CC BY
43IRSTI 14.01.45, 14.25.01 DOI: 10.52512/2306-5079-2022-91-3-6-16
TEACHERS' QUALITY IN KAZAKHSTANI RURAL SCHOOLS
M. A. Tajik, D. A. Shamatov, L. N. Fillipova
Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Abstract
This article is based on a large study that explored quality issues in Kazakhstani rural schools from the perspective of key stakeholders, including school leaders, teachers, students, parents, and education managers. As the understandings and approaches to education quality vary from one context to another, there is no universally agreed definition of quality education. We employed the UNESCO Quality Framework to guide this study—the framework that suggests to seeing the quality in four main domains of education: 1. Contexts / environments (physical, academic, psychological, and social atmosphere in schools); 2. Inputs (teachers, curriculum, leadership, and others); 3. Processes (teaching and learning, assessment, and other processes); 4. Outputs (students' learning outcomes, teachers' professional growth and others). Within the larger study, this article focuses on teachers' quality only.
The investigation of previous literature and the study's theoretical framework demonstrate that the rural school education challenges greatly impact the conditions of rural teachers' professional activity.
The study employed a mixed methods research design, including both quantitative and qualitative inquiries: survey and semi-structured interviews [1]. The quantitative survey included 125 respondents from 40 rural schools across Kazakhstan. For qualitative part, 90 interviews (41 individual and 49 focus group) were conducted with participants from rural schools in Almaty, Kyzylorda, South Kazakhstan, Mangystau, and East Kazakhstan regions. Interviewees included teachers, principals, vice principals, subject coordinators, students of Grades 7-11, regional and district education managers, and parents.
The study's main findings describe the core teachers' issues, challenges, perceptions, and suggestions about facilitation processes for the quality of the rural teacher profession. The findings are organized across the main topics, which have been retrieved from qualitative and quantitative data.
Keywords: rural education, rural schools, teachers, teaching profession, teacher's status, quality of teaching profession
Introduction
The provision and quality of education, particularly in rural or less advantaged areas, ought to be an essential agenda for all stakeholders in education. From becoming a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child [2] in 1994, Kazakhstan has taken several measures to improve access to and the quality of education in the country. However, many research studies have revealed significant disparities in the quality of educational provision and achievements in rural and urban schools in the country. Rural schools are afflicted by declining achievements and completion rates, deteriorating school infrastructure, a shortage of qualified teachers, and limited access to high-quality education [3]. Other factors involve a decrease in enrollment, rising drop-out rates [4], poor performance of rural school students in the Unified National Test [5], limited access to the Internet [6], lower salaries of school directors and teachers [7], and language-related problems [8].
Moreover, there is an inequitable distribution of teachers among schools, with competent teachers less likely to work at disadvantaged schools and more likely to move to schools for gifted students where additional resources are available [9]. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [10], Kazakhstan needs a plan to provide appropriately qualified teachers and high-quality educational resources to rural schools, for example, by sending some of the best teachers from elite schools because of a shortage of highly qualified teachers in the country. Moreover, girls are seen to have higher attainment rates than boys [11, 12]. In addition, the frequent renewal of the curriculum forces teachers to adapt to new courses in short periods, resulting in rural teachers struggling to cope with numerous reforms [13].
While the issues faced by rural schools are well documented elsewhere in the world, there, however, is a lack of empirical studies in the context of Kazakhstan to understand the quality issues in rural schools from the perspectives of the teachers, school leaders, and other stakeholders working on the ground in the
remote and rural villages across the country. Most educators and policymakers agree that the quality of teaching is considered to be an outlining factor of school students' achievements and overall success in schools and the nation's educational system [14]. Therefore, this paper primarily focuses on the issues and challenges experienced by rural teachers from the perspective of the teachers, school leaders, and other stakeholders in rural areas in Kazakhstan. Several general topics have been identified in the scope of quantitative and qualitative data: rural teachers' motivation attributes, quality of rural teachers, the quality of the psychological and academic environment and support system in rural schools, young teachers, self-development, workload, challenges, and recommendations.
Research questions
The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are Kazakhstani rural school leaders, teachers, students, and parents' conceptions of quality of education?
2. What opportunities, resources, and support do these rural school leaders and teachers have to achieve the perceived quality of education in their schools?
3. What issues and challenges do these rural school leaders, teachers, and students face in achieving the perceived quality of education in their schools?
4. What recommendations can be made to enhance the quality of education in Kazakhstani rural schools?
Theoretical framework
Quality of education has been a contested concept in the broader literature. The lack of universally accepted standard definition of education quality makes discussing the concept even more problematic [15]. Thus, it was decided to employ a theoretical framework of contexts, inputs, and outputs to understand stakeholders' conceptions of education quality and associated challenges, issues, and gaps in rural Kazakhstani schools. This is the framework that is primarily drawn from Tikley [16] and UNESCO [17].
Figure 1: UNESCO Quality Framework
Contexts / Environments
Quality of Education
Outputs
Processes:
- System level
- School level
Methodology
This study employed a mixed methods research design, including both quantitative and qualitative inquiries: survey and semi-structured interviews [1]. The quantitative survey was administered to over 200 teachers from 40 rural schools across Kazakhstan and 125 of them responded. To obtain rich, in-depth, and descriptive data from a relatively small sample [18], 90 qualitative interviews (41 individual and 49 focus group) were conducted with participants from rural schools in Almaty, Kyzylorda, South Kazakhstan, Mangystau, and East Kazakhstan regions. Interviewees included teachers, principals, vice principals, subject coordinators, students of Grades 7-11, regional and district education managers, and parents. The survey and
interview questions were developed in line with the quality framework presented in Figure 1 and piloted to ensure validity and reliability [19]. Semi-structured interviews and focus-group discussions, with deep probing questions, generated information-rich, descriptive data [20, 21]. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted in Kazakh or Russian, depending on the participants' choice, and later transcribed and translated into English.
Data analysis was done in three phases: first, the data received through the quantitative survey questionnaires was analyzed. Second, ongoing analysis of the qualitative data was done alongside data collection. Third, a more rigorous analysis of the data was done after the data collection was completed in different regions) [22, 19]. This ongoing data analysis helped us identify gaps in the data, probe further in subsequent interviews, and see emerging patterns and themes [23, 24, 21]. Several relevant and interconnected themes emerged as a result of the data analysis. However, keeping in view the word limit, we chose to present the findings in the following themes.
Results
Stakeholders' perception of rural teachers' motivation attributes
The study participants commented on the rural teachers' motivation. They observed incentives and resources that contribute to teachers' motivation. Thus, 89 % of the survey respondents agreed that their schools provide the necessary conditions for teachers, including awards, recognition, and professional development courses. In their focus group interviews, the participants also stated that there are incentives and bonuses provided to the rural teachers. For instance, there are incentives for rural teachers in the form of onetime payment (подъёмные in Russian). This money is allocated for teachers to purchase a house. The government also organized a program called "with a diploma to the village", in which young teachers who go to the villages to work receive free accommodation provided by the schools. Other respondents added that "Teachers with higher qualifications / advanced degrees willing to work in rural schools usually get 30-50% increase in their salaries". Another motivation for rural teachers is preparing their students for subject Olympiads, which brings them satisfaction from their work and some material rewards. For example, one teacher with 35 years of teaching experience in rural schools mentioned, "I got several job offers from schools in big cities. They promised me higher salary and incentives but I declined their offers because I get thrilled when my students [from this rural village] get positions in the Olympiads or another context".
In their interviews, other rural teachers acknowledged with gratitude that their schools and the MOES appreciate their hard work by awarding them with appreciation certificates, letters of appreciation, and certificates of merit. An education manager in the eastern region mentioned that rural schools in their region organize various events and seminars where teachers share their own experience and also receive bonuses. Most respondents mentioned such factors as students' achievements in various contests, gratifying attitudes and respects from students and parents, and support from school and regional education administration keep their motivation high to continue to work in rural schools.
However, the study participants also noted a number of factors that demotivate rural school teachers. These include, lack of encouragement and support from school administration, bureaucratic leadership style of school directors, lack of incentives and bonuses, and difficult conditions under which schools operate in these far-flung villages. These teachers lamented the absence of a uniformed policy and practices for teachers' motivation in rural schools. For example, one rural teacher from the same region admitted that in some other schools in rural areas, when a student wins a competition, the concerned teacher is awarded with an additional bonus salary and other incentives. However, there are no such policy and practice in the school where this teacher works.
Several participants of the FGDs reported about declining motivation in rural teachers. These participants mentioned that experienced teachers, who are closer to their retirement from the service, are neglected by the school administration and regional education authorities. These senior teachers attempt to adapt to the constant changes introduced in schools; they attend various trainings to keep abreast of the new knowledge and innovations. They, however, felt that despite all the hard work they have done and the challenges they have faced, there is no recognition of their work. Other teachers also added that there was little or no encouragement and lack of appreciation for teachers for work well-done. Thus, they did not have a sense of being useful anymore. Several participants also mentioned the uneven distribution of salaries and incentives. During the interviews, some rural teachers also pointed out the lack or no support from local authorities and MOES.
The survey data also showed that only 30% of participants considered the support from the MOES and Regional Education Offices relatively effective. The participants suggested that local authorities and the MOES may provide rural teachers with additional incentives such as providing apartments, transport allowances, hardship allowances, and considerable increase in their salaries to raise their motivation, and thus ensure talented teachers do not leave rural schools.
Stakeholders' perceptions about the quality of teachers
The study participants also shared their perceptions about the quality of rural teachers. First, they pointed out such quality indicators as teachers' qualifications, knowledge of the subject, ability to explain the content properly, and ability to interact with students and motivate them. About 80% participants expressed satisfaction with the quality of teachers in their schools. These participants stated that there are certain mechanisms and strategies to improve teachers' quality in rural schools. For example, all teachers undergo professional development courses and an attestation process every five years. Also, the representatives of the regional education department regularly visit schools to check teachers' portfolios and observe their lessons. Additionally, there is a six-level teacher appraisal system, which motivates teachers to grow professionally. According to this new appraisal system, there is a clear career-ladder for teachers to move from a lower category of teachers (trainee teacher) to the highest category (Master Teacher) based on his/her performance and professional learning.
Now we have the Nazarbayev Intellectual School, a 6-level system: trainee-teacher, educator, moderator, expert, researcher, and then a master teacher. Now, if I'm not mistaken, they introduced them last year, and we keep updated with the news in the NIS.
- Teacher in the South Kazakhstan region
In order to maintain the quality of teachers in rural areas, educational officials use set criteria in the hiring process. Teachers, vice-principals, and educational officials commented on the hiring procedure's stages, including interviews, testing procedure, and three months trial period. Then another assessment comes after the three months. If a teacher successfully passes, then he \ she may continue working in the school permanently. The school administration, in alliance with educational officials, also check teachers' CVs and their previous experience. To help novice and young teachers, the school administration also organizes mentorship, where experienced senior teachers play the roles of mentors.
As reported by the participants, rural teachers, apart from professional qualities, are fully devoted to their school and students. Some of these teachers spend 25-30 thousand KZ Tenge a month in buying teaching and learning materials that their school lack. They also extend financial help to needy students. The participants further stated that rural teachers pay attention to their students' general well-being. Sometimes, when they notice a child wearing training shoes during the cold weather, they address the issue to the sponsors. Also, there were cases when teachers had to collect money for a particular child from their own salaries.
Sometimes, children come in training shoes, even at the time of the first snow, which means that the family does not have money for the clothes. Sometimes we address the social pedagogue and ask for sponsorship if anybody has an opportunity. There were cases when teachers collected money for a particular child for footwear, coat, and something else. ...
-Teachers in the East Kazakhstan region
Students' perceptions of the rural teachers are generally very positive. The majority of students reported that, in general, their teachers were committed to their work. However, they indicated a discrepancy between senior and young teachers. Students mentioned such facts that senior teachers could maintain discipline in the classroom, and they conducted their lessons well. However, senior teachers are conservative, and sometimes students are not allowed to express their viewpoints.
On the other hand, novice young teachers sometimes could not deliver their lessons properly. Another remark was that some teachers were using only textbooks during their lessons and did not use any other additional materials. One student who participated in a FGD in Oskemen commented: "Not all teachers, but some do not simply tell what is written in the book but make us create table so that it is easier for us and the information is delivered to our brains".
The survey data indicated that about 80 % of participants agreed that rural teachers demonstrate the qualities of an effective educator. According to an education manager in one of the Kazakhstani regions, the best teacher's qualities are subject knowledge, proficiency in three languages (Kazakh, Russian and English), ability to use new technologies during the lesson, information communication technologies, oratory skills to convey the information easily. Students, in their turn, expressed their perception of the best teacher. They reported that an ideal teacher should attract students' attention, explain things in an interesting way, have a good rapport with students, treat all students equally, be a specialist in his/her subject, and have an active lifestyle. Teachers' opinion mostly coincides with the abovementioned qualities. However, they also added such capabilities as a good rapport with students and colleagues, flexibility and resourcefulness, and ability to adapt to any conditions.
Most rural teachers as well as the regional education managers and parents expressed their concerns about teachers' rights and status in the society. They all felt that teachers do not have the same privileges and status as other professionals enjoy in the society. One of the participants stated, "Teaching is not a profession of first choice for many high school graduates. Students with high GPA and good grades opt for a career in a technical field like medicine, engineering and others. Only low-achievers go for teaching". Therefore teachers are not treated in the same manner as are other professionals in the society. Parents have the right to complain about teachers. However, in most cases, even if parents' criticism is not valid, teachers are always guilty. The school administrators also support parents, but not teachers.
You see now. Any student can film a teacher in a lesson and post a video on the Internet or even on the ministry website. The aggression of a teacher is seen in the video, but the whole picture is hidden. The context of the situation is not visible, it is not visible how they lashed the teacher, this is not captured, and only the teacher's aggression is visible. But why did it happen?
-Educational Official in the East Kazakhstan region
A lack of teachers' protection and lack of respect for their rights leads to the low status of a teacher. Other factors which impact a teacher's life and work are the overload of lessons, long working days, bringing work home, low salary, and parents' attitude towards teachers. For those reasons, the teaching profession is not attractive to young people.
Quality of young teachers
Many teachers reported that generally the graduates of pedagogical universities are the ones who would have lower scores in their terminal examinations, and therefore they would apply for teaching profession. For that reason, teachers suggested to paying attention to the recruitment process of graduates.
Most stakeholders reported that there were conditions for young teachers in rural schools. The school administrators motivated young teachers via awards, certificates, and letters of appreciation and encouraged teachers' achievements.
As mentioned before, rural schools pay special attention to the mentoring process. Young teachers are assigned to their mentors who help them in terms of content knowledge, planning the lessons, teaching methods, and others. A principal in one of the regions also observed that there are different methodical associations who support young teachers.
...Besides this, young teachers have mentors who help them. Any teacher, if he is competent, will always help. ...if something is not clear..., we discuss it at the methodical association. Despite that, it's hard to get together, but we still try to do so.
-Department Head in the East Kazakhstan region
Many participants also mentioned some issues regarding young teachers' weak content knowledge and their unpreparedness for challenges at work in school. There is a considerable discrepancy between what the university teaches its graduates and the realities of the school workplace. Some young teachers feel that teaching work is rather challenging. Even though teachers attend the level courses and some young teachers completed master's degrees. They are not prepared for some practical realities of teaching work, such as too much paperwork, a new curriculum, and classroom management.
Teachers, during their interviews, mentioned their concerns about young graduates of pedagogical universities. They claimed that young teachers who come to the village are not appropriately prepared to teach in schools.
Professional development of rural teachers
The study participants shared information about the professional development of teachers in rural areas. The majority of respondents, including teachers, educational officials, vice principals, and principals, reported that there are professional development courses for teaching staff on updated curriculum, trilingual policy, and some external courses on how to use ICT and other equipment in schools. In general, teachers were satisfied with those courses and endorsed that such courses were useful for their teaching skills and student's motivation. However, some teachers stated that the courses conducted by foreign specialists were too theoretical and lacked a focus on Kazakhstani educational system.
Rural schools collaborate with various educational centers: National Institute for Teacher Training Orleu, Center of Excellence of NIS, and Department for Quality Control of Knowledge, which organize courses and seminars for teachers. The collaboration is mutual, teachers may attend those centers, or sometimes trainers from the centers travel to rural schools. A department head in one of East Kazakhstan regions reported that every 5-year period, teachers undergo a special test on professional qualification. Upon achieving the desired results in the test, teachers get promoted to higher categories. A principal in one of the rural schools confirmed that teachers attend three-level teacher development courses according to the Cambridge program.
... teachers are self-motivated and interested, because it [special test] can raise their salary. Every five years [period], teachers try to raise their category; that is, they do not remain at one level. ... The test, you know, is not a simple task to do. You should know the pedagogy and psychology of your subject. You start repeating everything, revising in order to get ready.
-Department Head in the East Kazakhstan region
Another finding of the study was related to students with special needs. In general, it was mentioned that rural schools lack facilities and expertise to deal with students with special needs. Therefore most special students have to study at home. Teachers sometimes invite them to schools to interact and learn with other students. Although, rural school teachers attend seminars on inclusive education, they, however, lack the specialized knowledge, pedagogies and resources to properly address the learning needs of students with special needs. Despite the fact that rural schools do not have adequate number of teachers equipped with the expertise required to teach students with special needs, some provisions are made in schools to ensure access and mobility of students with special needs.
Workload of rural teachers
All stakeholders supported the issue of teachers' overload at work. Rural teachers have to combine several roles apart from teaching lessons, which distract them from their primary work duties. These are working extra hours, class supervision, parent-teacher meetings, journal publications, and documentation work. In their interviews, many teachers from Southern and Eastern regions confessed that they have to teach in several shifts because rural schools accommodate too many students. Unfortunately, teachers do not receive any extra payment for extra work. However, one principal in the South region mentioned that their teachers do have one day off in a week, which is called methodological day—the day on which teachers can prepare for their lessons.
Another topic raised during the interview process was about class supervision (tutoring). Some of the participants reported that teachers usually combine teaching with class supervision. During class supervision, teachers have to arrange the following duties: parents' meetings, visiting students' houses and inspections, checking attendance of students, preparation of events such as New Year celebration. Teachers are also responsible for their classes (homeroom classes). A rural teacher receives only 5000 tenge for class supervision per month. Furthermore, respondents compared rural teachers with teachers at NIS where every teacher gets help from a teaching assistant for class supervision. Unfortunately, rural teachers do not have assistants who may help them with that duty.
... unlike in Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools, we do not have additional personnel for it [class supervision]. As compulsory, every teacher has a class, and even if the salary is low, he will work with children. 5000 tenge is being paid.
-Teachers in the East Kazakhstan region
Paperwork has been underlined as the most challenging issue by all stakeholders. Teachers, in addition to their primary work of classroom teaching, have to deal with increasing loads of paperwork on daily basis. They have to fill out several forms, write papers, and do other documentation and therefore they have to stay back after the usual school hours to do the paper work. Also, there is an electronic register for students' attendance and marks, "Kundelik," which also has to be filled by teachers. Consequently, teachers have less time left for proper lesson preparation.
The majority of respondents reported about their struggles with the implementation of the updated curriculum. However, over time, teachers and students could get used to it, although some issues are yet to be solved.
Participants reported the following challenges associated with the updated curriculum:
• More homework, complicated content, and some assignments take more time to solve them.
• Shortage of classrooms but growing number of students in rural schools. For example, one school the research team visited was built for 600 students over a decade ago, and now there are 1400 students. There are not enough classrooms and therefore the school has to construct new classrooms.
• Every school has an online registrar Kundelk.kz, which teachers must fill out. So, every classroom needs computers and a good internet connection as teachers have to fill the registrar at home even at night.
• Teachers have to prepare materials for summative assignments. Summative assessment assignments are prepared by teachers, which takes much time. Teachers prepare them at home.
• Teachers also have to buy paper for tests and reports with their own money. Sometimes they have to buy worksheets and charts etc. for students and this costs a handsome amount given that there are 25 or more students in each class.
Discussion
As the article mainly focuses on quality issues and challenges related to rural school teachers, it should be mentioned that the role of teachers in the national educational system of any country is crucial, and Kazakhstan is not an exception. Fortunately, in recent years, one could witness gradual positive changes in the national educational system and the facilitation of the conditions for teachers in Kazakhstan. For instance, the system of professional development courses, including the Center of Pedagogical Excellence Program, ORLEU organization, a reform under the agenda of MES working in collaboration with NU for the pedagogical institutes' Programmes, NIS initiatives in the changes in attestation, pay and career developments [25, 14]. NIS AEO not only aims to transfer its experience to the mainstream school system in terms of comprehensive development of primary and secondary education but it is also a hub of professional continuous development courses for teachers in the country [26]. NU is committed to becoming the national brand of higher education in Kazakhstan by combining the strengths of the national education system and the best international scientific and educational practices. Established in 2012, the Graduate School of Education is a "world-class center for teaching and research on education," which also aims at reforms in teacher education in Kazakhstan and Central Asia [27]. During the current study, the majority of rural teachers confirmed that NU and NIS had initiated many development courses to facilitate their teaching practices.
However, there are challenges and issues which all stakeholders of education face during the abovementioned reforms. The major issues which were revealed during the current study are a lack of qualified teachers and, in general, a lack of teachers for STEM subjects in rural schools. The role of teachers in rural schools is even more critical due to the shortage of other sources of learning and support for students [28]. However, there is an increasing concern in rural schools that more qualified teachers and effective leaders are likely to move to cities for better prospects and quality of life [10]. The share of highly qualified teachers in rural schools is 13.8% compared to 32.8% in urban schools [29]. The current study confirmed that there are various professional development courses for teachers in rural areas; however, sometimes, those courses do not bring highly effective results. For instance, there is no requirement for school teachers to earn a Master or Ph.D. because teachers with such advanced degrees are often considered "overqualified" for school settings [14].
Among the issues regarding the shortage of teachers is the lack of teachers for specific subject, the shortage of young specialists, declining number of male teachers, and a considerable number of teachers close to their retirement. The quantitative and qualitative data revealed a shortage of teachers for English,
mathematics, ICT, and science subjects in most schools. Considering the reform of trilingual policy, most participants also shared the concerns that many teachers are not proficient in the English language to teach STEM subjects solely in English. Consequently, apart from the fact that the trilingual policy is implemented in rural schools, still, students, as well as teachers, are not fully prepared for the conduction of subjects in English language [30]. Since young teachers are not intended to work in rural schools, a significant number of teachers in most schools are from the Soviet time and closer to their retirement age. The average age is 45 years old. Therefore, they are less motivated to learn new technologies and modern teaching methods, learning, and assessment [31].
During the interviews, some participants mentioned the need for more male teachers at rural schools, as they may positively influence school boys' upbringing and overall development. The respondents also mentioned possible reasons for the shortage of men in the teaching profession in Kazakhstan: heavy teaching load, lack of resources, low salaries, increasing paperwork, non-relevant duties forced on teachers, lack of autonomy, and frequent inspection causing stress to teachers [9]. The low status of the teaching profession and widening disparity in pay between the capital city and other regions also add to the teachers' shortage in rural schools [13]. However, the "Law on status of teachers" has been approved, and it will raise the prestige and status of the teaching profession when implemented effectively [32].
Teachers' quality in rural schools is also affected by the provision and quality of resources in these schools. The shortage of classrooms, ICT and other equipment, stationery, textbooks, and other teaching materials likewise impact the quality of teachers and their work. The current study also showed that there are teachers, though small in numbers, at each research site who go out of their way to support students' learning. Some of these teachers spend 20-30 thousand Tenge from their own pockets every month to buy stationary and teaching materials to engage students in their lessons meaningfully. The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed the disparity and inequalities that exist between rural and urban schools across the country. The technical issues with a poor internet connection, lack of WIFI internet, and lack of computers in some families in remote rural areas further hinder the work of rural teachers.
Conclusion
The study results showed that rural teachers' quality is affected by several factors including the teachers' own modest education background, low motivation, poor work conditions in schools, and inequalities between urban and rural schools. While experienced teachers, who are drawing closer to their retirement, have no further ambitions and aspirations, the young teachers lack content knowledge and pedagogical skills as well as the support they need to build their career on stronger foundations. Although several encouraging steps have been taken by MOES to reduce the gaps and inequalities between urban and rural schools, there is a need to direct more resources towards teacher professional development in Kazakhstani rural schools. It is important to ensure that any change or reform directed towards school improvement must offer opportunities, support and incentives for teachers capacity-building and motivation.
Considering all the factors and challenges that influence rural teachers' quality and their work, this study recommends to:
(i) attract qualified specialists to rural schools by offering them additional incentives such as free accommodation, hardship allowances, and opportunities for their professional development,
(ii) invest in young and gifted graduates from rural areas as to motivate them to join teaching profession and undertake quality training,
(iii) provide sufficient conditions in rural schools such as Internet connectivity, ICT equipment, and modern technologies to make teaching both fun and enriching in rural schools and,
(iv) provide specialized training on inclusive education in rural schools and arrange specialists such as defectologists, speech therapists, and others for building rural school teachers' capacity in inclusive education.
References
1. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. (2007). A typology of mixed-methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281-316.
2. Assembly, U. G. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. United Nations, Treaty Series, 1577(3), 1-23.
3. Bridges, D. and Sagintayeva, A. (2014). Introduction, in D. Bridges (Ed.), Educational reform and Internationalization: The Case of School Reform in Kazakhstan. Cambridge University press.
4. Yakavets, N. and Dzhandrina, M. (2014). Educational reforms in Kazakhstan: Entering the world arena, in D. Bridges (Ed.), Educational reform and Internationalization: The Case of School Reform in Kazakhstan. Cambridge University press.
5. Winter, L., Rimini, C., Soltanbekova, A. & Tynybayeva, M. (2014). The culture and practices of assessment in Kazakhstan: The Unified National Test, Past and Present. In D Bridges (Ed.), Educational Reform and Internationalization: The Case of School Reform in Kazakhstan, (pp 106-132). Cambridge University Press.
6. Fimyar, O., Yakavets. N., & Bridges, D. (2014). Educational reforms in Kazakhstan: The contemporary policy agenda. In D. Bridges (Ed.), Educational reform and Internationalization: The Case of School Reform in Kazakhstan. Cambridge University Press.
7. Frost, D., Fimyar, O., Yakavets, N., & Bilyalov, D. (2014). The role of the school director in educational reform in Kazakhstan. In D. Bridges (Ed.), Educational reform and Internationalization: The case of school reform in Kazakhstan, (pp 217-238). Cambridge University Press.
8. Mehisto, P., Kambatyrova, A., & Nurseitova, K. (2014). Trilingualism in Educational Policy and Practice. In D. Bridges (Ed.), Education Reform and Internationalisation: TheCase of School Reform in Kazakhstan (pp 152). Cambridge University Press.
9. Tastanbekova, K. (2020). Professional prestige, status and esteem of teaching in Kazakhstan: Temporal, regional and gender analysis of payroll data. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research, 7(2), 175-190.
10. Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2014). Secondary education in Kazakhstan 2014, reviews of national policies for education. OECD Publishing.
11. DeYoung, A. J. (2006). Problems and trends in education in Central Asia since 1990: The case of general secondary education in Kyrgyzstan. Central Asian Survey, 25(4), 499-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634930701210575
12. Drummond, T. (2011). Higher education admission regimes in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan: Differences make a difference. In I. Silova (Ed.), Globalization on the margins: Education and post-socialist transformations in central Asia, (pp 95-124). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
13. Irsaliyev, S. A., Kamzoldayev, M. B., Tashibayev, D. N., & Kopeyeva, A. T. (2019). Teachers of Kazakhstan: Why do young people choose this occupation and what motivates them to stay? Beles Centre for Strategy and Analysis. https://beles-cas.kz/images/teacher.pdf.
14. Kulakhmetova, A., McLaughlin, C., & Ayubayeva, N. (2015). Preparing teachers: An international review of the evidence on initial teacher education. Research Project "Development of Strategic Directions for Education Reforms in Kazakhstan for, 2020.
15. Barrett, A. M., Chawla-Duggan, R., Low, J., Nikel, J., & Ukpo, E. (2006). The concept of quality in education: A review of the international literature on the concept of quality in education. EdQual Working Paper Number 3.
16. Tikly, L. (2011). Towards a framework for researching the quality of education in low income countries. Comparative Education, 47(1), 1-23. DOI:10.1080/03050068.2011.541671
17. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2005). Measuring Educational Quality by Means of Indicators. [Unpublished Paper]. UNESCO, New York.
18. Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson Education,
Inc.
19. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-607.
20. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
21. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.
22. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A guide to design and implementation (4th Ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers.
23. Saldana, J. (2013). Power and conformity in today's schools. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(1), 228-232.
24. Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds?. Currents in pharmacy teaching and learning, 10(6), 807-815.
25. Fimyar, O., & Kurakbayev, K. (2016). 'Soviet' in teachers' memories and professional beliefs in Kazakhstan: points for reflection for reformers, international consultants and practitioners. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 29(1), 86-103.
26. Autonomous Education Organization Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools. (2018). 2030 development strategy. https://www.nis.edu.kz/en/about/str-doc/
27. Nazarbayev University. (2011). A brief history of the university. Nazarabyev University, Astana, Kazakhstan. https://nu.edu.kz/about-nazarbayev-university/history
28. Tajik, M., & Wali, A. (2020). Principals' strategies for increasing students' participation in school leadership in a rural, mountainous region in Pakistan. Improving Schools, 23(3), 245-263.
29. Information and Analytical Centre. (2019). Education statistics: ministry of education and science of the republic of Kazakhstan. http://iac.kz/sites/default/files/0nacionalnyy doklad za 2018 god final s oblozhkami na sayt compressed 0.pdf
30. Sagintayeva, A., Bridges, D., McLaughlin, C., Mehisto, P., Drummond, M. J., Ayubayeva, N., & Sagyndykova, Z. (2014). Development of strategic directions for education reforms in Kazakhstan for 2015-2020.
31. Almurzayeva, B., Shunkeyeva, O., Karavanova, L., & Sagiyeva, A. (2015). The rating system of the rural school pupils' assessment of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 1152— 1158.
32. KazInform (2019) "Law on status of teachers" [Законопроект о статусе учителя разработают в 2019 году - глава Минюста] https://www.inform.kz/ru/zakonoproekt-o-statuse-uchitelya-razrabotayut-v-2019-godu-glava-minyusta a3440961
КАЧЕСТВО УЧИТЕЛЕЙ В КАЗАХСТАНСКИХ СЕЛЬСКИХ ШКОЛАХ
М. А. Тажик, Д. А. Шаматов, Л. Н. Филлипова*
Назарбаев Университет, г. Астана, Казахстан E-mail*: lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Аннотация
В этом исследовании рассматриваются вопросы и проблемы, с которыми сталкиваются сельские учителя, с точки зрения ключевых заинтересованных сторон в сельских школах, включая руководителей школ, учителей, учащихся, родителей и лидеров образования, а также возможные рекомендации, основанные на мнениях заинтересованных сторон. Изучение существующей литературы и теоретических основ исследования показало, что проблемы образования в сельской школе также влияют на условия профессиональной деятельности сельских учителей.
В данном исследовании использовался дизайн смешанных методов исследования, включающий как количественные, так и качественные исследования: опрос и полуструктурированные интервью. В количественном опросе приняли участие более 200 учителей из 40 сельских школ Казахстана, но ответили только 125 участников. Было проведено 90 качественных интервью (41 индивидуальное и 49 фокус-групп) с представителями сельских школ Алматинской, Кызылординской, Южно-Казахстанской, Мангыстауской и Восточно-Казахстанской областей. В число опрошенных входили учителя, директора школ, заместители директоров, предметные координаторы, учащиеся 7-11 классов, региональные и районные руководители образования и родители.
Основные выводы исследования выявили насущные проблемы учителей, их взгляды и рекомендации относительно повышения качества профессии сельских учителей. Как правило, в процессе сбора количественных и качественных данных мы использовали Рамки качества ЮНЕСКО, которые фокусируются на таких моментах, как: 1. Контекст /окружающая среда; 2. Вводные данные; 3. Процессы; 4. Результаты. Поскольку это исследование направлено в основном на вопросы и проблемы качества учителей в сельских школах, результаты организованы по основным темам, которые были извлечены из качественных и количественных данных.
Ключевые слова: сельское образование, сельские школы, учителя, профессия учителя, статус учителя, качество профессии учителя.
ЦАЗАЦСТАНДЬЩ АУЫЛ МЕКТЕПТЕР1НДЕГ1 М¥ГАЛШДЕРДЩ САПАСЫ
М. А. Тажик, Д. А. Шаматов, Л. Н. Филлипова*
Назарбаев Университет^ Астана к., Казахстан E-mail*: lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Б^л зерттеу ауыл м:ратмдершщ ауылдьщ мектептердеп непзп мYДделi тараптар, соньщ iшiнде мектеп басшылары, мр^мдер, окушылар, ата-аналар жэне бшм беру кешбасшылары т^ргысынан кездесетш мэселелер мен мэселелерд^ сондай-ак мYДделi тараптардыц пЫрлерше непзделген мумшн ^сыныстарды карастырады. Зерттеудщ колданыстагы эдебиеттерi мен теориялык непздерш зерттеу ауыл мектебшдеп бшм беру проблемалары ауыл мр^мдершщ кэаби кызмет жагдайларына да эсер етепндтн керсетп.
Б^л зерттеу сандык жэне сапалык зерттеулердi камтитын аралас зерттеу эдютершщ дизайнын колданды: сауалнама жэне жартылай к¥рылымдалган с^хбат. Сандык сауалнамага Казакстанныц 40 ауыл мектебшен 200-ден астам мралш катысты, бiрак тек 125 катысушы жауап бердi. Алматы, Кызылорда, Оп^спк Казакстан, Мацгыстау жэне Шыгыс Казакстан облыстарыныц ауыл мектептерiнiц екiлдерiмен 90 сапалы с^хбат
15
(41 жеке жэне 49 фокус-топ) еткшлда. С^ралгандардыц катарына м^галмдер, мектеп директорлары, директорлардыщ орынбасарлары, пэндж Yйлестiрушiлер, 7-11 сынып окушылары, ещрлж жэне аудандык бiлiм беру басшылары мен ата-аналар кiрдi.
Зерттеудiц непзп корытындылары мратмдердщ езектi мэселелерiн, олардыщ ауыл м¥Fалiмдерi кэсiбiнiц сапасын арттыруга катысты кезкарастары мен ^сыныстарын аныктады. Эдетте, сандык жэне сапалык деректердi жинау процесiнде 6i3 ЮНЕСКО-ныщ сапа шецберш колдандык, олар: 1. Контекст / коршаган орта; 2. Юрюпе деректер; 3. Процестер; 4. Нэтижелерг Б^л зерттеу негiзiнен ауыл мектептерiндегi мратмдердщ сапасы мен мэселелерiне багытталгандыктан, нэтижелер сапалы жэне сандык мэтметтерден алынган негiзгi такырыптар бойынша ^йымдастырылган.
Туйт свздер: ауыл б1лш1, ауыл мектептерг, мугал1мдер, музалгм кэабг, Мугал1м мэртебеа, музалгм кэабтщ сапасы.
Information about the authors
Mir A. Tajik - PhD (Educational Leadership), Associate Professor, Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University. Address: 53, Kabanbay batyr Ave., Astana city, 010000, Kazakhstan. ORCID 0000-0003-2951-266X; E-mail: afzal.mir@nu.edu.kz
Duishon A. Shamatov - PhD (Education), Associate Professor, Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University. Address: 53, Kabanbay batyr Ave., Astana city, 010000, Kazakhstan. ORCID 0000-0001-6625-1054; Email: duishonkul.shamatov@nu.edu.kz
Lyudmila N. Fillipova - M. Sci. (Educational Leadership), Research Assistant, Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University. Address: 53, Kabanbay batyr Ave., Astana city, 010000, Kazakhstan. ORCID 0000-00018342-6178; E-mail: lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Информация об авторах
Тажик Мир Афзал - PhD (управление образованием), ассоциированный профессор, Высшая школа образования, Назарбаев Университет. Адрес: Казахстан, г. Астана, 010000, Кабанбай батыра, 53. ORCID 0000-0003-2951-266X; , E-mail: afzal.mir@nu.edu.kz
Шаматов Дуйшон Алиевич - PhD (образование), ассоциированный профессор, Высшая школа образования, Назарбаев Университет. Адрес: Казахстан, г. Астана, 010000, Кабанбай батыра, 53. ORCID 00000001-6625-1054; E-mail: duishonkul.shamatov@nu.edu.kz
Филлипова Людмила Николаевна - магистр наук (управление образованием), научный ассистент, Высшая школа образования, Назарбаев Университет. Адрес: Казахстан, г. Астана, 010000, Кабанбай батыра, 53. ORCID 0000-0001-8342-6178; E-mail: lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Авторлар туралы ацпарат
Тажик Мир Афзал - PhD (бшм берудi баскару), кауымдастырылган профессор, Жогары бшм беру мектеб^ Назарбаев Университета Мекенжайы: Казакстан, Астана к., 010000, Кабанбай батыр к-а, 53. ORCID 0000-0003-2951 -266x; E-mail: afzal.mir@nu.edu.kz
Шаматов Дуйшон Алиевич - PhD (бшм беру), кауымдастырылган профессор, Жогары бшм беру мектеб^ Назарбаев Университета Мекенжайы: Казакстан, Астана к., 010000, Кабанбай батыр к-а, 53. ORCID 0000-0001-6625-1054; E-mail: duishonkul.shamatov@nu.edu.kz
Филлипова Людмила Николаевна - гылым магис^ (бiлiм берудi баскару), гылыми ассистент, Жогары бiлiм беру мектеб^ Назарбаев Университетi. Мекенжайы: Казакстан, Астана к., 010000, Кабанбай батыр к-ri, 53. ORCID 0000-0001-8342-6178; E-mail: lyudmila.fillipova@nu.edu.kz
Редакцияга тYCтi / Поступила в редакцию / Received 26.09.2022 Жариялауга кабылданды / Принята к публикации / Accepted 29.09.2022
