Private institutions are a major provider of higher education in Kazakhstan. The country has the most privatized higher education system among all the post-Soviet countries. This article discusses how both the state and the market have contributed to the private sector’s growth.

Private higher education (PHE) has become an integral part of the higher education landscape in Kazakhstan. As in many post-Soviet countries, it emerged in the early 1990s following the demise of the Soviet Union. In fact, the sector marked its thirty years of development in 2023, and presents a unique case compared to other countries in the region. Though the rapid growth of private institutions could be witnessed in the 1990s across all the post-Soviet space, at present, Kazakhstan remains the only country with a strong PHE sector. The nonstate sector is the leader in Kazakhstan, both in terms of institutions and enrollments. In other post-Soviet countries, with the exception of Armenia and Georgia, public institutions outnumber private institutions, with private enrollments not surpassing 40 percent of total higher education enrollment in the region (as of 2023). Thus, Kazakhstan has become the sole country in the region where private institutions are the main provider of higher education. The article sheds light on the expansion of PHE in Kazakhstan and seeks to provide some explanation for it.

Background

In Kazakhstan, PHE was permitted by the 1993 law on higher education. Soon afterward, the first group of nonstate institutions appeared. Parallel with the majority of the former Soviet countries, there were few monitoring mechanisms at first (or none at all). Consequently, a weak legal base and the new socioeconomic realities (mostly economic decline) of the 1990s, coupled with the previous monopolistic higher education background, laid a fertile ground for the instant proliferation of PHE. As a result, by 1997, there already were 71 private institutions in Kazakhstan versus 62 public universities, and the numbers continued to grow. It was also in sync with private enrollment, which soared in a short time.

In the mid-2000s, the private sector reached its peak in absolute terms, and prevailed over the public sector both in the numbers of institutions and students. It is worth mentioning that the characteristics of Kazakh private institutions were no different from elsewhere: small in size, low academic standards, weak resources, low cost, and with a lack of permanent teaching staff. This dubious growth soon raised concerns. It was followed by a period of decline, which was primarily caused by delayed state regulation (as could also be observed elsewhere). By the late 2000s, many private institutions ceased to exist, as they were either closed or merged with others. Government regulation also tightened the conditions for establishing new ones. Yet, the sector continued to dominate in the system. According to the data of the Bureau for National Statistics, in 2023, 59.8 percent out of 112 higher education institutions were private and accommodated 54.2 percent of the country’s 592,700 students. Analysis reveals that, in the Kazakhstani case, both the state and the market have fueled the private sector growth.

The Role of the State

In Kazakhstan, PHE has been developing in the context of ongoing higher education reforms. Since its emergence, the sector has been evolving against the backdrop of building a national higher education system, which prioritizes the public sector, along with the changing socioeconomic conditions in the country. Public higher education itself, based on the Soviet model, has undergone several phases of transformation: from introducing neoliberal reforms to joining the Bologna Process. The private sector had to fit into the changing environment. There is no denying that, to a certain extent, some of these changes were initiated to curb private growth. Yet, the state also played a crucial role in legitimizing PHE. In the early 2000s, the government imposed a uniform legal and regulatory framework for both the public and private sectors. Accordingly, private institutions were subject to licensing, attestation, and accreditation procedures. On the one hand, this allowed the government to control the private sector. On the other hand, nonstate institutions benefited from the regulation, as it ensured that they maintained an acceptable level of quality. Therefore, despite wide criticism, private alternatives continued to function in large numbers, thanks to the regulatory infrastructure produced by state agencies.

Another policy of core importance was the state recognition of private institutions’ credentials. In Kazakhstan, under the traditional higher education model, the ministry of education and science awarded degree certificates (commonly referred to as “diplomas”) to all higher education graduates. With the 1999 law on education, the right to grant a uniform state diploma was also extended to the nonstate sector, and the situation remained so until 2021. In the historically state-monopolized higher education, the emergence of degree-awarding private institutions alongside public universities, no doubt, attracted students. In this sense, there is a clear connection between private sector expansion and its degree-granting power. The private sector’s degree-granting entitlement may, to some extent, be a starting point and a cause for its growth in the region.

Growth can also be explained by the privatization of some state universities. In 2000, the government proposed the full or partial privatization of a group of public higher education institutions. Over the years, two became totally private, while eight others were reorganized as joint stock companies with about 20-35 percent of the shares belonging to the state. The remaining shares were owned by private investors. However, by 2021, these were also sold to private entities. Eventually all of these institutions became completely privatized. This also led to the increase of private universities and their enrollment numbers.

The Role of the Market

Growth of the private sector was also, to a large degree, driven by demand in the market. The rapid expansion—at least in numbers—illustrates that private institutions have great support in the educational market, despite being at a disadvantage in competition with the public sector. There are quality and stability concerns, which means that there is no guarantee of private institutions’ long-term functioning. Nevertheless, PHE remains an attractive choice because private institutions provide higher education qualifications with minimal entrance requirements and at a low cost. Initially, an increase in students was associated with the increased access to education, including for previously underrepresented groups. The mode of study was another moving force in capturing more students. In the 2000s, up to 50 percent of all the private sector students were enrolled in part-time programs. Moreover, from the beginning, the newly established private institutions offered and still offer popular market-oriented programs. Since public universities enroll a big share of students on a fee-paying basis, but charge much more than the majority of private institutions, PHE has become an available alternative for many young people from lower-income families. The market also contributed to the differentiation among private institutions, as a result of better access to education. Thus, there are a few private institutions that meet the needs of those who are ready to pay higher tuition fees.

Current Dynamics and Prospects

The recent decades have seen the private sector gain dominance and diversity. But the majority of institutions still remain at the lower end of the higher education hierarchy. Only a small group of private universities have achieved a relatively solid position and managed to become highly competitive on the national level. Furthermore, controversial views toward the sector have not disappeared; rather, various stakeholders, including the public, have begun to understand the differences between private institutions. Overall, the current dynamics within PHE indicates that the private share of higher education will remain high in Kazakhstan both in terms of the number of institutions and students. Yet, the number of institutions is unlikely to grow again as it did in the 2000s. On the contrary, the sector may shrink over time at the expense of institutions with demand-absorbing characteristics, as observed in recent years. Meanwhile, those that remain are likely to expand in size and keep serving the needs of different groups of clients.

Amina Shaldarbekova is senior lecturer at the faculty of international relations of the L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Kazakhstan. E-mail: [email protected].