in 2018 published a report with UIL on lifelong learning development in 11 South-East Asian countries. In 2019, the International Labour Organization (ILO) launched the report ‘Work for a brighter future’, which was developed by their Global Commission on the future of work. They state that their ‘approach goes beyond human capital to the broader dimensions of development and progress in living standards, including the rights and enabling environment that widen people’s opportunities and improve their well-being’ (ILO, 2019).
8 9 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
Their first new proposal is: a universal entitlement to lifelong learning that enables people to acquire skills and to reskill and upskill. Lifelong learning encompasses formal and informal learning from early childhood and basic education through to adult learning. Governments, workers and employers, as well as educational institutions, have complementary responsibilities in building an effective and appropriately financed lifelong learning ecosystem (Ibid).
Many cities around the world organize annual lifelong learning festivals, lifelong learning weeks or adult learners’ week in order to inform citizens about lifelong learning opportunities. This includes cities in China, Ireland, Republic of Korea, and Slovenia, among others. Some countries have also opened up flexible accreditation systems like the Academic Credit Bank System (ACBS), which is an open educational system that recognizes diverse learning experiences gained not only in-school but also out-of-school. When the learner accumulates the necessary ACBS-approved credits, they can be awarded with a degree. The success of the Open University in the United Kingdom for instance, also provides opportunities for flexible learning, and as with distance education in general, is also testimony to the demand for lifelong learning at the global level.
1.1 Global Context: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
Among the 17 SDGs adopted in 2015 by the United Nations General Assembly, SDG 4 called upon all countries to ‘ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.’ As the lead agency for education, UNESCO was mandated to support Member States in reaching the ten targets of SDG 4. Together with partners and Member States, UNESCO developed the Education 2030 Framework for Action – the implementation plan providing indicative strategies for each target of SDG 4. With its vision to ‘transform lives through education’, SDG 4 recognizes the crucial role of education, not only as a main driver of development, but also in achieving the other SDGs (UNESCO, 2015). As UNESCO Member States, countries in Central Asia are committed to achieving all 17 SDGs and their 169 targets by 2030.4 Within the education sector in particular, countries are working to reach SDG 4 and its 10 targets (Table 1) by focusing their efforts on access, equity, and inclusion, as well as quality and learning outcomes by using a lifelong learning approach.
4 For more information about the SDGs, see: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
10 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
Table 1: Sustainable Development Goal 4 Targets SDG 4: Targets and indicators
Target 4.1 Target 4.7 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire complete free, equitable and quality the knowledge and skills needed to primary and secondary education promote sustainable development, leading to relevant and effective including, among others, through learning outcomes. education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, Target 4.2 gender equality, promotion of a culture By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys of peace and non-violence, global have access to quality early childhood citizenship and appreciation of cultural development, care and pre-primary diversity and of culture’s contribution to education so that they are ready for sustainable development. primary education. Target 4.а Target 4.3 Build and upgrade education facilities By 2030, ensure equal access for all that are child, disability and gender women and men to affordable and sensitive and provide safe, non- quality technical, vocational and tertiary violent, inclusive and effective learning education, including university. environments for all. Target 4.4 Target 4.b By 2030, substantially increase the By 2020, substantially expand globally number of youth and adults who have the number of scholarships available relevant skills, including technical and to developing countries, in particular vocational skills, for employment, decent least developed countries, small jobs and entrepreneurship. island developing States and African countries, for enrolment in higher Target 4.5 education, including vocational training By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in and information and communications education and ensure equal access to all technology, technical, engineering and levels of education and vocational training scientific programmes, in developed for the vulnerable, including persons countries and other developing countries. with disabilities, indigenous peoples and children in vulnerable situations. Target 4.c By 2030, substantially increase the Target 4.6 supply of qualified teachers, including By 2030, ensure that all youth and a through international cooperation for substantial proportion of adults, both teacher training in developing countries, men and women, achieve literacy especially least developed countries and and numeracy. small island developing States.
Source: adapted from UNESCO (2015)
Following several rounds of global consultations with UN Member States and a range of relevant organizations, a list of 11 global indicators to measure SDG 4 was formally adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2017. As shown in Table 2, SDG 4 indicators are markers of change or continuity, which enable countries to monitor their progress in relation to each specific target (UIS, 2018). Lack of data, limited use of existing data, and a lack of adequate monitoring procedures are acute problems in Central Asia. It is therefore hoped that this set of indicators may provide an opportunity for countries to develop new methodologies, definitions, and calculation methods for national data systems.
10 11 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
Table 2. SDG 4 Global Indicators
INDICATOR
Preparation of children and young people in (a) Grade 2 or 3; (b) at the 4.1.1 end of primary education; and (c) at the end of lower secondary education achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in (i) mathematics, by sex
Proportion of children under 5 years of age who are developmentally 4.2.1 on track in health, learning and psychosocial well-being, by sex
Participation rate in organized learning (one year before the official primary 4.2.2 entry age), by sex
Participation rate of youth and adults in formal and non-formal education 4.3.1 and training in the previous 12 months, by sex
Proportion of youth and adults with information and communications 4.4.1 technology skills, by type and sex
Parity indices (female/male, rural/urban, bottom/top wealth quintile and 4.5.1 others such as disability status, indigenous peoples and conflict-affected, as data become available) for all education indicators on this list.
Proportion of population in given age group achieving at least a fixed level 4.6.1 of proficiency in functional (a) literacy (b) numeracy skills, by sex
Extent to which (i) global citizenship education and (ii) education or sustainable development, including gender equality and human rights are 4.7.1 mainstreamed at all levels in: (a) national education policies, (b) curricula, (c) teacher education, (d) student assessment.
Proportion of schools with access to: (a) electricity; (b) the internet for pedagogical purposes; (c) computers for pedagogical purposes; (c) adapted 4.a.1 infrastructure and materials for students with disabilities; (e) basic drinking water; (f) single-sex basic sanitation facilities; and (g) basic handwashing facilities (as per the WASH indicator definitions)
Volume of official development assistance flows for scholarships 4.b.1 by sector and type of study
Proportion of teachers in: (a) pre-primary education; (b) primary education; (c) lower secondary education; and (d) upper secondary education who have 4.c.1 received at least the minimum organized teacher training (e.g. pedagogical training) pre-service or in-service required for teaching at the relevant level in a given country, by sex.
Source: adapted from UIS (2018) p.19
12 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
1.2 Conceptual Understanding of Lifelong Learning The 1990s witnessed a shift from ‘lifelong education’ to the ‘lifelong learning’ concept, which implies a broader ‘lifelong and life-wide’ approach rather than merely an extension of education in time that is confined to a sequence of schooling and formal education. The concept of lifelong learning is characterized by its flexibility, diversity, universality and dynamism. It therefore requires alternative arrangements for acquiring learning and a variety of learning styles, modalities, and techniques to suit the varying needs and interests of individuals at different points in time (Carlsen and Haddad, 2013). UNESCO’s definition of lifelong learning is based on a humanistic approach that focuses on human rights and dignity, and in particular, the right to education for personal development and fulfilment, and a socio-economic approach emphasizing the needs of our knowledge society and human capital development. Globally, lifelong learning is increasingly seen as adaptation to economic and technological changes, empowerment of individuals in social structures, and as a continuous ‘process of forming whole human beings – their knowledge and aptitudes, as well as the critical faculty and the ability to act’ (Delors et al., 1996). The relevance of lifelong learning is further recognized in today’s increasingly interconnected and fast-changing world. Exponential growth in, and the changing nature of, information in the digital age signal the need for learners to develop transversal competencies that are required for knowledge-based economies. Demographic shifts and increased mobility, as well as the growing concern for unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, are also underlining the relevance of lifelong learning as the conceptual framework and organizing principle of all forms of education in the twenty-first century (Yang and Valdés-Cotera, 2011; Carlsen and Haddad, 2013). UNESCO defines lifelong learning as: rooted in the integration of learning and living, covering learning activities for people of all ages (children, young people, adults and the elderly, girls and boys, women and men) in all life-wide contexts (family, school, community, workplace and so on) and through a variety of modalities (formal, non- formal and informal) which together meet a wide range of learning needs and demands (UIL, 2013).
Lifelong learning should enable people to develop an awareness of themselves and their environment, and encourage them to fulfil their social role at work and in the community. Therefore, education systems that promote lifelong learning should adopt a holistic and sector-wide approach involving all sub-sectors and levels to ensure the provision of learning opportunities throughout life for all individuals. Though lifelong learning is not a new idea when it comes to sustainability and development, it has now become a key strategy to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century (English and Carlsen, 2019).
1.3 Aims and Target Audiences of the Sub-regional Report Building on the results of the Education for All (EFA) era, as well as ongoing attempts and commitment of Central Asian governments in achieving SDG 4, UNESCO Almaty, in cooperation with DVV International, took the initiative to conduct national studies on lifelong learning policies and practices in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. These country reports have served as the basis for the preparation of this sub-regional report. The aim of this report is to provide evidence and policy recommendations for strengthening and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for these four Central Asian countries.
12 13 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
It therefore provides a cross-country comparative analysis of current lifelong learning policies and practices, and proposes policy recommendations for achieving SDG 4 and all of the SDGs in general. Although the report adopts a whole-system approach, within its limited scope it mainly focuses on providing evidence and policy recommendations to build a lifelong learning system in terms of the following areas: 1) Access and provision of education at different levels and sub-sectors, with a special emphasis on TVET and ALE, 2) Quality enhancement for adult teacher training, gender equality, NQFs, RVA learning outcomes in non-formal and informal learning, as well as transitions to the labour market, 3) Financing, and 4) Governance. The priorities and recommendations for further development that are proposed in this report were developed in response to the socio-economic realities of Central Asian countries, as well as their national development visions and strategies regarding education and lifelong learning. The key reasons for the emphasis on TVET, tertiary education and ALE are twofold. First, these three sub-sectors affect a large proportion of the youth and adult population of working age in these four countries. Second, the Education 2030 Framework for Action states that:
TVET and tertiary education, including universities as well as adult learning, education and training, are important elements of lifelong learning. Promoting lifelong learning requires a sector-wide approach that encompasses formal, non-formal and informal learning for people of all ages, and specifically adult learning, education and training opportunities. It is necessary to provide opportunities for equitable access to university for older adults, paying particular attention to vulnerable groups (UNESCO, 2015).
This sub-regional synthesis report is therefore intended for national education policy-makers, practitioners, and international development partners who work on the development, implementation, and evaluation of lifelong learning policies and practices in Central Asia. More specifically, the target audience includes ministerial officials, representatives of public authorities responsible for lifelong learning, quality assurance agencies and other bodies with a public mandate. It also includes donors and sponsors, leaders of educational establishments, adult educators and teachers, researchers, private education providers and stakeholder organizations, such as those representing learners, civil society, and employers. This report was built upon the country reports, which provided statistical data for each of the countries. Given limitations in data collection and quality in Central Asia, its validity cannot be verified and it should therefore be seen as indicative to provide an overall picture. In order to strengthen this analysis, this report also benefits from extensive policy reviews, published data from sources such as the OECD, European Training Foundation (ETF), UIS, UIL, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the World Bank, and the European Commission, in addition to hands-on experiences and evidence-based analysis by the author. With regard to the research methodology used, aside from secondary data obtained from desk research, the country reports included first-hand data from surveys and semi-structured interviews conducted with relevant ministries and other government organizations, universities, research centres, institutes, TVET colleges, Community Learning Centres (CLCs), education partners, teachers and learners. The interviews were conducted in local languages and the sample was selected by UNESCO Almaty, DVV International and the national consultant teams. However, this sub-regional report incorporates additional published sources and presents meaningful comparative analyses where reliable data is available.
14 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
2 CONTEXT OF LIFELONG LEARNING IN CENTRAL ASIA
2.1 Impact of the Socio-economic and Political Context on Lifelong Learning The four Central Asian countries examined in this report – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – have each followed different but also partly similar trajectories, especially when it comes to political and economic transformation since achieving independence from the former Soviet Union in 1991. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan began market-oriented reforms shortly after their independence, while Tajikistan began similar reforms only after the end of its civil war (1992–1997), and Uzbekistan resisted market transformation to retain many instruments of a command economy for much longer (Batsaikhan and Dabrowski, 2017). Overall, the major common challenge for these countries is the economic liberalization and adoption of a broad spectrum of socio-economic and political reforms. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, many industries in Central Asia lost their previous trade relations and markets. These four economies excessively depend on exports of natural resources, such as oil, natural gas, aluminium, and gold. With the exception of Kazakhstan, the other three countries also rely heavily on remittances from migrant workers. For example, personal remittances accounted for 33 per cent of Kyrgyzstan’s GDP in 2017 (ADB, 2018), and 27 per cent of Tajikistan’s GDP in 2016 (OECD, 2018). During the recent decades of transition, the annual GDP increased by 5–8 per cent on average among the four countries (Belosludtseva, 2018; Quddusov, 2018; Rakhimov, 2018; Tretyakova, 2018). However, this growth was driven by lending capital invested in infrastructure projects, rather than by technological change and higher labour productivity. Having experienced the sharp decline of commodity prices in 2014, as well as falling remittance inflows and rising annual inflation, the four countries launched various structural transformation and industrial modernization programmes for economic diversification, private sector development, and job creation. For instance, in Kazakhstan, in addition to the traditional agriculture export such as cotton, grain and livestock, the government has also attempted to diversify its economy by targeting sectors such as transport and logistics services, pharmaceuticals, telecommunications, petrochemicals, and food processing (Anderson et al., 2018). Similarly, in Kyrgyzstan trade, finance, transport, communications, hospitality and health care sectors have all created more jobs. Tajikistan has also identified high-potential sectors including agro-food processing, textile and garments, mining and quarrying, and animal farming to diversify its export products (ADB, 2016). Uzbekistan focuses more on development of the home appliances manufacturing industry and the export of fresh fruits and vegetables, while reducing raw cotton exports and increasing cotton fibre processing to develop its textile industry (OECD, 2017). Consequently, structural reforms have changed the demands of the labour market, which has led to a shortage of qualified workforce in all four countries. Such political and economic reforms have had a profound impact not only for legal institutions, but they have also raised expectations for education systems and human resources to ensure a workforce with relevant new skills. In other words, these reforms have increased the demand for and supply of lifelong learning for improving the responsiveness and quality of the workforce in these countries.
14 15 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
Other factors that also influence lifelong learning policies and practices include languages, identities, cultures, religions, literacy, financial resources, age structure and geographical locations (urban, rural) as depicted in Table 3. The four Central Asian countries under study have a mix of indigenous and imported cultures as well as identities – a consequence of their collective and individual histories. While the Uzbek, Kyrgyz and Kazakh languages belong to the Turkic language family, Tajik belongs to the Persian language family. Nonetheless, Russian continues to play the role of regional lingua franca, especially in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Language policies in Central Asia should therefore be part of lifelong learning policies concerning equal and inclusive opportunities for all. Although the four economies have been growing relatively fast, urban-rural disparities persist in terms of learning opportunities, employment and economic prosperity, which poses significant challenges in terms of equal opportunities and social cohesion. Furthermore, the large proportion of youth and people of working age (see Table 3) implies that there is a high demand for initial education as well as for ALE. The main accomplishments of Central Asian education systems have been near universal enrolment at primary and secondary levels as well as literacy. Their main weakness and inherited challenge, however, has been the inflexibility of the education system, as well as its inability and limited resources in adapting to the diverse needs of learners and rapid changes in education and learning. In brief, the four countries have adopted a pragmatic approach to modernization that prioritizes the development and liberalization of the economy and the improvement of the social sector. In this context, lifelong learning is less about leisure time activities for post-retirement populations as it may be in China, the Republic of Korea, and other aging societies. Instead, it can be seen as an effective way to enhance the skills and productivity of the workforce to build a cohesive and equal society that can achieve more stable and inclusive economic growth.
Table 3. Key Socio-economic Facts and Figures
Literacy GDP per Age Official Languages level (popu Population Major Ethnic Religions capita Countries Structure (*) and widely used lation over (***) Groups (*) (*) (USD, 2017, (***) languages 15 years old) WB) (**) in 2015 (*)
18 million 22% (1-14) Kazakh 63%, Kazakh (official) 74% Muslim 70%, 9,030 99.8% Urban: 58% 71% (15-65) Russian 24%, Uzbek 2.9% and Russian (official) 95% Christian 26% Kazakhstan Rural: 42% 7% (over 65) Ukrainian 2.1%, (2017) (2016) Others 8% 6.1 million *30% (0-14) Kyrgyz 73%, Kyrgyz (official) 71.4%, Muslim 75%, 1,220 99.5% Urban: 34% 64% (15-65) Uzbek 15% Russian (official) 9%, Christian 20% Kyrgyzstan Rural: 66% *6% (over 65) Russian 6%, Uzbek 14.4% (2017) (2018) Others 6% 8.9 million 60% (0-25 ) Tajik 84%, Tajik (official) 84%, Muslim 97%, 801 99.8% Tajikistan Urban: 27% (2018) Uzbek 12% Uzbek 12% Christian 1.6% Rural: 73% Others 4% (2018) 32.7 million 30% (0-15) Uzbek 84%, Tajik 5%, Uzbek (official) 74% Muslim 88%, 1,534 100% Urban: 51% 61% (16-59) Kazakh 2.5%, Russian 14% Christian 9% Uzbekistan Rural: 49% 9% (over 60) Russian 2.3% (2018) (2018) other 6.2%
Source: Arne Carlsen, based on *CIA (2019), **World Bank (2019a), *** Belosludtseva (2018), Quddusov (2018), Rakhimov (2018), Tretyakova (2018).
16 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
2.2 Transforming Education Systems into Lifelong Learning Systems All four Central Asian countries have undertaken important educational reforms from pre-school to postgraduate levels in the past decades. However, these reforms have taken place at separate levels and sub-sectors of education rather than establishing a holistic lifelong learning approach. Such an approach would encourage learning, and recognize learning outcomes in the form of increased knowledge, skills, and attitudes attained from inside and outside the formal education system. In order to meet SDG 4 targets by 2030, Central Asian countries need to revisit their education policies and redesign their current practices with a view to developing lifelong learning systems. All four countries have similar education systems which consist of the following levels: 1. Pre-school education (2–3 years), 2. General primary and lower secondary education (9 years), 3. General vocational and technical upper secondary education (2–4 years), 4. Tertiary education: Bachelor’s degree or post-secondary professional diplomas (3–4 years), and 5. Post-graduate education: specialist diploma, candidate of science, Master and Doctoral degrees (1–5 years). In order to better understand the structure of these four education systems, Kazakhstan’s system is illustrated in Figure 1 as an example bearing resemblance to the other countries.5
Figure 1. Kazakhstan: Structure of the Education System
AGE POSTGRADUATE EDUCATION
Doctoral courses: research Universities, academies, scienti c and research institutions (3-year courses)
Postgraduate courses Universities, academies, scienti c and research institutions (3-year courses)
HIGHER EDUCATION
Master’s degree Universities, academies (2-year programmes)
Bachelor’s degree Diploma of specialist Universities, academies (4-year programmes) Universities, academies, institutes (4/5-year programmes)
Secondary special education Colleges (2/3-year courses)
17-18 SECONDAR CO PLETE EDUCATION
Comprehensive Vocational Comprehensive schools, lycea, gymnasia Vocational schools, vocational lycea, 10,11, (12) forms higher vocational gymnasia (2/3-year courses) 15-16
Basic comprehensive
Comprehensive schools, gymnasia, basic schools (Grades 5–9) 10-11
10-11 Primary comprehensive
Comprehensive schools, elementary schools (Grades 1–4) 6-7
6-7 Pre-school education Kindergartens, crèches (day nurseries)
Source: adapted from UNESCO (2011).
5 For an analysis of Kazakhstan’s education system taking into account recent reforms, please see: https://www.nuffic.nl/en/publications/education-system-kazakhstan/
16 17 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
All four countries offer 11 years of general school education (4+5+2) which is one year shorter than many other countries in the world (OECD and World Bank, 2015). Uzbekistan offers free and compulsory school education for 11 years, whereas the other three countries provide for only 9 years. Between 1998 and 2017, Uzbekistan offered 12 years of compulsory school education. From 2017 however, the country changed back to 11 years of compulsory school education (4+5+2). The majority of students in Grades 10 and 11 have one day per week of vocational education, where they focus on a specific profession within a college attached to that particular industry. The minority of students who aim at entering university usually move to an academic lyceum for Grades 10 and 11 (UNESCO, 2018). The duration of free education offered, and the type of school (vocational or academic), can influence access to higher levels of education as well as cause unequal opportunities in terms of lifelong learning in adulthood. Recently, Kazakhstan has been extending its schooling system from 11 to 12 years in pilot projects, and this extension is scheduled to be implemented nationwide from 2020 (OECD and World Bank, 2015). However, most schools still offer an 11-year curriculum. Currently, only a small number of ‘experimental’ schools offer a 12-year curriculum (5+5+2), such as the Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (NIS), which were set up in 2010. Tajikistan has also made ambitious plans to change to a 12-year schooling system in its National Strategy for Education Development 2020. The strategy foresees significant changes in the education curriculum starting from pre-school to upper secondary education. NIS are a relatively new phenomenon in Kazakhstan, and are currently made up of a network of 20 schools targeting ‘gifted’ pupils where admission is extremely competitive. There is at least one NIS per region, and two in larger cities such as Almaty, Nur-Sultan, and Shymkent. These schools piloted a 12-year curriculum in Kazakh, Russian, and English to approximately 15,000 pupils in 2018 alone, out of the national total of over 2 million. NIS are well-equipped schools that are funded by the government and provide almost all pupils with a full scholarship (NIS, 2018; Nuffic, 2018). In contrast, the small-class schools (ungraded classrooms) in remote areas receive far less resources. Approximately 50 per cent of all public schools in Kazakhstan are considered small-class schools and account for 11 per cent of the total student population. In some regions the vast majority of schools are small-class, notably in North Kazakhstan (86 per cent), Akmola (81 per cent), Kostanay (76 per cent) and West Kazakhstan (74 per cent). Small-class schools are confronted with particular challenges, such as very small class-sizes, poor infrastructure (especially poor heating in the winter), lower quality teachers and staff shortages, which has resulted in a lower quality of education (OECD and World Bank, 2015). Recent policy efforts by the Ministry of Education and Science have focused on establishing resource centres to enhance the capacity of these small schools and support alternative boarding facilities and transportation services for pupils. The three other countries face similar challenges with regard to small schools in rural areas, though to a lesser extent. Such educational experiences have negative consequences for school attainment and for the potential lifelong learning of children in these disadvantaged schools. Policy Recommendations: NIS schools are designed to serve as an innovative model for future school reforms, and can be seen as an example of enhancing the quality of school education. However, they receive more funding than other schools in the country, which may contribute to widening the gap between levels of resources, and thus, pupil achievement across the country – as shown in PISA 2012 and in the 2013 Unified National Test results (OECD and World Bank, 2015). Therefore, investing in selected schools should be avoided, as it does not benefit the majority of pupils. Evidence from many countries show that investing as early as possible
18 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
in high quality basic education for all, particularly in supporting pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, yields higher returns because early cognitive development makes it easier to acquire skills and knowledge later in life, as well as to engage in lifelong learning in adulthood. Furthermore, providing equal opportunities for all individuals to gain the foundational skills necessary to prosper at later educational stages is particularly important in an economy that is in transition. It is especially important when there is a relatively small workforce in order to sustain more stable and inclusive growth. This is the case in most Central Asian countries due to the large number of children and early retirement age in the sub-region. The labour participation rate stands at 71 per cent in Kazakhstan, 61 per cent in Kyrgyzstan, 44 per cent in Tajikistan, and 65 per cent in Uzbekistan.6 When it comes to higher education (tertiary and postgraduate education), Kazakhstan is the only Central Asian country that became a member of the Bologna Process in 2010. The three other countries have undergone significant reforms in their higher education structures over the last decades that align them closely with the Bologna model of three cycles (Bachelor, Master, and Doctorate). Such Bologna-inspired reforms serve as a means of modernizing their higher education sector and creating the Central Asian Higher Education Area, which is modelled after the European Higher Education Area. The reforms in all four countries have mainly followed a top-down approach and Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) still have rather limited autonomy in important matters, such as designing new courses or managing their own finances. This situation therefore hinders the responsiveness of HEIs to labour market and other social demands, while also limiting the educational offerings to young and older learners. One of the significant reforms in all four countries is the introduction of Unified National Tests (mainly based on multiple choice questions) at Grade 9 and Grade 11 (and for university entrance in the case for Uzbekistan). At the end of Grade 9, the test intends to certify the graduation of general secondary education, and at the end of Grade 11 it intends to determine entrance to higher education and access to state education grants. The national tests are administered by the National Testing Centres under the auspices of the President of Tajikistan, the Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan, and the Cabinet of Ministers in Uzbekistan respectively. In Kyrgyzstan, however, the national tests (ORT) are conducted by the independent Centre for Educational Assessment and Teaching Methods, which was founded with USAID support (ADB, 2015; EACEA, 2017b, 2017d, 2017c, 2017a). Generally, such centralized tests were aimed at enhancing the quality of merit-based and transparent results, radically improving fairness of access to higher education and limiting widespread corrupt practices. However, the unified test can limit the opportunities of many learners by posing challenges and barriers for progression and pathways between different levels. Therefore, if Central Asia is to promote lifelong learning and inclusive development, an alternative or parallel policy option should be in place in order to create opportunities and flexible pathways for learners. Centralized tests, however, have caused the phenomenon of ‘shadow education’ and supplementary private tutoring paid for by families. The increase in private tutoring is mainly due to the following key reasons: a) mismatch between centralized tests and the school curricula, b) family’s capacity to increase private spending on education, c) shifting status of the teaching profession and underpaid jobs in the formal system, d) changing quality of education in mainstream schools, and e) increasing demand for higher education. On
6 For an overview of the labour participation rate per country, see: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZS
18 19 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
the one hand, private tutoring has been perceived as a more efficient, flexible, and prompt response to students’ needs. This social phenomenon, however, has also had a number of negative consequences, such as increasing social inequities, distorting curricula, inviting corruption, and depriving the state of tax revenues (Silova, 2010). In the TVET sector, the economic and demographic challenges in all four countries have highlighted the role of vocational education and training, but their TVET systems have developed differently. In Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan for instance, there are two levels of TVET (known as initial or primary TVET, and secondary TVET) which correspond to different qualification levels. There are two possible entry points to TVET: after Grade 9 and after Grade 11 (see Figure 1). In terms of financial support, only some students benefit from state grants in these three countries, and the majority have to pay for their own studies. In Uzbekistan, after Grade 9 pupils enter either into an academic lyceum or a professional college, with the majority (over 90 per cent) of pupils oriented towards TVET (UNESCO, 2018). All students in TVET are funded by the state as part of the compulsory education system. These two distinct approaches have led to varying levels of enrolment in TVET at upper secondary level among the four countries. Enrolment rates range from 93 per cent (2015) in Uzbekistan, to 41 per cent (2015) in Kazakhstan, 37 per cent (2014) in Kyrgyzstan, and 6.4 per cent (2013) in Tajikistan (ETF, 2017). Consequently, the number of TVET providers varies significantly across these four countries. With regard to governance, the TVET sector and its sub-levels are also managed by different ministries in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, while in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, only the Ministry of Education is responsible for TVET. From 2012 onwards, all four countries set up new bodies, such as skills or business councils at national, sub-national and sectoral levels, and are currently in the process of building up the capacity of these new organizations to improve links with employers and the private sector in particular. Since 2010, they have participated in the Torino Process supported by ETF to improve TVET policies through evidence-based assessment of progress, cross-country peer learning, common understanding of medium-term vision, priorities and strategy for an impact-oriented TVET sector. Across all four countries, the linkages between different levels of the education system are mainly linear and confined to formal testing, while TVET policies continue to focus on youth and first-time learners (16–24 year-olds). Furthermore, the quality of adult education has been largely neglected, even though these countries have had active labour market measures and training initiatives for the unemployed in place for at least the last 10 years. Having recognized this situation, recently these Central Asian countries have made efforts and progress in developing adult education, such as the adoption of the law on Adult Education in October 2016 in Tajikistan. With support from various international development agencies such as UNESCO, ETF, DVV International, ADB, and the World Bank, adult education is now high on the reform agenda. Policy Recommendations: In order to develop a lifelong learning system, it is necessary to a) create multiple and flexible pathways between all levels to widen access, b) redesign teaching and learning processes where learners are at the centre and develop curricula with a learning outcome approach, c) institutionalize adult education and recognize it as part of the lifelong learning system, and improve the coordination between different governing bodies and providers of adult education.
20 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
2.3 Key Drivers for the Development of Lifelong Learning The economies of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan rely overwhelmingly on commodity exports or on remittances – making communities vulnerable to external changes. Economic restructuring and diversification, as well as job creation, are key strategies for development. One of the pressing issues in all four countries is the shortage of a skilled workforce to cope with the changing demands of the market-oriented economies and technological advancement. While the official unemployment rate is relatively low, many people work in low-paid jobs, as well as in informal and insecure businesses. Many face high risks of falling into poverty and exclusion. The governments of Central Asian countries are also aware of the crucial role of human capital in attracting Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) for the economic development. Multi-National Enterprises (MNEs) seek quality labour force equipped with knowledge, skills, and work ethics. It was evident in the World Bank’s large-scale study in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan in 2013 that employers need more workers with transversal competencies. This is because these competencies matter for labour market outcomes – whether in terms of employability, productivity, and job satisfaction (World Bank, 2013; GIZ and World Bank, 2017). Further studies supported by ADB in 2014 and by ILO in 2015 were conducted in Tajikistan in order to assess the needs for specialist knowledge and competencies in energy (oil and gas), as well as construction and manufacturing industries. The results of these studies highlighted the shortage of professional skills and knowledge to handle new technologies, tools and materials. Employers also reported a lack of transversal competencies, such as learning to learn, the ability to understand documents and write clearly, teamwork, greater aspiration for professional development, a sense of initiative, as well as the ability to interpret and use text, numbers, and tables (World Bank, 2013; Quddusov, 2018). In March 2016, the World Bank launched a 5-year project entitled ‘Kazakhstan Skills and Jobs’ aimed at improving employment outcomes and skills of people in Kazakhstan and increase the relevance of TVET and higher education programmes under the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection of the Population (World Bank, 2019a). In an era of globalization and competition, Central Asia can no longer rely on cheap labour in order to gain competitiveness. Given their geographical disadvantage as landlocked countries, the key to improving competitiveness in Central Asian economies lies in enhancing their human resource capabilities by making appropriate investments in education and professional training for their people. In other words, to increase and create better lifelong learning opportunities for adults so that they can update their knowledge and skills as well as expand their capabilities. The formation of skills and capabilities occurs throughout the life cycle, and although adult learning is the longest part of working life, it has been largely neglected. The term ‘adult education’ has been largely absent in legislative documents, and has only started to appear in policies recently as a result of inputs from international development partner organizations. The term ‘continuous professional education’ was used, which only covers some of the elements of the term ‘adult education’. Noticeable progress has been made in legislation on adult education in some countries. For instance, in October 2016, the law ‘On Adult Education’ was adopted in Tajikistan, which recognized, validated, and promoted informal, non-formal and self-education, as well as the science of andragogy.7 However, more work needs to be done in order to implement this law, such as raising awareness among
7 Andragogy refers to the profession of teaching and training adult educators.
20 21 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
authorities about adult education and lifelong learning, defining validation processes and procedures, setting standards for the andragogical profession of ‘adult education teachers’, and creating a system to collect and use statistics. The validation procedures developed by the Ministry of Labour, Migration and Employment of the Population were approved by the Government of Tajikistan in December 2017. Given Central Asia’s ethnic diversity, there have been tensions between some ethnic groups. Social cohesion is crucial in providing a structure for collective life, as well as creating a sense of responsibility for peacebuilding and community development among individuals. The Tajik civil war in the 1990s, ethnic riots in Osh (Kyrgyzstan) in 1990 and 2010, the popular uprising in Andizhan (Uzbekistan) in 2005, and two revolutions in Kyrgyzstan in 2005 and 2010 – have all engendered the need for community-based lifelong learning. This would contribute to creating convergence across different groups in society as well as to developing a community of shared values, challenges and equal opportunities (Esenaliev et al., 2016). Overall, the key drivers for lifelong learning in Central Asia are to improve skills among the workforce, boost economic development, and build peace and social cohesion. Lifelong learning contributes to all the SDGs, and at an individual level, numerous international studies such as the UIL Global Report on Adult Learning and Education have shown evidence of the wider benefits of adult and lifelong learning for health and well-being, the quality of social and cultural life, positive attitudes and behaviours, as well as crime reduction (UIL, 2016).
22 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
3 CURRENT POLICIES AND PRACTICES FROM A LIFELONG LEARNING PERSPECTIVE
3.1 Capacity of Education Systems This chapter aims to review education policies and practices from a lifelong learning perspective as well as to provide a broader picture of the current situation at all levels of education from pre-school to higher education in Central Asian countries. While this comparative analysis gives a systemic overview, it will place emphasis on TVET, higher education, and adult education, as well as the pathways and linkages between different levels and sub-sectors of education. It highlights good practices and major challenges in achieving SDG 4, while also focussing on the capacity to build lifelong learning systems in Central Asian countries.
3.2 Pre-school Education The provision of pre-school education varies widely across the four countries in Central Asia. Pre-school education is neither free nor adequately available in the sub-region – characterized by low enrolment, uncertain quality, and unevenly distributed resources across regions. Although there has been a fast increase of pre-school provision through Private- Public Partnerships (PPPs) in all four countries in recent years, there is still a gap in access to pre-school education between urban and rural areas. Tajikistan has the lowest level of enrolment (Table 4) as most of the population lives in rural areas (73 per cent). In comparison to other Central Asian countries, Kazakhstan has a higher level of enrolment. It is also the first country that has made the final year of pre-school education (equivalent to age 6) compulsory in order to address low levels of enrolment among those that are 3–5 years old in pre-school education. Kyrgyzstan has also introduced a 480-hour pre-school preparation programme for almost 100 per cent of children aged 5.5–7 years old who did not previously attend any pre- school education. Uzbekistan has piloted projects to introduce a free year of pre-school education in schools. These projects all aim to include children who are not enrolled in pre-school education.
Table 4. Pre-school Education Enrolment (2018)
Enrolment Kazakhstan * Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan Uzbekistan**
3–6 year-olds 95.2% n/a 12% 29%
3–5 year-olds n/a 21% n/a n/a
Source: Arne Carlsen, based on Belosludtseva (2018), Quddusov (2018), Rakhimov (2018), Tretyakova (2018), * IAC. 2018, ** Government of Uzbekistan (2018).
22 23 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
Challenges to achieving SDG 4 Targets 4.2 and 4.5 Low levels of enrolment in pre-school education in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan may have the following negative implications: a. Lack of readiness for primary education due to poor preparation, b. Continued urban/rural divide in school performance, which will continue to increase at primary and secondary school levels, and c. Increased gender inequality as child care duties limit opportunities for women to participate in the labour market and in adult learning.
3.3 Primary and Secondary Education In Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan, compulsory school education consists of 9 years. At the end of Grade 9, pupils can then continue to upper secondary education either in general or vocational schools, or enter the labour market. From 1998 to 2017, Uzbekistan increased compulsory education to 12 years, which indicated the government’s desire to invest in the provision of both general and vocational upper secondary education. However, from 2017 Uzbekistan reduced compulsory school education to 11 years. The last two years of compulsory education (Grades 10–11) are provided in two types of upper secondary school based on performance. The top 10 per cent of Grade 9 graduates attend academic lyceums, while the remaining pupils attend vocational or professional schools for the remaining pupils (UNESCO, 2018).
School education in Central Asia is provided mostly by state schools as well as some private schools. While public school education is still predominant throughout the sub-region, private schools are mainly concentrated in large cities and are less common in rural regions. Both public and private educational organizations must undergo the procedure of state licensing in order to offer educational programmes. The classical education attainment pyramid often shows decreasing participation in formal education at higher levels. This is also the case in Central Asia, where access to formal education generally decreases as the level goes up. The challenge is to create more learning opportunities, as well as multiple and flexible pathways between different levels and types of education. This will increase the participation and attainment rate at higher levels in the long term. Table 5 presents the gross enrolment rate by country at different levels of education.
Table 5. Gross Enrolment Rate at Different Education Levels in Central Asia
% School-leavers Gross enrolment rate Grade 10–11 Vocational upper Grade 1–9 entering higher (academic lyceums) secondary education Country education (2017) Kazakhstan 106%**** (2016) n/a **41% (2015) *50% Kyrgyzstan 98.4% (2014) 53.4% **37% (2014) *44% Tajikistan 99% (2017) n/a **6.4% (2013) *31% Uzbekistan ***97% (2016) ***10% (2018) ***90% (2018) *9%
Source: Arne Carlsen, based on Belosludtseva (2018), Quddusov (2018), Rakhimov (2018), Tretyakova (2018), *UIS (2019), **ETF (2017). Notes: ***Government of Uzbekistan (2018), **** Gross enrolment includes students of all ages. In other words, it includes students whose age exceeds the official age group (e.g. repeaters). Therefore, if there is late enrolment, early enrolment, or repetition, the total enrolment can exceed the population of the age group that officially corresponds to the level of education – leading to ratios greater than 100 per cent (World Bank, 2019b).
One of the key performance indicators of compulsory school education in Central Asia is access to education that ensures the constitutional rights of each citizen to free education.
24 SDG
Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
However, there is a high risk of school drop-out before the completion of compulsory education, which is linked to poverty and a considerable gap between access to and quality of school education. A critical analysis of the four country reports highlights the following main issues: a large gap in achievement between students from rural and urban schools, a weak infrastructure, schools operating in two or three shifts, schools in emergency conditions, a large number of ungraded or multigrade classrooms,8 shortage of highly qualified teachers and school administrators, low level of teacher training, and insufficient school funding. For example, about two-thirds of schools in Uzbekistan operate in multiple shifts, and this is more prevalent in semi-urban and urban areas, which shows limited capacity to accommodate the increase in enrolment. Schools that are required to operate in shifts often face challenges that affect the quality of learning, such as the need to: a) condense class time to accommodate for two or more shifts; b) share classrooms and furniture among students of different age groups, and c) eliminate extracurricular activities (Government of Uzbekistan, 2018). These issues are likely to lead to negative school experiences, which may then deter learners from continuing learning in adulthood. Good Practice in Kazakhstan: At basic school level (Grades 1–9), school admission is determined (in addition to entrance exams) by the pupil’s home address, and enrolment is decided by the school leader. The maximum class size is of 25 pupils. As of 2016, in Kazakhstan 45 per cent of state general schools offered inclusive education to children with special needs. There is also a growing number of evening schools that offer supplementary and equivalency education programmes for young adults, who have dropped out from schools (Belosludtseva, 2018). To support the improvement of educational quality in small ungraded or multigrade schools (which account for 70 per cent of rural schools and almost half of all schools in Kazakhstan), special resource hub-centres have been set up across the country. Each resource centre supports 3–4 small schools. In 2015 there were 160 hub- centres operating across the country (OECD and World Bank, 2015). In partnership with the University of Cambridge, Kazakhstan has also started a new scheme for teacher professional development consisting of three levels. Upon successful completion of each level of training, teachers are entitled to a pay rise of 30 per cent, 70 per cent and 100 per cent respectively (Torebekova and Shamshieva, 2016). Non-formal Education (NFE) for children of school age is often referred to as ‘out-of-school educational opportunities’ or activities in Central Asia, which is supplementary to school education and not compulsory. This type of education mainly serves the educational and developmental needs of children and adolescents in music, arts, and sports, as well as to assist in organizing their free time and recreation. The provision of this kind of NFE is relatively good in urban areas but limited in rural areas. It is also increasingly privatized, often in the form of PPPs.
Challenges to achieving SDG 4 Targets 4.1, 4.7 and 4.c Despite high gross enrolment rates at the compulsory school education level, Central Asia still faces issues with regard to the quality of education, which then results in unequal opportunities. This includes the shortage of quality teachers, outdated school curricula, limited activities for developing transversal competencies that are needed to promote sustainable development, poor quality and shortage of textbooks, multiple shifts in school, rural and urban divide, patchy career guidance and counselling services, as well as poor facilities for inclusive education.
8 An ungraded or multigrade classroom refers to pupils of different ages and grades learning in one classroom.
24 25 Ensuring lifelong learning for all in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: Country Evidence and Policy Recommendations
3.4 TVET Systems This section focuses on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET). The term ‘TVET’ is understood in this report as consisting of education, training, and skills development for a wide range of occupational fields, production, services, and livelihoods. TVET also includes a range of skills, notably transversal competencies, that are attuned to national and local contexts. In this section it mainly refers to formal education and training that leads to qualifications, whereas non-formal TVET, as part of continuous learning and education, will be examined later in this report. In Central Asia, TVET systems have developed differently. Given that Uzbekistan offers longer compulsory education (11 years) than the other three countries (9 years), after Grade 9 Uzbek students progress either to general upper secondary education or to vocational education and training. The vast majority (93 per cent) are directed towards TVET, where all study places are state-funded as part of the compulsory education system (ETF, 2017; UNESCO, 2018). While many TVET institutions in rural areas have been closed in Central Asian countries, they still operate in the case of Uzbekistan, as well as in some rural areas in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, as reforms in the agricultural sector have sought to avoid closing down established institutions. However, these institutions face significant challenges in providing quality education. TVET is often placed under various ministries such as the ministries of labour, health, and culture, among others, in addition to education. This indicates the need for cooperation among ministries in order to formulate national lifelong learning strategies.
Figure 2. TVET Formal, Non-formal and Informal Systems