The third meeting in the Senate within the framework of the Young Experts Club. For the first time I listened to the Minister of Education live.

I didn't ask a single question because there was nothing to ask. Almost everything I know he knows too. And from publications of international organizations, and research on human capital, and the results of PISA with PIAAC.

The minister answered cheerfully, as if they had obviously asked him these questions more than once. He knows his business.

***

While sitting, I thought about the following.

1) We are not objective.

1.1) We believe that the state has endless resources. Therefore, if there is a problem with education, then the Ministry of Education has overlooked something.

1.2) Parkinson's Law - the clearer and closer the subject, the more often it is discussed. Decisions on a nuclear reactor will be made faster than on a type of coffee in a vending machine (exaggerated).

Everyone studied once, many have children now. Naturally, there is personal experience and interest. But not always objective. Education receives disproportionately more attention than other areas.

***

2) Problems in the field of education are not always within the competence of the ministry.

2.1) "Dutch disease". The labor market is skewed towards mining and related areas. This is also why it is difficult to attract personnel to education.

2.2) Rural population. It is not just about higher per capita costs. Child = worker, looks after livestock and farm. Objectively less time for study.

2.3) "Different Kazakhstan". Parents are different, and at the level of entire macroregions. Somewhere a child - "property", somewhere - "expenses", somewhere - "investments". Parents pass on values ​​to their children, teachers in schools are also local. How do you manage it from the center? How to break down what is at the level of the cultural code?

Etc.

***

Is it possible to solve the problems of education radically?

Yes, if there are resources. I constantly hear about the underfunding of the sphere, but the situation is even more complicated.

We cannot compare ourselves with Estonia, Korea, Singapore, with anyone else. They have a completely different demographic structure.

A large mass of adults and the well-off pay for the education of a small proportion of children.

In our country, a small number of poor adults evade paying (taxes) for the education of a large proportion of children.

This is called the "demographic overhang".

In terms of the increase in the share of children in the structure of the population, we occupy the 1st place in the world (for the last 10 years).

It is clear that in such conditions the ministry will maximally maintain the status quo in terms of quality, "choking" on the flow of children born over the past 10 years.

But it seems that something is being decided. They want 800 schools, look for reserves through PPP, eliminate bureaucracy.

It remains to wish success specifically to the minister and his team. And continue to torture other stakeholders in support of the education sector.

***

P.S. The President of the Senate generally took the audience 2.5 thousand years ago, in the era of Ancient Greece, when modern education was born. I spoke about its branches, about the importance of basic skills, values.

He expressed personal "pain" when he sees unstructured and illiterately written texts.

It seems to me that such conversations and such thinking are important in matters of institutional reform.

How what happened 100 years ago is affecting us now. "Institutional Track". "Ideological platform". "What country are we building?" "Why exactly should we be in the top 30?"

Such reasoning and a long historical perspective are much more important than "quick wins", "chips" and "manual control".