SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AS A HOUSEHOLD-LEVEL DRIVER OF SOCIOECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN UZBEKISTAN

Kamolova Kumush; Qahhorova Matluba

Authors

Kamolova Kumush Doctorate student of Scientific research institution of Family and Gender, Uzbekistan Senior teacher of University of Science and Technologies in Tashkent
Qahhorova Matluba Scientific advisor: Dc S, professor of International Islamic academy of Uzbekistan

Keywords:

second language acquisition; household well-being; socioeconomic development; English learning; education policy; Uzbekistan; human capital; family learning environment.

Abstract

This study examines the socioeconomic significance of second language acquisition at the household level in Uzbekistan using survey-based evidence from adult respondents across multiple regions. The findings indicate that foreign language competence, primarily English is widely perceived as a multidimensional resource influencing household income, economic stability, social participation, and self-confidence. The research also identifies an implementation gap between national foreign language education policy and the everyday realities faced by families, including time constraints, affordability, and limited practical learning environments. To address this gap, the study proposes a time-efficient, family-compatible language learning model designed to complement existing educational initiatives and expand access for adult learners. Despite limitations related to self-reported data and cross-sectional design, the study contributes to education-for-development discourse by demonstrating that second language acquisition functions as a household-level driver of socioeconomic resilience and long-term human capital formation in Uzbekistan.

References

Ahn, S., & Smagulova, J. (2022). Language, identity, and policy in post-Soviet Central Asia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(3), 945–960. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1718595

Becker, G. S. (1993). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

British Council. (2020). English language education in Uzbekistan: An impact report. British Council.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943

Grin, F. (2001). English as economic value: Facts and fallacies. World Englishes, 20(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00196

Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015). The knowledge capital of nations: Education and the economics of growth. MIT Press.

Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman;

Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, experience, and earnings. Columbia University Press;

OECD. (2019).

Education policy outlook 2019: Working together to help students achieve their potential. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/2b8ad56e-en

OECD. (2021). OECD skills strategy 2021: Skills to shape a better future. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/effebd9a-en;

Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2018). Returns to investment in education: A decennial review of the global literature. Education Economics, 26(5), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2018.1484426

Siebert, H. (1997). Labor market rigidities: At the root of unemployment in Europe. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(3), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.11.3.37

UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education. UNESCO Publishing.