other international organizations (such as the World Bank and UNICEF), but not mentioning cooperation with educational organizations of Russia. Debate on the impact of Russia on higher education policy in Kyrgyzstan is underway in the higher education field. The modernization of higher education and international cooperation was confronted on two sides, either cooperation with the EU and Western countries, or cooperation with Russia. One representative of the educational organization describes ironically how the government, despite its independence, has been unable to make independent decisions after all the years since independence (No. 16). The influence of Russia is still reflected in the decision-making process, but also in the identification of European policies. The methodological, scientific and pedagogical basis is still oriented towards Russia or under Russia’s influence. For example, the vice-rector of one state university described how their university is very advanced:
“I am a professor and for the past 20 years I have also worked in the Rector’s office. Thus, I am very knowledgeable on this and I found a lot of good information in the materials provided by the EU. Just look at my table here, these programs and methodologies are all European. Look at these materials. My work requires me to know what is going on abroad, and to implement global tends here. These are my individual initiatives.” (B.1, No 1)
However, a closer examination of the guidebooks showed that all of these European manuals and the Bologna Process Guidebooks are Russian-language works printed in Russia. Due to linguistic and financial constraints, many materials come to Kyrgyzstan directly from Russia. As a representative from an educational organization (No. 16) described, despite the 24 years of independence, the government is still not competent to make independent decisions. Russia is taken as a point of orienting education policies and approaches, and Russian textbooks and methodology are widely used. The methodological, scientific and pedagogical base is still oriented to Russia. Through Tempus projects, Kyrgyzstan could introduce liberal reforms, multilevel education and independent accreditation.
Many of the reforms in Kyrgyz higher education were implemented because of the European Commission’s Tempus projects. Representatives of universities agreed that the impact of the Tempus projects was a positive and significant factor for Kyrgyzstan’s higher education. At the same time, Russia’s potential influence is enhanced in practice, albeit critically. Common language and history influence today’s attitudes and operating models. In the discourse on modernization, there were two sides of progress. Either, the progress toward Western influences or Rus- sian influences. The representative of the educational organization expressed concern about the possible increase in Russia’s influence and the abolition of reforms:
“Through Tempus projects we were able to introduce some liberal reforms, multi-level education, and independent accreditation and so on. Where this progress will be taken in the future is very much dependent on the decisions of the Ministers. Some of them look to the West, some look to Russia. Some are more progressive, but the majority of them received their education during the Soviet times and are more sympathetic to the old ways.” (A, No 16)
Cooperation between Russia and Kyrgyzstan takes place across many sectors. For example, Kyrgyzstan joined the Eurasian Economic Union in 2015, which is considered to be the most comprehensive form of economic cooperation in the former Soviet Union. Besides that, in 2015 Russia also discussed the copying of Russian laws (such as the Anti-gay Law ‘the Act on Foreign Agents and Law on Homoprocessing’) to Kyrgyzstan and evaluated the increased popularity of Russian in Kyrgyzstan (Dzubenko 2015). The vice-rector of a university suggested that people became familiar with central government during the Soviet era, and it is difficult to give up this thinking. As a result, many Russian laws are copied to the legislation of Kyrgyzstan without deeper scrutiny. (No. 13).
As expressed by one of the representatives, Eurasian integration is perceived as a neutral progress for Kyrgyzstan, even though it is not a widely shared belief:
“There is another issue and my colleagues may disagree on this with me, but it is my opinion. There is a general political trend. We understand that Kyrgyzstan will geographically not be able to be part of the Bologna process. At the moment, there is a new trend towards Eurasian integration. So, the main orientation is Russia now, and Russia is using the old Soviet systems, there is no accreditation or quality assurance. There is a Ministry that makes all the decisions on whether the institution is working well or not.” (A, No 16)
It is possible to come to the interpretation that while Russia has emphasized cooperation with its own allies, Russia has also adopted global education reforms (Bolotov & Efremova 2007) for its own education system and has used them as a tool for increasing their own influence in Central Asia. The Bologna Declaration was signed in Russia in 2003, while Kyrgyzstan has not yet signed the Bologna Declaration although the law on education has made changes in accordance with the Bologna Process. In the mid-2000s, when Russia was discussing the process of joining the Bologna Process, researchers suggested how the Russian higher education policy balanced national development needs and the attractiveness of internationalization. It is possible to divide the interest in the Russian Bologna process both as foreign-oriented interests and internal political interests (Pursiainen & Medvedev 2005, 21–24). The interpretation of Pursiainen and Medvedev (2005) was that Russian interests also had to add a soft form of power rather than hard power. Russia's accession to the Bologna Process has been not only a Russian foreign policy approach to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), but also a way to become a stronger global player in the field of higher education. In 2008, Russia signed a cooperation agreement with the World Bank (READ) on training development aid. In the name of the World Bank-Russia cooperation agreement, the aim was to develop training quality assessment systems in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. With the cooperation agreement, Russia wanted to increase its cooperation with quality assurance of training and international actors and export their own quality assurance model abroad. The objective of the READ project was to improve basic education and learning outcomes in low-paid countries, in particular through the methods of monitoring and evaluating the quality of teaching. (Takala & Plattoeva 2012). Since the beginning of the 21st century, Russia’s education policy has aimed at exporting its own training models to CIS countries and the opening of Russian university branches (the Russian federal target program 2006-2010).
There is no doubt that Russia has a special role in the field of Kyrgyz higher education. Building on this argument on political, cultural, economic or historical
context, Russia cannot be seen as having a neutral position in the field of education in Central Asia. Simultaneously, Russian education policy development is followed as “models” that can be directly translated into Kyrgyz education policy and practice. What is done in Russia serves as an example for Kyrgyzstan. In this opinion, the Russian example is thus unquestioningly associated with awareness and adoption of global ‘models’, that would be attractive for Kyrgyzstan as well:
“We also closely look at what is done in Russian lifelong education. Basically, an opportunity to constantly improve and study new things and change the profession if that is needed. We also try to improve our programs based on the demands of the market.” (B.2, No 7)
Previous history and procedures also influence education policy and what is sought by reference groups for their own education policy lines. Merrill (2012, 7) has focused attention on whether it is possible to transfer the skills offered by higher education from one culture to another. The transition from Soviet-based education to the modern education system has not been unproblematic. Skills and knowledge appreciated by the Soviet Union differ from the skills that are valued today in Kyrgyzstan. In the post-Soviet era, the universities balanced between two different realities - between old Soviet practices and information and new, con- temporary demands. In part, these two different cultures and traditions coexisted and continue to affect today's university education.
Sakwa (2011, 958) writes how the present day is defined in history, especially in those countries that have been great powers in the past. In Kyrgyzstan, history as part of the Soviet Union’s great power is still reflected in today’s education policy, and also in research interviews, a view highlights the Soviet era higher education. For example, a vice-rector of a state university stressed how Kyrgyzstan was part of the world’s best university system during the Soviet Union. In his view, it is natural to follow the Russian guidelines in Kyrgyz universitys’ higher education policy, due to this common higher education, cultural and linguistic history (C–B.1, No 4). Among Kyrgyzstan’s professors, there are also professors who appreciate the higher education system of the Soviet Union while at the same time understanding the new demands of modern society and the many interests involved.
6 CONCLUSION
In a broad sense, this chapter deals with domestication of discourses of travelling reforms. This chapter has three aims: (i) summary of the findings, (ii) responding to the research tasks, and (iii) theoretical interpretation of the findings. Each of these points is elaborated in a separate sub-chapter.
The first sub-chapter provides a conclusion based on the empirical findings of this study. I start this chapter by highlighting the main findings of each of the discourses. Through these three discourses – the discourse of quality, the discourse of modernization and the discourse of internationalization – domestication of travelling reforms becomes visible. Through the framework of domestication this dissertation sheds light on the discursive adaptation of travelling reforms, which are situated in a larger social, cultural, political and economic context (see Sobe et al. 2017).
The aim of the second sub-chapter is to answer to the research task presented earlier in Chapter 3. In a broader sense, the task of this study has been to investigate the domestication of travelling reforms in the context of higher education of Kyrgyzstan. This sub-chapter summarizes the findings from the perspective of the identified theoretical gaps and research aims. I discuss the research findings from the perspective of the theoretical questions and then reflect on whether it is possible to analyze the phenomena of travelling reforms in higher education of Kyrgyzstan from the theoretical perspective of domestication.
The third task of this chapter is to interpret the empirical findings by Bourdieu’s theoretical framework of ‘discursive space of social reality’. Bourdieu’s framework of discursive space of social reality is well suited for interpreting domestication of global education reforms in higher education of Kyrgyzstan, because this theoretical framework allows one to interpret opposing dynamics in the field of higher education of Kyrgyzstan. With Bourdieu’s framework of discursive space of social reality, it is possible to deepen the understanding of adaptation of travelling reforms. Despite the different resources, conditions, and political histories of countries, surprisingly similar reforms and institutional models are constantly carried out different parts of the world (Meyer et al. 1997). With the analytical lenses of Bourdieu’s discursive space of social reality, it is possible to unveil the process of domestic field battle.