Achieving SDG 4, Equitable Quality Education after COVID-19: Global Evidence and a Case Study of Kazakhstan

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of two years of emergency distance schooling on achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4—equitable quality education, both globally and in Kazakhstan. The study used a qualitative research design. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 teachers and 30 parents, while focus group discussions (FGDs) were utilised to gather the perspective of 28 students. The conceptual framework developed puts effective pedagogy at the heart of quality distance education, nested within four supportive factors—digital infrastructure; policy guidelines about pedagogy; curriculum and assessments; professional development in digital pedagogy; and the home environment. The study found that distance schooling in Kazakhstan has undermined progress on SDG 4 and worsened inequalities in access to quality education despite the distribution of digital devices to disadvantaged children and teachers. While mainstream public school teachers transitioned to distance school without any systematic preparation, provision of digital resources or clear policy guidelines, schoolteachers at elite public institutions received meticulous guidance and support. Despite later receiving professional development in digital pedagogy and access to digital resources and platforms, public school teachers in rural and deprived urban areas still faced challenges due to fragmented internet connectivity. This limited interactive and communicative pedagogy, particularly in rural and public schools, and hindered teachers’ ability to assess the impact of their teaching on student outcomes. Policy initiatives failed to mitigate disadvantages in the home environment for low-income families, parents with limited education and working parents, especially mothers, who primarily supported homeschooling. Recommendations are offered for adapting education provision and envisioning more robust education quality to achieve SDG 4 and address historical inequities in a post-pandemic world.

1. Introduction

The widespread closure of schools due to the COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted progress towards achieving SDG 4, which seeks to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all [1]. The long-term consequences of school closures are expected to be costly, with a decline in learning outcomes, especially for disadvantaged groups [1,2]. Remote learning modalities were not a perfect substitute for in-person instruction and were not universally accessible or affordable [1]. The longer schools were closed, the more students’ learning suffered [2].

While the focus on ‘quality’ and ‘equity’ in global development agendas is a relatively new and welcome change [3,4], a narrow pseudo-technicist and instrumental approach towards the concept and measurement of quality dilutes its potential reach and impact [4]. As the COVID-19 crisis subsides, there is a need for reflection on two years’ experience of distance schooling to understand how we might envision education quality for ‘building back better from COVID-19’ [5] (p. 76). One crucial transformation that needs to be prioritised is the reduction of education inequalities in order to achieve SDG 4 [5]. The impact of failing to meet SDG 4 targets on progress towards other SDGs is also a key area for consideration.

This study aims to investigate the impact of two years of emergency distance schooling on the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4, which is dedicated to ensuring equitable quality education. A comprehensive review of global literature was conducted alongside a qualitative study that focused on the effect of school closures on the achievement of SDG 4 in Kazakhstan. By undertaking this investigation, we expect to gain a deeper understanding of the implications for equitable education quality both in current times and during future development while also gaining valuable insights that will contribute to the advancement of SDG 4.

The study considers various schooling modalities during COVID-19 closures, including online and blended learning. It reviews the global literature on COVID-19 to develop a conceptual framework for assessing equitable quality distance education and applies this to a qualitative case study in Kazakhstan. The latter examines stakeholders’—teachers’, students’ and parents’—different experiences of quality distance schooling in the country. Kazakhstan offers a unique opportunity to explore the topic since schools were fully or partially closed for roughly two academic years [6]. While pre-pandemic access to schooling in Kazakhstan was universal [1], inequities based on school types (public vs. selective schools) and location (rural vs. urban schools) existed [7]. This context provides opportunities for understanding access to quality education during prolonged school closure for groups facing multiple disadvantages and intervention points that must be addressed if SDG 4 is to be achieved.

2. Global Evidence on Equitable Quality Distance Education during COVID-19

2.1. Digital Infrastructure

The lack of digital equipment has been cited as a major barrier to accessible distance education [8,9], especially for low-income households and multi-child families [10,11]. Limited access to devices hindered participation in online sessions, leading to educational inequality between rich and poor students [12]. While students from elite schools could attend synchronous lessons at home, very few public school students attended online sessions because of a lack of digital devices [12]. Unstable internet connections resulted in student exclusion, particularly in remote rural areas [13]. The quality and coverage of online materials have varied across schools, influenced by factors such as household income and parental education [14,15]. Tailoring educational materials for students with special educational needs (SENs) or disabilities has been a significant challenge [9,16], resulting in some learners with disabilities discontinuing their studies [17].

2.2. Policy Guidelines

The COVID-19 pandemic required rapid adjustments to education system guidelines [18], resulting in variations in policy responses across and within countries [19]. School leaders were responsible for interpreting, translating and implementing guidelines related to safeguarding, school closures, preparing students for distance learning and facilitating a safe return to traditional schooling [19]. However, how these policy guidelines were communicated to them led to inconsistencies in their implementation and caused stress for school leaders. The guidelines school leaders received about matters such as curriculum decisions, mandatory grading and distance modalities varied across school districts within a country [20]. Many teachers in the United States did not receive the necessary guidance to support all their students with diverse needs and abilities, adapt the curriculum or keep students engaged or motivated when schools were closed [21]. In England, schools faced challenges in delivering clear guidance to diverse stakeholders in a rapidly changing environment [19].

2.3. Professional Development in Distance Pedagogy

Teaching exclusively online made it essential to offer teachers professional development opportunities so they could adapt their pedagogy to the virtual environment. Many countries provided teachers with online professional development opportunities, particularly during the first wave of the pandemic [21,22]. Nevertheless, such opportunities were unevenly distributed across countries and rural and urban locations within a country [23].

2.4. The Home Environment

Variations in home environments in access to digital infrastructure, quiet study space and parental supervision resulted in the uneven impact of distance teaching on student academic achievement and learning outcomes. Multi-child households often could not provide a quiet place for all children [14]. Parents in blue-collar jobs could not work remotely and often lacked academic skills to support their children [9,24]. Conversely, high-income families spent more time supporting and supervising their children [6,25], had better educational credentials and often worked remotely [24]. They could also often afford to hire private tutors or order extra educational resources for their children [25]. While remote education caused enormous challenges for less advantaged parents, for parents with primary school-aged children, homeschooling proved much more demanding across the board [6,26]. In some countries, for example, Bangladesh and Ethiopia, girls received less support in schoolwork from families than boys, with parents making greater demands on girls to complete household chores [17].

2.5. Teacher Pedagogy

2.5.1. Teacher Knowledge of Digital Pedagogy

Globally, studies report teachers’ unpreparedness to conduct online lessons and ambiguity about digital tools and methods, particularly at the beginning of the pandemic [27,28,29]. Teachers from countries with developed digital infrastructure could produce better quality online teaching resources than their peers from less-developed states [30]. Additionally, teachers from public schools did not generally possess basic digital literacy skills compared to private school teachers [31]. Furthermore, older teachers found the shift extremely challenging, and female teachers were under pressure as they had to combine domestic chores and familial responsibilities alongside distance teaching [31].

2.5.2. Teachers’ Pedagogic Practices

Studies confirm the centrality of communicative, interactive pedagogy to ensure the quality of distance education [32]. The limited use of communicative and interactive practices led stakeholders to view the quality of distance education negatively [33,34]. Engaging students online was challenging for teachers [26]. Students and parents reported that teachers’ feedback was less than expected [35] or found lacking [8]. Conversely, regular and quality feedback resulted in parental satisfaction with distance education [36]. Like other facets of quality education, disparities existed in stakeholders’ assessment of teacher pedagogy, with private schools being reported as responsive, engaged, innovative, interactive with students, conducting real-time online teaching, and setting high expectations compared to public schools [37,38].

2.5.3. Students’ Outcomes

Teachers contacting students was positively associated with students’ self-reported learning, although a lower proportion of public school teachers contacted and effectively communicated with their students than private school teachers [39]. The level of student engagement varied according to the subject or content. While it was easier to adapt online teaching in social sciences, modifying hands-on activities, such as science labs, technology or physical education lessons, was more demanding [40]. In other contexts, for example, in the UK, student engagement was associated with family income and gender, with low-income families and boys at a disadvantage [10]. Students appeared less engaged and motivated when they had limited opportunities to interact in the lesson and ask questions. Effective student collaboration resulted in greater self-reported learning [41].

Online assessment has been characterised as one of the most challenging issues of distance schooling [42]. Studies report that teachers either failed to assess students online or were unable to use technology for assessment and feedback [28,43]. In addition, challenges of ensuring academic integrity in online assessment, particularly summative assessments, have been widely reported [44,45,46].

Many studies report that the inadequate quality of distance teaching led to a learning crisis globally [2,47,48,49], with the severity of learning loss associated with the length of school closure [2]. However, learning loss was greater among students from less-educated homes and lower socio-economic backgrounds [12,48,49,50]. Public school students and younger students perceived that they were learning less or significantly less than private school students and older students [39].

In summary, intersecting disadvantages based on school types, household and country income, family size, parental education and occupation, location and, in some countries, gender limited equitable access to distance education and effective pedagogy, thus producing differentiated outcomes for diverse groups of learners.

3. Conceptual Framework for Equitable Quality Distance Education

Exploring the history of ‘quality education’ in global development policies, Sayed and Moriarty note a complete absence of the term from the 1990 Jomtien World Declaration on Education for All (EFA) and the Millennium Development Goals [4]. Although quality permeated all six EFA goals since the 2000 Dakar framework, physical access to schools was prioritised at the expense of quality. Despite the pervasiveness of the term, the concept was not elucidated, resulting in a ‘striking neglect of pedagogy’ and ‘classroom processes and outcomes’ [3] (p. 251). Sayed and Moriarty conclude that pedagogy and classroom teaching and learning processes remain neglected in SDG 4 goals and targets despite the turn to quality in the SDG agenda.

Similar to traditional face-to-face schooling, teacher pedagogy holds a central position in quality education in a distance learning context. Based on the synthesis of literature presented earlier, we contend that distance quality education is influenced by four key supporting factors: digital infrastructure, professional development in distance education, policy guidelines regarding pedagogy, curriculum and assessment, as well as the home environment and parental supervision (Figure 1).

Drawing on data from education systems in Europe, North America and Asia, Alexandar defined pedagogy as both ‘the act of teaching’ and the discourses or ideas that inform and shape teaching [51] (p. 255). Building on this definition, Westbrook et al., argued that teacher pedagogy in Southern contexts is shaped by teacher thinking, what teachers do in the classroom and the outcomes of their practice on students [52]. Effective pedagogy is characterised by an interactive and communicative approach that elicits a positive response from students, indicating that learning is occurring [52].

Drawing on the literature review and applying Westbrook et al.’s conceptualisation of face-to-face pedagogy [52] to distance education, we propose that the three aspects of effective pedagogy manifest in the following ways, represented by the large circle in Figure 1:

• Teacher thinking: sound knowledge of the principles of distance education, knowledge of the curriculum and an empathetic understanding of the child’s home environment;
• Teacher doing: giving instruction and offering a digitally imaginative explanation; using varying levels of questioning, elaboration, digital materials and platforms; creating a positive emotional and social environment for students; and flexibly using whole-class, group and pair work and interaction;
• Outcomes of pedagogy: monitoring student engagement, participation and motivation online; reviewing and supporting students’ work and offering timely constructive feedback; and assessing student outcomes through online tests and assignments.

Finally, teachers’ pedagogy is not isolated but embedded within four supporting factors, represented by factors outside the large circle in Figure 1:

• Effective online education presupposes access to digital devices, platforms and learning resources and stable internet for students and teachers;
• Quality distance schooling requires policy regarding timetable, curriculum coverage and modes and frequency of assessment;
• Exclusive distance teaching requires continued professional development for teachers in distance pedagogy;
• Since effective distance schooling relies on the active support of the family, teachers and schools must pay close attention to the variation in home environments in access to digital infrastructure, quiet study space and parental supervision.

An intersectional approach is essential in analysing equitable quality distance education, recognising both experiences of marginalisation and privilege across social groups [53,54]. The convergence of multiple forms of marginalisation leads to significant disadvantage.

4. Materials and Methods

Before describing the research questions and methodology, a brief background of the country case study is presented to situate the findings.

4.1. The Case Study Background

Kazakhstan provides free-of-charge education at kindergarten, primary (grades 1–4), secondary (grades 5–9) and upper secondary education (grades 10–11) levels [55]. The state funds the overwhelming majority (96.4%) of schools. Around 71% of schools and 43.5% of children are based in rural areas [56]. Schools funded and governed by the state are called ‘mainstream’ schools, henceforth public schools, as they are the equivalent of state/public schools. Additionally, there are state-funded elite schools for gifted students with substantially better human and material resources. The most prestigious of these is a cluster of 20 schools in different regions, called Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (NIS), henceforth elite schools. This sector is fully autonomous and self-governing. The schools are in cities but have dormitories so children from rural and remote areas can attend.

School education is universally accessible [1]. However, school infrastructure, human resources and learning outcomes suggest wide disparities in quality. Rural schools are under-resourced and need more qualified teachers and effective leadership [57]. Rural students underperform compared to urban students in high-stakes national [58] and international assessments [59]. Unlike other southern contexts, gender disparities at the expense of girls are not noticeable. Kazakhstani girls outperform boys in literacy and science and perform at par with boys in mathematics [60].

School closure was announced in early March 2020, with schools given only three weeks to prepare for a complete transition to distance education on 6th April 2020. The sudden transition to distance education in Kazakhstan was inevitable in an unprecedented, disruptive, fast-growing pandemic, but the infrastructure for distance/online education was not ready for mass expansion [61].

The government mitigated the digital divide by distributing digital devices among low-income and multi-child households [62]. Nevertheless, because of poor bandwidth, teachers could not use interactive lessons [63], and somewhat surprisingly, older teachers with longer experience reported higher engagement in synchronous teaching [64]. Although two local online platforms—Online Mektep and Kundelik—were provided, teachers mostly used them to upload students’ scores rather than to offer interactive lessons [63]. The lack of teachers’ preparedness also affected the quality of distance education [62].

4.2. Research Questions, Design and Methods

In line with the conceptual framework and the literature review, this study examines research participants’—teachers, students and parents—experiences of quality distance education in Kazakhstan by addressing three research questions:

• How are research participants’ experiences of distance education shaped by four supporting factors: digital infrastructure, policy guidelines, teacher professional development and the home environment?
• What are the research participants’ experiences of teacher pedagogy during distance schooling?
• How are research participants’ experiences of distance education differentiated across intersectional markers of disadvantage, namely, school type, rural vs. urban location, gender, family status, socio-economic background, grade and age?

This study used a qualitative research design to delve deeper into participants’ lived experiences and perspectives [65,66]. Individual in-depth semi-structured interviews were used to gather teachers’ and parents’ views. In addition to individual interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted to gather students’ perspectives. The interview and FGD protocols covered a range of issues pertinent to the study, ensuring a comprehensive exploration of the topic under investigation. The areas covered in the interviews and FGDs encompassed policy guidelines, digital infrastructure, study environment, parental involvement and the three dimensions of teacher pedagogy. This included understanding how teachers practised their teaching methods, their knowledge and competence in digital pedagogy and the impact of their pedagogic practices on student outcomes. By examining these aspects, the study aimed to gain a holistic understanding of the effects of emergency distance schooling on achieving SDG 4 in Kazakhstan.

Because of COVID-19 restrictions, most data were collected via secure electronic means, except 15 interviews (five teachers and ten parents) which were conducted in person at the request of participants, following safety protocols. In most cases, this happened when participants had limited familiarity with the technology required for virtual interviews or had no access to or poor connectivity to the internet. Sometimes, participants requested an in-person interview because the interviewer was known to them or they valued face-to-face interactions.

Data were collected between mid-December 2020 and mid-February 2021 in Kazakh, the state language, or Russian, the language of inter-ethnic communication. The School of Medicine Research Ethics Committee (SoMREC), University of Leeds, granted ethical approval for the study. Teachers and parents provided written consent. Written parental consent was obtained before conducting student FGDs, and students’ assent was recorded orally. All interviews and FGDs were audio-recorded using an encrypted device, with the participants’ consent, transcribed verbatim and translated into English for analysis, producing 1059 pages of textual data.

4.3. Participants and Research Sites

In total, 30 parents, 30 teachers and 28 students participated in the study (

Table 1. Field sites, methods and the number of participants.

	Stakeholders (Method)
Research Site	Teachers Interview	Parents Interview	Students FGDs *	Total
Almaty Region	10	10	8 (2)	28
Astana	10	10	10 (2)	30
Shymkent	10	10	10 (2)	30
Total	30	30	28 (6)	88

* Numbers outside the brackets indicate the number of participating students, while the numbers inside the brackets indicate the number of FGDs.

). Participants were recruited from Kazakhstan’s three most populous regions: Astana (the capital city), Almaty (the southeastern region) and Shymkent (the south–central region).

Qualitative research aims to gain a comprehensive understanding rather than extensive coverage [65,66]. The concept of theoretical saturation is relevant in qualitative research design, indicating that data saturation can be achieved with as few as 12 cases, especially when studying a relatively homogeneous population [67]. Thus, the current study obtained a sufficient sample size, with data saturation achieved for each participant group.

At each of the three research sites, a multilingual school teacher with research training and experience was recruited as a research assistant. They were selected for their existing networks with schools in the region. The three research assistants were crucial in recruiting participants from within their respective school networks, including parents, teachers and students. The study focused on public schools that catered to marginalised populations in each region, but also included teachers and students from elite schools for comparative analysis (

Table 2. Participants’ school characteristics.

		Stakeholder
	Characteristics	Teachers (n = 30)	Parents (n = 30)	Students (n = 28)
School type
	Public	25	N/A	24
	Elite	5	N/A	4
Location
	Rural	12	3	5
	Semi-urban	6	13	11
	Urban	12	14	12

).

The majority of participating teachers were women (

Table 3. Selected socio-demographic characteristics of research participants.

	Stakeholders
Characteristics	Teachers (n = 30)	Parents (n = 30)	Students (n = 28)
Gender
Female	26	29	16
Male	4	1	12
Family status
Single	2	N/A	N/A
Single parent	6	12	6
Nuclear family	19	13	16
Extended family	3	5	6

), which aligns with the high percentage of female teachers (80%) in Kazakhstan [68]. In terms of highest educational qualification, 8 teachers had a college education, 17 had a bachelor’s degree, and 5 had a master’s degree. All teachers had a teacher training qualification. On average, the participating teachers were 39 years old and had 16 years of experience. Teacher-participants’ subject specialisaton was diverse. Among them, 15 teachers taught languages (English, Kazakh or Russian), 7 taught science subjects (physics, chemistry or biology), 3 taught mathematics, 3 taught all subjects in primary school and 1 each taught physical education and information technology. In terms of the grades they taught, 3 teachers exclusively taught primary grades (1–4), while the rest taught a combination of primary grades (1–4) and secondary grades (5–11).

All participating parents were mothers with one exception (Table 3), which aligns with the global trend where research often underrepresents fathers due to the primary role of mothers as caregivers [69]. None of the interviewed parents had a child attending an elite school. Schoolgirls slightly outnumbered schoolboys in FGDs. Participating students were aged between 11 and 17 and enrolled in grades 5 to 11. While most participants lived in nuclear households across stakeholder groups, single-parent households and extended families were also represented.

4.4. Data Analysis

The conceptual framework and research questions informed data analysis. In line with a qualitative approach, a fieldwork diary, notes and reflections were developed in narrative form and transferred into NVivo along with interview transcripts. Data analysis started simultaneously with data collection and followed an iterative process [70], starting with initial coding, which entailed assigning a truncated symbolic meaning to text, going from codes to categories by clustering ‘similar or comparable codes into groups for pattern construction’ [71] (p. 587) and finally developing themes from categories to ‘capture some recurring pattern that cuts across [the] data’ [65]. Appendix A illustrates the process. The authors manually analysed a sample of interviews to identify emerging codes, categories and themes, which were finalised through meetings and discussions. Later, a codebook was prepared, and all interview transcripts were coded in Nvivo software. Five themes emerged, guided by the conceptual framework and the research questions: access to digital infrastructure; policy guidelines during distance schooling; teacher professional development; study space and parental supervision; and distance pedagogy (Figure 2). Each theme included two or more categories.

4.5. Data Validation

A stakeholder roundtable was convened on 31 March 2021 to ensure data validation. The roundtable brought together a diverse group of stakeholders, including parents, teachers, school leaders, representatives from the Ministry of Education and Science (MoES), multilateral organisations, NGOs specialising in supporting marginalised children and researchers conducting empirical studies on the impact of COVID-19 on education. Research findings and recommendations were shared during the roundtable, and fruitful discussions took place. The feedback received from the stakeholders indicated that the research findings aligned with their own experiences. This valuable input, along with the insights from research participants and existing literature, greatly enhanced the quality of the recommendations put forth to policymakers, school leaders and teachers in Kazakhstan.

5. Results

The first four sub-sections present results related to the four supportive factors within which distance pedagogy is located, and the last theme explains how stakeholders experienced pedagogy. Within each sub-section, intersectional disadvantage is explored and highlighted. The interview extracts use the unique participant code, with the first letter signifying the stakeholder group, i.e., ‘P’ for parents, ‘T’ for teachers and ‘S’ for students. We only identify the gender of teachers and parents if they are men since most were women. Likewise, we mention the school sector only if a stakeholder is from an elite school since most participants represented public schools.

5.1. Access to Digital Infrastructure

5.1.1. Digital Devices

Only 4 public schoolteachers had an individual device, 16 shared a device with a family member, and 5 used a device provided by the school. However, one teacher claimed that he and other teachers in his school went into debt to purchase a device for distance schooling to keep face (T20_Shymkent_rural_male). Of the elite schoolteachers, 2 shared a device with a family member, and 3 used a device provided by the school.

Of the public school students, 3 had no digital device, 1 had a personal device, and 19 shared a device with family members. All 4 elite students had an individual laptop provided by the school.

Of the parents, 9 did not possess a computer/laptop, and only 4 had two devices. Since most had two or more children, the implication is there were insufficient home devices to cater for distance education.

Both elite and public schoolteachers asserted, and parents confirmed, that schools carried out surveys to identify vulnerable students (students in low-income and multi-child households) for distributing digital devices purchased by regional governments, local education departments and the Ministry of Education. Nevertheless, several public schoolteachers shared that many children in low-income and multi-child households could not join classes ‘because there is a single mobile phone or a computer per family’ (T15_Shymkent_rural) and were worried about the inclusion of children in multi-child households: “Undoubtedly, it becomes challenging when five children are vying for one laptop, with each of them needing to use it for their work. This situation creates difficulties in managing their individual learning needs’ (T29_Almaty_urban). Public school students claimed, and teachers and parents concurred, that they and their peers mainly studied using smartphones.

5.1.2. Internet

While poor internet was a significant challenge across locations, the severity of the problem was more profound in rural areas: ‘The internet connection has been consistently poor, and unfortunately, we continue to face issues with a weak connection’ (T6_Astana_rural). Thus, distance lessons were severely affected in rural areas: ‘I can catch a network signal in front of the window’ (T17_Shymkent_rural). Rural children skipped classes or had to go to ‘the daughter-in-law’s house or cousin’s house’ to access the internet (T17_Shymkent_rural). These challenges were particularly profound in winter because of sub-zero temperatures, as ‘the pupils were unable to gather in someone’s yard to have access to stable internet for their study, further exacerbating the difficulties they faced’ (T15_Shymkent_rural). Some students missed assignment deadlines because of unstable internet. While praising the excellent support provided by teachers and the school, a rural elite school student nonetheless considered the poor quality of the internet as his major challenge: ‘At times, the internet connection completely disappears, leading to a state of panic as we struggle to figure out how to submit our work without a stable connection’ (S27_Almaty_boy_rural_grade 11).

5.1.3. Learning Materials and Platforms

Elite school students and teachers appeared satisfied with their access to quality learning materials. Teachers used Microsoft Teams both for teaching and stakeholder consultation. These schools already had rich learning materials, and when COVID-19 struck, electronic books were purchased immediately:

‘Currently, we use the MS Teams platform. Therefore, all pertinent data and content were made available exclusively through this platform.’

(T25_Almaty_elite school _urban)

‘Even the costly books required for teaching purposes were promptly procured.’

(T19_Shymkent_elite school _urban)

Although public schools struggled with interactive learning platforms and digital learning materials in the transition to distance education, they were provided access to online platforms before the new academic year began. The two platforms mentioned by participants were Online Mektep and BilimLand. While teachers praised BilimLand, most students across the three locations expressed dissatisfaction with the school learning platforms. During the summer of 2020, when schools were closed for summer vacation, the local education authorities developed and collected video lessons for public schoolteachers. However, some teachers did not find these videos good enough for use: ‘I saw a lot of bad lessons … I didn’t choose or offer one to my children’ (T26_Almaty_rural).

Parents either lamented the absence or were dissatisfied with the quality of digital textbooks, compelling them to use the internet to help their children with school tasks. Some parents expressed their discontent with the quality of videos or found a lack of correspondence between the content students needed to understand and the explanation offered: ‘The textbook and the workbook do not coincide in terms of what they have studied during the class’ (P22_Almaty_semi-urban).

Thus, the study found rural/urban and public/elite school disparities in access to digital devices, platforms and learning materials. Internet connectivity for rural students and teachers was minimal, and a lack of sufficient devices or weak internet connection resulted in most students using smartphones for lessons.

5.2. Policy Guidelines during Distance Schooling

Elite schools meticulously prepared teachers and staff within three weeks to transition smoothly to a full-distance mode. Teachers received structured guidelines in digital pedagogy. Schools used online surveys to regularly solicit parents’ and students’ feedback, resulting in school leaders and teachers collaboratively deciding how to improve the online learning environment.

‘The methodological support to facilitate the learning process was provided at an exemplary level. Any questions or concerns were promptly addressed through open discussions. Moreover, both the school’s IT service and informatics teachers were readily available to assist in resolving any issues that might arise, regardless of the time.’

(T24_Almaty_elite school_urban)

By contrast, most public schoolteachers recounted a chaotic transition and a lack of structured guidance in the immediate switch to distance schooling: ‘We didn’t receive any methodological instructions or guidance whatsoever’ (T29_Almaty_urban). Teachers were given the directive to ‘create your own conditions’ (T5_Astana_urban) or advised to use any methods as long as they were ‘clear, accessible, and interesting, so the children were engaged’ (T16_Shymkent_semi-urban). Teachers also mentioned receiving ambiguous or contradictory advice: ‘There were conflicting opinions and recommendations on how to proceed, with some suggesting one approach while others advocated for an alternative method’ (T12_Shymkent_urban).

However, by the summer of 2020, education authorities took stock and listened to feedback from parents, teachers and other stakeholders, issuing a range of policy guidelines, including reducing lesson duration to only 20 min, asking teachers to cut the number of student tasks and assessments and staggering lessons for different grades to assist with the shortage of devices for students at home.

In summary, the digitally competent elite schoolteachers received meticulous guidance and support, resulting in a smooth transition to distance schooling. By contrast, public schoolteachers struggled with the demands of distance education, and the absence of central guidance on digital pedagogy amplified their challenges during the transition period.

5.3. Teacher Professional Development

Even though elite schoolteachers were digitally competent, they received prompt online training to teach exclusively online, and IT specialists supported teachers and students in troubleshooting IT problems.

‘The school administration prioritises professional development and has organised numerous webinars for teachers through the Center for Pedagogical Excellence. Additionally, the Methodological Association of Informatics has arranged various events that have proven to be highly beneficial. Moreover, many teachers from our school have taken courses tailored to the Microsoft Teams platform, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of online learning facilitated by Microsoft.’

(T25_Almaty_elite school_urban)

By contrast, public schoolteachers received no training in transitioning to distance education. However, all public schoolteachers interviewed received professional development in distance education during the summer of 2020.

‘Education departments conducted a series of webinars designed to offer methodological support to teachers for effective distance learning. Furthermore, all teachers participated in a specialised course that equipped them with the necessary skills and knowledge to implement distance education successfully.’

(T27_Almaty_rural)

Thus, teachers received support with digital infrastructure and professional development, boosting their competence and confidence to experiment with digital tools. This is likely to have positively impacted teacher thinking and doing: ‘We started the new academic year this September with extensive preparation. This was made possible by our prior understanding of the different types of lessons, including synchronous and asynchronous formats and how to conduct them effectively. We knew the need to prepare presentations for synchronous lessons, which enhanced our readiness for the academic year.’ (T1_Astana_urban).

5.4. Diversity in Home Environment

5.4.1. Study Space

Most students in multi-child families had to share their workspace with siblings. Several participants could creatively manage the space shortage once authorities advised schools to use different lesson times across the grades:

‘While my siblings studying in the morning are busy with their lessons, those of us with afternoon classes assist our mother with household tasks. Similarly, when the afternoon shift begins their lessons, the morning shift takes charge of household chores. This requires discipline and time management from everyone involved.’

(S13_ Shymkent_semi-urban_girl_grade 8)

Several multi-child parents mentioned they live in two-bedroom apartments and struggled to enforce a timetable and disciplinary regime for providing quiet study space for each child. Some parents were simultaneously working remotely, putting pressure on space and creating inconvenience. A father of four school-aged children in urban Astana explained how the family deals with the shortage of space in his two-bedroom apartment.

‘The child having lessons isolates themselves by locking their room. The rest of us stay in the other room together to avoid causing distraction. The little ones are not allowed to play around or make a noise during this time.’

(P5_Astana_urban_male)

5.4.2. Parental Supervision

While all parents needed to monitor and supervise their children’s academic work, it was evident that primary students’ progress was challenging without sustained parental involvement, primarily mothers, as illustrated by a mother of a primary school child: ‘And I had to read the book and study for her and then explain the content to her. However, despite my efforts she didn’t perform well’ (P11_Almaty_urban).

By contrast, secondary school students studied largely independently, with parents only needing to monitor their children’s attendance and progress, as explained by a mother of a grade 7 child: ‘Most of the time, she independently manages her studies, with occasional assistance from me, primarily regarding equipment rather than the actual content of the classes. Regarding the academic material, she takes charge of her own learning’ (P14_Almaty_urban).

However, if a secondary school student needed parental support with schoolwork, not all parents could provide academic support across school subjects. Those who could afford it hired private tuition: ‘Due to his participation in additional paid courses, he has mastered the entire program. In subjects like mathematics, he operates at a significantly higher level than his peers attending regular online classes’ (P9_Almaty_urban). Even teachers with secondary school children grappled with helping their children in subjects other than their area of expertise, as shared by a humanities teacher with a grade 8 daughter, ‘If my daughter is struggling in a particular subject, such as mathematics, she seeks additional tutoring classes for support. I can help her with humanities subjects’ (T22_Shymkent_urban).

Elite school students claimed their parents did not directly supervise them, perhaps because they could see their children were learning and engaged: ‘Our parents can clearly see we are learning. They witness the workload that we deal with.’ (S29_Almaty_elite school_rural_boy_grade 11).

Parents facing challenges in supervising children included working mothers, less educated parents, single mothers, and parents with a child with SEN. Students whose parents, particularly mothers, worked outside the home could understandably lack supervision: ‘Teachers expect that parents will oversee their children’s learning. However, it becomes challenging for parents to fulfil this role when the majority of them are occupied with work commitments.’ (P25_Almaty_rural). Teachers confirmed that such children often missed lessons, and parents were worried their children were not using the smartphone for schoolwork when they were not around. Parents with no post-compulsory education lamented their ‘level of education was inadequate to effectively support the learning’ of their children (P20_Shymkent_rural). Teachers confirmed that low-income parents lacked the digital skills to support children’s learning using technology. A single mother could not supervise her daughter with SEN without professional support at home: ‘When I ask her to study, she shows reluctance and disinterest. She primarily spends her time taking care of her younger sibling, and that is it’ (P11_Shymkent_rural).

Mothers across various circumstances homeschooled their children. A working mother of three who worked remotely full-time shared that she solely engaged with her children’s lessons: ‘To be honest, my husband does not participate in our children’s lessons. It is solely my responsibility to oversee their education and engagement’ (P6_Astana_urban). Similarly, the only father among the 30 parents admitted to not being involved in homeschooling, citing his wife’s role as a stay-at-home mother. Even among teachers, homeschooling remained gendered. Female teachers with school-aged children faced the challenge of supervising their own children while teaching their students remotely, as described by a rural teacher with two children in primary school:

‘Due to my husband’s work schedule, he leaves in the morning and returns in the evening, leaving him with limited availability to contribute. There are instances when even I struggle to find time due to my household chores, resulting in homework occasionally being left undone during those periods.’

(T17_Shymkent_rural)

The evidence presented shows that the home environment created an uneven playing field for children and families, with low-income and multi-child families and parents with no post-compulsory education or working parents finding themselves at the intersection of multiple disadvantages, with gender intersecting with the preceding markers since mothers homeschooled their children.

5.5. Distance Pedagogy

5.5.1. Teacher Thinking

Teachers’ self-reported confidence in distance education varied based on their preparation and policy guidelines in their respective school sectors. Elite schoolteachers expressed confidence in the necessary knowledge and principles of effective distance pedagogy. On the other hand, most public schoolteachers admitted they were not prepared for distance schooling and lacked knowledge on giving online feedback and determining student workload. Even when provided with online learning platforms like Online Mektep, they still required assistance in navigating them, leading them to rely primarily on WhatsApp for lessons.

The learning curve was particularly tough for older and rural teachers: ‘And many teachers, probably my peers over 40, faced difficulties like that. We didn’t know what this ‘Zoom’ was … I prefer not to remember that time’ (T26_Almaty_rural).

Parents perceived younger teachers as more effective and older teachers as less effective in distance education, with some believing that older teachers could not use email or Zoom. The sudden school closures caught everyone offguard, including education authorities, school leaders, teachers, parents and students. Some parents empathised with teachers, recognising the challenges they faced. However, many parents criticised teachers for lacking digital knowledge, claiming ‘teachers could not organise online lessons due to a lack of ICT skills’ (P10_Astana_semi urban). One parent even mentioned buying a new iPhone for her son because teachers were uncomfortable sending tasks by email (P29_Almaty_urban).

5.5.2. Teacher Doing

Elite schoolteachers expressed satisfaction with the quality of their teaching, student engagement and participation. Both teachers and students from elite schools described that digital tools, interactive games, quizzes, videos and digital materials were used to maintain student engagement.

Public schoolteachers received policy guidelines on pedagogy, curriculum and assessment at the beginning of the academic year in September 2020 and received professional development in interactive teaching during the summer vacation. These inputs aimed to positively impact student outcomes by targeting teacher thinking and actions. As a result, public schoolteachers gained confidence in distance education. They claimed to create their own videos or use those provided by LEAs, along with online learning platforms and materials. However, the learning platforms provided by authorities lacked interactivity between teachers and students and between students and the materials. As a result, teachers resorted to using various other digital tools.

‘We use the Online Mektep platform for our studies; however, it lacks content for certain subjects like Physics. Therefore, I take it upon myself to prepare the necessary materials and presentations on this topic for the children. I explain the lessons using Google Meet and share tasks with them via WhatsApp. The children review these assignments and cross-reference the Kazakh version on the Online Mektep platform. I can also provide individual assignments in English through Google Forms [Science subjects in secondary school are taught in English].’

(T2_Astana_rural)

Teachers, especially in rural areas, faced challenges using Zoom for live interactive lessons due to poor internet connections. They shared examples of how the unreliable internet prevented them from utilising engaging activities like online quizzes, as students could not access them, forcing teachers to give students ‘the tasks directly, either from a textbook or some other resource’ (T16_Shymkent_semi urban).

‘During our experience of teaching remotely, we acquired the skills to deliver lessons both asynchronously and synchronously. However, due to the limitations of poor network connectivity, we cannot use platforms that would be ideal for interacting with the children. As a result, we rely primarily on WhatsApp as the means of communication and teaching.’

(T11_Shymkent_rural)

Students and parents desired more interactive and engaging pedagogy in public schools. Students noted that interactive lessons, where they could interact with the teacher and peers, were infrequent and unevenly used across different subjects. This lack of interactive lessons hindered students’ understanding.

‘The teacher simply sends the video for us to watch. And then, he asks us to complete the tasks in Online Mektep. But I do not understand anything from the videos he sends.’

(S11_Shymkent_urban_boy_ grade 8)

Similarly, the lack of two-way communication was a significant source of parental discontent with the quality of distance education: ‘They send us presentations, that’s all. However, it would greatly benefit the learning process if teachers initiated video conferences, conducted live classes, and directly explained the topics to the children’ (P22_Almaty_semi urban).

Although well intended, policy guidelines on lesson reduction did not provide enough time for teachers to explain concepts or for students to ask questions. Elite schoolteachers implemented flipped teaching in upper secondary grades to address time constraints, allowing for more interactive and collaborative activities during class time. Flipped teaching involves moving direct instruction out of the classroom, allowing for more interactive and collaborative activities during class time [72]. However, they faced challenges covering content effectively in lower secondary grades, as flipped teaching was harder to implement with younger students.

No public schoolteacher mentioned using flipped teaching, and most struggled to explain the lesson effectively during 20 min: ‘I do not even have time to ask them questions. I often find myself rushing through the main topic, sometimes unable to reach the exercises, and before I know it, I hear the students saying, ‘Bye-bye, teacher. We have the next lesson’ (T20_Shymkent_rural_male). Parents and students likewise viewed the shortage of time as a key factor limiting the quality of distance education. Parents saw the lack of time as a major factor that hindered the quality of distance education: ‘The teacher cannot teach a child the basics of this or that subject within 20 min. They teach only superficially’ (P5_Astana_urban_male).

Students across different school sectors found 20 min too short to cover the material adequately and ask questions: ‘Because there is a lot of material, we are graduating classes, and we often find ourselves lacking sufficient time to thoroughly study the material that can only be effectively taught by a teacher’ (S26_Almaty_elite school_rural_girl_grade 11). Public school students likewise complained that ‘few teachers explain the topics’ (S18_ Shymkent_semi-urban_ girl_grade 9) and content is covered superficially: ‘You rush through the tasks without taking the time to consider them adequately’ (S14_ Shymkent_semi-urban _girl_grade 8).

5.5.3. Outcomes of Pedagogy

Teachers claimed that monitoring student engagement and learning was limited in public schools due to occasional synchronous lessons and low bandwidth, causing students and teachers to turn off cameras: ‘The internet connection is slow, resulting in difficulty seeing everyone, and not all students actively participate in the class’ (T16_Shymkent_semi urban).

This lack of monitoring created issues of comprehension and interest for students. Elite schoolteachers addressed student engagement challenges by involving them in group- and pair-work activities: ‘Now they enjoy studying because of group and pair work... During the conference, when we are all together, someone may be shy, afraid to say something. And when they’re paired, they feel more confident’ (T25_Almaty_elite school_urban).

Teachers claimed student engagement declined, particularly for students with working parents or those who struggled pre-COVID-19.

‘In my opinion, many students who lacked motivation in traditional school settings now face even greater challenges in maintaining their motivation. This makes the learning process particularly difficult. Also, some parents cannot monitor their children throughout the day due to work commitments. As a result, children may be left to navigate online learning independently at home.’

(T7_Almaty_ _rural)

‘A high-performing, excellent student became less active … He is alone, and his parents are at work.’

(T4_Astana_semi urban)

Students across school sectors and locations noted a decline in their engagement, but elite school students maintained higher engagement due to their academic aspirations: ‘Whether we like it or not, we have to learn. I am determined and committed to pursuing education, whether it be at school or from home’ (S28_Almaty_elite school_rural_girl_grade11). In contrast, public school students experienced a continuing decline in interest and engagement: ‘I have absolutely no interest in doing anything’ (S24_Almaty_urban_boy_grade 7). Gender differences in engagement were not visible, but some girls had competing demands due to household chores: ‘I help to clean the house and wash the dishes’ (S1_Astana_ semi-urban_girl_grade 8).

Negative perceptions of distance education led some parents to hire paid tuition to improve their child’s engagement and academic performance: ‘My son has taken extra paid classes since the beginning of the academic year’ (P8_Astana_urban).

An additional challenge teachers faced in gauging students’ learning and comprehension was related to academic integrity. Primary school teachers claimed that parents completed school tasks for their children, preventing teachers from accurately determining the child’s understanding and planning remedial teaching.

Teachers, students and parents acknowledged that assessment data was unreliable as students copied from each other or had parents complete their assessments:

‘They likely cheat, but I turn a blind eye to this.’

(T21_Almaty_elite school_urban_male)

‘While it may not be possible to copy each other’s tests when attending school in person, distance learning has allowed us to help and support each other in different ways.’

(S9_Astana_semi-urban _girl_grade 7)

‘They cheat anyway; they copy each other’s assessment tasks.’

(P29_Almaty_urban)

Teachers did not confront students who copied as they couldn’t prove malpractice and wanted to avoid conflict with parents. Weak internet connections also made it difficult to assess students in real-time and allowed for collusion.

In conclusion, interactive pedagogy was more prevalent in elite than public schools and underused specifically in rural schools because of the unstable internet. Lesson duration was shortened to alleviate the burden of children, but it left little time for teachers, particularly in upper secondary grades, to effectively explain content. Stakeholders believed students’ engagement and learning had been negatively impacted, although this was mitigated for elite school students because of their higher aspirations and for students whose parents could hire private tuition. Widespread perceptions of academic dishonesty made it harder for teachers to estimate students’ outcomes accurately.

6. Discussion

Our findings indicate that the transition to distance schooling both highlighted and exacerbated existing inequalities in access to quality education, with significant implications for the achievement of SDG 4 targets in Kazakhstan. However, a positive outcome of the pandemic in Kazakhstan was the implementation of an equity-driven policy by education authorities aimed at mitigating the digital divide for disadvantaged families and schools. Kazakhstan’s policy drive towards digital equity during the pandemic can be seen as an example of good practice from which other countries could learn. While not sufficient to address all inequities, this policy was helpful in terms of supporting disadvantaged families and teachers in need of digital resources.

All four supporting factors needed for quality distance education—access to digital infrastructure, teachers’ professional development in distance education, policy guidelines and the home environment were inequitably distributed in relation to school sectors, geographical locations and family circumstances. Although an equity-driven policy was adopted after the transition to distance schooling, disparities in digital learning materials and platforms between the two school sectors were observed, similar to other contexts [12,24]. While evidence in other contexts has shown differentiated support between private and public schools [8,12,13,24], in Kazakhstan, these differences existed within the state sector itself. Consistent with global studies [8,13], elite schools had better resources for distance education, while rural students and teachers had minimal internet connectivity.

Our findings also confirm international evidence that the benefits of well-structured and systematic policy guidelines for distance education in the transition period were primarily limited to elite schoolteachers and students who experienced a smoother transition and more positive educational experience [12,39]. There was far less policy support for public schoolteachers and parents, especially in rural areas, who faced challenges in transitioning due to limited resources and unclear policy guidelines on distance pedagogy. Older and rural teachers found digital technology extremely challenging, confirming existing international evidence [27,31] and contradicting a quantitative study that suggested older and more experienced Kazakhstani teachers used digital technologies more frequently [64]. However, Kazakhstani teachers’ confidence and self-reported competence in distance education improved with practice and professional development, aligning with studies in other contexts [27,29]. While these findings have been confirmed in other global contexts [12,27,39], studies have not specifically explored the impact of these outcomes on achieving SDG 4, which the current study has addressed.

The need for strengthened policy initiatives supporting digital inclusion was also indicated in relation to home environment issues and constrained access to quality education. As reported by existing studies globally [10,31,71], significant challenges to equitable quality education in Kazakhstan must be addressed in relation to low-income families, parents with limited educational resources and digital connectivity, working parents, single mothers, multi-child families, rural parents, parents with children in primary grades and those with children with special educational needs.

Gender inequities affected parental ability to support children. Existing literature indicates that Kazakhstani parents’ capacity to homeschool their children depends on the number and age of children [61]. However, our results confirmed global evidence that mothers, regardless of employment and family status, bore the brunt of homeschooling [73,74]. Mothers who needed to work or had limited education could not effectively meet the expectations of parental support for education, so their children did not receive the support they needed for online education. The existing disadvantage was thus transmitted to the next generation within these communities, possibly further contributing to the cycle of poverty. In Kazakhstan, unlike other contexts [10,17], this study found no evidence of parental bias in supporting the education of sons over daughters or vice versa or gender disparities in student engagement. Nevertheless, some adolescent girls’ time was pressured by household chores during distance/online education. Further exploration with a larger sample size is needed to understand this finding fully.

Education policy could also exacerbate challenges in achieving quality distance education. Reduced lesson time mandated by policy left little time for teachers to cover the curriculum and monitor student comprehension, particularly in upper secondary grades across school types and locations. In contrast to public schools, elite schools, having greater autonomy, resources and teacher capacity, could employ more creative approaches, resulting in higher student satisfaction, confirming international studies [12,39]. A key finding of the paper is that the concept of privilege in the school sector in Kazakhstan differs from other contexts. Rather than being based on the division between private and public schools, privilege in Kazakhstan is determined by differences within the public sector in relation to school autonomy, human and material resources and students’ academic ability. Selective public schools, which have autonomy and receive more funding from the state, create and maintain privilege for students with higher academic abilities, who receive higher levels of state support along with free education.

Policy initiatives in Kazakhstan also failed to address fragmented internet connectivity in rural and deprived urban areas, which led to disadvantaged students being excluded or using smartphones for lessons, confirming similar dynamics in existing global literature [61,63]. This further impacted the capacity to achieve SDG 4 in terms of the quality of teaching and learning, particularly in rural public schools.

Stakeholders felt that the above inequities had adversely impacted learning and student engagement, particularly for low achievers and shy, introverted students. The long-term implications for the achievement of SDG 4 are likely to be influenced by the loss of concentration and motivation to learn, as reported by most students during the COVID-19 lockdown period. Despite a decline in interest, elite school students with high aspirations managed to maintain their pre-COVID attainment levels, highlighting how students with existing advantages were further privileged during the pandemic. However, teachers across school sectors could not accurately gauge the extent of learning loss because parents completed assessment tasks for primary graders, and students engaged in collusion and plagiarism.

Kazakhstan prioritises equity and addresses the digital divide resulting from school closures in its post-pandemic policy development. Noteworthy initiatives include the introduction of computer literacy for grade 1 students [75] and the launching of a special programme to attract highly qualified teachers to regions with teacher shortages and low education quality [76]. This programme offers increased salaries and four-week training courses to teachers willing to work in disadvantaged areas. Additionally, a program for rural school development was initiated on 29 April 2023 [77].

In a significant move, the Minister for Education, Askhat Aimagambetov, announced the introduction of academic freedom for schools on 4 January 2023 [78]. Furthermore, the pilot project ‘Developing the Potential of Ungraded Schools’ was launched in the Aktobe region [79]. This project provides advanced training in digital skills, innovative teaching approaches and online resources for school leaders and teachers in six regions. Overall, the education authorities in Kazakhstan are considering the unequal impact of school closures on schools and education stakeholders in post-COVID policy initiatives.

6.1. Study Implications

The study findings suggest multilevel implications for meeting SDG 4 targets on equitable quality education in the post-pandemic world.

6.1.1. Bringing Teaching and Learning Processes to the Core of SDG 4 Measurement

Our conceptual framework suggests that measuring the quality of education under SDG 4 should go beyond cognitive outcomes such as literacy and numeracy. A comprehensive understanding of education quality should focus on the teaching and learning processes at the classroom level. This broader perspective is crucial for informing education policy and achieving progress on SDG 4. Our findings provide evidence that stakeholders tend to prioritise assessment outcomes over learning. However, it is crucial to ensure that learning is not solely focused on memorisation for exams or standardised tests. Instead, it should emphasise fostering critical thinking, encouraging questioning and promoting knowledge creation.

6.1.2. Investment in Digital Equity

Inequities exacerbated during the pandemic are likely to become further entrenched via the greater reliance on digital forms of education. Investment in digital equity is crucial for achieving SDG 4 and building resilient education systems. Expanding access to high-speed internet, especially in rural and remote areas, is essential for equitable quality education. Collecting disaggregated data on learners’ digital needs can help deliver resources to those in most need swiftly in future emergencies. Investment in digital learning materials and systems is vital to ensure the skills developed in the pandemic continue to be practised, reinforced and further developed.

6.1.3. Teacher Education for Digital Pedagogies in Support of SDG 4

Equity in teachers’ professional development plays a crucial role in achieving SDG 4. To ensure this, teacher education should prioritise the development of digital pedagogies. This emphasis on digital pedagogies is significant for teachers in deprived and rural areas, as it equips them with the necessary skills for effective distance teaching. Regular training and development in digital competency will help teachers adapt to alternative teaching modalities. Without such approaches, teacher disadvantages relating to geography, socioeconomic status and age are transmitted to students who already experience inadequate and discriminatory policy support.

Teachers need support in constructing suitable assessment tasks for distance education. Educational technology could support the development of assessment approaches resistant to cheating, collusion and plagiarism.

6.1.4. Intersectional Disadvantage

A broad range of initiatives are needed to mitigate intersectional disadvantage if the aspiration to include all children in SDG 4 is to be realised. Quality education must be equitable in access and how it is experienced [4]. Governments and international partners should provide targeted support for marginalised groups, such as students with special educational needs and students from low-income families. Initiatives for equitable education outcomes during future emergencies include keeping schools open for marginalised students, supporting parental engagement, providing financial support and meals and offering remote counselling services. Several of these strategies are important issues to be adapted and applied to post-pandemic school education systems. Now that brick-and-mortar schools have returned, policy, research and practice relating to SDG 4 need to bring to the fore the needs of the most marginalised to ‘build back better’.

6.2. Limitations and Future Directions

This study has two limitations. First, rural parents and students were relatively underrepresented because of fieldwork constraints during quarantine. Only one parent with a disabled child participated. Because of social stigma, it is hard to access people with disabilities in Kazakhstan [80], and the pandemic made accessing this sub-group even more challenging. Participating parents were relatively well educated, and most had a stable income. Parents who are less educated or in precarious economic circumstances are expected to experience more significant challenges supervising their children’s schoolwork. Now that brick-and-mortar schools have returned, studies of SDG 4 need to bring to the fore the voices of the most marginalised. This will require intentional efforts to reach out to underrepresented communities and ensure their meaningful participation. Furthermore, participatory action research is best suited to empower marginalised groups to contribute actively to research, including engaging them in data collection, analysis, and decision-making [81].

Second, this study could not observe pedagogy and classroom processes in situ. Teaching and learning processes are better illuminated when stakeholders’ accounts of education quality are analysed alongside observational data on teaching and learning. Future studies could apply the conceptual framework of education quality using classroom observation in conjunction with stakeholders’ experiences and quantitative data schools routinely collect, such as school resources, to produce a more nuanced and holistic picture of progress on SDG 4. Observational–analytical studies can better produce reliable and valid knowledge of pedagogic practices. Such methods are particularly needed to study remote rural schools compared to the over-researched urban schools [52].

7. Conclusions

Focusing on distance education imposed by the global pandemic, this paper advances debates on ensuring and measuring equitable quality education. We argue that quality improvement initiatives in post-pandemic times need to examine the contextual factors that shape teaching and learning and how they are differentially experienced by diverse social groups. The study concludes that school type, rurality, family income and family size and type were key markers of disadvantage in accessing the four supportive factors—digital infrastructure, policy guidelines, professional development in digital pedagogy and the home environment. This profoundly influenced how teacher pedagogy was experienced and its impact on student engagement and outcomes. These equity concerns notwithstanding, Kazakhstani schools are more affluent in digital resources today due to an equity drive stimulated by the sudden transition to distance education, and all stakeholders have developed vital skills in digital learning out of necessity, which need to be maintained and nourished. The lessons learned from the pandemic should be seen as an opportunity to build upon and further improve educational delivery in ways that do not widen existing inequalities. Progress on SDG 4 is crucial because a failure to achieve this goal can have wide-ranging consequences on other related SDGs. Lack of progress on SDG 4 can adversely impact levels of poverty (SDG 1), hunger (SDG 2), gender equality (SDG 5), health (SDG 3), economic growth and the reduction of inequalities (SDG 8) [82]. Therefore, it is essential to prioritise and invest in quality education to ensure progress across all these SDGs [5].