This paper focuses on the transformation of the mainstream school governance in Kazakhstan in the context of the recent introduction of financial autonomy through the implementation of per-capita school funding. Specifically, the paper addresses the characteristics of school boards of trustees and the functioning and utility of these bodies from the perspective of school principals. The paper seeks to address the following research questions:

1)      What are the characteristics of school boards in Kazakhstan in terms of their membership?

2)      How do school principals see what the primary functions of the school boards are?

3)      How do principals evaluate their day-to-day experiences with the school boards at their schools?

4)      How, in the assessment of the principals of the schools, are different groups of stakeholders represented on the board involved in the decisions about the allocation of funding at the school?

The focus of this paper is relevant for advancing the understanding of the experience of educational governance reforms in the context of broader contradictory policy paradigms in the sector of education (Ait Si Mhamed, Vossensteyn & Kasa, 2021). On the one hand, since the early 1990s, the normative language of educational policy in Kazakhstan reflected the expanding discourse of New Public Management supporting devolution of decision-making to the school level. On the other hand, up until recently, public schools have been constrained in their decision-making power for the allocation of school resources according to the needs of schools (Yakavets, 2014).

The timeline of the two dimensions in the mainstream school governance reforms – school governing bodies and the allocation of funding – shows that legislative changes concerning the structural reforms in school governance preceded changes in the distribution of school funding. The national regulations on establishing school boards were first adopted in 2004 (Loskutov, n.d.). Legislation setting out school per-capita funding followed in 2017, even though the piloting of this school funding approach started in 2013 (Financial Center, 2022). The preceding legislation requiring that schools establish boards of trustees as advisory institutions should have provided schools with an opportunity to advance organization-based consultative decision-making processes.

According to the current law, school boards of trustees are responsible for ensuring the rights of students and pupils of the educational organization, developing and amending the charter of the educational organization, participating in the budgeting process, coordinating the hiring procedure of the head of the educational organization, engaging in diverse conferences and seminars regarding the educational organizations’ activities, and establish close cooperation with the students of the educational organization (Adilet, 2017).

Thus, at the moment there is an established normative framework for the functioning of the school boards and per-capita funding in Kazakhstan. Per-capita school funding is aimed to improve transparency, adequacy, and equity of the school funding, while school boards are in place to advise for allocation of the funds on the school level for school improvement. Yet, as Fullan (2001) writes: “Educational change is technically simple and socially complex” (p. 69). This paper will present evidence on how the technical change of having school boards and per-capita school funding stipulated in law grounds itself in the social environment of the schools through the perspective of school principals. 

Evidence in this paper comes from an online survey of school principals conducted in 2021 as part of Nazarbayev University Graduate School of Education research project Per-capita funding model in Kazakhstani public and private schools and issues of adequacy, equity, and accountability, grant nr. АР09261436, funded by the Ministry of Education and Science, Republic of Kazakhstan. The dataset used in the analysis in this paper represents the responses of over 1200 school principals in Kazakhstan, which is about 16 percent of all school principals in the country (National Education Database, 2021). The range of responses by the region was 300, with a median of 52. At the same time, each region of the country was represented in the responses of principals to the survey. Data in this paper were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistical analysis techniques, such as Chi-square for the comparison of groups. Independent variables in the analysis were the type of the school, location of the school, and receiving per-capita funding. The dependent variable included characteristics of school boards, functions of the school boards, and the assessment of the school boards overall and in terms of school budget distribution decisions.

Almost all principals participating in the survey indicated that there is a school board at their school (98%, n = 1271). According to the national regulation (Minister of Education and Science, Order nr. 355, 2017), the school administrators participate in the meetings of the school board, however, they are not members of the school board. Nevertheless, 14.5% of principals (n = 183) indicated that they are a member of the board of trustees at their school. This indicates that there might be some misunderstanding among the principals as to what their role is as they participate in the school board meetings. Most school boards included parents (n = 1156), while groups of other stakeholders such as representatives of the local and national public administration, business community, and non-governmental sector were less frequently represented. In terms of the primary functions of the school board, most frequently principals mentioned setting priorities for the school’s development (n = 712). In respect to school finance, 460 respondents said that making financial decisions was a priority function of the school board, and 71 said that approving the school’s budget was a primary function. Raising additional funds was also viewed as a priority area of activity for the school board (n = 548). Most principals felt that the school board provides them with adequate support (87%, n = 1070), with 12% of principals (n = 141) claiming that they receive insufficient support from the school board, and only about 1% of the principals saying that the school board interferes too much with their day-to-day decisions (n = 10). In terms of the involvement in making decisions about the allocation of funding at the school, the majority of principals said the school board members were often (25%, n = 282) or always (33%, n = 380) involved.

Ait Si Mhamed, A., Vossensteyn, H., & Kasa, R. (2021). Stability, performance and innovation orientation of a higher education funding model in Kazakhstan. International Journal of Educational Development, 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102324 Financial Center. (2022). Piloting of per-capita funding model. http://www.fincenter.kz/funding/approbation/ Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press. Loskutov, Y. (n.d.). Boards of trustees. https://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=30145978 Minister of Education and Science, Order nr. 355. (2017). Ob utverzhdenii Tipovykh pravil organizatsii raboty Popechitel'skogo soveta i poryadok yego izbraniya v organizatsiyakh obrazovaniya [On the approval of the Model Rules for the Organization of the Work of the Board of Trustees and the procedure for its election in educational organizations]. https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1700015584 National Education Database. (2021). General education day schools. https://nobd.iac.kz/ Yakavets, N. (2014). Educational reform in Kazakhstan: The first decade of independence. In D. Bridges (Ed.), Educational reform and internationalization: The case of school reform in Kazakhstan (pp. 1 – 27). Cambridge University Press.