Uzbekistan’s doctoral system: Western standards on paper, Soviet legacy in practice
|23:49 / 27.02.202550,03212 min
The doctoral education system in Uzbekistan is overly complicated for researchers, and scientific works, dissertations, and articles are losing their value. Scientific advisors lack sufficient knowledge… These were the main theses of a recently published article in a reputable international journal. Kun.uz revisited this pressing issue and discussed it with education experts.
A recent article on the need for reform in Uzbekistan’s doctoral education system was published in the Higher Education Policy journal by Uzbek researchers.
In the article, the authors highlight that Uzbekistan’s current doctoral system has been made unnecessarily complex for researchers, leading to the devaluation of scientific works, dissertations, and articles. Moreover, they point out that scientific advisors often lack adequate expertise. The article was authored by Professor Kobil Ruziev from the University of the West of England, Lecturer Dilshoda Rabbimova from “New Uzbekistan” University, and Researcher Mohidil Mamasoliyeva from the University of Surrey.
Using this article as a starting point, Kun.uz discussed the topic with higher education expert Azamat Akbarov and Istanbul University doctoral candidate Otabek Tillaev.
Let’s begin with a general question as an introduction. Why is it important for countries to develop a strong community of scientists and establish a system for training researchers? Please share your brief thoughts.
Azamat Akbarov: "Why is doctoral education necessary? Doctoral education is essential for a nation’s economic development, serving as a bridge between industry and higher education. In all developed countries, research conducted by scientists forms the foundation for achieving key indicators of progress. Simply put, high-quality research determines a country’s future, and only doctoral candidates can conduct this level of research.
"In fields where innovation is in demand, doctoral students collaborate with industries. For example, in South Korea, universities play a crucial role in supporting Hyundai and Samsung. Similarly, the backbone of Elon Musk’s industrial empire consists of universities. While figures like Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, or Jeff Bezos are the public faces of innovation, the reality is that universities stand behind them. The professionals conducting applied research are the ones commercializing academic ideas through industry-funded projects."
Related topics
Otabek Tillaev
: "The development of any field is primarily driven by science — without science, there is no progress. In any higher education system, after reaching a certain stage — such as completing a bachelor’s or master’s degree — professionals face two paths: continuing with practical work or pursuing an academic career. Naturally, they choose their path based on their personal aspirations and goals.
"So, why is the doctoral system necessary? Primarily, it ensures that science remains a state-level priority and integrates theory with practice. Since practical fields cannot advance without scientific innovation, researchers play a crucial role in bridging this gap. By applying their research to real-world problems, countries can drive progress in both science and development."
The article criticizes the system for reverting to the old Soviet-style two-tier structure. According to sources, in 2012, Uzbekistan introduced a one-tier system that granted a Doctor of Science degree. However, in 2017, this was abolished in favor of a two-tier structure: the first level grants a PhD (Doctor of Philosophy), while the second level awards a DSc (Doctor of Science). In your opinion, what should this system look like, and why?
Azamat Akbarov: "In 2019, I wrote a critical article questioning the necessity of the Higher Attestation Commission (OAK) and these scientific degrees. The Turkish have a saying: “Reason follows a single path,” meaning that regardless of whether a country follows Korea, Germany, or Australia, the direction should be the same. Increasing the number of universities should serve a single purpose — delivering quality education that leads to employment, generates added value, creates new jobs, and fosters innovation. In other words, scientific ideas and universities should contribute to GDP, just like factories and industries.
"Uzbekistan’s Higher Education Development Strategy Until 2030, signed by the president in 2019, explicitly states that universities should contribute to GDP like their counterparts in Korea, Malaysia, and Australia — through scientific research and innovation.
"Globally, doctoral education follows a one-tier structure: bachelor’s → master’s → PhD. The PhD is the highest academic degree, beyond which there is nothing—only academic titles follow, but there is no second tier. The two-tier system is a Soviet-era relic, an outdated legacy.
"No developed country in the world uses a two-tier doctoral system like post-Soviet states do. The very term basic doctoral studies (for the first tier) is absurd. Even in Turkey, the doctoral degree is the highest qualification. During a PhD, a researcher not only creates new knowledge but also challenges or refines previous findings. The second tier is unnecessary because it requires writing another 150-page dissertation, which serves no real purpose.
"Western academia advocates for a one-tier PhD system. In a globalized world, we should focus on producing critical, research-based articles. Imagine if, instead of a 150-page dissertation for the second tier, researchers wrote a high-quality 5-6 page article that significantly impacted a scientific field. No one reads these dissertations—they have no citations, are not published in English, and do not contribute to industry.
"Thus, transitioning to a one-tier system in 2023 was a positive step toward aligning Uzbekistan’s higher education with international standards. Now, consider the situation for international students or foreign academics. If they earn the highest academic degree in their country, it may not be recognized in Uzbekistan due to our two-tier system.
"However, some members of the old academic system resisted this change, saying, “We had to go through two tiers, and now young scholars are reaching the same level with just one step.” If the two-tier system had improved education or contributed significantly to industry, we would support it. But if it merely fosters corruption and harms education, we must reconsider it. Where is the world headed? Do any advanced countries use a two-tier doctoral system?
"On paper, our system aligns with Western and global standards, but in practice, it still follows the old Soviet model. In the world’s top 50–70 countries, there is no two-tier doctoral system at all. It is unnecessary because a dissertation should be written only once, after which research articles become the priority. In the U.S., there is even a discussion about eliminating the dissertation requirement entirely, arguing that scholars should focus solely on producing impactful research. Therefore, I believe returning to a two-tier system was a mistake, as there is no global precedent for such a model."
Otabek Tillaev: "Several factors influenced this decision at the state level. As an independent nation, Uzbekistan aimed to align its academic path with international standards. However, equating a newly awarded PhD with an old-system Doctor of Science degree created internal conflicts.
"To put it bluntly, senior academics asked, “Can someone who just earned a PhD be considered my equal?” This created significant resistance. Additionally, having worked in higher education for 15 years and witnessed internal decision-making firsthand, I can say that bureaucratic politics and the overall academic environment played a major role.
"If we aim to follow the best global standards, we must acknowledge that the world’s leading education systems primarily operate under a one-tier PhD structure. Their equivalent of a DSc degree is rarely used because a PhD graduate is already expected to contribute to science through publications, monographs, and mentorship.
"Regardless of the number of tiers, the real question is: Does the research contribute to society, technology, or progress? If this aspect is not thoroughly examined, the system becomes nothing more than a degree-producing conveyor belt. After working within and observing European higher education, I’ve come to realize that our system does very little for scientific advancement."
During the discussion, experts also emphasized the need for competent academic advisors, replacing the Higher Attestation Commission with an independent organization, and eliminating corruption within the system. The full interview is available in Uzbek in the video above.
