By Vesti Baku
For several years now, official discourse in Azerbaijan has emphasized “significant progress” in science and higher education. Yet when these claims are measured against outcomes, they raise difficult questions. If progress is real, where are its results? Why is it not reflected in international academic rankings, peer-reviewed publications, academic freedom, or genuine institutional autonomy?
To be sure, the state has invested heavily in education. New universities have been established, modern campuses constructed, and several flagship institutions have emerged. Yet despite decades of funding and reform initiatives, Azerbaijani universities remain absent from the top tiers of global rankings. This is not merely a question of resources or infrastructure. It points to deeper, systemic shortcomings.
At the core lies governance and substance. The national higher education system continues to operate largely within outdated administrative models inherited from the Soviet era. Reforms have often been formal rather than substantive. Curricula are “updated” on paper, but in practice syllabi remain unchanged for years, lectures are recycled, and rote learning dominates classroom culture.
Western educational frameworks are frequently adopted in name and documentation, while their underlying principles – academic freedom, critical inquiry, transparency, and merit-based advancement – remain only partially implemented.
Doctoral education illustrates these problems most clearly. In Western systems, doctoral programs are designed to train independent researchers capable of producing original scholarship. In Azerbaijan, the PhD track is often treated as a formal credential rather than a research process.
Supervisor–student relationships lack transparency, evaluation prioritizes timelines and reporting requirements over scholarly quality, and publications are too often produced to meet formal criteria rather than contribute meaningful knowledge. Plagiarism and nominal academic output are widely acknowledged challenges.
Corruption within higher education further compounds these issues. From admissions and grading to academic promotions and administrative appointments, informal networks frequently outweigh merit.
For many talented young scholars unwilling to accept these conditions, the choice is stark: remain silent or leave the country. Brain drain has become a structural feature rather than an exception.
Perhaps most concerning is the normalization of this reality. Instead of openly confronting systemic failures, official narratives highlight selective success stories, while statistical indicators are used to mask structural stagnation. Yet genuine development is not achieved through rhetoric or presentation. It requires honest self-assessment and institutional accountability.
If Azerbaijan seeks a meaningful place within the global academic community, cosmetic reforms will not suffice. What is needed is a transformation of values as much as structures: real academic freedom, institutional independence, transparent funding, credible international integration, and – above all – a research environment insulated from political and administrative interference.
Without such changes, “progress” will remain a rhetorical device – persuasive on paper, but disconnected from academic reality.
