'If you want to be a khan, be with your people': educational leadership in rural school in Kazakhstan.

• In Event: School education in Central Asia: Academic achievement, educational leadership, and curricular reform

Proposal

This phenomenological study aims to explore the understanding and practice of leadership in rural schools in Kazakhstan. The research employed a constructivist perspective to understand the experiences of teachers, middle leaders, headteachers, parents, and the heads of local education authorities by exploring their perceptions and understanding of leadership within the education system. The constructivist worldview, where the researcher seeks to understand the world in which participants work and live, relies on participants’ views of educational leadership as ‘subjective meanings of their experiences’ (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p.8), as it is valuable in schools. Their views contributed to shaping the understanding of leadership and defining educational leadership within the Kazakh context.
This research did not begin with a particular theory; instead, it started with a broad research question, allowing participants to share their experiences within the context of cultural and historical norms. However, to support the analysis and interpretation of the data, the research employed the new institutionalism theory by using various concepts (Greenwood et al., 2017). Additionally, the current study employs a case study approach (Yin, 2018), as a significant advantage of using a case study is that the data can be described as ‘down-to-earth and attention-holding’ (Cohen et al., 2018, p. 379), offering potential harmony with readers' experiences. Employing a constructivist approach in designing and conducting this case study enables the capture of different participants’ perspectives, which can clarify their perceptions of leadership (Yin, 2018).
Academic research on educational leadership in Kazakhstan is scarce. Recent books (Bridges, 2014; McLaughlin et al., 2023; Tajik & Makoelle, 2024) provide information on academic leadership in Kazakhstan. Bridges (2014) is one of the first international books to provide information on the recent reforms being implemented in Kazakhstan, discussing the modernisation of Kazakh schools, policy borrowing, and the internationalisation of education policy. However, only the chapter by Frost et al. (2017) provides information on the role of principals in Kazakh schools. McLaughlin et al. (2023) examine the education reforms in Kazakhstan, including the trilingual education policy, new methods of financing schools, and teacher leadership. Tajik and Makoelle (2024) have a chapter devoted to educational leadership in secondary schools in Kazakhstan, where they discuss educational leadership in post-Soviet Kazakhstan, secondary education perspectives, educational reforms, teacher leadership, perceptions of leadership and culture, principals’ views on equity, and school development in Kazakhstan. However, most research in this country has focused on higher education; therefore, there is limited research on leadership in secondary education.
This research provides findings from the analysis of the case study, a rural school in Kazakhstan. Based on the data from the interview and focus group discussion transcriptions with the rural school Director (Principal), teachers, and parents, the background information about Auyl rural school and participants' understanding of leadership are discussed. It has also addressed leadership practices in the Auyl school by examining the roles of the school Director, teachers, middle leaders, and students in school leadership. The leadership approaches are also analysed from authoritarian and democratic perspectives. Other prominent themes, such as key factors for leadership, the impact of leadership on educators, and performance issues, were also analysed in this research. Using new institutionalism theory concepts allowed us to highlight the role of institutional norms and culture in school leadership (Deephouse et al., 2017).
To better understand the various contradictions in rural schools, this research used the perspective of new institutionalism to consider the conflict between agency and structure. Findings revealed that the village school director operates within a highly centralised governance structure where hierarchical requirements, bureaucratic layers, and coercive isomorphism dominate leadership decisions. The school director reports to the village akim, who is subordinate to the district akim, who is in turn subordinate to the district education department and its head, then to the head of the regional education department, their deputies, and the regional akim above them. Above all, they are subordinate to the Ministry of Education. It is challenging to satisfy everyone in such a hierarchical governance system. The village school director, who initially introduced innovative leadership ideas, felt after a year that his efforts were not being appreciated. The district education department primarily requires someone who can submit reports promptly; there is little recognition for innovative leaders who think outside the box.
The village director was sceptical about his prospects and believed there was no scope for career advancement. Several key challenges can be identified. The school’s limited autonomy over financial resources and curriculum decisions stems from strict control by the district and regional education departments. Additionally, the lack of professional development opportunities has led to reliance on traditional leadership methods. Most critically, there is pressure to comply with government standards, primarily to ensure a steady flow of funds and to avoid sanctions from the education authorities. Despite these limitations, the village director has implemented a pragmatic compliance strategy that balances institutional requirements with local leadership adaptations. While strictly adhering to state policy, the village principal was taking a multifaceted approach. Teacher-led initiatives were also being implemented in the school, and students were developing their leadership skills. Students in the village are also showing positive results in science projects and subject Olympiads. Legitimacy was achieved through Olympiads, which were a means of gaining legitimacy in the eyes of the district. This case illustrates how rigid coercive pressures can limit innovation, resulting in leaders placing more emphasis on compliance with policy than on innovative leadership. By focusing on the Olympiads to gain legitimacy, he has earned high prestige among the villagers. However, it seems that he has not been able to achieve high legitimacy in the eyes of the bureaucratic district education department, because he refuses to carry out orders from the district on time and considers daily reporting to be an unnecessary task.

Author

• Bauyrzhan Kaziyev, SDU University