Teaching and learning English in
Uzbekistan
D I L B A R H O N H A S A N OVA
A review of the current situation in a post-Soviet Central
Asian republic
ONLY A couple of decades ago, few could
imagine that one of the most powerful coun-
tries in the world – the Union of Soviet Social-
ist Republics (USSR) – would collapse, and
Russian – the most prestigious and predomi-
nant language of the Soviet people – would be
overtaken by English, the language once con-
sidered ‘the language of Western imperialism’
(Dushku, 1998:372). Today, because of both
its unique international role and the fall of the
Iron Curtain, English has become the most pop-
ular foreign language taught in schools and
other educational institutions in former Soviet
republics. The present paper will focus on the
teaching and learning of English in Uzbekistan
– a Soviet republic until 1990. In addition,
issues related to foreign-language curriculum
innovations, to teacher training, and to teach-
ing resources will be discussed.
Introduction: English in educational
institutions in the Soviet Union
To gain a better understanding of, and insight
into, the current status of English in post-
Soviet Uzbekistan, it is essential to discuss its
role and status during the Soviet era. Uzbek
schools and other educational institutions
started incorporating English education in
their teaching curricula when the Soviet gov-
ernment released a decree in 1932 promulgat-
ing ‘the necessity of providing every secondary
school graduate with the knowledge of a for-
eign language’. For most Soviet learners, Eng-
lish classes started with the fifth grade. In
grades V and VI, English classes were offered
four hours a week, while grades VII through X
had three hours a week. In general, a total of
660 hours of foreign-language classes had
been taken by students by the end of grade X,
DOI: 10.1017/S0266078407001022
English Today 89, Vol. 23, No. 1 (January 2007). Printed in the United Kingdom © 2007 Cambridge University Press
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
the academic year averaging 33 weeks. It is
noteworthy that the allocation of foreign-lan-
guage teaching hours differed in Russian- and
Uzbek-medium schools. It was essential for
Uzbek students to master the Russian language
before they started learning foreign languages
because Russian was considered not only the
language of friendship and interethnic commu-
nication within the Soviet Union but also in
effect the second mother tongue of non-Russ-
ian Soviet people.
Hence, ‘in the parts of the Soviet Union
where education [was] conducted in the native
language and where Russian has to be learned
as a second language, the hours given to the
study of a foreign language [were] somewhat
fewer’. More specifically, in non-Russian-
medium schools, ‘students generally aver-
age[d] one hour less weekly of foreign lan-
guage instruction, which reduced the number
of contact hours by approximately one third’.
In addition, since most of the teaching materi-
als and textbooks were designed and written
DILBARHON HASANOVA is currently completing
her doctorate in English as a Second Language at
Purdue University, USA. Her research interests
include sociolinguistics, world Englishes, and
communicative language teaching. She has a BA in
English Philology from Bukhara State University,
Uzbekistan (1997), and an MS in Education from
Purdue University in the United States (2002).
Before starting her graduate studies in the USA, she
was for three years a lecturer at Bukhara State
University. Concurrently with teaching
undergraduate students she worked with adult
learners at the Language Learning Center (LLC) in
Bukhara, where she taught classes in English
Grammar and Conversation to students from
beginning to advanced levels.
3
 by prominent Russian scholars of Russian, it
was also permitted to introduce a foreign [non-
Soviet] language in non-Russian schools in
grade VI, by which time students were
expected to have gained at least a medium
level of proficiency in the Russian language.
As for the variety of English used and
learned in Soviet schools and higher educa-
tional institutions, only one variety was used:
British English (also known as the Queen’s
English or Oxford English). Rose Nash (1971),
who studied the place of English in the USSR,
offers several reasons for Soviet EFL educators
insisting on teaching Received Pronunciation
(RP) in language classes:
First, it was believed by educators to be the
most universally intelligible and socially
desirable pronunciation of English. Secondly,
textbooks and pronunciation manuals have
been traditionally based on the works of British
phoneticians, who made detailed linguistic
descriptions of that variety of English. Thirdly,
because almost all English language teachers in
the Soviet Union [were] non-native speakers
who have been trained in RP by other non-
native speakers, it would be highly impractical,
in the absence of a large number of native
speakers, to introduce other English accents
(p.10).
It is also worth noting that foreign-language
classes were student-centred. By and large,
most class time was devoted to analytical read-
ings, grammatical rules, grammatical analysis,
and translation exercises, and students were
required to construct sentences in the target
language using well-studied rules. The primary
focus in English classes was developing stu-
dents’ theoretical understanding of complex
grammatical structures rather than providing
them with what Rao (1996:469) calls ‘appro-
priate circumstances to practice the rules so that
the students can ultimately use them in real
life’. Hence, instead of using knowledge of the
English language as a tool to help students gain
communicative competence and understanding
in culture, tradition, and literature of the coun-
tries where English was spoken natively, teach-
ers focused on producing qualified translators
of technical and scientific materials and of
selected British and American literary works.
Teaching and learning English in
independent Uzbekistan
As post-Soviet Uzbekistan established interna-
tional relations and started collaborating with
4 ENGLISH TODAY 89
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
the Western world, English became the language
of international communication. As Khaitova
(2000) has put it, ‘an important vehicle for pro-
moting an open and democratic society in
Uzbekistan’. The growth in demand for English
is the result of recognition both by the Uzbek
government and individual citizens of the
unique role of the language and Uzbekistan’s
response to globalization and modernity.
In the early 1990s, significant changes
occurred in the field of teaching English as a
foreign language in Uzbekistan. In July 1992,
the Ministry of Education promulgated the
Education Act, which emphasized revision of
the current curricula and textbooks, which
were set up in the Soviet era and were unable
to cope with the global education and the
rapidly growing demands of Uzbek learners.
Hence, it has become essential to update the
existing curricula for all disciplines, including
foreign languages, so that they correspond to
the current economic, social, and political real-
ities of Uzbekistan.
On the teaching of foreign languages, two
major projects were undertaken by foreign-
language educators and curriculum designers.
Among the changes identified by foreign-
language curriculum designers was a more
gradual shift from traditional grammar-trans-
lation methods to communicative language-
teaching approaches so that students develop
not only linguistic knowledge but also improve
their communication skills. To realize curricu-
lum changes, the Ministry of Education, with
the initiative of the British Council, published a
series of communicative textbooks and orga-
nized a number of short-term teacher-training
courses.
In order to present a better and more com-
prehensive insight into the status of English in
post-Soviet Uzbekistan, the following subsec-
tion will discuss teaching and learning of
English in schools and higher educational
institutions.
The place of English in school
In all public schools and other educational insti-
tutions, English (along with Russian, German,
French, and Spanish) has the status of a foreign
language. Uzbek children can be introduced to
English language classes as early as preschool,
at the age of 4 to 6. It is worth noting that Eng-
lish is the only foreign language offered in
preschools. According to the report of the Min-
January 2007
 Figure 1 Unit IX from Uchebnik angliiskogo iazika
istry of Education, approximately 7% of chil-
dren study a foreign language in preschools.
The preschools offering English classes have
higher enrolment fees than schools with no
English education. The extra fee is charged in
order both to pay teachers and buy teaching
materials. Since foreign-language education in
preschools is not mandatory, there is no
national curriculum at that level. To teach Eng-
lish in preschools, EFL teachers design their
own curriculum, lesson plans, and teaching
materials, and children learn the English alpha-
bet, some formulaic expressions, basic mathe-
matics, and popular children’s songs.
In secondary schools, as a result of the
decentralization of the management of educa-
tion, the central government no longer speci-
fies what foreign language should be taught.
TEACHING AND LEARNING ENGLISH IN UZBEKISTAN
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
The choice is left to local educational offices,
which are authorized to conduct surveys to
find out what foreign languages are most in
demand among local schools, their students,
and the students’ parents. It is worth noting at
this point that, even though there is no official
policy promoting the teaching and learning
English in Uzbekistan, a growing number of
secondary schools and other educational insti-
tutions throughout the country offer English as
a foreign language to their students.
That said, the survey undertaken for the pre-
sent study, in the summer of 2004, showed
that in the city of Bukhara, out of thirty-eight
public schools, thirty-two offer English as a for-
eign language, three offer German, two offer
French, and one offers Hebrew. All schools also
offer Russian.
5
 Generally, secondary-school students start
their classes in foreign languages in the fifth
grade. Public secondary schools offer three
hours of foreign-language classes a week,
while specialized foreign-language teaching
schools offer 6-8 hours of FL. In order to meet
the needs and demands of their EFL learners,
many schools have reduced class hours for
Russian in order to introduce English. Accord-
ing to Mrs. Sattarova, the director of the
Department of Employment, in all public
schools and other educational establishments
Russian-language teaching hours were
decreased by as much as fifty percent, while
English classes increased up to thirty-five–forty
percent (personal communication, 17 Jun 04).
Expected learner outcomes
The National Teaching Standards and Curricula,
a manual for secondary school teachers, suc-
cinctly describes what EFL learners at sec-
ondary public schools are expected to achieve
before completing their education. Generally,
most local EFL teachers follow the requirements
of this manual, designing their lesson plans
accordingly. The manual divides the English-
language learning process into two stages:
Stage One
Students are expected to acquire the basic
skills in foreign languages. In other words, dur-
ing the first couple of years, students focus on
reading and writing in English. At this stage,
English teachers are expected to focus on
developing learners’ listening comprehension,
communication skills, pronunciation and into-
nation. All in all, the educational purposes of
Stage One are to help students acquire all basic
grammatical and lexical materials and be able
to create new sentences and speech patterns
based on textbook models. Among the skills
learners are expected to acquire during Stage
One are:
● distinguishing letter from sound
● comprehending recorded speech and be
able to recreate text using ‘correct’ pronunci-
ation
● being able to make grammatically correct
sentences with specific words and word
combinations
● being able to create new texts with the help
of lexical and grammatical materials
acquired during the period of learning.
6 ENGLISH TODAY 89
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
Stage Two
Learners undertake this stage in high school
(VII–IX grades) and continue to work on listen-
ing comprehension, speaking, reading, and
writing. At this level a lot of attention is paid to
developing students’ independent and creative
thinking. By the end of Stage Two, learners are
expected to have acquired the following skills:
● understanding and recognising lexical pat-
terns not only in written texts but also to use
them in independent sentences
● identifying the meaning of unknown lexical
patterns from the context or being able to
translate them with the help of dictionaries
● speaking on a given topic with the help of
both active and passive vocabulary
● forming grammatically correct sentences
● being able to compare, contrast, analyse,
and synthesize
● being able to make complex sentences and
to have knowledge of subordinate clauses.
In order to receive a certificate of completion of
secondary education, high-school students
take national examinations in a range of sub-
jects. To pass the English language examina-
tion, they are expected to achieve some level of
proficiency in the following:
● reading and comprehending texts in a for-
eign language and to be able to identify the
main points of those texts
● reading and understanding literature and
sociopolitical articles published in newspa-
pers and journals in a foreign language
● being able to read 300 words in 10 minutes.
Students should also be able to:
● recognise c.80–90% of texts that contain 5%
of unknown words
● identify the main idea of 11⁄ 2 to 2 pages of
text with 70% unknown vocabulary
● express their ideas fluently (in short descrip-
tions, through storytelling, or making com-
ments)
● communicate successfully
● develop the skills needed for effective dia-
logues
● reproduce oral and written material.
The place of English in higher
education
All college and university students are required
to take 2–4 hours of foreign-language classes a
week. Based on their background in learning
January 2007
 foreign languages at secondary schools, stu-
dents can choose English, German, or French
as their FL in college. However, a number of
departments in higher educational institutions
have, since the late 1990s, been including Eng-
lish as a required subject in their teaching cur-
ricula. For example, at Tashkent State Univer-
sity, in the departments of economics,
management, international relations, and sci-
ences, intensive courses in English are compul-
sory. At Bukhara State University, students in
the department of economics are expected to
know English, not only to do well at their for-
eign-languages classes, but also, since they are
taught in English, to pass some core subjects,.
Needless to say, English is the most popular
major in the faculties of foreign languages.
A survey conducted in spring 2005 revealed
that in Bukhara State University, in the Faculty
of Foreign Languages, out of 771 students 528
(68.5%) majored in English, while 120
(15.5%) in German, and 75(9.7%) in French,
and only 48 (6.2 %) majored in Russian. In the
Uzbek State University of World Languages in
Tashkent, out of 3,801 students enrolled in the
Faculties of English Philology, German Philol-
ogy, Romance Philology, and Russian Philol-
ogy, as well as Education (for upgrading teach-
ers’ skills) about 60% of students major in
English.
Teachers of English and teacher
training
Until 1997, in order to teach English in sec-
ondary schools and other educational institu-
tions, applicants were required to obtain a
diploma in English philology from a five-year
program at universities or pedagogical institu-
tions. In 1998, as a result of educational
reforms, universities started offering a four-
year program, which provided students with
the basic higher education providing funda-
mental knowledge according to specialty. On
completing this program, students are granted
a diploma with a bachelor’s degree, which
qualifies them to teach English in secondary
schools, community colleges, and public and
private language-learning centres. To teach
English at a university level, job-seekers are
required to obtain M.A. or Ph.D. degrees in
English or related areas.
All practising teachers, both at schools and
universities, have to attend mandatory in-ser-
vice teacher-training courses once in every four
TEACHING AND LEARNING ENGLISH IN UZBEKISTAN
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
to five years. While in-service teacher-training
courses are mandatory, they are not able to
meet the demands of the new curricula.
According to Huttova & Silova (2002), the ‘in-
service teacher education system itself is phys-
ically incapable of serving all teachers over the
period of five years. In Uzbekistan, for exam-
ple, the capacity of teacher training institutions
allows enrollment of only 60–65 % of teachers
every five years’ (p.18). In addition, Huttova &
Silova (2002) observe that:
[I]n-service training institutions have not
changed much since the collapse of the Soviet
Union. In many cases, they provide outdated
training by focusing on “new” factual
information, instead of preparing teachers for
working in a “new” environment through
introducing child-centered, interactive
teaching/learning methods. Training
opportunities in teaching critical thinking skills,
problem-solving skills, curriculum planning,
and assessment of students are badly lacking
(p. 18).
In addition to mandatory in-service teacher-
training courses, practising teachers are
encouraged to participate in teacher-training
programs organized by the Uzbekistan Teach-
ers of English Association (UzTEA), the
Regional English Language Office of the Amer-
ican Embassy (RELO), the British Council, and
other non-governmental educational organiza-
tions. While teachers get paid and reimbursed
for attending mandatory teacher-training
courses, in order to attend optional profes-
sional development training, teachers them-
selves, in most cases, become responsible for
finding both the finances and the time. Local
schools are unable to provide their teachers
with travel grants to participate in teaching
workshops and seminars organized by interna-
tional educational agencies and usually held in
the capital city, Tashkent.
It is also worth noting that in addition to
insufficient in-service teacher training and
unaffordable international teaching seminars,
an increasing number of local schools are suf-
fering from shortages of qualified English
teachers.
Economic instability, which Uzbekistan
faced after the collapse of the Soviet Union,
‘has severely affected teachers as a profes-
sional group, resulting in multiple financial,
professional, and social losses’ (Huttova &
Silova, 2002:17). As a result of low salaries
and insufficient benefits, a significant number
7
 of language teachers left their teaching posi-
tions for either well-paid non-governmental
jobs or private tutoring. Those who have
remained in the system are not motivated to
devote their time and energy to the profes-
sion. Hence social respect for the teaching
profession dropped as teachers became more
concerned about their financial stability than
their students’ education.
In order to fill teaching positions, the Min-
istry of Education authorized a new measure
allowing the recruitment of teachers from
among successful secondary-school graduates
(Huttova & Silova, 2002). To be qualified as an
English teacher at primary or secondary
schools, high-school graduates are encouraged
to have a certificate from public or private lan-
guage-learning centers. This kind of certificate
can be obtained upon completion of a 3-to-6
month period of study at a private or public
language-learning center. In addition, because
Russian-language teaching hours have dramat-
ically decreased since 1991, a number of Russ-
ian teachers, after attending short-term Eng-
lish classes at local language-learning centers,
were considered by school administrations to
be qualified to teach English.
Textbooks and other teaching
materials
At the suggestion of the British Council, the
Ministry of Education of Uzbekistan published
a series of communicative textbooks, such as
Fly High English and English Matters. Fly High
English is used in Grades VI through IX. Its con-
tent is quite different from the English text-
books used during Soviet times and is designed
to meet the educational standards of the new
curriculum. By and large, this course:
…aims to help pupils to develop the four
language skills: reading, listening, speaking
and writing. There is an emphasis on
teaching Modern English for communication
so special attention is paid to speaking and
listening. Vocabulary and grammar are also
developed systematically. The main
difference between Fly High and other
textbooks we have used is that Fly High
encourages a learner-centered approach to
teaching. For this reason Fly High contains
many activities, exercises, debates, projects
and games, which encourage pupils to use
the new language naturally through working
in pairs and groups.
– Matskevich, 2002
8 ENGLISH TODAY 89
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press
When Fly High and other textbooks are actu-
ally available at local bookstores they are not
always affordable. Unlike the Soviet era, when
schools distributed required books free of
charge, the post-Soviet Uzbek education sys-
tem makes it the parents’ responsibility to pur-
chase all school books for their children.
Because of low salaries and the high price of
textbooks, most parents cannot afford to do
this. In order to make the books available for
school children, ‘funding agencies have been
urging the adoption of rental schemes, which
are more economical but require better quality
books. A book rental scheme has been success-
fully operating in Uzbekistan with the support
of Asian Development Bank (ADB)’ (Huttova &
Silova, 2002).
While some teachers have started using new
teaching materials, the majority continue to
rely on Soviet textbooks, which are available
and relatively affordable. In order to give a bet-
ter idea about the content of the textbooks
commonly used, it is helpful to examine some
of them. Figure 1 presents a sample unit from
one of the most widely used. As these two
pages demonstrate, grammar and translation
are crucial to the framework. The unit starts
with a text or a short story, followed by text-
related exercises and vocabulary drills, after
which the focus shifts to grammar and transla-
tion exercises. For example, Exercise 1 (page
71) lists twelve words from the text and asks
students to write a phonetic transcription of
them and find out how many sounds and let-
ters there are in each word. Exercise 2, on the
same page, asks learners to copy the text (by
hand) and underline the words containing a
diphthong. To complete Exercise 3, students
have to read the given words out loud and
explain what phonological rules should be
applied for correct pronunciation. Exercise 4
then asks them to fill in blanks with preposi-
tions or adverbs whenever necessary. There
are then two exercises on articles and pro-
nouns and two on making and asking ques-
tions, the unit ending with a translation exer-
cise consisting of 21 sentences in Russian.
An examination of other textbooks shows
that, like Bonk (2002), they focus on develop-
ing grammatical competence and therefore do
not go beyond pattern drills and grammar-
translation exercises. Obviously, such activities
do not give students any opportunity to think
critically, to express their own ideas, and to
relate to the people around them.
January 2007
 The shortage, availability, and affordability
of teaching material pose a serious obstacle in
incorporating new approaches into classroom
teaching. Most of the time teachers rely on
textbooks and blackboards as their main (if not
only) resources. Tape recorders and overhead
projectors are rarely used. Owing to the short-
age of financial support, local schools and
other institutions (with only a few exceptions)
are unable to provide their teachers with
audio-visual equipment, photocopiers, com-
puters, and overhead projectors that, as Rao
(1996:468) puts it, are ‘required to support
dynamic teaching necessitated by communica-
tive methods’.
Conclusion
This paper has provided a brief overview of the
role of English in Uzbekistan during the Soviet
period and after the country was declared inde-
pendent. After the collapse of the Soviet Union,
as Uzbekistan was recognized as an indepen-
dent developing country within the global vil-
lage, English became the most prestigious and
widely learned foreign language in the coun-
try. Like the Hungarian people (Petzold &
Berns, 2000), Uzbeks recognize the impor-
tance of English for their professional growth
and success in the global community. Yet,
despite the popularity of English in the educa-
tion system, local schools and other institutions
are unable to meet the ever-growing demand
from English language learners because of a
lack of financial support and insufficient
teacher education and training. 
in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan:
Challenges and ways forward. Budapest, Hungary:
Open Society Institute Education support
program.
Khaitova, Saodat. 2000. English as a vehicle of a
More Open Society in Uzbekistan. In The Weekly
Column.
<athttp://www.eltnewsletter.com/back/July200
0/art212000.shtml>
Landau, J., & B. Keller-Heinkele. 2001. Politics of
Language in the ex-Soviet Muslim States. Ann
Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Matskevich, L. 2002. New trends in teaching English
in Uzbekistan. Retrieved December 10, 2005.
Nash, Rose. 1971. ‘The place of the English language
in the USSR.’ In Review Interamericana 1(1), pp.
1–13.
Ornstein, Jacob. 1958. ‘Foreign language training in
the Soviet Union: A qualitative view.’ In The
Modern Language Journal 42(8), pp. 382–392.
Petzold, R., & M. Berns. 2000. ‘Catching up with
Europe: speakers and functions of English in
Hungary.’ In World Englishes 19(1), pp. 113–124.
Rao, Z. 1996. ‘Reconciling communiative
approaches to the teaching of English with
traditional Chinese methods.’ In Research in the
Teaching of English 30(4), pp. 458–471.
Umumiy orta ta’limning davlat standarti va oquv
dasturi (‘National teaching standards and
curricula’). 1995. Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

References
Abell, Marcell. 1959. ‘Foreign language teaching in the
USSR.’ In The Modern Language Journal 43(2), pp.
72–78.
Bilinsky, Yaroslav. 1981. ‘Expanding the use of
Russian or Russification? Some critical thoughts
on Russian as a lingua franca and the “language
of friendship and cooperation of the peoples of
the USSR”.’ In Russian Review 40(3), pp.
317–332.
Bonk, N. A., G. A. Kotiy, & N. A. Lukyanov. 2002.
Uchebnik angliiskogo iazika v 2-x toma. Moscow:
EKSMO.
Dushku, Silvana. 1998. ‘English in Albania: Contact
and convergence.’ In World Englishes 17(3), pp.
369–379.
Garrard, J. G. 1962. ‘The teaching of foreign
languages in the Soviet Union.’ In The Modern
Language Journal 46(2), pp. 71–74.
Huttova, J., & I. Silova. 2002. Education development

TEACHING AND LEARNING ENGLISH IN UZBEKISTAN 9

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078407001022 Published online by Cambridge University Press