Rural spaces in Kazakhstan unfold within a complex historical and socio-cultural landscape deeply influenced by colonial legacies of exploitation of nature, industrial progress, and human-induced catastrophes (Abishev, 1949; Altayev & Imanbayeva, 2021). The imposition of external ideologies and centralized policies throughout modern/colonial history has often marginalized traditional ecological ways of knowing and almost entirely disrupted traditional nomadic lifestyles, which have long been central to rural communities' identity and survival (Altayev & Imanbayeva, 2021). Against this backdrop, this research seeks to explore rurality in Kazakhstan through a decolonial lens by acknowledging the enduring impacts of modern/colonial processes on local cultures and knowledge systems. By centering the voices and experiences of rural children, the study aims to illuminate the intersections of colonial and environmental histories, (rural) education, and human-nature relationships (Tuck & McKenzie, 2015). Moreover, it seeks to challenge dominant narratives of Cartesian dualities (human-nature, urban-rural) that perpetuate metrocentric educational views to devalue rural knowledge.

Collaborative, creative, and affective work with children and engagement with local ecological knowledge will enable a deeper understanding of learnings from and with a more-than-human world. 

Research questions: 

1. How do children in rural Kazakhstan experience, relate to, and engage with rurality as a learning space?  

2. Where and how do children in rural Kazakhstan learn to connect and coexist with the more-than-human world?

Decolonizing rurality through relationality 

Traditional definitions of rurality often perpetuate unhelpful dichotomies and fail to capture the complexities of rural spaces. Dominant approaches in various social sciences apply Cartesian binaries (rural/urban, local/global, place/space, nature/culture), rely on Euclidean spatiality perspectives (size, distance, proximity), homogenize rurality, and emphasize human-centric and exploitative views. These frameworks often examine rurality through a deficit-thinking lens.

I challenge these dominant conceptualizations by approaching rurality as a multifaceted, multidimensional concept. Rurality is an imaginary space encompassing diverse cultural, historical, and political meanings, from idyllic to oppressive and backward to the backbone of society (Cloke, 2006). Halfacree (2006) argues that rurality can encompass various spaces such as countryside, wilderness, periphery, farm belt, village, and more. This perspective highlights the complexities of rural existence and the dynamic interplay between local practices and global trends.

Corbett (2009) emphasizes the ingrained duality of rural and urban, resulting in the exclusion of rurality from modernity's conceptual boundaries. Rurality is often romanticized as natural and idyllic (Silova, 2019; Bartmes & Shukla, 2020). Corbett (2021) argues that rurality is relational and dynamically linked to urban centers and global processes. This relational perspective reveals the resilience and adaptability of rural communities in maintaining unique cultural identities and local knowledge systems despite external pressures.

This study is grounded in a decolonial theoretical framework, which seeks to interrogate and dismantle colonial legacies and influences in education and knowledge production. The decolonial theory emphasizes the importance of recognizing and valuing Indigenous epistemologies and local knowledge systems, particularly those that have been marginalized or erased by colonial processes (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018), especially rural communities. 

Relationality is central to Indigenous cosmologies. Traditional ecological/nomadic knowledge in Kazakhstan similarly emphasizes interconnectedness with the more-than-human world, including land, seasons, animals, and spiritual dimensions. Thus, my research explores how rural children in Kazakhstan engage with and learn from the more-than-human world, highlighting the importance of interconnectedness in local ecological knowledge. Additionally, the research draws on post-humanist perspectives, which prioritize relationality, sensory awareness, and embodiment. These perspectives challenge anthropocentric views and emphasize the interconnectedness of humans and more-than-human entities (Braidotti, 2013; Haraway, 2016). By focusing on the relational aspects of learning and being, this framework allows a deeper exploration of how rural children interact with and learn from their environments.

The study incorporates arts-based research methodologies, which emphasize using creative and participatory methods to engage participants and capture complex, multidimensional experiences (Leavy, 2015). These methodologies align with decolonial and posthumanist perspectives by valuing diverse ways of knowing and being and providing tools for marginalized voices to be heard and validated. This study employs a multifaceted approach combining participant-led walking activities, artistic expression, and collaborative analysis to explore how children in a rural village and nomadic encampment in Kazakhstan engage with their environment and more-than-human companions. Context and Participants. The research was conducted in a rural village and a nearby nomadic encampment in Kazakhstan. These locations are characterized by distinct cultural and environmental features, providing a rich background for understanding children's interactions with their surroundings. The study focuses on children aged five to ten. Methods Walking and photographing: Children were encouraged to take photographs of significant elements in their environment, such as their homes, gardens, and animals, while walking. This artistic and affective method allows children to express their experiences and perspectives visually (Leavy, 2020). The photographs were analyzed in two stages: initially through individual photovoice sessions where children discuss their images and subsequently through collaborative analysis to identify shared themes and interpretations. The approach aimed to capture how children interact with their environment and express their understanding of rural life, providing insights into cultural, ecological, social, and geographical contexts (Springgay & Truman, 2017). Mental Mapping: Inspired by traditional nomadic knowledge (Abishev, 1949) and contemporary mapping practices (Chen, 2013), this method involved children creating mental maps of important places in their rural environment. These maps provided insights into children’s experiences, memories, and future plans related to their surroundings. Mental mapping promotes multiple interpretations and collective authorship, challenging conventional cartographic practices and offering a dynamic view of rural spaces (Chen, 2013; Malone, 2016). Data for this study was collected from various sources, including 1) capturing conversations and interactions during the walking activities, 2) photographs taken by children to document significant aspects of their environment, 3) mental maps and drawings that children create to illustrate their connections to important places, 4) documenting reflections and observations from the research process. Diffractive Analysis: This approach examines the dynamic and relational aspects of data, integrating artistic expressions, sensory experiences, and memory work. It emphasizes the interconnectedness and complexities of data, avoiding reductionist interpretations (Barad, 2014; Smith & Dunkley, 2018).

Findings suggest that the arts-based methods employed in study effectively capture the multidimensional experiences of rural children. Creative doings created by the participants reveal a deep understanding of their environments. The children’s interactions with animals and plants reveal essential insights into their understanding of the more-than-human world. Their identification of certain animals and plants as “friends” and “teachers” reflects a profound emotional bond and acknowledgment of the agency of these non-human entities (Figures 1, 2). This anthropomorphic viewpoint illustrates how children incorporate more-than-human beings into their social and emotional frameworks, recognizing them as essential to their lived experiences (Malone, 2020; Tuck & McKenzie, 2015). Such friendships nurture empathy and reinforce cultural values and norms regarding relationships with animals and plants. They promote environmental awareness as children learn to care for and respect the living environment (Smith & Dunkley, 2018). In contrast, the children’s fear of spiders and snakes highlights their instinctual responses to potential threats, shaped by cultural narratives and personal experiences (Jiang, 2020). This fear emphasizes a natural, evolutionary adaptation to avoid danger, revealing the children’s awareness of environmental risks. Meanwhile, their acceptance of death of animals like a calf or a lamb signifies a mature recognition of life cycles and natural processes (Figure 3). This acceptance reflects an understanding of the interconnectedness of life and death and a cultural context where death is viewed as an integral part of the natural order (Tuck & McKenzie 2015). The children’s experiences of friendship, fear, and acceptance are profoundly shaped by local ecological knowledge (Chen, 2013). Their interactions with animals and plants are not only personal or emotional but are also grounded in ecological and cultural practices of their community. This local knowledge influences how they perceive and relate to more-than-human world, impacting their understanding of environmental processes and relationships.

Abishev, H., (1949). Elements of astronomy and weather in oral folklore Kazakhs. Alma-Ata Altayev, Z. A., & Imanbayeva, Z. M. (2021). Values of traditional Kazakh culture. Central Asian Journal of Art Studies, 6(2), 10-24. Barad, K. (2014). Diffracting diffraction: Cutting together-apart. In Diffraction: Cutting together-apart. Duke University Press. Bartmes, N., & Shukla, S. (2020). Re-envisioning land-based pedagogies as a transformative third space: perspectives from university academics, students, and Indigenous knowledge holders from Manitoba, Canada. Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education, 14(3), 146-161. Braidotti, R. (2011). Nomadic theory: The portable Rosi Braidotti. Columbia University Press. Chen, C. (2013). Mapping waters: Thinking with watery places. In C. Chen, J. McLeod, & A. Neimanis (Eds.), Thinking with water (pp. 274-298). Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. Cloke, P. (2006). Conceptualizing rurality. In The Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 18-28). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608016 Corbett, M. (2009). Rural schooling in mobile modernity: Returning to the places I've been. Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 24(7), 1. Corbett, M. (2021). Structures of Feeling and the Problem of Place in Rural Education. In: White, S., Downey, J. (eds) Rural Education Across the World. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6116-4_9 Halfacree., K. (2006). Rural space: constructing a three-fold architecture. In The Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 18-28). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608016 Haraway, D. J. (2016). Manifestly haraway (Vol. 37). U of Minnesota Press. Jiang, J. (2020). Encounters with Alternative Ways of Teaching and Learning. (unpublished dissertation) Leavy, P. (2020). Method meets art: Arts-based research practice. Guilford publications. Malone, K. (2016). Posthumanist approaches to theorizing children’s human-nature relations. Space, place, and environment, Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-044-5 185-206. Malone, K. (2020). Children in the Anthropocene: How are they implicated?. Research handbook on childhoodnature: Assemblages of childhood and nature research, 507-533. Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis. Duke University Press. Silova, I. (2019). Toward a Wonderland of comparative education. Comparative Education, 55(4), 444–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2019.1657699 Smith, T. A., & Dunkley, R. (2018). Technology-nonhuman-child assemblages: Reconceptualising rural childhood roaming. Children’s Geographies, 16(3), 304–318. Springgay, S., & Truman, S. E. (2017). Walking methodologies in a more-than-human world: WalkingLab. Routledge. Tuck, E., & McKenzie, M. (2015). Place-based education and the work of indigenous knowledge. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 37(1), 80-105.