Overcoming educational inequality in Turkestan

Education is recognized worldwide as a key driver of social and economic development, poverty reduction, and equal opportunities for future generations. For Kazakhstan, which aims for sustainable growth and modernization, the education system plays a critical role in shaping human capital that is competitive both nationally and globally.

Yet, despite significant progress over the past decades, stark regional differences remain in the quality and accessibility of education. The Turkestan region stands out as one of the most vulnerable in the country. Several negative factors converge here: high poverty (8.1% compared to the national average of 4.5%) [1], lower human development index (0.853 compared to 0.903–0.908 in major cities) [2], limited access to basic infrastructure (many schools still lack proper sanitation), and a large number of schools with Uzbek as the language of instruction—creating additional barriers for university admission.

Demographics also matter: Turkestan is one of the most populated regions, with 2.15 million residents, of whom nearly three-quarters (74.7% or 1.6 million people) live in rural areas [3]. This rural dominance means most schools face shortages of qualified teachers, outdated facilities, and limited access to digital resources—all of which deepen the education gap.

When compared to urban centers such as Almaty or Astana, the differences become even more striking. Studies show that the learning gap between southern regions (including Turkestan) and Almaty can be equivalent to several years of schooling. This not only reduces opportunities for young people but also perpetuates broader socio-economic inequality.

The aim of this policy paper is to analyze education inequality in Turkestan, identify the main drivers of underperformance, and propose practical mechanisms to overcome these gaps. Both socio-economic and institutional barriers—as well as language and infrastructure issues—are examined, with recommendations tailored for government agencies, local authorities, and NGOs.

Turkestan is Kazakhstan’s most populated region, with over 2.15 million people, 74.7% of whom live in rural areas. This rural bias creates structural obstacles: schools in villages are more likely to face staff shortages, outdated facilities, and limited access to digital tools. Naturally, the quality of education is lower compared to urban schools.

Poverty compounds these challenges. With poverty at 8.1% (versus the national average of 4.5%), many families cannot afford tutors, extra lessons, or modern educational materials. This socio-economic factor directly feeds into the cycle of inequality, locking in disadvantages from one generation to the next.

PISA 2022 Results

The most telling sign of Turkestan’s education gap comes from the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA-2022).

• ⁠ ⁠Math: 389 points — lowest in the country (64 points behind Almaty).
• ⁠ ⁠Reading: 347 points — again last place (80 points behind Kostanay region).
• ⁠ ⁠Science: 389 points, compared to 458 in Almaty (69-point gap).

For comparison, Kazakhstan’s national averages were 425 (math), 386 (reading), and 423 (science). Turkestan lags 30–40 points behind national levels and 60–80 points behind the top regions.

PISA also highlights non-academic issues. Students in Turkestan reported lower levels of “progressive thinking” (64.6% vs. 71.5% in Astana), higher anxiety, and weaker motivation. This shows inequality is not only institutional but also socio-psychological [4].

Language Barriers: Uzbek-Language Schools

A unique feature of Turkestan is the high number of Uzbek-language schools. In 2022–2023, the region had 526,136 students, of which 65,334 studied in Uzbek—77.4% of all Uzbek-language students in Kazakhstan [5].

This creates several problems:

1.⁠ ⁠Teaching materials. Uzbek-language textbooks and resources are scarce and often outdated.

2.⁠ ⁠Mismatch in exams. While classes are taught in Uzbek, national exams (ENT, PISA) are only in Kazakh or Russian. Even students who understand the subject in Uzbek struggle with test wording in another language.

3.⁠ ⁠Limited pathways. Graduates from Uzbek schools are at a disadvantage when applying to universities, where Kazakh and Russian dominate. As a result, they are more likely to end up in low-skilled, low-paid jobs.

Thus, the language factor multiplies inequality: most Uzbek-language schools are rural, and their students show the weakest performance in exams and PISA.

Infrastructure and Teacher Shortages

Infrastructure is another critical gap. Many schools in Turkestan still lack proper sanitation. Some operate in two shifts, and until recently, three-shift schools also existed. This reduces classroom time, limits extracurricular opportunities, and lowers overall quality.

Teacher shortages worsen the problem. Rural schools face high staff turnover and a lack of young specialists. Often, underqualified or near-retirement teachers must cover multiple subjects, dragging down teaching quality. Young graduates rarely stay in rural schools due to lower pay and lack of housing, childcare, or social support.

Turkestan is a vivid example of systemic education inequality in Kazakhstan. The key drivers are:

• ⁠ ⁠High poverty and social vulnerability.
• ⁠ ⁠Predominance of rural schools.
• ⁠ ⁠Low PISA scores (389/347/389).
• ⁠ ⁠Large share of Uzbek-language schools (77% of all Uzbek-language students in the country).
• ⁠ ⁠Shortage of teaching materials and language mismatch in national exams.
• ⁠ ⁠Infrastructure gaps and teacher shortages.

These factors reinforce one another, creating a persistent education gap. The issue is not just local—it is a systemic challenge for Kazakhstan. Without decisive action, it risks reproducing social inequality and undermining the country’s long-term human capital development.

Mechanisms for Overcoming Inequality and Policy Recommendations

Educational inequality in the Turkestan region is multi-layered. It is driven not only by poverty and a predominantly rural population but also by language barriers, weak infrastructure, and a shortage of qualified teachers. Addressing this gap requires a comprehensive approach.

1) Social and Economic Support for Students

High poverty rates directly limit children’s opportunities. Without targeted measures, many families will remain excluded from the education system. Key tools include:

• ⁠ ⁠targeted grants,
• ⁠ ⁠expanded free meal programs,
• ⁠ ⁠and transportation support for rural students.

These measures reduce the influence of family background on academic performance and help children from vulnerable households stay in school longer.

2) Language Barriers and Teaching Materials

The fact that 65,334 students in the region study in Uzbek (77% of all Uzbek-language students in Kazakhstan) makes language policy a central issue. The main challenge is that instruction is in Uzbek, while exams (ENT, PISA) are in Kazakh or Russian. This mismatch lowers results: students often fail to handle the exam format even if they understand the material.

A promising solution is Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE). This model provides a solid foundation in the mother tongue in primary grades, followed by the gradual introduction of Kazakh and Russian subjects starting from grades 5–6. To make this work, updated textbooks and bilingual teachers are essential. Without such reforms, the current language asymmetry will continue to reproduce inequality.

Reference: MTB-MLE uses the child’s native language as a bridge for learning other languages and subjects. It helps students, especially from minority communities, better understand material and build cognitive skills in a multilingual world.

3) Academic Performance and the “Lag Effect”

In PISA-2022, Turkestan ranked at the bottom:

• ⁠ ⁠389 points in math,
• ⁠ ⁠347 in reading,
• ⁠ ⁠389 in science.

These scores are 60–80 points behind the top regions, equal to a learning gap of 1.5–2 years. If left unaddressed, this will cement long-term educational marginalization.

To close the gap, remedial programs are needed:

• ⁠ ⁠extra courses in math and literacy,
• ⁠ ⁠targeted summer schools for struggling students,
• ⁠ ⁠regular quality monitoring through “mini-PISA” assessments.

4) Infrastructure Limitations

Despite new construction, the region still has overcrowded and even unsafe schools. Nearly all rural schools lack proper indoor toilets—an issue that discourages attendance, especially among girls. This is more than an education problem; it is a social one.

The solution is:

• ⁠ ⁠prioritizing school construction in the most overcrowded districts,
• ⁠ ⁠upgrading sanitary facilities across all schools within the next three years.

5) Teacher Shortages

Even where there are enough teachers on paper, quality remains a challenge. Young professionals are reluctant to work in rural areas, while existing teachers often carry heavy workloads—sometimes teaching multiple subjects. This is especially critical for science and language education.

Possible solutions include:

• ⁠ ⁠comprehensive support packages (housing, bonuses, career advancement, mentoring),
• ⁠ ⁠expanding targeted university admissions for local students from Turkestan with a requirement to return and teach in the region.

The analysis shows that education inequality in the Turkestan region cannot be solved by a single measure. It is reproduced through the combination of poverty, language barriers, poor infrastructure, and teacher shortages. Only a combined strategy—social support for families, reforms in language policy for Uzbek schools, infrastructure investment, and teacher incentives—can be effective.

Such a package would not only improve test scores but also broaden long-term educational pathways, giving children in Turkestan fair opportunities to enter universities and succeed in the labor market.

Educational inequality in Turkestan is complex, cutting across social, linguistic, infrastructural, and human resource dimensions. The region has 65,000 Uzbek-language students (77% of all in Kazakhstan), consistently records the lowest PISA scores (389 math, 347 reading, 389 science), faces a poverty rate of 8.1% (vs. 4.5% nationally), and has nearly three-quarters of its population living in rural areas. These interconnected factors reinforce each other, creating a self-sustaining cycle of disadvantage passed from one generation to the next.

This is not just a local issue but a strategic challenge for Kazakhstan. Without tackling it, the country cannot achieve fair development, strong human capital, or reduced socio-economic disparities. International experience (OECD, UNESCO, UNICEF) shows that such gaps can be narrowed through comprehensive measures: social support, multilingual education, infrastructure investment, and teacher incentives.

The proposed recommendations—from developing Uzbek-language textbooks and introducing MTB-MLE to building schools, improving sanitation, digitalizing classrooms, and supporting rural teachers—should be viewed as complementary. Only through their joint implementation can Kazakhstan ensure that children in Turkestan have equal opportunities to access quality education, enter universities, and participate fully in the country’s social and economic life.

Future Scenarios for Education Development in the Turkestan Region

The analysis of educational inequality is not only diagnostic but also predictive. For the Turkestan region, it is crucial to consider possible development paths for the education system in the medium term (5–10 years). Below are three scenarios that illustrate different futures depending on the measures implemented.

1) Optimistic Scenario: Intensive Reforms

In this scenario, national and regional authorities consistently introduce a wide set of reforms: modernization of infrastructure (new schools, elimination of triple-shift learning), creation of Uzbek-language textbooks, expanded digital access, and incentives for rural teachers. At the same time, a model of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) is introduced, helping Uzbek-language students transition smoothly to Kazakh and Russian as languages of instruction.

Expected results by 2030:

• ⁠ ⁠The PISA performance gap between Turkestan and leading regions narrows by 30–40 points.
• ⁠ ⁠Average national exam (UNT) scores rise to the republican average (65–68).
• ⁠ ⁠The share of Uzbek-school graduates entering universities increases by 20–25%.
• ⁠ ⁠Social inequality declines as access to quality education becomes more equal.

This scenario requires major investment and strong political will but provides a real chance for Turkestan to move onto a path of sustainable human capital development.

2) Inertia Scenario: Staying on the Current Path

If existing problems are not addressed systematically, little will improve. With limited funding and old practices unchanged, educational inequality will persist. Uzbek-language textbooks will remain incomplete, UNT and PISA results will stay low, and infrastructure challenges will continue.

Possible consequences:

• ⁠ ⁠The PISA gap with leading regions remains at 60–80 points, equal to 1.5–2 years of schooling.
• ⁠ ⁠Uzbek-school graduates continue to face language barriers and low competitiveness when applying to universities.
• ⁠ ⁠Migration of young specialists and teachers to more developed regions accelerates, further weakening the region’s education system.
• ⁠ ⁠Social inequality becomes entrenched, keeping Turkestan among the “outsiders” in terms of human capital quality.

This scenario reflects the risks of a passive approach and shows the cost of inaction.

3) Moderate Scenario: Partial Measures and Gradual Progress

Here, some initiatives are implemented: new school construction and improved sanitation, limited teacher support programs, and individual projects by international organizations. However, language barriers and teacher shortages are only partially resolved.

Likely outcomes:

• ⁠ ⁠PISA results improve by 10–15 points, but the region remains near the bottom nationally.
• ⁠ ⁠UNT scores rise moderately but stay below the national average.
• ⁠ ⁠The share of university entrants grows slightly (by 5–7%).
• ⁠ ⁠Some schools move to two shifts, but overcrowding remains.

The moderate scenario ensures stability and incremental improvement but does not address strategic challenges. It helps “maintain the level” but does not close the gap.

Scenario analysis shows that the region’s trajectory depends directly on how comprehensively and decisively reforms are implemented. The optimistic scenario requires significant resources but is the only one capable of reducing the education gap and making Turkestan a competitive region. Otherwise, the risk is that the inertia scenario will prevail, reinforcing socio-economic inequality.

International Experience and Comparative Lessons

Educational inequality is common in countries with multilingual populations and stark urban–rural divides. The experience of several countries can offer valuable lessons for Turkestan:

• ⁠ ⁠Baltic states (Latvia, Estonia): For years, they faced gaps between national and Russian-language schools. The solution was gradual bilingual education: some subjects in the native language, key disciplines in the state language. In Estonia, high school students must take at least 60% of classes in Estonian. This cut the exam performance gap nearly in half.
• ⁠ ⁠Georgia: Similar practices were applied for Armenian and Azerbaijani schools, with preparatory courses and “zero-year” programs in universities to improve language skills. This raised the share of minority students in higher education.
• ⁠ ⁠Kyrgyzstan: The “Teacher for the Village” program provided housing and bonuses to young teachers, reducing staff shortages in rural schools.
• ⁠ ⁠Uzbekistan: Massive investment in digitalization connected all schools to the internet and created computer labs, narrowing the urban–rural gap.

Key strategies that proved effective:

• ⁠ ⁠bilingual education as a bridge between native and state languages,
• ⁠ ⁠preparatory programs for minority students,
• ⁠ ⁠social packages for rural teachers,
• ⁠ ⁠and digital infrastructure upgrades.

These measures are adaptable to the Turkestan context and could help reduce both language-based and social inequality.