For the past three decades Kazakhstan has undergone many transformations in the higher education system (Ahn et al., 2018). In particular, Kazakhstan’s universities have witnessed significant changes in the content of curriculum (Kerimkulova & Kuzhabekova, 2017). For example, Kazakh education policymakers asked the teaching body to modernise the content of the curriculum and change the way in which faculty work by aligning it more closely with the Bologna process (Maudarbekova & Kashkinbayeva, 2014). However, no studies have been done on how faculty members enact curriculum reforms in practice in Kazakh higher education system. Therefore, the purpose of this ethnographic study is to explore how faculty members of one foreign languages department are enacting the changes in curriculum and teaching policy implemented in Kazakhstan’s public higher education system and their experiences in changing their teaching and learning practices. This research analyses the reaction and response of faculty members to the ambitious goals laid out by Kazakhstan’s policymakers, and how educators interpret and work in response to these aims. 

The following research questions will be addressed: 

1. What are the perspectives of faculty members in one public university in Kazakhstan on curriculum and teaching policyreform?  

2. How do faculty members enact curriculum and teaching policy in practice?

3. What are the factors that facilitate or impede the adoption of curriculum and teaching policy?

The theoretical framework of policy enactment into practice will guide this study (Ball et al., 2012). This theory will help to understand how curriculum and teaching policies work in practice. The significance of this theory in this study is that it has not previously been applied in post-Soviet higher education contexts, and so potentially will make an original contribution to knowledge by gaining insights and knowledge how faculty are enacting changes in curriculum and teaching policy. This theory will enable me to study this particular issue in all its complexity and gain some valuable insights into how policies work in practice. 

The research findings of this study will contribute to existing knowledge by contributing to the limited literature on higher education curriculum and policy enactment in Kazakhstan. The findings of this study may serve as a recommendation for policy makers to facilitate the enactment of teaching policy in practice. Also, research-based evidence of the enactment of teaching policy might be useful for faculty to reflect on their own experiences and practices, by improving their program and teaching practices. 

To achieve the purpose of the study, the current study will employ an ethnographic research design. The ethnographic research will be conducted in the natural setting of a university and long-term engagement in the academic department will provide a holistic analysis of participants’ understanding and experiences of the curriculum and teaching policy, how they implement a new curriculum which is manifested in their classroom teaching, during discussions with each other, informal conversations, meetings with the head of the department; produce a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon through doing observations outside and inside of the classroom, understanding how participants construct their knowledge of curriculum and teaching policy, recording what academics are saying about curriculum changes and analysing data (Geertz, 1973) to avoid superficial findings (Woods, 1994). Further, the ethnographic approach will allow me to hear the voices of participants to provide a wide range of interpretations (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). I will explore the faculty’s daily teaching practices, activities, behaviours, their interactions, beliefs, values, and the things that impact the culture of that department. Also, in an ethnographic study, I will build rapport with my participants, choose interviewees, observe lessons and keep a diary. As I am doing an ethnographic study, I will be using multiple sources of data collection such as participant observations inside and outside of the classroom, document analysis, semi-structured and informal interviews, and field notes. The use of a wide range of data collection methods will provide a holistic analysis of the ethnographic study.

I am engaged in a data collection for one semester in one public university in Kazakhstan starting from February to May, 2023. I will conduct semi-structured and informal interviews, observe faculty’s classroom teaching, attend faculty formal meetings and do document analysis. I will present my preliminary findings during the international conference by answering three research questions: 1. What are the perspectives of faculty members in one public university in Kazakhstan on curriculum and teaching policy reform? 2. How do faculty members enact curriculum and teaching policy in practice? 3. What are the factors that facilitate or impede the adoption of curriculum and teaching policy? Expected outcomes of the study will be that professors may have mixed feelings about curriculum reforms. Some of them may be positive about these reforms as they obtained their MA or PhD degrees abroad that facilitated curriculum policy enactment whereas senior faculty members may not support curriculum changes as they were trained under the Soviet education system and their teaching instructions may be based on the Soviet pedagogy that hindered curriculum policy enactment. In addition, a close collaboration with faculty may facilitate curriculum development and improvement in instructional approaches as well as professional development and a peer networking between universities may lead to the changes in the content of curricula and teacher pedagogy. However, one of the hindrances in curriculum policy enactment by faculty might be a lack of governmental support to provide faculty members with professional development programmes as most faculty may lack of understanding on how to enact the proposed policy in practice as it lacked clear guidelines or instructions.

Ahn, E. S., Dixon, J., & Chekmareva, L. (2018). Looking at Kazakhstan’s higher education landscape: From transition to transformation between 1920 and 2015. In 25 Years of Transformations of Higher Education Systems in post-Soviet Countries (pp. 199-227). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. Ball, S., Maguire, M. & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools, London: Routledge. Hartley, M., Gopaul, B., Sagintayeva, A. & Apergenova, R. (2015). Learning autonomy: higher education reform in Kazakhstan. Higher Education, 72(3), 277-289. Kerimkulova, S., & Kuzhabekova, A. (2017). Quality Assurance in Higher Education of Kazakhstan: A Review of the System and Issues. The Rise of Quality Assurance in Asian Higher Education, 87-108. LeCompte, M., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. Academic Press. Maudarbekova, B., & Kashkinbayeva, Z. (2014). Internationalization of higher education in Kazakhstan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4092-4097. Silova, I. & Steiner-Khamsi G. (2008). How NGOs react: Globalization and education reform in the Caucasus, Central Asia and Mongolia. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press. Tastanbekova, K. Rethinking the “Post-Soviet” Legacy in Education of Central Asia: focus on Kazakhstan.