Abstract
Kazakhstan language policy is evolving from one of revitalization of Kazakh to one of trilingualism including Kazakh, Russian, and English. This shift in policy poses new questions regarding Kazakh preschool children’s language and literacy learning. Preschool children learn best through active social interaction, and the home sphere is the most influential for learning prior to entering formal education. With global access to technology, home learning practices have expanded knowledge-sharing. However, in the rural context, access to digital technology and global practices is limited. This study investigates the types of learning interaction that are occurring in remote areas of Kazakhstan and how they differ from more urban areas. The first stage of the 2-year study involved observation in public spaces during the work week. Over 400 observations in 20 towns, villages, and urban centers were collected. This initial assessment stage of the study included 200 h of nonparticipatory observation. The factors investigated were frequency and length of learning interaction, where the interactions occur (urban vs. rural area), with whom (parent vs. caregiver), and what modality (mobile phones, action figures), types of practices (verbal vs. gestures vs. both), purpose (knowledge-sharing, entertainment), and whether technology was used as a part of parental social interaction. These observations address the questions: (1) What types of practices are being engaged at the preschool age, with whom, and using what modality? and (2) In addition to parents, can other community stakeholders facilitate communities of learning through digital technology? The results reveal that in knowledge-sharing, the types of learning practices and interactions among elderly caregivers differ from those of young caregivers. Additionally, variations were identified in types of learning practices between elderly parents and community members in rural and their urban counterparts.
The second phase of implementation included four 5-h pilot awareness sessions performed on a weekend. Awareness sessions covered themes such as active learning, multiliteracies, ethnic storytelling, and story construction. Pre- and post-session questionnaire data were collected. Preliminary results revealed that participants created preschool resources and a community of learning through digital technology. This occurred through the organic participant-created videos on their smartphones. These videos captured extra peripheral learning practices. Additionally, these videos were shared among the participants. Thus, they collectively created a digital community of multilingual learning resources. These findings from the pilot stage address challenges for rural communities through intergenerational participation in preschool learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abbott-Chapman, J., & Robertson, M. (2015). Youth leisure, places, spaces and identity. In Landscapes of leisure (pp. 123–134). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Aitken, J. (2011). Kazakhstan: Surprises and stereotypes after 20 years of independence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Anderson, K. H., Pomfret, R., & Usseinova, N. (2004). Education in Central Asia during the transition to a market economy. In S. P. Heyneman & A. J. DeYoung (Eds.), Challenges to education in Central Asia (pp. 131–152). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
Becker, B. (2010). The transfer of cultural knowledge in the early childhood: Social and ethnic disparities and the mediating role of familial activities. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 17–29.
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The “digital natives” debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x.
Boivin, N. (2016). Multiliteracies of transnational and immigrant pre-teens: Meditating intercultural meaning. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 45(6), 470–486.
Boivin, N., Noraini Albakri, R., Yunus, Z., Mohammad, H., & Muniandy, N. (2014). Assessing emergent, social, and multiliteracy practices in urban Malaysian homes. Malaysian English Language Research Journal, 10(2), 34–54.
Burkhalter, N., & Shegebayev, M. R. (2012). Critical thinking as culture: Teaching post-Soviet teachers in Kazakhstan. International Review of Education, 58(1), 55–72.
Casler, K., & Kelemen, D. (2007). Reasoning about artifacts at 24 months: The developing teleo-functional stance. Cognition, 103(1), 120–130.
Cercone, J. (2010). Learning English in new times: The participatory design spaces of the new literacies classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University at Buffalo.
Chiswick, B. R., Lee, Y. L., & Miller, P. W. (2005). Family matters: The role of the family in immigrants’ destination language acquisition. Journal of Population Economics, 18(4), 631–647.
Cristancho, S., & Vining, J. (2009). Perceived intergenerational differences in the transmission of traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in two indigenous groups from Colombia and Guatemala. Culture and Psychology, 15(2), 229–254.
Cummings, S. N. (2013). Symbolism and power in Central Asia: Politics of the spectacular. New York: Routledge.
Darieva, T., Kaschuba, W., & Krebs, M. (2011). Urban spaces after socialism: Ethnographies of public places in Eurasian cities (Vol. 22). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
Dave, B. (2007). Kazakhstan – Ethnicity, language and power. New York: Routledge.
Deniz, D. (2010). Nationality policies in post-Soviet Kazakhstan. Unpublished MA dissertation, Middle Eastern Technical University, Ankara.
Duman, G., Orhon, G., & Gedik, N. (2015). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL, 27(2), 197–216.
Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2006). Moving forward: Ideas for research on school, family, and community partnerships. In C. F. Conrad & R. Serlin (Eds.), SAGE handbook for research in education: Engaging ideas and enriching inquiry (pp. 117–138). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Farver, J. A. M., Kim, Y. K., & Lee-Shin, Y. (2000). Within cultural differences examining individual differences in Korean American and European American preschoolers’ social pretend play. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(5), 583–602.
Fierman, W. (1998). Language and identity in Kazakhstan: Formulations in policy documents, 1987–1997. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 31(2), 171–186.
Fierman, W. (2000). Changing urban demography and the prospects of nationalism in Kazakhstan. Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism, XXVII(1–2), 7–20.
Galindo, C., & Sheldon, S. (2012). School and home connections and children’s kindergarten achievement gains: The mediating role of family involvement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(1), 90–103.
Gee, J. P., & Hayes, E. R. (2011). Language and learning in the digital age. New York: Routledge.
Gregory, E., & Williams, A. (2000). City literacies: Learning to read across generations and cultures. New York: Routledge.
Gregory, E., Lytra, V., Choudhury, H., Ilankuberan, A., Kwapong, A., & Woodham, M. (2012). Syncretism as a creative act of mind: The narratives of children from four faith communities in London. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 13, 322.
Jaeger, M. M. (2012). The extended family and children’s educational success. American Sociological Review, 77, 903. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412464040.
Kress, G. (2004). Literacy in the new media age. Hove: Psychology Press.
Laurent, A., Nicoladis, E., & Marentette, P. (2015). The development of storytelling in two languages with words and gestures. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(1), 56–74.
Lowrey, K. (2008). Incommensurability and new economic strategies among indigenous and traditional peoples. Journal of Political Ecology, 15(1), 61–74.
Marsh, J. (2004). The techno-literacy practices of young children. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(1), 51–66.
McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society (Vol. 111). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Minahan, J. (2013). Miniature empires: A historical dictionary of the newly independent states. New York: Routledge.
Møllegaard, S., & Jæger, M. M. (2015). The effect of grandparents’ economic, cultural, and social capital on grandchildren’s educational success. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 42, 11–19.
Piaget, J. (2013). The construction of reality in the child (Vol. 82). New York: Routledge.
Purcell-Gates, V. E. (2007). Cultural practices of literacy: Case studies of language, literacy, social practice, and power. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Roberts, J., Jergens, J., & Burchinal, M. (2005). The role of home literacy practices in preschool children’s language and emergent literacy skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(2), 345–359.
Robson, S., & Quinn, S. F. (2014). The Routledge international handbook of young children’s thinking and understanding. New York: Routledge.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rowsell, J. (2013). Working with multimodality: Rethinking literacy in a digital age, Routledge.
Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2007). Creativity, communication and collaboration: The identification of pedagogic progression in sustained shared thinking. Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 1, 3–23.
Suny, R. G. (1998). The soviet experiment: Russia, the USSR, and the successor states. New York: Oxford University Press.
UNICEF. (2015). Annual Report – Kazakhstan. Paris: UNICEF.
Van Steensel, R. (2006). Relations between socio-cultural factors, the home literacy environment and children’s literacy development in the first years of primary education. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 367–382.
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by funding from the Graduate School of Education, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Boivin, N. (2020). Kazakh Transnational Multiliteracies: Building Intergenerational Communities of Learning. In: Brunn, S., Kehrein, R. (eds) Handbook of the Changing World Language Map. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02438-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02438-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02437-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02438-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences