Kazakhstan’s Uneven Education Frontier

Across the windswept plains of Kazakhstan, the world’s ninth-largest country by land area, opportunity often depends on location and geography. In Astana and Almaty, students at well-funded public schools enjoy the luxury of robotics labs and trilingual instruction. In the western steppe, however, children gather in aging buildings where electricity flickers and textbooks are passed from sibling to sibling. The nation’s vastness has quietly become its most stubborn barrier to educational equality.

Kazakhstan has poured billions into reforming a modern curricula, providing digital resources, and creating elite Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools designed to nurture globally competitive graduates. The results look great on paper. Literacy exceeds 99 percent, and Kazakhstan now ranks above the OECD average in mathematics. Yet these achievements conceal a growing gulf between urban and rural learners.

In cities, students benefit from the “Trilingual Education Policy,” which mandates proficiency in Kazakh, Russian, and English. It reflects the government’s goal of linking national identity with global integration. But outside the cities, implementation falters in practice. Rural schools, especially in northern and western regions, lack qualified English teachers and teaching materials. The Ministry of Education reported in 2024 that more than 30 percent of rural English-teaching positions remain unfilled. Multilingualism has become a marker of privilege rather than inclusion.

Technological advancements has likewise deepened divides. Internet penetration exceeds 90 percent in Almaty but remains below 70 percent in western provinces such as Mangystau. When the COVID-19 pandemic forced remote learning, many rural students were left out entirely, unable to stream lessons or download materials. In one village near Oral, a single shared laptop served forty students, rotated on a schedule scribbled in chalk.

Teacher retention compounds the educational inequality between rural and urban areas. Rural educators earn less, face isolation, and often teach multiple subjects outside their expertise. Government incentive programs offer housing and salary bonuses, but turnover remains high. Young teachers frequently leave after a year or two for better prospects in the cities. The problem is not only financial, but also psychological.

Until rural schools can consistently attract and keep trained teachers, and until students outside major cities can access the same basic resources as their urban peers, national education will remain unevenly distributed. The future of the system will be shaped not in Astana’s model classrooms, but in whether the country can support the teachers and students who remain beyond them.