Summer 2018 is turning out to be a productive time for book publishing: in July, a chapter I wrote with Professor Creso Sá on scientific nationalism and scientific globalism was published; late August saw the publication of my new chapter with Dr Merli Tamtik called:
Emerging global players: Building institutional legitimacy in universities in Estonia and Kazakhstan
It’s out as part of an exciting new collection, Comparing Post-Socialist Transformations: Purposes, policies, and practices in education, edited by Maia Chankseliani and Iveta Silova.
Our chapter compares how Estonia and Kazakhstan are using their two flagship universities – the University of Tartu and Nazarbayev University – as tools in their broader quest to find a place towards the top of the global hierarchy of nations with high quality (and top ranking) universities.
Why compare Estonia and Kazakhstan?
Apart from the obvious sharing of 20th century educational and political history as republics of the USSR, both states have in recent decades been investing heavily in higher education reforms. They do this in their effort to transform into the much desired ‘knowledge economy’, which is basically a global panacea for all countries’ educational and labour market problems.
Adding a really interesting dimension to the comparison is the historical differences between the two countries and universities we examined. Estonia was a nation-state well before being annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940, and the the University of Tartu is one of the oldest universities in the European model, having been founded in 1632. That makes it older than any university in the United States which has a plethora of institutions in the global rankings.
At the other geographical end of the former Soviet space, Kazakhstan became an independent state only after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. It does have a deep and rich history, just not in the geographic and political formation it inherited last century. Our case study Nazarbayev University is an archetypal creation of contemporary Kazakhstan, teaching in English, recruiting academics from around the world and rapidly expanding after admitting its first students in 2010.
Building international legitimacy
To make our comparison, we used the theoretical idea of international legitimacy building. This is a dynamic process in which actors – in our case, the governments of Estonia and Kazakhstan and the two universities – discover, shape, adopt and diffuse ideas or sets of norms with the aim of enhancing their global standing.
Having a top university is one symbol of being a highly ranked nation, which is why we focused in on the flagship university in each state.
Going through the four phases of international legitimacy building, we found both patterns and divergences between the two countries. For example, strong leadership from the top in steering higher education was found in both settings, as were a series of rapid reforms to higher education made as soon as economically possible after 1991.
The clearest distinction between the two states was the much greater agency of higher education institutions in Estonia than their counterparts in Kazakhstan, where persistent centralization has only very recently started to shift towards offering universities greater autonomy.
Why is this important?
It’s never enough to say that your study is important because it is the first of its kind (although it is true that this is the first comparison of national/higher education developments in Estonia and Kazakhstan and we are pretty excited about having done this!).
We believe the chapter makes a contribution in the understanding and analysis of processes of state formation in the post-socialist space – states that are (re-)forming under intense global pressures not experienced by other countries that came into existence in the mid-20th century or earlier.
We have also used our study to raise the important question of ‘what happens next’ for states like Estonia and Kazakhstan that choose to adopt dominant global discourses. Can they get their heads above the parapets and get the universities into a global top 100 ranking? Will they have to change their systems completely to achieve what they see as ‘global best practice’? Or is there a way in which Estonia and Kazakhstan can use this global discourse to enable their universities to flourish as global players on their own terms?
Tamtik, Merli, and Emma Sabzalieva. 2018. “Emerging Global Players? Building International Legitimacy in Universities in Estonia and Kazakhstan.” In Comparing Post-Socialist Transformations: Education in Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Union, edited by Maia Chankseliani and Iveta Silova, 127–45. Oxford: Symposium Books.
More details about the book including a useful summary and chapter listing can be found at: http://www.symposium-books.co.uk/bookdetails/104/
Under copyright rules, I am not allowed to freely distribute our chapter. Sorry. But if you are based at a university or college, would you encourage your library to stock a copy? Thank you to Max Antony-Newman for requesting a copy for the University of Toronto library already!
Alternatively, if you would like to buy a copy, I can help you get one with an extremely respectable 50% author discount. Please drop me a note to follow up.
3 thoughts on “New publication: Emerging global players: Building institutional legitimacy in universities in Estonia and Kazakhstan”
Congrats on this. Thinking of buying it but wanted to know: how much of book is k12 and how much higher Ed?
We didn’t get to read the other chapters so the best I can suggest is to look at the chapter list. Or wait until I’ve got my copy and we can take a look together. Here’s the chapter list:
Contents [Please click on author name for summary]
Maia Chankseliani, Iveta Silova Reconfiguring Education Purposes, Policies and Practices during Post-socialist Transformations: setting the stage, 7-25
Elena Minina, Nelli Piattoeva, Vera G. Centeno, Xingguo Zhou, Helena Hinke Dobrochinski Candido Transnational Policy Borrowing and National Interpretations of Educational Quality in Russia, China and Brazil, 27-44
Sanja Djerasimovic Constructing the European Citizen: the origins and the development of the Serbian post-2000 civic education discourse, 45-62
Simon Janashia Introduction of the Per Capita Funding Model of Finance in the Post-Soviet Countries: the cases of Latvia and Georgia, 63-83
Tatiana Khavenson Post-socialist Transformations, Everyday School Life and Country Performance in PISA: analysis of curriculum education reform in Latvia and Estonia, 85-103
Mihaylo Milovanovitch, Kate Lapham Good Intentions Cast Long Shadows: donors, governments and education reform in Armenia and Ukraine, 105-125
Merli Tamtik, Emma Sabzalieva Emerging Global Players? Building International Legitimacy in Universities in Estonia and Kazakhstan, 127-145
Bridget A. Goodman, Laura Karabassova Bottom Up and Top Down: comparing language-in-education policy in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, 147-166
Garine Palandjian, Iveta Silova, Olga Mun, Rakhat Zholdoshalieva Nation and Gender in Post-socialist Education Transformations: comparing early literacy textbooks in Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Latvia, 167-192
Iveta Silova Comparing Post-socialist Transformations: dead ends, new pathways and unexpected openings, 193-206
Pingback: Going, going, gone: Kazakhstan's Innovation University is shut down « Emma Sabzalieva