Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Global competitiveness is like the lion and the impala roaming the open field in the Serengeti looking for booty. Each freely comes and goes but with a prize for the impala to pay because the mighty lions are in control and can consume the small and weak animals at their discretion. The analogy of the lion and the impala above signifies the generally implied notion of incursions of advanced knowledge-based economies in less developed countries. This study investigates the possibilities offered by indiscriminate educational policy borrowing from advanced knowledge-based economies to reform human capital development and make Kazakhstan's universities globally competitive. The article critically examines and reformulates the beliefs about human capital and how it induces development and enhances global competitiveness. The present inquiry utilizes a qualitative methodology case study to investigate the global competitiveness goals behind educational policy borrowing in Kazakhstan. We draw a linkage between global competitiveness and educational policy borrowing. Our findings indicate that educational policy borrowing in context is a means of advancement that streams development criteria into global competitiveness. Whereas it is essential to become closer to advanced knowledge-based economies, it is also important to find ways to avoid the forfeiture of the best accomplishments of national education, self-identity, and culture.

Keywords

educational reform educational policy borrowing development globalization human capital theory national identity

Introduction

Global Competitiveness has become chronic, standard, and ubiquitous. Its ever-increasing tempo is outpacing the capacity of nation-states to cope with it. Frequently, comparative education scholars have worked with a conception of global competitiveness that amounts to no less than a reference to all the significant economic, social, cultural, information, communication, and technological changes in the world today. Through the information and communications technologies of recent times, all nations, all peoples, and all cultures are coming into face-to-face proximity from which there is no escape (Akhmat et al., 2014; Akkary, 2014; Anand, 2015; Furlong, 2013). The processes and patterns of change in terms of human capital development, global competitiveness, and educational policy borrowing are crucial to understanding the contemporary world (Furlong, 2013; Kim, 2005; Komatsu, 2013). This article attempts to analyze a concept of global competitiveness that may help explain not only many international actions of nations but also clarify the evolving patterns of educational change in contemporary times (Verger, 2014). The article critically examines contemporary educational policy borrowing and attempts to reformulate the beliefs about global competitiveness and human capital development.

Educational policy borrowings around the world have been on the attack as undermining the development needs of nation-states by emphasizing global competitiveness to such an extent as to subdue all the other considerations of the real needs of national societies (Akhmat et al., 2014; Akkary, 2014; Anand, 2015; Furlong, 2013; Kim, 2005; Komatsu, 2013; Verger, 2014). With the increase in the amount of international information about both social structures and information and communication technologies, and of the appropriate channels by which such information circulates, developing countries can select much more readily the aspects of development to which they wish to refer and which they wish to imitate (Clayton, 2004; Dale & Robertson, 2009; Kellner, 2002). In this article, we reexamine the import of educational policy borrowing in the era of global competitiveness and redetermine the goals of the policy borrowing reforms. In other words, our first imperative is to investigate how educational change can become primarily concerned with the foundations upon which social change occurs and national development functions. In the context of the juxtaposition of global competitiveness and its influence on societies, we must reexamine educational reforms’ goals in contemporary times (Clayton, 2004; Dale & Robertson, 2009).

The purpose of this article is to take a closer look at the human capital theory and how educational reforms can bear the responsibility of changing education to meet the domestic sociocultural needs of nation-states. Some researchers conceptualize global competitiveness as a cumulative process that induces development in nation-states (Ginsburg & Megahed, 2013). The incursions of advanced knowledge-based economies in less developed nations’ economies, society, politics, and culture have become a feature of global competitiveness (Agbo, 2005; Agbo et al., 2022; Jarvis, 2009). Contemporary educational policy borrowing in developing societies such as Kazakhstan suggests that global competitiveness drives educational reforms and defines the reform process's character (Agbo & Pak, 2017).

Kazakhstan has recently adopted educational policies, programs, and structures from knowledge-based economies of Europe, North America, and the rest of the Western world to enhance its human capital to become globally competitive (Agbo et al., 2023; Ibraev et al., 2015). Reforms have been contingent on educational policy borrowing, underscoring selective education-related models espousing equivalent aspirations to catch up with developed knowledge-based economies (Beech, 2009; Robertson & Dale, 2015). Entrenched in the notion of development is equivalence with developed knowledge-based economies to the degree that they reckon the qualities of esteemed or prestigious national societies. Accordingly, contemporary educational policy borrowing indicates the increasing degree to which developing nations such as Kazakhstan tend to focus on the sociocultural characteristics of developed nations, not merely to respond positively to changes in their local material and sociocultural environments (Akkary, 2014; Beech, 2009; Carney et al., 2012; Phillips & Ochs, 2004). For example, in 1997, Kazakhstan assumed a development scheme (Kazakhstan 2030: Prosperity, Security and Ever-Growing Welfare for all Kazakhstanis, 1997) to convert the country into one of the 30 or 40 most developed countries globally (Agbo et al., 2023; Bhuiyan, 2011; Ibraev et al., 2015). The government identified seven priorities for advancement. The priority areas include (1) nationwide well-being; (2) internal steadiness and social interconnection; (3) economic development; (4) health, education, and Kazakhstan's citizen's welfare; (5) energy reserves; (6) substructure, transport, and communications; and (7) skills (Agbo et al., 2023; Bhuiyan, 2011).

To achieve the end of Kazakhstan 2030, the government is promulgating higher education reforms as a directional purpose that operates as an inspiration for human capital development and a global competitive path (Bhuiyan, 2011). The university reform is mainly to supply highly competent personnel in human capital to meet the communal and economic tasks of the knowledge age (Agbo et al., 2023; Bhuiyan, 2011; Ibraev et al., 2015; Hartley et al., 2016). Consequently, the government assigns onerous dependability to universities as agents for implementing human capital development and global competitiveness (Agbo & Pak, 2017; Agbo et al., 2023). Accordingly, education carries out reforms for guiding purposes that serve as beacon lights on global competitiveness. Global competitiveness becomes a crucial symbol to view the adequacy or inadequacy of current educational goals in developing countries such as Kazakhstan.

One of Kazakhstan's most significant landmarks of higher education reform is joining the Bologna Process by passing the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan, “On Education.” The government adopted the law in 2007 to transition to a three-level system of Bachelor, Master, and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) as the structure of universities to be in line with the Bologna Process (Bhuiyan, 2011; Hartley et al., 2016; Ibraev et al., 2015). Albeit the official transition in 2007 since 2005, Kazakhstan has been implementing PhD in conjunction with the two-tier Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science that has been the traditional system of educating highly qualified personnel (Ibraev et al., 2015). In 2011, the government awarded the Doctor of Philosophy the status of an academic degree (Ibraev et al., 2015). The 2011 State Mandatory Educational Standards of the Republic of Kazakhstan outlined the key provisions underpinning the development of human capital of highly qualified personnel in the document “Postgraduate Education, Doctoral Education.” Consistent with these standards, the education and training of technical and pedagogical staff rest on doctoral education that awards a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or an area Doctoral degree after completion. PhD training programs on paper should concentrate on research training in scientific, pedagogical, and methodological areas to provide an in-depth study of science disciplines relevant to the research segment and higher and graduate education system (Ibraev et al., 2015). The area doctoral programs encompass “fundamental educational, methodological, and research training and an in-depth study of disciplines in the scientific areas that correspond to the national social and economic sector, including education, medicine, law, arts, services, and business” (Ibraev et al., 2015, pp. 78–79). The set time for PhD studies is at least 3 years of full-time study.

For global competitiveness, the government set out to make policy changes concerning research to be abreast with global developments vis-à-vis scientific research in the international arena (Agbo & Pak, 2017; Agbo et al., 2023; Trihn, 2018). One of Kazakhstan's crucial areas of university reform hinged on the modernization of education in line with international standards to train scientific and teaching staff (Agbo et al., 2022). In addition, higher education reform has aimed at integrating Kazakhstan into the global research and education space (Agbo & Pak, 2017; Ibraev et al., 2015). In their study, Ibraev et al. (2015) noted that Kazakhstan needs more scientific personnel, unlike West or Southeast Asia. As they write:

The number of research personnel per 1 million and 10,000 members of the economically active population has been several times lower than in the leading countries worldwide. For example, according to the Statistics Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in 2012, the number of research employees per 10,000 members of the economically active population in Kazakhstan was 26 people, which is significantly less than in developed countries, such as Finland (217), Sweden (170), the Republic of Korea (149), France (147), Germany (137), Japan (135), and the UK (114). (Ibraev et al., 2015, p. 79)

The purpose of the present study is to explore how educational policy borrowing enhances national development and global competitiveness in Kazakhstan. In this study, we first attempt to define the meaning and significance of the concepts of human capital, educational policy borrowing, and global competitiveness; secondly, we attempt to emphasize in what respect the concepts are autonomous and in what respect they overlap; and, finally, we make an effort to investigate the possibilities offered by educational policy borrowing and their sociopolitical consequences created by indiscriminate emulation of advanced knowledge-based economies. The present study operationally defines global competitiveness as the capacity of a nation-state, business, or individual to compete successfully in the global arena, bearing in mind elements such as economic output, innovation, modernization, and the quality of goods and services. Accordingly, global competitiveness refers to the competition among countries and territories to achieve economic, cultural, and political control on a global scale (Agbo et al., 2023).

The structure of the concept of global competitiveness has imposed specific priorities where educational policy borrowings from advanced knowledge-based economies have become the mainstay of social change in contemporary times (Agbo et al., 2023). Global competitiveness has closely linked educational policy borrowing to models applicable to advanced knowledge-based economies. However, the logistics of moving human capital for development differ from those in knowledge-based economies (Agbo et al., 2022; Akkary, 2014). This article explores the implications of educational policy borrowing, identifies policy borrowings contextual to the situation in Kazakhstan, and explores policy borrowings that are merely white elephants. The study is a case study of graduate students in two universities in Kazakhstan. The study examines the implications of how educational policy borrowing impacts graduate studies, faculty, and administrators, and the challenges posed by some of the policy borrowings. The present study draws on human capital theory for its theoretical framework.

The Human Capital Theory

The human capital theory proposes that the most productive route to the development of any society depends on its population, that is, the human capital. In Theodore Shultz's address to the American Economic Association in 1960, Schultz declared that education was a productive investment and was not merely a form of consumption (Schultz, 1961). He maintained that apart from improving individual choices available to people, education provides the category of labor force required for industrial development and economic growth. In his book Investing in People – The Economics of Population Quality, Schultz (1981) identifies the acquired abilities of people as the most critical economic resource available to societies. He maintains that human capital is decisive in improving the welfare of poor people worldwide. As Shultz writes:

While land per se is not the critical factor of being poor, the human agent: investment in improving population quality can significantly enhance poor people's economic prospects and welfare. Childcare, home and work experience, acquiring information and skills through schooling, and other investments in health and schooling can improve population quality (Schultz, 1981, p. 7).

Accordingly, in the 1960s, social scientists became interested in studies on the economic value of investment in education. This interest resulted from the social scientists’ notion that the most productive course to the national development of any society lies in advancing its population, that is, its human capital (Agbo et al., 2023; Becker, 1964; Denison, 1967; Schultz, 1961). In other words, human capital theory contends that an educated population is productive because education contributes directly to the growth of societies’ national income by enhancing employees’ skills and productive abilities (Agbo, 2005). Human capital scholars argue that economic development and growth can only occur by enhancing technology to become more efficient (Agbo, 2004, 2005; Agbo et al., 2023). When societies utilize technology in human resources, improved technology leads to excellent production, and employees will acquire the skills to use technology through education and training (Agbo, 2005; Schultz, 1980). Thus, societies invest in education to increase the population's productivity (Denison, 1967).

Several studies (Agbo, 2005; Becker, 1964; Fagerlind & Saha, 1989; Saha, 1991; Schultz, 1961, 1980, 1981) have demonstrated the relationships between education and economic levels of development among societies. For example, Becker (1964) found the return on investment in college education higher than the rate of return on alternative investments in the United States. Griliches (1988) asserts that increased educational achievement accounted for one-third of an unexplained increase in the output of the U.S. economy. Denison (1979) observes that education accounted for 0.5% of the 2.4% of the growth in national income per worker in the nonresidential business sector in the U.S. Schultz (1980) reinforces his original thesis by arguing that the modernization of the economies of both advanced and less developed countries was due to the decrease in farmland and an increase in the mobilization of human resources. Also, Schultz (1981) asserts that because of improved farm technology, farmers cultivated less acreage for more agricultural productivity. Therefore, Schultz stresses the significance of upgrading the population's quality through education to improve the economic conditions of poor societies.

In a study conducted in 44 countries using the human capital approach, Psacharopoulos (1980, cited in Fagerlind and Saha, 1989) substantiated Schultz's argument by surveying the rates of return to educational investment. He found that primary education reveals the highest social and private returns. Secondly, private returns are higher than social returns, particularly at the university level. Thirdly, all rates of return on investment in education exceed the rates of return on alternative investment in capital. Moreover, the return on investment in education in developing nations such as those in Africa, Asia, and Latin America was higher than that of advanced industrialized countries at comparable levels.

Accordingly, from the early 1960s to the mid-1970s, governments in developed and less developed countries encouraged investment in education to enhance the quality of human productivity. However, by the late 1970s, the lack of economic growth in most parts of the world slowed governments’ investment in education significantly as researchers started to question the feasibility of human capital theory as the basis for a possible development strategy (Agbo, 2005; Fagerlind & Saha, 1989; Webster, 1984). Researchers no longer accepted that increased educational expenditure with a related increase in participation rates was enough to enhance economic productivity in developed and less developed countries (Fagerlind & Saha, 1989).

This case study explores the challenges university faculty, students, and administrators face in emulating educational policies appertaining to advanced knowledge-based economies and how the universities cope with the structures the government borrowed and imposed on the local higher education system to become globally competitive. In this study, we based our research questions and procedures on the assumption that many of the borrowed policies are incompatible with the normative education context of Kazakhstan and that many of the policies are merely white elephants that may not enhance global competitiveness and catapult Kazakhstan into becoming one of the 30 or 40 advanced economies of the world as the government intended. Accordingly, we further surmise that indiscriminate policy borrowing in Kazakhstan compromises the national identity of the higher education community. In what follows, we describe our methodology, report our findings, discuss the findings, and provide conclusions and implications.

The Study

The present study drew on a qualitative methodology. The study utilizes interviews, participant and nonparticipant observations, and document analysis to investigate and interpret educational policies that the government borrowed from advanced knowledge-based economies to enhance the global competitiveness of Kazakhstan's higher education. We explored the impact and challenges of the borrowed educational policy on faculty, students, and administrators. Using interviews, observations, and document analysis is analogous to Miles and Huberman's (1994) concept of triangulation. Triangulation is critical to throwing light on experiences that help us create meaning and insights of trustworthiness and credibility to the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014).

The Study's Design

The strategy for this study shadowed an instrumental case study approach that offered interpretations of educational policy borrowing, which would enhance our understanding of educational policies that can enhance the economic development of less developed countries (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Stake, 1994; Yin, 2003). The methods we chose for the present study permitted us to investigate policy issues that cast light on our understanding of the impact of educational policy borrowing on national development (Baxter & Jack, 2008). This study is “a holistic case study with embedded units” (Baxter & Jack, 2008, p. 550) as it relates to the exploration of issues that impact a group of people within higher education (Baxter & Jack, 2008; Stake, 1994; Yin, 2003). As Stake (1994) argues, “The case is of secondary interest; it plays a supportive role, facilitating our understanding of something else” (p. 237). In this study, we sought to comprehend the impacts of educational policy borrowing on a developing country such as Kazakhstan's higher education.

The Study Context and Participants

We conducted the case study at two universities in two midsize cities in western Kazakhstan. When selecting the sites for our case study, we prioritized purposeful sampling by choosing cases that offer rich understandings, range, and prospects for in-depth investigation. We focused on relevance and context that would allow readers to understand the issues that we raised in our article. We, therefore, intentionally selected the two institutions based on their specific characteristics, such as their extent of policy borrowing, the observable white elephants on their campus, and the size of their student populations that are relevant to our research questions. We also selected the two universities based on their similarities. Both universities have identical student populations, and they offer undergraduate and graduate courses leading to master's and PhD degrees in Humanities, Social Sciences, Engineering, and Mathematics. The first university is in a city of about 400,000 residents in south-central Kazakhstan, with a student population of about 10,000 students. The second university is in the Almaty region, in a city of about 100,000 and a student population of about 9,000. Both universities cooperate with several universities in advanced knowledge-based economies in joint programs and student and faculty exchange. A fundamental goal of the universities is to become modernized and globally competitive.

We employed purposeful sampling to “intentionally select individuals and sites to learn or understand the central phenomenon” (Creswell, 2012, p. 206). The major subdivisions in the investigation were graduate students, graduate faculty, and graduate program administrators. We invited 18 graduate students, 10 faculty members, and 10 program administrators to participate in the interviews. We also sent recruitment emails inviting all potential participants to participate in the inquiry.

Data Collection

We gathered data through open-ended, audio-recorded interviews (Miles & Huberman, 1994), document analysis, field notes, and participant and nonparticipant observations. The diverse techniques permitted us to deepen our investigation of the impact of educational policy borrowing on graduate students, faculty, and administrators. We gathered the data from September 2024 to January 2025. Our data mainly comprised interviews that we supplemented with participant observations on university campuses and classrooms. We maintained copious field notes from the observations to bolster our interview data.

Interviews

The study's interviews were face-to-face dialogical and email interviews of 38 participants. To explore participants’ experiences concerning their roles in the university, we designed 17 questions for graduate students and 18 for graduate faculty and graduate program administrators, respectively. Our interactions with those who could speak and understand English and agreed to have the interviews in English interacted with us in English and Russian for those who chose to interact in Russian. The duration of the interviews was 45 min to one hour. We tape-recorded the face-to-face semistructured and open-ended interviews. Our goal was for the participants to freely express their unique experiences about educational policy borrowings and how they impact them. We embarked on verbatim transcriptions from the beginning of the data collection period. A coauthor of the present article, proficient in English and Russian, was an interpreter who translated the Russian data into English. We focused on the following samples of rudimentary research questions that portrayed the participants’ experiences with the impacts of educational policy borrowing such as:

What do they know about the new graduate program borrowed from the Bologna Process to replace the Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science programs?

What do they think are the differences between the new Bologna Process three-tier program of Bachelor's, Master's, and PhD that replaced the Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science programs?

The job opportunities for graduating from a graduate program

What do they think about the requirements students must fulfill to graduate from a graduate program and the resources available?

How do they consider the Bologna Process type of education to enhance the educational achievement of graduate students?

Suggestions/recommendations that they have for Kazakhstan's Ministry of Education and Science to enhance graduate education

Document Analysis

The present study considered documents like the data we collected utilizing other investigative tools. Regarding the document analysis, we first examined each government document concerning the changeover from Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science to the one-stage Bologna Process PhD in Kazakhstan. We decided on the documents’ significance in the present study and created a document summary form (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Questions leading the document analysis comprised the conceptions that resulted in the move from Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science to the one-stage Bologna Process PhD and their implications. The material from the document analysis offered some direction that allowed us to comprehend the effect of the educational policy borrowings.

Data Analysis

Data analysis focused on generating meaning from participants’ responses. Qualitative procedural researchers (Creswell, 2007; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014) assert that data collection and analysis in the qualitative study are inseparable and jointly represented. Thus, responsive, inventive qualitative studies should incorporate data collection with analysis. Accordingly, we analyzed the data persistently from the beginning of the study (Miles & Huberman, 1994). We referred continuously to the data we collected and developed systematic field notes from the observations that portrayed the participants’ perceptions (Creswell, 2007). We categorized the data into emergent themes and developed and verified ideas and relations among the concepts and related perceptions to the emergent perspectives (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014). We mostly listened to each audiotape for the interview data and made copious notes. Next, we inscribed the data according to a coding system we developed to differentiate the interview questions and their respondents (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2014). We classified each response using the research questions as guidelines. We then cataloged the responses into common perspectives, patterns, and ideas corresponding to the research questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014). We imagined possible misconceptions because we had to interpret responses from Kazakh and Russian to English. To minimize this possibility, we exposed the tape recordings in Kazakh and Russian to a second interpreter. Therefore, data analysis involved transcribing, sending the data to a second interpreter, coding and classifying them, and highlighting other markers evident from the collected data (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations were critical to this study's design (Butler-Kisber, 2018; Creswell, 2007; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Savin-Baden & Major, 2013). Although there is a dearth of Research Ethics Boards in Kazakhstan's universities, we followed the Ethical Conduct of Research Involving Humans procedures. We provided contact letters informing all the respondents about the study's purpose and guaranteed their confidentiality and anonymity. After agreeing to participate in the investigation, we educated the participants about Ethics Procedures and Guidelines for Research Involving Human Participants. We requested that they sign consent forms before commencing with the interviews. We then apprised them of their anonymity and that they could withdraw anytime. In narrating the study's findings, we alluded to all the participants by pseudonyms and did not include any identifying information about the participants.

Findings

Five main perspectives emerged from the present study:

The motivation to enroll in a graduate program.

Educational Policy borrowing and global competitiveness.

Job opportunities for graduates.

Realities of the Borrowed Bologna Process

Suggestions for the Kazakhstan Ministry of Education and Science to enhance the global competitiveness of Kazakhstan's universities.

The first, the motivation to enroll in a graduate program, concerns respondents’ answers about what motivates students to enroll in a graduate program. The second, educational policy borrowings for global competitiveness, has to do with participants’ responses concerning global competitiveness for moving from Candidate of Science and Doctor of Science to a one-stage PhD. The third, “job opportunities for graduates,” describes what the respondents considered available to graduates. The fourth is the realities of the borrowed Bologna Process, which relate to participants’ experiences implementing the Bologna Declaration. Here, participants addressed the advantages, disadvantages, and challenges that students, faculty, and administrators face in implementing the borrowed program, such as graduation requirements and the availability of resources such as library books and journal subscriptions. Finally, suggestions for the Kazakhstan Ministry of Education and Science to enhance the global competitiveness of Kazakhstan's universities describe respondents’ suggestions and recommendations that they considered would enhance Kazakhstan's universities’ global competitiveness.

The Motivation to Enroll in a Graduate Program

When asked what motivated students to enroll in a graduate program, most students cited a higher degree that would offer prospects of a higher increase in their status in society. Many cited parents that motivated them to acquire graduate degrees. For example, 34-year-old Aikerim, in her second year in the PhD program, stated that as a lecturer at the university, she thought it was expedient to obtain a PhD to enhance her status. As Aikerim stated:

For the last five years, I have been working at the university as a lecturer. I started to be interested in getting PhD degree. Working at a higher institution requires a certain status as a candidate of sciences or professor. It motivated me to be a PhD student now. I am comfortable working as a lecturer at the university. It is a prestigious job.

Similarly, 36-year-old Symbat, in her first-year PhD program, said that she was motivated to enroll in the PhD program because her parents considered higher degrees prestigious. As she argued:

I grew up in a family where my parents wanted their children to be highly educated and prestigious. My mother is a teacher, and my father is a lawyer, so they want us to be even more educated than they are. So, I enrolled in the PhD program to become prestigious.

Some respondents referred to higher remunerations that they expected to obtain from high-paying jobs. Forty-three-year-old Saltanat, in her third year in the PhD program, stated that she was motivated by expectations of receiving a high salary after graduation. As Saltanat stated:

The first and most essential motivation for enrolling in the PhD program was an increase in my salary, which would provide me with the funds I needed to buy a house and a car.

Among students who declared that their parents motivated them to acquire graduate degrees was 37-year-old Madina, in her first-year PhD program, who stressed the importance of parents’ education in motivating their children. As she indicated:

My family members have a PhD. I wanted to continue this tradition, as my parents’ high education would motivate my children to pursue higher degrees and have a better education overall. 2. As I work at HEI, I am supposed to have a PhD because, without a PhD, I will not be able to get promotions and higher salaries. Besides, I like doing research more than teaching English.

Going beyond students, most faculty and administration thought that students enrolled in graduate programs to become researchers and move Kazakhstan toward global competitiveness. Nurken, a 45-year-old graduate studies administrator, asserted that there is a need for highly qualified personnel to make Kazakhstan competitive in the global market, and that is why they encourage their students to obtain higher degrees. As Nurken stated:

Our President wants us to be among the 30 or 40 most advanced countries by 2030. That is why the government tries to align our PhD program with the Bologna Process to make our country globally competitive. We encourage our students to enroll in the Master's and PhD programs to become globally competitive.

Educational Policy Borrowing and Global Competitiveness

One of our pursuits in this study was the participants’ viewpoints on why Kazakhstan embarks on educational policy borrowing from advanced knowledge-based economies. Most students, faculty, and administrators indicated that by aligning Kazakhstan's education with advanced knowledge economies, Kazakhstan would become globally competitive. They specified that educational policy borrowing harmonizes the education system, makes degrees internationally recognized and compatible, and allows students and researchers to mobilize to ensure the creation of quality standards. Alia, a 45-year-old head of the department's response, echoes the majority's views. As Alia stated:

The transition from the Candidate of Sciences (Kandidat Nauk) and Doctor of Sciences (Doktor Nauk) system to the Bologna Process-style PhD aims to modernize and align academic qualifications with international standards. This change makes degrees globally recognized, improves academic mobility, and aligns research quality with global standards. However, it requires updating academic programs, training faculty, and adapting to the new systems.

Similarly, Nurlan, a 35-year-old faculty member, echoes the same sentiments as Alia as he stated:

The purpose is to align the local system with the European one so that processes like exchanging students, staff, and knowledge can happen smoothly. For example, some of our students have experienced academic mobility. They studied in foreign universities for a specific period (depending on the agreements between universities). That exchange can help students learn from teachers and students from other countries and improve their knowledge from different perspectives.

Seventy-six-year-old Daryn, head of the International Education Department and now in charge of International Relations Projects and Scholarship at his university, was an emissary of Kazakhstan to negotiate for the country to join the Bologna Process. Daryn gave an insightful response to Kazakhstan's purpose of joining the Bologna Process. As he declared:

The purpose of the changeover to the Bologna Process was the Bologna Process principles to introduce a three-cycle higher education system consisting of bachelor's, master's, and doctoral studies to ensure the mutual recognition of qualifications and learning periods abroad completed at other universities to implement a system of quality assurance, to strengthen the quality and relevance of learning and teaching, and so on. The Bologna Process is an important process of harmonizing various systems of European higher education that aims to create a European Area of Higher Education and promote the European system of higher education worldwide to increase its international competitiveness. Therefore, the main objectives of the Bologna Process are to increase the transparency and comparability of higher education qualifications, promote student and staff mobility, and enhance the quality of higher education.

We noticed the graduate students we interviewed needed to know more about the Bologna Process.

Job Opportunities for Graduates

When we asked participants about job opportunities they anticipated for graduate students after graduation, like most students, faculty and administrators responded that they anticipated teaching and administrative jobs in academia. As a 37-year-old first-year PhD student, Alina stated:

I want to be a TR (teacher-researcher). As a TR, I will have a smaller teaching workload and more time to do research. Regular teachers need to teach approximately 25 h per week. Those who are TR teach for eight or fewer hours per week but must publish some papers annually.

Similarly, faculty and administrators revealed that they expected their graduates to work in higher education. As Madi, a 38-year-old administrator overseeing graduate programs, specified:

Because PhD graduates are required to work in their universities for three years after graduation, most will eventually remain in academia.

Realities of the Borrowed Bologna Process

We were interested in exploring how universities practice the borrowed Bologna Process and the challenges of implementing it. A crucial finding in the present study is that while the government moved to borrow educational policy from the Bologna process, many faculty have indicated that what they practice in their universities looks different from what the European Union (EU) universities do. They cited numerous differences between their practices and the EU countries that they set out to emulate, such as outrageous requirements of numerous publications and internships as conditions for graduating from a PhD program. The head of the department, 45-year-old Alia, highlighted requirements for PhD graduation that are inconsistent with the Bologna Process. As Alia pointed out:

To graduate from a PhD program, you must complete coursework, conduct original research, write and defend a dissertation, and often publish in peer-reviewed journals 3 in the KOKSON and 1 in Scopus or two articles in Q1. Then you are allowed to go to deference with your publication.

Thirty-five-year-old faculty member Nurlan also spelled out graduation requirements for PhD students as follows:

They need to write and defend their PhD thesis. One of the requirements is to get published in journals ranked between Q1 and Q3. If I am correct, PhD students can defend their research works without writing their theses if they publish their research works in high-ranking journals (Q1-Q3).

Apart from the dissertation or thesis defense in the Bologna Process zone, all of the other requirements, such as publications and internships, are optional in the Bologna Process. As a follow-up question, we asked participants why they thought Kazakhstan included several requirements for graduation, such as article publication, which are not requirements in any danced knowledge-based economy. Alia's response epitomizes all the responses. As Alia argued:

Kazakhstan has included publication as a requirement for the PhD degree to meet international academic standards, improve the quality of research, and enhance the global visibility of its universities and researchers. The Bologna Process ensures that postgraduate students contribute to their fields and acquire recognition in the global academic community. The requirement to publish articles in peer-reviewed journals is beneficial because it ensures the quality of research, builds academic reputation, and prepares students for future careers. However, it can add pressure and may only suit some fields equally, especially those with longer research timeframes.

Many participants highlighted their challenges in implementing the one-stage Bologna Process-style PhD. Alia's response reflects the majority's view of the challenges. As Alia contended:

Kazakhstan's adoption of the Bologna Process faces challenges such as adaptation to local needs, limited resources, gaps in teacher training, ensuring quality standards, pressure to publish, and unequal access across regions.

In comparing the Bologna Process system with the erstwhile Soviet system, faculty members and administrators thought the Bologna Process system could be more efficacious if appropriately implemented. As a 35-year-old faculty member, Damir, director of graduate programs, indicated:

If fully and adequately implemented, the Bologna Process single-stage PhD is undoubtedly better and more appropriate for the current demands of the modern work economy. It enables students to apply their knowledge better and contribute to knowledge production.

Similarly, 38-year-old PhD first-year student Juldyz thought that the Bologna Process was better than the erstwhile Soviet system, but it lacks greater specialization. As Juldyz stated:

The Bologna Process single-cycle PhD is better suited to training researchers in today's globalized world. It is more efficient, takes 3–5 years to complete, and is internationally recognized, making it easier for researchers to collaborate and work worldwide. It also emphasizes publication in indexed journals, ensuring that research meets global standards. The Soviet-era two-cycle system allowed for greater specialization, and the PhD provided recognition for cutting-edge achievements. However, it took longer, needed more international recognition, and could delay career advancement.

When questioned about the research training of PhD students within the Bologna Process, the majority indicated that the students need to obtain adequate research training reminiscent of the Bologna Process. As a 35-year-old faculty member, Nurken pointed out:

PhD training here in Kazakhstan could be better organized like it is in Western European countries. We have students in their second and third years of study who still need their research aim(s) or research question(s) and their first literature review draft. So this shows the low quality of the research training. Additionally, entrance requirements should be transparent, I think, because if we accept those who know at least what the research is and have general knowledge about how to conduct research, the training that we have currently would be helpful for them to identify their way towards completing their degrees in time.

When asked to rate her research training, second-year PhD student, 36-year-old Madina lamented that she did not have any research training in her master's program and did not think she would be proficient in research and conduct a study for her dissertation. As Madina indicated:

I did not obtain any research training in my master's program. In our PhD program, we must complete several courses that I do not find helpful in enhancing our research capacity. Our Ministry of Education says we should publish several articles in Q1, Q2, and Q3 journals as a requirement to graduate. However, we do not know what they want us to publish since we have not received any lessons about publications. It is only recently that we are lucky to have a Canadian visiting professor who is very proficient in publications and is teaching us how to conduct research and publish it.

Another challenge facing graduate students is library resources and journal subscriptions. Thirty-four-year-old PhD student Amina bemoaned her university's dearth of library resources and journal subscriptions. As Amina expressed:

We need more library resources and journal subscriptions for our PhD studies. There are few library books, but when it comes to journal articles, we need help obtaining them, as our university has a limited subscription. We must pay as much as $120 for a single article, making it complicated. We should have enough journal subscriptions to do our studies.

A few respondents thought that Kazakhstan has wholly distorted the Bologna Process. For example, the PhD graduation requirements differ from those in advanced knowledge economies such as the EU, from which Kazakhstan borrowed the one-stage Bologna Process PhD. Thirty-three-year-old Dilnur expressed frustration that the government distorted the borrowed policy by adding stringent graduation requirements. As Dilnur revealed:

Our government said it was borrowing the educational policy of the Bologna Process. However, the requirements for graduation from a PhD program differ entirely from those of the EU or advanced knowledge-based economies. For example, I must write a thesis paper, present it to the dissertation council, and publish an article in a journal indexed in Scopus or Web of Science. The journal must be only a Q1 or Q2 journal; otherwise, the publication will not count. It will only be accepted if I am the first author (corresponding author). Additionally, I must publish three articles in local journal databases like ККСОН or ВАК. But, according to the latest alterations in the regulation, if I succeed in publishing an article in a Q1 journal, I will obtain the PhD degree without writing or presenting the thesis paper. Also, it will not be necessary to publish other ККСОН or ВАК articles.

Dilnur says the requirements for publishing in Q1 and Q2 journals as a first author do not apply to the EU or any knowledge-based economy. It needs to be clarified why the government added such requirements for graduation. If a student publishes an article in a Q1 journal, the student does not need to complete a dissertation before graduating.

Our field notes indicated that many PhD students cannot graduate because of the publication requirement. As the Field Notes stated:

We spoke with PhD students on our research sites, who revealed that publication is the most difficult requirement to fulfill to graduate. In one of the universities where we conducted the present study, we found that more than 50 PhD students who have been in the PhD program for the past 10 years cannot graduate because of the publication requirement (Field Notes, October 2024).

Forty-five-year-old head of the department, Alia, succinctly epitomizes how students and faculty in Kazakhstan are faring within the Bologna Process. Alia's response shows the distortion within the borrowed Bologna Process. As Alia stated:

In Kazakhstan, many PhD applicants need a precise research topic or methodology when applying to a program. Even at the interview stage, many students still need clarification when asked about their research topics. This contrasts with Western academic practice, where a student's research proposal and match with the supervisor's experience are critical to admission. In Western systems, students often approach potential supervisors with clearly defined research interests, which ensures a better match. In Kazakhstan, supervisors can find it challenging to help students develop topics, as it requires significant time and effort. The requirement for a second supervisor further complicates the process. Second, supervisors often need more involvement in practice, making their role largely informal and practical. These issues highlight the need for reform to improve PhD admissions, supervision practices, and the overall research culture in the country.

Suggestions to Enhance Global Competitiveness

Finally, we asked participants to offer suggestions to the Kazakhstan Ministry of Education and Science about making the universities globally competitive. Students, faculty, and administrators came up with several suggestions and recommendations, most of which hinged on how to make the borrowed Bologna Process more efficacious. Thirty-three-year-old Dilnur quickly suggested that since the Ministry wanted to align PhD with the Bologna Process, all the requirements should be consistent with what pertains in the EU. As Dilnur pointed out:

I need clarification on why our graduation requirements differ from those of the EU and other knowledge-based economies. I want to understand why a publication in a Q1 journal should be enough to graduate without a dissertation. PhD is a research degree, and we need to know how to conduct research after graduating. The Ministry should stop concentrating on publications and focus on developing PhD students’ research capacity.

Similarly, Inkar, a 33-year-old in her first year in the PhD program, reiterated:

I wish we had lectures on how to conduct research and publish it in high-impact journals. Asking PhD students to publish several articles within three years is nonsense. They need to teach us how to conduct research and publish articles. I hope the Ministry will reconsider its requirements. They should copy the original Bologna Process without any additional requirements.

Forty-five-year-old head of the department, Alia, suggested:

To improve graduate programs and enhance global competitiveness, the Ministry of Education and Science of Kazakhstan should (a) increase research funding and access to global journals, (b) train faculty, and promote international collaboration. Therefore, we have a Bolashak scholarship for scholars to intern at top institutions worldwide; (c) attract international faculty; and (d) the Ministry of Education and Science has funding to support research projects.

Seventy-six-year-old Daryn, who was a negotiating member for Kazakhstan to join the Bologna Declaration, recommended:

I recommend reconsidering the publication concerning highly ranked Scopus and Web of Science-based journals. Publication in such journals requires much time and finance to be published.

Our field notes suggest that apart from program borrowing, Kazakhstan also borrows structures that have become white elephants on the university campus. As we recorded in our field notes:

In this case study university, we counted seventeen costly security gates. There is a security gate in every building on campus. We realized that the security gates were not serving any purpose other than acting as white elephants for the campus to look like American campuses. There are security personnel at the gate for 24 h and seven days in the week (Field Notes, October 22, 2024)

Discussion

The present study's findings indicated that the main reason for aligning universities with the Bologna Process is for Kazakhstan to enhance its human capital, become globally competitive, and be among the world's 30 or 40 most advanced knowledge economies. Consequently, the government has consigned a hefty task to universities to converge the needs of a knowledge-based economy (Clayton, 2004; Robertson & Dale, 2015; Veniziani & Yoshihara, 2017). As Furlong (2013) argues, “National prosperity, social justice, and social cohesion are all seen to rest on the shoulders of education” (p. 29). Nevertheless, this study revealed that university reform in Kazakhstan trails the paths of human capital development without considering the country's cultural and sociopolitical circumstances (Klerides, 2009; Pickel, 2013). This investigation has revealed that despite rhetoric about educational policy borrowing from the Bologna Process, there needs to be more akin to the EU and advanced knowledge-based economies. Kazakhstan's policymakers distorted the Bologna Process and embedded it with unusual graduation requirements for graduate study. Some researchers contend that borrowing indiscriminate educational policy circumvents less developed countries’ growth (Kamens & McNeely, 2010; Klerides, 2009; Robertson & Dale, 2015). This study has demonstrated that the procedures of educational policy borrowing were flawed in that graduate study in Kazakhstan is incompatible with the research-building capacity that the government envisioned (Ibraev et al., 2015).

Another finding from the present study is that human capital is not a panacea for economic development and global competitiveness, as the human capital theory is fraught with criticism. From the early 1960s to the mid-1970s, human capital development was on the agenda of governments in developed and less developed countries, encouraging investment in education to enhance the quality of human productivity. However, by the late 1970s, the lack of economic growth in most parts of the world slowed governments’ investment in education significantly as researchers started to question the feasibility of human capital theory as the basis for a possible development strategy (Fagerlind & Saha, 1989; Webster, 1984). Researchers no longer accepted that increased educational expenditure with a related increase in participation rates was enough to enhance economic productivity in developed and less developed countries (Fagerlind & Saha, 1989).

Thus, researchers’ criticisms of the human capital theory have usually centered on the assumptions underlying the theory itself. First, the theory assumes a perfect labor market (Agbo, 2005; Webster, 1984). In other words, it assumes that the better-educated and more skilled workers obtain better jobs and are eventually more productive; however, this does not happen in the real world. Second, the human capital theory does not consider factors other than education, such as job satisfaction and working conditions, which could contribute to higher worker productivity (Webster, 1984). Third, the human capital theory fails to recognize education as a screening or filtering device (Agbo, 2004). That is to say, employers merely use education to identify workers with superior abilities and personal attributes; while education may identify productive capacities, it may not directly improve workers’ skills and productivity (Agbo, 2004). Thus, the human capital theory assumptions suggesting that development depends only on education are untenable.

Similarly, Blaug (1985) argues that boosting the level of education in society may increase inequalities in income distribution. Fagerlind and Saha (1989) note that although human capital theory is naturally appealing, it needs to be more robust with methodological problems, such as the difficulty of measuring how education contributes to labor quality. Therefore, it is not easy to use the theory as an approach to the study of the economic value of schooling.

The human capital theory considers individual change rather than structural change as a prerequisite to development. By emphasizing individual change against structural change, the theory entirely neglects the effects of international relations on development (Fagerlind & Saha, 1989). Therefore, while the human capital theory has been instrumental in shaping policies regarding education and development strategies for governments and, more recently, for international organizations such as IDA, OECD, and UNESCO, more and more researchers dispute the theory and the relationship between education and development becomes more obscured. However, the theory continues to appeal to individuals and politicians alike because while individuals think education would provide personal economic success and achievement, politicians think the encouragement of investment in human capital would result in rapid economic growth for society. We, therefore, argue that the human capital development efforts in Kazakhstan's universities are not yielding the intended outcomes of economic development and global competitiveness.

Our analysis of the effects of the importance and fascination of educational policy borrowing from advanced countries, as demonstrated by the findings in this study, is twofold. First, under the pretext of human capital development, universities are making a carbon copy of universities in Europe and North America without considering the social context of education in Kazakhstan.

Furthermore, our campus observations support a previous study by Agbo et al. (2023) that educational policy borrowing is not limited to policies and that Kazakhstan universities are borrowing structures such as security systems to the detriment of providing resources such as journal subscriptions and library resources that students need for graduate study (see Agbo et al., 2023). While American institutions have installed security systems to prevent people from carrying weapons into campus buildings, the situation is different in Kazakhstan, where people do not carry weapons around. Accordingly, educational institutions in Kazakhstan can handle such expensive and sophisticated weapon-detecting systems. Nevertheless, Kazakhstan regards the security systems as stylish and worth imitating so that their institutions look like American campuses. Thus, almost all universities in Kazakhstan spend vast amounts of money imitating white elephants of structures in Europe and North America.

The situation in Kazakhstan is like putting the horse before the cart by requiring students to publish articles before they know how to conduct research and write a manuscript. This study revealed that students find the PhD graduation requirements of publishing seven articles within the 3 years of PhD studies to be the most overwhelming task in their studies. The government needs to revise the publications requirement, given that students entering the PhD program must acquire formal training in research and publications at any level of their studies. In advanced knowledge-based economies’ educational systems, such as those in North America and Europe, there is no requirement for PhD students to publish articles in peer-reviewed journals as a condition for graduation. Instead, the institutions prepare students to become skillful researchers and writers before graduating from PhD programs (Agbo, 2024).

Accordingly, in concluding our analysis of Kazakhstan's educational borrowing to modernize the country, we assert that the focus on the social, cultural, and structural characteristics of developed nations rather than responding positively to changes in their material and sociocultural environments is a lost dream for global competitiveness (Akkary, 2014; Beech, 2009; Carney et al., 2012). Accordingly, the possibilities of socially, culturally, politically, and economically related development offered by educational policy borrowing with the determination to catch up with the advanced nations are mythical thinking (Aasen et al., 2014; Clayton, 2004; Wang, 2018). Globalization, in these terms, is a standardizing procedure that tends to make all societies alike, but with the developing and less developed countries moving much more to the developed nations than vice versa. Undoubtedly, the revolution in information technologies in the closing part of the twentieth century has engendered the factual basis for the upsurge of global competitiveness as a world culture engendering widespread educational policy borrowing from advanced countries to developing countries (Carney et al., 2012; Phillips & Ochs, 2004).

Conclusion

Our analysis does not advocate a rejection of educational policy borrowing and replacing it with the tradition of sovereign nationhood. Educational policy borrowing should depend on recognizing national requirements to meet the specific needs of society and introducing educational change that would promote national development (Phillips & Ochs, 2004). In that case, educational policy borrowing should concern itself more specifically than hitherto with the country's most controversial social, political, economic, and cultural issues (Agbo et al., 2023; Ibraev et al., 2015). In other words, education should follow a set of purposes commensurate with the contextual development of national societies. Phillips and Ochs (2004) reprove indiscriminate educational policy borrowing, asserting that transferring educational policy from an advanced country into a developing nation is like a child yanking a beautiful flower from a garden and sowing it in the sand at home with the hope that it will grow.

Nonetheless, instead of presuming a concern that developing countries such as Kazakhstan must reject educational policy borrowing altogether, developing nations should start identifying their domestic responsibilities to the specific needs of their national societies and initiating educational change contextual to national development. Suppose educational policy borrowing is to move in the direction that brings growth and well-being to nations. Educational policy borrowing needs to be more apparent, compliant, and flexible to nation-states’ needs and not unthinkingly link educational reform to models applicable to advanced knowledge-based economies (Agbo et al., 2023; Bhuiyan, 2011; Ibraev et al., 2015). Educational policy borrowing among politicians and policy actors must be discreet and avoid the dilemma of distortion (Agbo et al., 2023; Akkary, 2014). Along with the essential principles to further the course of assembling the domestic sociocultural needs of the nation-state are those of advancing the normative structures of the society, specifically national identity (Klerides, 2009).

The fundamental issue here is, therefore, not educational policy borrowing versus local focus; it is whether policy borrowing can be more efficient and effective in the economic growth of nation-states. The dependence of Kazakhstan on human capital development to become globally competitive is controversial. Indeed, educational policy borrowing among politicians and policy actors must be discreet. Akkary (2014) pointed out that regarding educational reforms in the Arab world, “reformers in developing countries still need to control their urges for imported quick fixes as a means for hastily turning around their failing educational systems” (p. 196). Accordingly, our speculation of Kazakhstan's educational policy borrowing from the Bologna Process is in line with Ibraev et al. (2015):

The transition to the new training and certification system of scientific personnel in Kazakhstan has destroyed the existing, relatively efficient, domestic system of training highly qualified personnel. It is important to become closer to the European community. However, finding means to prevent the loss of the best achievements of national education, spirituality, and culture is also important (p. 82).

To conclude, our conceptions align with Klerides’ (2009) as he appeals for a glimpse “beyond economic aspects of education and globalisation into a cultural and historical motif of analysis reinvented, however, along the lines of the new emancipatory views on nationhood and cultural identity” (p. 1226).

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Kazakhstan is borrowing educational policy and structures from advanced knowledge-based economies to boost its human capital for global competitiveness. One of Kazakhstan's most significant landmarks of higher education reform is joining the Bologna Process to transition to a three-level system of Bachelor, Master, and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) as the structure of universities to be in line with the Bologna Process. This article is a follow-up to a previous article that examined the challenges posed by the Ph.D. graduation requirements on university students and administrators in Kazakhstan, published in the International Journal of Educational Reform. The present article investigates the possibilities offered by indiscriminate educational policy borrowing from advanced knowledge-based economies to reform human capital development and make Kazakhstan's universities globally competitive. The article critically examines and reformulates the beliefs about human capital and how it induces development and enhances global competitiveness. The present inquiry utilizes a qualitative methodology case study of two universities to investigate the global competitiveness goals behind educational policy borrowing in Kazakhstan. We draw a linkage between global competitiveness and educational policy borrowing. We present international scholars’ study results between September 2023 and December 2024. The issues raised in this article are based on our roles as comparative education researchers.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the two universities’ faculty, students, staff, and administrators who took part in this qualitative case study for their support of the project.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Seth A. Agbo

Author Biographies

Seth Agbo teaches educational research, Sociocultural Foundations of Education, and Comparative and International Education at Lakehead University in Canada Prior to his present position, Dr. Agbo taught at the State University of New York (SUNY) at Potsdam and at Pacific University in Oregon, USA. He obtained his Ph.D. from the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada. Dr. Agbo's research interests include leadership and policy studies; comparative and international education social justice; and lifelong learning. He is coeditor for the Pedagogical Perspectives Journal and serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of American Indian Education and the Journal of Adult and Continuing Education. He is also a consulting editor for the Canadian Journal of Education.

Akmarzhan Nogaibayeva is an assistant professor in the Department of Language Education at SDU University in Kazakhstan. Prior to her current position, Dr. Nogaibaeva taught at various higher education institutions, contributing to English language teaching and teacher training programs. She received her PhD in Education from the University of Warwick in UK. Dr. Nogaibayeva's research interests include higher education, language education, mixed methods research, qualitative research, and the internationalization of higher education.

Temirbolat Kenshinbay teaches theoretical and practical courses of English at the Korkyt Ata Kyzylorda University, Kazakhstan. He is a candidate of philological sciences (PhD). Dr. Kenshinbay's research interests include comparative studies, international education, internationalization of higher education. During 2007–2014, he acted as the Higher Education Reform Expert (HERE) of the Kazakhstan National team and had been working in close contact with the National Erasmus+ office in Kazakhstan, participating in different international seminars of Bologna experts and HERE experts in Europe.

Aidos Myrzabek is a research coordinator in the Faculty of Education and Humanities at SDU University. He earned his PhD from the University of Glasgow in the United Kingdom. Dr. Myrzabek's research interests include the internationalization of higher education, academic mobility experiences of students and faculty, lifelong learning, and formative assessment in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). He is also a member of the ASEM Lifelong Learning Hub (IRELAND 2020–2025).

Idayatulla Adikhanov teaches research methodology in Education, Academic Writing, and Educational Leadership to undergraduate and graduate students at SDU University. He has extensive experience in school education, having previously served as a teacher, vice-principal, academic director, and principal at lyceums and international schools in Kazakhstan. He also worked and pursued his PhD at Nazarbayev University. His research interests include School Technology Leadership, ICT Integration, Mixed-Methods Research, and the Professional Development of School Leaders and Teachers.

Yernar Mazhen is a senior lecturer in the Department of Religious Studies and Cultural Studies at the Faculty of Philosophy and Political Science, Kazakh National University (KazNU). He earned his master's degree in Islamic Studies from Selçuk University in Konya (2007–2009). Currently, he is pursuing further studies in Philosophy and Political Science at KazNU (2017–present). His research interests include religious studies, cultural studies, Islamic philosophy, and interfaith dialogue.

References

Aasen

Proitz

T.S.

Sanberg

. (2014). Knowledge regimes and contradictions in education reform. Education Policy, 28(5), 718–738.

Anand

. (2015). Globalisation and Indian school education: Impact and challenges. European European Scientific Journal, 11(10), 235–249.

Agbo

, et al. (2023). Modernizing Kazakhstan’s higher education: Challenges of policy borrowing and doctor of philosophy graduation requirements. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879231191500

Agbo

S. A.

(2004). The dialectics of Education for modernization and the new African diaspora: Unstated features of the university as a vehicle for national development in Africa. In Lazaridou

(Ed.), Contemporary educational administration and policy issues: An introduction (pp. 43–60). Athens Institute of Education and Research (ATINER).

Agbo

S. A.

(2005). Myths and realities of higher Education as a vehicle for nation building in developing countries: The culture of the university and the new African diaspora. In Preston

D. S.

(Ed.), Contemporary issues in Education (pp. 49–69). Rodopi.

Agbo

. (2024). The Scholars’ Publication Sourcebook: Preparing academic manuscripts for journals in the humanities and social sciences. Routledge.

Agbo

S. A.

Pak

(2017). Globalization and educational reform in Kazakhstan: English as the language of instruction in graduate programs. International Journal of Educational Reforms, 26(1), 16–45.

Agbo

S. A.

, et al. (2022). Global competitiveness myths and ideals: English language policy in universities in Kazakhstan. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879221137572

Akkary

R. K.

(2014). Facing the challenges of educational reform in the Arab world. Journal of Educational Change, 15, 179–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-013-9225-6

10.

Akhmat

Zaman

Shukui

Ahmed

. (2014). Educational reforms and internationalization of universities: Evidence from major regions of world. Scientometrics, 98, 2185–2205.

11.

Baxter

Jack

(2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.

12.

Becker

G. S.

(1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. Columbia Press.

13.

Beech

(2009). Who is strolling through the global garden? International agencies and educational transfer. In Cowen

Kazamias

A. M.

(Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 341–358). Springer.

14.

Bhuiyan

S. H.

(2011). Transition towards a knowledge-based society in post-Communist Kazakhstan: Does good governance matter? Journal of Asian and African Studies, 46(4), 404–421. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021909611401565

15.

Blaug

. (1985). Where are we now in the economics of education? Economics of Education Review, 4(1), 17–28.

16.

Butler-Kisber

(2018). Qualitative inquiry: Thematic, narrative and art-based perspectives (2nd ed.). Sage.

17.

Carney

Rappleye

Silova

(2012). Between faith and science: World culture theory and comparative Education. Comparative Education Review, 56(3), 366–393. https://doi.org/10.1086/665708

18.

Clayton

(2004). “Competing conceptions of globalization” revisited: Relocating the tension between world-systems analysis and globalization analysis. Comparative Education Review, 48(3), 274–294. https://doi.org/10.1086/421180

19.

Creswell

(2012). Educational research. Pearson Education, Inc.

20.

Creswell

J. W.

(2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

21.

Dale

Robertson

S. L.

(2009). Beyond methodological ‘isms’ in comparative education in an era of globalization. In Cowen

Kazamias

A. M.

(Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 1113–1128). Springer.

22.

Denison

E. F.

(1967). The sources of economic growth in the United States and the alternatives before us. Committee for Economic Development.

23.

Denison

E. F.

(1979). Accounting for slower economic growth: The United States in the 1970s. The Brookings Institute.

24.

Fagerlind

Saha

L. J.

(1989). Education and national development – A comparative perspective (2nd ed.). BPCC Wheatons Ltd.

25.

Furlong

(2013). Globalisation, neoliberalism, and the reform of teacher education in England. The Educational Forum, 77(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2013.739017

26.

Ginsburg

Megahed

(2013). Globalization and the reform of faculties of Education in Egypt: The roles of individual, organizational, national and international actors. Education Policy Analysis, 19(15), 1–24.

27.

Griliches

(1988). Technology, education, and productivity: Early papers with notes to subsequent literature. B. Blackwell.

28.

Hartley

, et al. (2016). Learning autonomy: Higher education reform in Kazakhstan. Higher Education, 72, 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9953-z

29.

Ibraev

A. Z.

, et al. (2015). Reforming the system of research staff training: Doctoral (PhD) Education in Kazakhstan. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 42(2), 78–84. 277–289. https://doi.org/10.3103/S0147688215020082

30.

Jarvis

(2009). Lifelong learning and globalization: Towards a structural comparative model. In Cowen

Kazamias

A. M.

(Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 601–617). Springer.

31.

Kamens

D. H.

McNeely

C. L.

(2010). Globalization and the growth of international testing and national assessment. Comparative Education Review, 54(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1086/648471

32.

Kazakhstan 2030: Prosperity, Security and Ever-Growing Welfare for all Kazakhstanis. (1997). Retrieved June 5, 2020 from https://www.akorda.kz/en/official_documents/strategies_and_programs

33.

Kellner

. (2002). Theorizing globalization. Sociological Theory, 20(3), 285–305.

34.

Kim

K.S

. (2005). Globalization, statist economy and unsuccessful reform in South Korea, 1993-2003. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(12), 1‒24.

35.

Klerides

(2009). National cultural identities, discourse analysis, and comparative Education. In Cowen

Kazamias

A. M.

(Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 1225–1248). Springer.

36.

Komatsu

. (2013). Why do policy leaders adopt global education reforms? A political analysis of SBM reform adoption in post-conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(62), 1‒16.

37.

Merriam

S. B.

Tisdell

E. J.

(2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey Bass.

38.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications Inc.

39.

Patton

M. Q.

(2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage Publications Inc.

40.

Phillips

Ochs

(2004). Researching policy borrowing, some methodological challenges in comparative Education. British Education Research Journal, 30(6), 773–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192042000279495

41.

Pickel

(2013). Nations, national cultures, and natural languages: A contribution to the sociology of nations. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour, 43(4), 425–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12018

42.

Psacharopoulos

(1980). Higher education in developing countries – A cost benefit analysis. World bank staff papers #44. World Bank.

43.

Robertson

S. L.

Dale

(2015). Towards a ‘critical cultural political economy’ account of the globalising of Education. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 13(1), 149–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2014.967502

44.

Saha

L. J.

(1991). Universities and national development – issues and problems in developing countries. Prospects, 21(2), 248–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02336065

45.

Savin-Baden

Major

C. W.

(2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. Routledge.

46.

Schultz

T. W.

(1961). Education and Economic Growth. In Henry

N. B.

(Ed.), Social forces influencing American education (p. 7). University of Chicago Press.

47.

Schultz

T. W.

(1980). Nobel lecture: The economics of being poor. Journal of Political Economy, 88(4), 639–652. https://doi.org/10.1086/260895

48.

Schultz

T. W.

(1981). Investing in people – The economics of population quality. University of California Press.

49.

Stake

R. E.

(1994). Case studies. In Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (p. 237). Sage.

50.

Trihn

A. N.

(2018). Local insights from the Vietnamese education system: The impacts of imperialism, colonialism, and neoliberalism of globalization. The International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 17(3), 67–79.

51.

Veniziani

Yoshihara

(2017). Globalization and inequality in a dynamic economy: An axiomatic analysis of an equal chance. Social Choice & Welfare, 49, 445–468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-017-1062-8

52.

Verger

. (2014). Why do policy makers adopt global education policies? Toward a research framework on the varying role of ideas in education reform. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 16(2), 14‒29.

53.

Wang

D. T.

(2018). Trend of community of shared future for mankind in the perspective of Marx’s thoughts of globalization. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 18(6), 3753–3760.

54.

Webster

(1984). Introduction to the sociology of development. Macmillan.

55.

Yin

R. K.

(2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage.

Human Capital,White Elephants,and Global Competitiveness: Predicament of Distorted Educational Policy Borrowing in Kazakhstan's Universities

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

The Human Capital Theory

The Study

The Study's Design

The Study Context and Participants

Data Collection

Interviews

Document Analysis

Data Analysis

Ethical Considerations

Findings

The Motivation to Enroll in a Graduate Program

Educational Policy Borrowing and Global Competitiveness

Job Opportunities for Graduates

Realities of the Borrowed Bologna Process

Suggestions to Enhance Global Competitiveness

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Acknowledgments

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Author Biographies

References