Uzbekistan is not only the most populous country in Central Asia, with over 37.5 million people, but also one of the youngest nations in the region. On average, the country’s permanent population increases by around 1,700 people each day. While this is good for the economy, it has not been for the education system. Not only is free public secondary education struggling to meet growing demands – particularly in terms of school facilities and qualified teaching staff – but there is also a significant mismatch between the demand and supply for higher education services, leading to a shortage of accessible higher education opportunities.
For example, in 2023, out of over 1 million applicants – locally known as abiturients – only 190,000 were admitted to public universities, reflecting an 18 percent admission rate. While this marks almost a 100 percent increase compared to 2015, when the admission rate was just 9.6 percent, it still means that around 80 percent of young applicants must seek alternative pathways. But the job market without a tertiary degree is not promising either – around 300,000 new jobs are created annually while 650,000 finish secondary schooling each year.
In response to the growing demand for higher education, Tashkent began opening the country to international universities and encouraging the development of private institutions. This shift was formalized in the national development strategy for 2022–2026, which set out to increase the share of organizations providing non-state educational services to 3 percent by 2022 and 8 percent by 2026, by expanding opportunities and conditions for such organizations.
The 49th goal of Uzbekistan’s development strategy is to increase the number of non-state higher education institutions (HEIs) to at least 50 by 2026. As of the 2024–2025 academic year, that target has already been surpassed, with 67 private universities operating across the country.
Uzbekistan’s Higher Education: A Tale of 2 Eras
To understand why the privatization and internationalization of HEIs in Uzbekistan accelerated after the change in government in 2016, “I think periodization is important here,” explained Sherzod Khaydarov. “Karimov’s period was a transitional one.”
Khaydarov, who studies education at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland, noted that Islam Karimov’s early background – deeply influenced by Soviet ideology – shaped his educational policies. The primary goal of the Soviet system was “to train human resources to serve the national economy and the state. In other words, the Soviet system was used as a tool for social engineering so that academia contributed to the broader socialist agenda,” Khaydarov explained. Under Karimov’s leadership, education was similarly envisioned as a means to serve the state and nation, fostering national identity and patriotism, with the state retaining full control over its direction.
“Karimov’s politics was also ‘security driven.’ He was very careful dealing with the West, especially,” Khaydarov continued, referring to the work of his other colleagues in academia, Dr. Timur Dadabaev and Dr. Dilnoza Ubaydullaeva. During the Karimov era, there weren’t any private universities and only seven branches of international universities in the country, none of which was affiliated with the United States. The student unrest in 1992 and the subsequent bombings in 1999 reinforced Karimov’s focus on security. As a result, only universities from countries considered “safe” at the time were allowed to operate. Uzbekistan had good relations with South Korea, Singapore, and Russia, for instance, which led to the establishment of university branches from these nations.
“After Karimov’s death, Mirziyoyev not only had to build his own image but also address the deeply rooted problems he inherited,” Khaydarov noted. Among the most urgent issues was a rapidly growing population and the resulting surge in demand for higher education. The government feared that a large number of unemployed and uneducated young people could pose a serious threat to social stability. “This was no longer just a perceived risk – by 2016, it had become an urgent necessity, especially as many young people had already begun leaving en masse to study in neighboring countries,” Khaydarov said.
In response, scaling up of higher education became essential – not only to expand access, but also to retain talent, reduce social tensions, and support economic development. “Higher education was also viewed as a potential market and a long-term investment in the economy. To sustain future economic growth, the issue of human capital had to be addressed,” Khaydarov explained.
The accumulated problems were thus seen both as risks and as opportunities. It became clear that they could not be resolved without meaningful reforms, including internationalization and privatization of the higher education sector. “Whereas during Karimov’s rule, security concerns were often politicized, Mirziyoyev adopted a more pragmatic approach,” Khaydarov said.
Not only did Uzbekistan open up to international universities, but the market-driven approach has sparked a boom in the number of private universities too – many of which seem more focused on generating profit than on delivering quality education. In theory, competition drives quality. Yet in a system where market entry rules remain lax and corruption persists, revenue-focused competition risks undermining educational standards rather than improving them.
Profit Motive in Uzbekistan’s Education Sector
This profit-making engine has given birth to a new wave of unconventional universities, often sporting grandiose or eccentric titles. Their names often trumpet the word “International” and pepper it with superlatives like “Perfect.” Their eye-catching billboards and flashy advertisements can be spotted across the capital. These names promise many opportunities; in reality, they might shine brightest on marketing brochures while the substance inside raises questions.
“These market-based universities are remarkably successful because they align perfectly with societal demand. This alignment underscores a fundamental flaw — the gulf between contemporary educational ideals and Uzbekistan’s excessively formal, yet surface-level, approach to education,” English Language Teaching specialist Alexey Ulko told The Diplomat.
“Education in our country is rarely about the process of learning, the pursuit of knowledge, or even the development of practical skills… Success in this context is often defined by superficial achievements, such as constructing new school buildings, procuring computers or books, establishing universities, or awarding diplomas and degrees.”
Ulko concluded, “When academic standards are lacking, and education is reduced to the mere pursuit of a diploma or degree, students often lose the motivation to truly learn and grow. Their sole interest becomes chasing marks and scores. This approach devalues the learning process itself, reducing education to a mere credentialing exercise.”
Accessibility is another major issue with private universities, as they operate on significantly higher tuition fees. While state universities typically keep tuition in the range of $550 to $1,000 a year, private institutions often charge three to five times that amount. Some even set as much as an $8,000 price tag per year – a figure affordable only to the wealthiest segment of the population. For reference, Uzbekistan’s annual household income per capita was just over $1,700 in 2023.
The rapid expansion of private universities has also raised concerns and brought about a number of problematic situations, ultimately prompting the Ministry of Higher Education to step in, closing several of these institutions and stripping them of their licenses. For example, last year, five private universities in Uzbekistan were shut down due to serious violations and a barrage of student complaints. That same year, the licensing of new private universities was suspended due to concerns over quality and failure to meet regulatory standards. No licenses have been issued since.
Yet the profit‑driven boom itself is only one facet of the issue. The deeper concern is that the explosion in quantity has led to the erosion of academic standards and educational quality in Uzbekistan
A Question of Quality vs Quantity
As the number of universities continues to grow, admission standards are becoming more lenient. Last year, the minimum passing score at public universities for abiturients was 56.7 points, just 30 percent of the highest possible score, 189. However, nearly half of them, over 345,000 individuals, failed to meet even this threshold. The minimum passing score for a state-funded scholarship is 68 points.
Admission to private and international universities tends to be even more flexible. In many cases, applicants only need to present a secondary education diploma and an IELTS certificate, as instruction is often conducted in English.
“No university truly needs an IELTS or TOEFL score for its own sake,” Ulko observed. “What international universities – whether in Europe or the United States – seek are individuals who possess the maturity, global awareness and independence required to succeed in a modern academic environment. They value students who take responsibility for their own learning, set meaningful goals and expand their understanding independently, far beyond achieving superficial benchmarks.” His remarks underscored the importance of qualitative evidence – motivation statements, reference letters, and documented extracurricular achievements – metrics that extend far beyond a single language test score.
Another worry stems from a lack of teachers and people within academia, and the ways they are recruited. “There is a substantial outflow of talented students from the academic profession,” noted Ulko. “Those with ambition and aptitude often seek careers in fields such as programming, business, medicine, law, or IT, leaving academia and teaching behind.”
Yet the biggest question is the employability prospects of graduates from non-state universities, which are often run not by academics but by businesspeople. As the trend has been evolving only in the past few years, there are not many graduates and their career paths have not been studied to draw any conclusion.
“I have no idea what’s happening in terms of employability, how companies are now hiring, especially the graduates of private universities,” said Khaydarov, offering a cautious assessment of the evolving reputation of Uzbekistan’s current higher education system. “But one thing I know is that, to this day, we still don’t have a developed or structured job market. In developed countries there is a strong job market which is tightly related with higher education institutions.”
In such systems, companies actively recruit from universities they trust, often targeting soon-to-be graduates through direct outreach. But that’s not the case in Uzbekistan. Private companies in Uzbekistan tend to hire based on whether the applicant holds a diploma, rather than assessing the quality of education received. Khaydarov also pointed out that most private universities are still very new, with only a few having produced graduates so far, making it premature to judge their long-term value in the labor market. Within public institutions, especially in the government sector, preference is given to graduates of state universities as they are seen as the safest choice, he concluded.
Dissatisfaction with the education quality has driven many of Uzbekistan’s young generation to seek higher education elsewhere. In 2021, Uzbekistan ranked fifth globally, according to UNESCO, with around 110,000 of its citizens studying abroad. While this reflects a strong appetite for tertiary education among Uzbek youth, it doesn’t necessarily mean enrollment in prestigious institutions like the Ivy League. Many pursue degrees in neighboring countries, where institutional reputations are often modest. According to a 2019 statement by Ulugbek Tashkentbayev, head of the State Inspectorate for Quality Control of Education, 98 percent of Uzbek students abroad were enrolled in Russia (12 percent), Kazakhstan (22 percent), Tajikistan (30 percent), and Kyrgyzstan (34 percent). The majority reportedly don’t study in-demand fields – like marketing, political science, architecture, medicine, or computer science – but primarily pedagogy in early education, which offers more universal curricula and easier employment prospects. Since 2019, Russia has emerged as the top destination, with 63,000 Uzbek students enrolled in its universities as of 2025.
“Whether diplomas of other countries, neighboring countries, and Russia, or maybe some other post-Soviet countries are valued or not depends on one thing now – rankings,” explained Khaydarov. “Rankings became very popular and normative. That’s why everyone at universities now measures your qualification based on the ranking of the university you graduated from. If your university is in the top 500 or top 1,000, it doesn’t matter if you graduate from Kazakhstan or Russia, or from the U.S. or Japan. Your diploma is valued, [people] accept it without any problem, because the state already acknowledged it.”
Tashkent’s market-centered approach to addressing educational challenges extends beyond higher education. For years, the government has promoted the growth of private preschools and schools. As the number of newborns has exceeded 900,000 annually for each of the past five years, the state budget has no capacity to provide free and quality schooling. Recent policy measures from March 2025 have reinforced this direction. Tax exemptions and customs duty relief for non-state education providers have been extended until January 1, 2030 – including exemptions on foreign teachers’ salaries and imported educational equipment.
The moment calls for a calibrated equilibrium between openness and oversight – avoiding Soviet‑style blanket content control and top‑down micromanagement, yet also preventing a chaotic free‑for‑all in licensing. As Uzbekistan might be tilting toward a somewhat market-driven philosophy, or what scholars term “marketization and commodification,” policy- and decision-makers must ask the looming questions: How will this shift affect quality, how should it be institutionally regulated, and what does it mean for accessibility and equity for lower social classes in the context of Uzbekistan?