2026, no. 8
ECONOMY & MANAGEMENT IN SOCIAL SYSTEMS

Conceptual foundations for increasing student engagement in the context of higher education transformation

Ekaterina V. Politsinskaya, Elena Yu. Malushko

DOI 10.20339/am.08-26.072pp. 72–79UDC 37880 RUB

PDF

Bookmark

Abstract

The article discusses the problem of decreasing cognitive engagement of students in the context of the transformation of Russian higher education. The purpose of the work is to identify and substantiate the conceptual foundations for increasing meaningful activity and emotional-intellectual engagement of students. Based on a system-dynamic approach and an analysis of modern pedagogical and psychological literature, theoretical and methodological guidelines have been developed, including cognitive-activity, subject-oriented, and emotional approaches. The article discusses the mechanisms of increasing cognitive engagement through the integration of personalization, practical implementation, gamification, reflection, and cyclicality. The empirical part of the study was conducted on a representative sample of senior students at a technical university (N106). The results of the survey showed that students are most interested and motivated by practical classes, interactive lectures, active forms of work, creative tasks, gamification, and free expression of opinions. The findings of the study have practical significance for teachers and university management who are striving to improve the quality of the educational process and the competitiveness of graduates in the labor market.

Funding

Russian Science Foundation

Acknowledgments. This study was supported by grant No. 25-28-01654 from the Russian Science Foundation, https://rscf.ru/project/25-28-01654/.

Award
25-28-01654

References

  1. Semenov, E.V., Sokolov, D.V. Digitization of higher education: opportunities and risks. Ideas and ideals. 2022, vol. 14, no. 4, part 1, pp. 137–153. https://doi.org/10.17212/2075-0862-2022-14.4.1-137-153. (In Rus.)

    DOI 10.17212/2075-0862-2022-14.4.1-137-153
  2. Borzova, T.A. Lessons of pandemic: digital transformation of higher education in distance format. Territory of new opportunities. Vestnik of Vladivostok State University of Economics and Service. 2021, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 195–208. https://doi.org/10.24866/VVSU/2073-3984/2021-1/195-208. (In Rus.)

    DOI 10.24866/vvsu/2073-3984/2021-1/195-208
  3. Sitnikova, S.Yu., Burya, L.V. On the question of the nature and structure of cognitive activity. Pedagogical journal. 2023, vol. 13, no. 11A, pp. 73–83. https://doi.org/10.34670/AR.2023.52.90.007. (In Rus.)

    DOI 10.34670/ar.2023.52.90.007
  4. Fredricks, J., Reschly, A., Christenson, S. Handbook of student engagement interventions: Working with disengaged students. London; San Diego: Academic Press, 2019. 410 pp.

  5. Ivannikov, V.A. Analysis of motivation from the standpoint of activity theory. National psychological journal. 2014, no. 1, pp. 49–56. https://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2014.0105. (In Rus.)

    DOI 10.11621/npj.2014.0105
  6. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., Kalyuga, S. Cognitive Load Theory. New York: Springer, 2011. 355 pp.

  7. Biggs, J., Tang, C. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2011. 389 pp.

  8. Hattie, J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge, 2009. 392 pp.

  9. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough. M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordan, H., Wenderoth, M.P. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. 2014. Nr. 111 (23). Pp. 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

    DOI 10.1073/pnas.1319030111
  10. Rogers, C. Freedom to learn for the 80’s. Columbus-Toronto-London-Sydney: Charles E. Merrill Pub. Co., 1983. 312 pp.

  11. Ernst von Glasersfeld Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning. Washington, DC: Falmer Press, 1995. 213 pp.

  12. Vygotsky, L.S. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978. 159 pp.

  13. Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M. The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior // Psychological Inquiry. 2000. Nr 11 ( 4). Pp. 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

    DOI 10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01
  14. Boud, D. Developing student autonomy in learning. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge, 2020. 276 pp.

  15. Hajhosseini, M. The Effect of Dialogic Teaching on Students’ Critical Thinking Disposition. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012. Nr 69. Pp. 1358–1368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.073

    DOI 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.073
  16. Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Duncan, R.G., Chinn, C.A. Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist. 2007. Nr 42 (2). Pp. 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368

    DOI 10.1080/00461520701263368
  17. Tomlinson, C.A. The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2014. 197 pp.

  18. Rafiq, S., Iqbal, S., Afzal, A. The Impact of Digital Tools and Online Learning Platforms on Higher Education Learning Outcomes. Al-Mahdi Research Journal. 2024. Nr 5 (4). Pp. 359–369. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380734414_The_Impact_of_Digital_Tools_and_Online_Learning_Platforms_on_Higher_Education_Learning_Outcomes (accessed on: 10.02.2026).

    researchgate.net
  19. Kahu, E. Framing Student Engagement in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education. 2013. Nr 38 (5). Pp. 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505

    DOI 10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
  20. Gheyssens, E., Consuegra, E., Engels, N., Struyven, K. Good Things Come to Those Who Wait: The Importance of Professional Development for the Implementation of Differentiated Instruction. Frontiers in Education. 2020. Nr 5. Article 96. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00096

    DOI 10.3389/feduc.2020.00096
  21. Kizilcec, R.F., Reich, J., Yeomans, M., Dann, C., Brunskill, E., Lopez, G., Turkay, S., Williams, J.J., Tingley, D. Scaling Up Behavioral Science Interventions in Online Education. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA. 2020. Nr 117 (26). Pp. 14900 –14905. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1921417117

    DOI 10.1073/pnas.1921417117
  22. Barab, S.A., Gresalfi, M., Ingram-Goble, A. Transformational Play: Using Games to Position Person, Content, and Context. Educational Researcher. 2010. Nr 39 (7). Pp. 525–536. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X10386663

    DOI 10.3102/0013189x10386663
  23. Kolb, D.A. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc., 2014. 288 pp.

  24. Hattie, J. Visible Learning: The Sequel: A Synthesis of Over 2,100 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. London: Routledge, 2023. 420 pp.

  25. Landers, R.N., Bauer, K.N., Callan, R.C. Gamification of Task Performance with Leaderboards: A Goal Setting Experiment. Computers in Human Behavior. 2015. Nr 71. Pp. 508–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.008

    DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.008
  26. Endres, T., Weyreter, S., Renkl, A., Eitel, A. When and Why Does Emotional Design Foster Learning? Evidence for Situational Interest as a Mediator of Increased Persistence. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2020. Nr 36 (4). Pp. 514–525. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12418

    DOI 10.1111/jcal.12418