Student's Choice of an Individual Educational Trajectory: Subjective Position and Selection Strategies



The article is devoted to the study of students' ideas about the choice of an individual educational trajectory. The features of the digital transformation of education are determined, the parameters of subjectivity as a conscious attitude of the student acting as a participant in globalization processes are described. Interpretations of the concept of choice and its determining factors are considered. It is assumed that students' ideas about the choice of an individual educational trajectory are characterized by partial formation and differ depending on the direction of training. 218 first-year students were examined. It is shown that students' ideas about the individual educational trajectory are quite meaningful and adequate. At the same time, the understanding of the essence of choice and their participation in its implementation are fragmented. The differences in the understanding of the phenomena of "individual educational trajectory" (X2emp.=13,9, p≤0,05) and "digital educational environment" (X2emp.=12,5, p≤0,05) by students of different directions are shown. It is described that the phenomenon of "individual educational trajectory" is understood by students quite well (less than 15% of incorrect answers), while students of technical and pedagogical directions give more correct answers than students studying natural sciences and social sciences.

General Information

Keywords: university students, digitalization of the educational process, individual educational trajectories, subjectivity, choice strategies

Journal rubric: Educational Psychology

Article type: scientific article


Funding. The reported study was funded by Kemerovo State University within the framework of the scientific project "Forming the readiness of students in the system of general, professional, higher and additional education to choose individual educational routes in the context of digitalization of education"

Received: 18.05.2022


For citation: Morozova I.S., Bugrova N.A., Kretsan Z.V., Evseenkova E.V. Student's Choice of an Individual Educational Trajectory: Subjective Position and Selection Strategies. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2023. Vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 30–45. DOI: 10.17759/pse.2023280203.

Full text


All aspects of modern society are af­fected by the end-to-end digital technolo­gies and artificial intelligence [38], nano-and biotechnologies, BigData, etc.[7].However, the development and imple­mentation of new technologies are as­sociated with new risks as they increase the potential ability of each and every human to create and destroy [22, p.8].All people share the responsibility for all the changes that happen in the modern world [37].

Education also experiences the effect of breakthrough technologies.Digital ac­ademic environment raises the legitimate question: are the subjects of academic activity ready to become part of the new processes brought about by global digi­talization?

Academic digitalization follows two main legislations.The first one includes the laws on education and is represented by the Federal Law on Education in the Russian Federation (No.273-FZ, Decem­ber 29, 2012).The second covers the laws on information technology stipulated by the Federal Law on Informatization, In­formation Technologies, and Information Protection (No.149-FZ, July 27, 2006).

The year of 2019 saw the launch of the Federal Project on Digital Educa­tional Environment, aimed at creating a digital academic environment in educa­tional institutions and the general digital transformation of Russian education.The Project defines digital academic environment as a subsystem of socio-cultural environment and a set of peda­gogical conditions for personal develop­ment with digital infrastructure, content, methods, and communication.

However, digital academic environ­ment creates both opportunities and problems [36].The most obvious obsta­cle that inhibits academic modernization is the gap between the digitalization rates of academic resources and academic processes [35].

The Digital Academic Environment Project mentions student-tailored learning path along with such goals as available horizontal learning for students and teachers and the digital footprint system.Some researchers link the digital transformation of educa­tion to the individualization of learning [21, p.30].This approach focuses on increasing the digital skills of academic community [40] and raising the aware­ness of all its subjects of their own aca­demic path.

The emerging academic model gives rise to a certain paradigm of personal­ ity in education.Agency becomes both a goal and a condition for a person to enter the academic process.As a result, the emphasis falls on the awareness and responsibility of each student as a participant in globalization.The Federal State Education Standard sets the fol­lowing requirements for personal and meta-subject results of education: the readiness and ability of students for self-development and self-education; independence in planning and imple­menting academic activities, as well as designing one’s academic path [16].We believe that university applicants are al­ready fully prepared to choose and plan their own academic future.

Digital transformation is directly re­lated to such issues as choice, career counseling, and student-tailored aca­demic path.In this regard, the problem of students’ readiness for choosing and building their own academic path is quite relevant.

Student-tailored academic path: concept and choice

Choice means overcoming uncertain­ty by reducing alternatives [9].Similarly, choice is an internal activity [1].It mani­fests itself in situations of coping with ad­verse life circumstances [14].Profession changes one’s personality in a multivari­ance of ways [12, p.28].

The choice of a coping strategy de­pends on a variety of factors [4], which can be divided into facilitating and de­motivating.Professional personality development has its own specifics [29].Development of choice strategies re­quires psychological and pedagogical support [5].However, decision-making also relies on intuition [27].

The object of choice can be repre­sented by subjectively important rela­tions and activities, including an individ­ual academic path [10].

Domestic science correlates indi­vidual, or tailored, academic path with student-centered education and the pedagogy of cooperation.Studies that feature tailored academic path cover such concepts as the sequence of ele­ments in the academic activity of each student [19], the individual path of real­izing students’ personal potential [23], and the individual path of the subject of academic relations [20].The differenti­ated approach sees tailored academic path as an innovative pedagogical means of differentiating the educational process [1].

Foreign sources also offer a variety of definitions.For instance, the concept of learning trajectory is usually connected with mathematical education [30], where it represents an understanding of the process and sequence of learning [31].Personalized Learning Pathways (PLPs) is an alternative term reported in foreign publications [39].

Personalized learning is the ad­justment and adaptation of academic methods and techniques to adapt the learning process to each student with their own unique learning style, needs, and background [32].Tailored academic path is a student-centered approach to e-learning, where the student designs their own education road map [35], i.e., the entire process is initiated by stu­dents themselves [31].

The issue is interdisciplinary and is a research object in various scientific fields.Legal science interprets the con­cept of tailored academic path based on the fact that students are aware of their responsibility to master the aca­demic program [3, p.53] and their abil­ity to make a conscious choice while  exercising their rights to education [11, p.123].

Psychologists put emphasis on stu­dents as representatives of the global community [17], the priority of personal responsibility [2], and the maximization of students’ own interests [26].

The numerous pedagogical interpre­tations include the diversity and flexibil­ity of academic programs and technolo­gies [18; 22]; the variability of academic interaction, including extramural [15]; academic solutions based on pedagogi­cal design [28]; detailed and potentially changeable goals [36; 39]; variability of academic environment [6; 33].


The empirical study included a sur­vey conducted on the premises of the Kemerovo State University.The survey determined the attitude of students to tailored academic path and academic choice.It involved 218 first-year stu­dents, 65 boys and 153 girls, aged 17— 19, the average age being 18.71 years old.The participants were divided ac­cording to their major.The group of Natural Sciences included 52 students of the Institute of Biology, Ecology, and Natural Resources.The group of Tech­nical Sciences included 57 students that majored in Engineering Technology.The group of Education and Pedagogi­cal Sciences involved 56 students from the Institute of Education.The group of Social Sciences included 53 students of History and International Relations.The students gave an informed voluntary consent to participate in the study.To increase the reliability, the survey was anonymous.

The first stage involved collecting em­pirical data through a system of diagnos­tic procedures.

The analysis relied on the following methods and techniques:

1) theoretical methods: a review of scientific and psychological literature;

2) psychodiagnostic methods and techniques:

the methodology for determining the choice strategy in academic choice based on D.A. Leontiev and N.V. Pilip­ko’s procedure for highlighting and ana­lyzing arguments during choice-making;

an authentic questionnaire for as­sessing the level of awareness of such concepts as tailored academic path and digital academic environment, as well as the peculiarities of conscious choice-making in a situation of uncertainty and ideas about one’s future.

The methods followed the integrated approach to collecting data and the re­quirement of comparability.The scientific adequacy analysis relied on expert as­sessments: we selected six statements, two of which were completely true, the other two were partially true, and the remaining two were incorrect but had an associative similar meaning.The stu­dents received three points for choosing the correct statement, two points for par­tially correct statements, and one point for choosing an incorrect statement.

The second stage featured data pro­cessing and generalization.The statisti­cal processing involved SPSS 23.0 for Windows and X2 Pearson contingency tables.

The research objective was to deter­mine the subjective position of students of different majors regarding their choice of academic path.

The research hypothesis was as fol­lows: students’ ideas about the choice of academic path differ in their understand­ing of choice, their participation in its implementation, and their major. Analysis and discussion

The questionnaire consisted of ques­tions that made it possible to assess the level of students’ awareness about such concepts as tailored academic path, digi­tal academic environment, means of ob­taining information in a situation of uncer­tainty, and ideas about one’s own future.

The first question was What media do you appeal to when you need to make a choice in a situation of uncertainty? Fig­ure 1 illustrates the responses.

Most respondents appeared to be guided by their own opinions and de­sires.They commented that for them choice depended primarily on their own goals and aspirations.As for the media, the respondents tended to look for infor­mation on official websites and in official documents.Such a preference for ob­jective information indicated a respon­sible approach to choice-making.They did not regard social networks or the­matic forums as a basis for an educated decision, which we interpreted as a positive trend.The students commend­ably turned to their parents for advice, but the majority of them clearly preferred the variant with their own opinions and desires.

To assess the awareness about the concept of tailored academic path, we asked the respondents to choose the correct definition.The definitions were provided by experts and obtained from teachers that worked with individual aca­demic trajectories [24].About half of the participants (48%) provided correct inter­pretation (Fig. 2) and described it as an individual learning path and a sequence of obtaining knowledge and its content.

A similar number of respondents (39%) were partially informed about the phenomenon and chose such answers as individual path and individual strategy.

Few participants (13%) chose such wrong variants as directed activity and academic course.

The next question tested the under­standing of the concept of digital academic environment.The correct answers were also provided by the focus groups.The introduc­tory paragraph of this article described the concept based on regulatory documents and the Federal Project on Digital Academic Environment.The focus groups provided a number of interpretations, which is impor­tant in situations of subjective choice.

More than half of the survey partici­pants (52%) chose the partially correct interpretation, i.e., a set of resources and a pedagogical system.Only 9% gave the correct answer: an open set of information systems and an open set of different information systems.Finally, 39% of respondents demonstrated a low level of awareness (Fig.3).

Responding to My ideas about my future: what shall I do after graduation?, the students covered the entire range of option answers (Table 1).

A quarter of the respondents had vague ideas about their future, which they associated more with external cir­cumstances than with their personal agency. However, more than a third of the respondents were aware of their own capabilities and the need to apply their own efforts to achieve their goal. We compared the results by distributing the responses into groups based on the major (Tables 2, 3). The differences proved significant: the students of technical engineering and pedagogy gave more correct answers while those that majored in other directions usually gave partially correct answers.The differences proved to be significant, but in this case the empirical rela-

Table 1 . Responses to My ideas about my future






The future is a set of actions, and its targets depend on my resources and efforts.



I know what I will do, and I see the ways to achieve my goals; I am aware of my capabilities and the efforts I will need to achieve my goals.



I have no clear idea of what I will do, but I can see the field of activity where I want to work, and I have a general idea of what I need to do to achieve my goals.



My choice will depend on a number of circumstances, including my attitude.



The future depends on where you will find yourself in the future and the people you will meet.



Everything depends on the situation.




Table 2. Responses to the question about tailored academic path distributed according to the major

Social Sciences

Natural Sciences

Technical Sciences

Education and Pedagogy


Correct answer






Partially correct answer






Wrong answer












Х2emp.=13.9, p≤0.05


Table 3 . Responses to the question about digital academic environment distributed according to the major

Social Sciences

Natural Sciences

Technical Sciences

Education and Pedagogy


Correct answer






Partially correct answer






Wrong answer












Х2emp.=12.55, p≤0.05

tive X2 exceeded critical relative X2 to a lesser degree than in the previous ques­tion.On average, the students were less informed about the essence of digital academic environment than about that of tailored academic path.

To determine the main academic choice strategy, we used the method of extracting and analyzing arguments dur­ing choice-making developed by D.A. Le­ontiev and N.V. Pilipko [8].Choice is an internal activity of constructing founda­tions and semantic criteria to compare available options.The students were asked to choose one statement they agreed with.We used the data obtained in our pilot study where we defined cri­teria for evaluating alternatives [13].The students were to correlate the proposed statements with one of four strategies for planning the academic path.The semantic strategy was connected with semantic arguments.The I-strategy involved assessing the choice through the prism of one’s abilities, inclinations, and skills.The activity strategy referred to the features of education itself and the future professional activity.The situational strategy could be described as situational-opportunistic reasoning (Table 4).

Most students appealed to semantic arguments to make a choice, as well as to their capabilities, inclinations, abilities, and skills.The participants were less likely to use the activity strategy associ­ated with a future job with a good income and stability.The revealed preferences might indicate that most students were not ready to predict their professional fu­ture, and therefore relied on their internal resources, meanings, and abilities in their choice for academic opportunities.Few students preferred the situational strat­egy, according to which the choice of the academic direction cannot be planned in advance and depends on each specific situation.

The strategies were not associated with the major (Х2emp.=8.3, p>0.05) and were almost equally distributed in differ­ent groups of students.


In the context of global digitalization, the determinants that guide students in their choice of academic path are an important research issue: young people have to choose their future responsibly, understand the consequences of their choice, and select the right ways to achieve their goals.The digital trans­formation of education has one practi­cal condition: personal agency of each student in determining their education goals and content.Personal agency is a conscious and responsible attitude of each student as a participant in glo­balization processes.Personal agency provides skills and helps to achieve

Table 4

Strategies for choosing the future academic path






Semantic strategy






Activity strategy



Situational strategy





goals throughout the entire life.The empirical data obtained in this study re­vealed that the students lacked mean­ingfulness and awareness of their own attitudes.In their choice-making, they had almost the same preferences for websites as they did for parental advice.However, most respondents were guid­ed by their own opinions and desires.They demonstrated different degrees of awareness in terms of understand­ing the essence of digital academic en­vironment and tailored academic path.The differences in their ideas about the future were also significant, but the majority saw their future as depending on external circumstances, not on their own choice.

The described empirical data tes­tify to the manifestations of the subject position and the variability of strategies for determining the academic path.The participants had consistent and ad­equate ideas about tailored academic path.About 50% of them gave the correct interpretation to the essential characteristics of digital academic envi­ronment as an individual learning path and a sequence of obtaining knowledge and its content.More than half of the participants chose partially correct an­swers.However, their responses to the questions connected with the essence of choice and one’s own role in its im­plementation were fragmented.The responses to the question about the na­ture of tailored academic path depended on the major.The students that majored in Technical Sciences, Education, and Pedagogy gave more correct answers, while those from other groups mostly chose partially correct variants.The stu­dents were generally less well-informed about digital academic environment.

Most students relied on the semantic strategy while choosing their future aca­demic path.However, their image of the future did not coincide with their ideas about how to achieve the future goals.While personal agency depended on the major, the differences in choice strate­gies were not affected by this factor.

In general, the identified features of personal agency and choice strategies showed that the students were not ready to plan their own academic path.

The results obtained might be a spe­cial case of age patterns.The period between 17 and 25 sees an active for­mation of ideals, values, and attitudes to oneself and others.On the other hand, they might have been caused by the ob­jective difficulties connected with gender-related variations in personal agency and choice strategies, which is a prospective research topic.


  1. Batina E.V., Serikov G.N. Priznaki gotovnosti obuchayushchikhsya k vyboru individual'no-orientirovannoi traektorii obrazovatel'noi deyatel'nosti [Characteristics of readiness of students to choose an individual education trajectory]. Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya «Obrazovanie. Pedagogicheskie nauki» [Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Series «Education. Pedagogical sciences»], 2021. Vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 40–50. DOI:10.14529/ped210404 (In Russ.).
  2. Bystrova N.V., Kaznacheeva S.N., Urakova E.A., Gosel'bakh O.I. Osobennosti psikhologicheskogo blagopoluchiya obuchayushchikhsya v obrazovatel'noi srede [Peculiarities of psychological well-being students in educational environment]. Innovatsionnaya ekonomika: perspektivy razvitiya i sovershenstvovaniya [Innovative economy: prospects for development and improvement], 2019, no. 5(39), pp. 26– (In Russ.).
  3. Kapitonova E.A. Problemy pravovogo regulirovaniya obyazannostei rebenka v obrazovatel'noi sfere [Problems of legal regulations of child’s duties in education]. Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Povolzhskii region. Obshchestvennye nauki [University proceedings. Volga region. Social sciences. Politics and law], 2014, 1(29), pp. 51–60. (In Russ.).
  4. Kibal'nik A.V. Strategii preodoleniya lichnost'yu trudnykh zhiznennykh situatsii: factory vybora [Elektronnyi resurs] [Strategies of coping with difficult life situations: factors of decision-making]. Azimut nauchnykh issledovanii: pedagogika i psikhologiya [Azimuth of scientific research: pedagogy and psychology], 2017, no. 1(18), pp. 336– Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  5. Kolomeets L.A. Model' psikhologo-pedagogicheskogo soprovozhdeniya formirovaniya strategii osushchestvleniya vybora u starsheklassnikov [Model of Psychological and Pedagogical Support for Formation of Choice Strategies in High School]. Nauka i sovremennost' [Science and modernity], 2013, no. 24, pp. 187– (In Russ.).
  6. Kornilov Yu.V. Immersivnyi podkhod v obrazovanii [Immersive approach in education]. Azimut nauchnykh issledovanii: pedagogika i psikhologiya [Azimuth of scientific research: pedagogy and psychology], Vol. 8, no. 1(26). DOI:10.26140/anip-2019-0801-0043
  7. Lapidus L.V., Gostilovich A.O., Omarova Sh.A. Osobennosti proniknoveniya tsifrovykh tekhnologii v zhizn' pokoleniya Z: tsennosti, povedencheskie patterni i potrebitel'skie privychki internet-pokoleniya [Features of Digital Technologies Penetration into Generation Z Life: Values, Behavioral Patterns and Consumer Habits of the Internet Generation]. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Elektronnyi vestnik [State administration. Electronic Bulletin], Vol. 83, pp. 271–293. DOI:10.24411/2070-1381-2020-10119 (In Russ.).
  8. Leont'ev D.A., Pilipko N.V. Vybor kak deyatel'nost': lichnostnye determinanti i vozmozhnosti formirovaniya [Choice as an Activity: Personal Determinants and Possibilities of Formation]. Voprosy psikhologii [Questions of Psychology], 1995, no. 1, 97–110. (In Russ.).
  9. Leont'ev D.A. Psikhologiya vybora [Psychology of Choice] / D.A. Leont'ev, E.Yu. Ovchinnikova, E.I. Rasskazova, A.Kh. Fam. Moscow: Publ. Smysl, 2015. 464 p.
  10. Lukov V.A. Molodezh' v situatsii vybora [Youth in a choice situation]. Kiseleva M.S. (ed.). Chelovek pered vyborom v sovremennom mire: problemy, vozmozhnosti, resheniya: materialy Vserossiiskoi nauchnoi konferentsii, 27-28 okt. 2015 g., IF RAN (Moskva) [Human choice in the modern world: challenges, opportunities, solutions Proceedings of the scientific conference on October 27–28, 2015 Institute of Philosophy Russian Academy of Sciences (Moscow)]. Vol. 2. Moscow: Publ. Nauchnayamysl', 2015, pp. 158–
  11. Matveev V.Yu. Slozhnye i spornye voprosy realizatsii prava na obrazovanie v Rossii [Complex and controversial issues of realization of the right to education in Russia]. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava [Journal of Russian law], 2018, no. 2(254), pp. 123–131, DOI:10.12737/art_2018_2_12 (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  12. Minyurova S.A. Psikhologicheskie osnovaniya vybora strategii samorazvitiya v professii [Psychological bases of the selection of self-development strategies in profession]. Teoreticheskaya i eksperimental'naya psikhologiya [Theoretical and experimental psychology], 2009, no. 1, pp. 26– (In Russ.).
  13. Morozova I.S., Kolomeets L.A. K probleme klassifikatsii strategii osushchestvleniya vybora starsheklassnikami [Elektronnyi resurs] [Conoerning classification of choice making strategies of high school students]. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya [Theory and practice of social development], 2013, no. 11, pp. 112– Available at: file:///C:/Users/MSI/Downloads/k-probleme-klassifikatsii-strategiy-osuschestvleniya-vybora-starsheklassnikami%20(1).pdf (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  14. Orlova M.M., Orlov D.V. Vybor strategii psikhicheskoi adaptatsii i ego posledstviya dlya lichnosti [Elektronnyi resurs] [The Choice of Psychical Adaptation Strategy and its Consequences for Personality]. Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Pedagogika [News of the Saratov University. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy], 2007, no. 1, pp. 38– Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  15. Popova N.E., Chikova O.A. Tekhnologii distantsionnogo obucheniya kak innovatsiya v protsesse realizatsii obrazovatel'nykh standartov novogo pokoleniya [Technologies of distance learning as an innovation in the course of implementation of educational standards of new generation]. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Novosibirsk state pedagogical university bulletin], 2014, no. 2(18), pp. 17–26. DOI:10.15293/2226-3365.1402.02
  16. Prikaz Ministerstva prosveshcheniya Rossii ot 31.05.2021 N 287 "Ob utverzhdenii federal'nogo gosudarstvennogo obrazovatel'nogo standarta osnovnogo obshchego obrazovaniya" (Zaregistrirovano v Minyuste Rossii 05.07.2021 N 64101) [Order of the Ministry of Education of Russia dated 05/31/2021 N 287 "On approval of the federal state educational standard for basic general education" (Registered in the Ministry of Justice of Russia on 07/05/2021 N 64101)]. Ofitsial'nyi internet-portal pravovoi informatsii [Official Internet portal of legal information]. Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022).
  17. Ryazanova N.E., Morgun D.V., Argunova M.V. Formirovanie global'nykh kompetentsii dlya VUCA-mira: zachem, chemu i kak uchit'? [Forming global competences for VUCA world: why, what and how to teach?]. Nauka i shkola [Science and school], 2021, no. 2, pp. 86– DOI:10.31862/1819-463X-2021-2-86-97
  18. Sinitsina I.A. Variativnost' kak sistemoobrazuyushchii kontsept posteneklassicheskoi obrazovatel'noi paradigmy [Elektronnyi resurs] [Variability as a system-forming concept of the post-non-classical educational paradigm]. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya [Modern problems of science and education], 2017, no. 3. Available at: (Accessed 28.04.2022).
  19. Surtaeva N.N. Pedagogicheskie tekhnologii estestvennogo obucheniya [Pedagogical technologies of natural learning]. Khimiya v shkole [Chemistry at school], 1998, no. 7, pp. 13–
  20. Timoshina T.A. Opyt organizatsii individual'noi obrazovatel'noi traektorii studentov [Elektronnyi resurs] [Experience of the Students’ Individual Educational Trajectory Organization]. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University], 2012, no. 1, pp. 196– Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022). (In Russ.).
  21. Trudnosti i perspektivy tsifrovoi transformatsii obrazovaniya [Difficulties and prospects of digital transformation of education]. Uvarov A.Yu., Frumin I.D. (eds.). Moscow: Publ. House of the HSE, 2019. 343 p. (In Russ.).
  22. Uvarov A.Yu. Tsifrovaya transformatsiya i stsenarii razvitiya obshchego obrazovaniya [Elektronnyi resurs] [Digital transformation and scenarios for the development of general education] // Sovremennaya analitika obrazovaniya [Modern education analytics], 16(46). Moscow: HSE University, 2020. 108 p. Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022). (In Russ.).
  23. Khutorskoi A.V. Individual'naya obrazovatel'naya traektoriya v evristicheskom obuchenii [Elektronnyi resurs] [Individual educational trajectory in heuristic learning]. Vestnik Instituta obrazovaniya cheloveka [Bulletin of the Institute of Human Education], 2014, no. 2. Available at: (Accessed04.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  24. Chekhovskii I.V. Metod fokus-grupp: etapy realizatsii issledovaniya [Elektronnyi resurs] [The focus-group method: stages of the research]. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Sotsiologiya [RUDN of sociology], 2012, no. 4, pp. 145– Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  25. Tsifrovoi perekhod: opyt pedagogov i obrazovatel'nykh organizatsii v Rossii i mire: ekspertno-analiticheskii doklad [Elektronnyi resurs] [Digital transition: experience of teachers and educational organizations in Russia and in the world: expert and analytical report]. Moscow: HSE University, 2021. 98 p. Available at: Tsifrovoiperekhodopytpedagogov_v_Rossii_i_mire.pdf (Accessed04.2022). (In Russ.).
  26. Shamsiddinov M.I., Yusupova D.M. Formirovanie professional'nykh interesov uchashchikhsya v optimal'nykh usloviyakh vzaimodeistviya sub"ektov shkola – vuz [Elektronnyi resurs] [Formation of the professional interests of pupils in optimal conditions, the interaction of school subjects – or Higher school]. Uchenye zapiski Khudzhandskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni akademika B. Gafurova. Gumanitarnye nauki [Scientific notes of the Khujand State University named after academician B. Gafurov. Humanitarian sciences.], 2016, no. 1(46), pp. 163– Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  27. Shirinbekova Zh.A., Koshan A.S., Nasirova A.Sh. Intuitsiya v protsesse prinyatiya resheniya [Elektronnyi resurs] [Intuition in the decision-making process]. Innovatsionnaya nauka [Innovaton science], 2017, no. 3–1, pp. 247– Available at: (Accessed 14.05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  28. Shirinkina E.V. Proektirovanie pedagogicheskogo dizaina obrazovatel'noi sredy universiteta [Designing the pedagogical design of the educational environment of the university]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo instituta kul'tury [Vestnik of Saint Petersburg State University of Culture], 2021, no. 1(46). DOI:30725/2619-0303-2021-1-156-162
  29. Emil'bekova A.E. Professional'noe stanovlenie i dinamika professional'noi identichnosti na raznykh etapakh formirovaniya lichnosti [Elektronnyi resurs] [Professional development and dynamics of professional identity at different stages of personality development]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta. Obrazovanie i pedagogicheskie nauki [Bulletin of the Moscow State Linguistic University. Education and pedagogical sciences], 2018, no. 1(790), pp. 153–163. Available at: (Accessed05.2022). (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
  30. Clements D.H., Sarama J. Early Childhood Mathematics Intervention. Science, 2011, no. 333(968). DOI:1126/science.1204537
  31. Daro Ph., Mosher F.A., Corcoran T. Learning Trajectories In Mathematics: A Foundation for Standards, Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction. 2011. January [Elektronnyi resurs]. Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022).
  32. Hopkins D. Personalized Learning in School Age Education. International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition), 2010, pp. 227– DOI:10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00789-2
  33. Hung D., Jamaludin A., Chen V. Investigating projective identity trajectories for 21st century learning. Educational Technology, 2010, no. 50(5), pp. 50–
  34. Lai Y., Saab N., Admiraal W. University students’ use of mobile technology in self-directed language learning: Using the integrative model of behavior prediction. Computers & Education, 2022. Vol. 179(104413). DOI:1016/j.compedu.2021.104413
  35. Machekhina O.N. Digitalization of education as a trend of its modernization and reforming [Elektronnyi resurs]. Revista Espacios, 2017. Vol. 38(40), p. 26. Available at: (Accessed 04.2022).
  36. Personalized Learning [Elektronnyi resurs]. Valamis learning solution: The end-to-end ecosystem for organizational learning. Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022).
  37. Schwab K. The Fourth Industrial Revolution [Elektronnyi resurs]. Geneva: World Economic Forum. 2016. Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022).
  38. Sustainability in a Digital World: New Opportunities Through New Technologies. T. Osburg, C. Lohrmann (ed.). Springer International Publishing AG, DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-54603-2
  39. What Are Personalized Learning Pathways? [Elektronnyi resurs] Leadership in Action: a briefing series for new England’s educational leaders. Available at: (Accessed 18.04.2022).
  40. Zhao Y., Llorente A.M.P., Gómez M.C.S. Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 2021. Vol. 168(1042212). DOI:1016/j.compedu.2021.104212

Information About the Authors

Irina S. Morozova, Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Head of the Department of Acmeology and Developmental Psychology, Director of the Institute of Education, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Natalya A. Bugrova, PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor of the Department of Acmeology and Psychology of Development, Institute of Education, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Zoya V. Kretsan, PhD in Education, Associate Professor of Chair of Acmeology and Psychology of Development, Kemerovo State University, Kemerovo, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:

Elena V. Evseenkova, Assistant, Department of Acmeology and Psychology of Development, Institute of Education, Kemerovo State University (KemSU), Kemerovo, Russia, ORCID:, e-mail:



Total: 609
Previous month: 41
Current month: 41


Total: 256
Previous month: 30
Current month: 21