Prerequisites for Accepting the Digital Educational Environment in New Cultural and Historical Conditions

222

Abstract

According to cultural historical activity theory motivation, adaptability, study-related experience (“perezhivanie”), and moral codes may be considered as prerequisites for Digital educational environment (DEE) acceptance. To measure the attitudes towards DEE a Scale for Assessing University Digital Edu¬cational Environment was used (AUDEE Scale by M. Sorokova, M. Odintsova, and N. Radchikova). Aca¬demic motivation was evaluated by “Academic Motivation Scales” Questionnaire (by T. Gordeeva, O. Sy¬chev, and E. Osin). Study-related experiences were measured by Activity-Related Experiences Assessment technique (AREA) developed by D. Leontiev and his colleagues. Moral behavior was evaluated with the help of Moral Disengagement Questionnaire (MD-24) adapted by Y. Ledovaya and her colleagues. Stu¬dents’ adaptability was accessed by a questionnaire developed by T. Dubovitskaya and A. Krylova. 406 stu¬dents of Moscow State University of Psychology and Education took part in the investigation (90,1% fe¬male). The average age was 28,7±9,6 years (median = 24 years) varying from 19 to 72 years. The results showed that it is possible to distinguish two groups based on the results of AUDEE scale: Acceptance group and Resistance group. Acceptance group has higher scores in almost all motivation indicators, study-related experiences of pleasure and meaning, adaptability to educational activities, and lower scores in five out of seven moral disengagement strategies. Statistical analysis (classification trees) showed that motiva¬tion (both external and internal) and study-related experience are key resources for the DEE acceptance.

General Information

Keywords: digital educational environment, prerequisites for acceptance / rejection, motivation, cultural-historical conditions, «cultural capability».

Journal rubric: Problems of Cultural-Historical and Activity Psychology

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2021170315

Funding. The reported study was funded by the Moscow State University of Psychology and Education (MSUPE) in the framework of the research project “Digital Technologies in Higher Education: Development of Technology for Individualizing Education Using E-Courses”.

For citation: Radchikova N.P., Odintsova M.A., Sorokova M.G. Prerequisites for Accepting the Digital Educational Environment in New Cultural and Historical Conditions. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2021. Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 115–124. DOI: 10.17759/chp.2021170315.

References

  1. Akimov A., Malin M. When old becomes new: a case study of oral examination as an online assessment tool. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2020. Vol. 45, no. 8, pp. 1205— 1221 (In Russ.). DOI:10.1080/02602938.2020.1730301
  2. Albers N.D., Knotts T.L. Cultural Influences on Academic Sharing: A Challenge to Academic Honesty. In J. Keengwe (ed.) Handbook of Research on Cross-Cultural Online Learning in Higher Education, 2019, pp. 230—252. DOI:10.4018/978-1-5225-8286-1.ch012
  3. Aljurf S., Kemp L. J., Williams P. Exploring academic dishonesty in the Middle East: a qualitative analysis of students’ perceptions. Studies in Higher Education, 2020. Vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 1461—1473. DOI:10.1080/03075079.2018.1564262
  4. Bandura A. Moral Disengagement in the Perpetration of Inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1999, no. 3(3), pp. 193—209. DOI:10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3.
  5. Blayone T.J.B. Theorizing effective uses of digital technology with activity theory. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 2019. Vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 447—462. DOI:10.1080/1 475939X.2019.1645728
  6. Breiman L. et al. Classification and regression trees. Brooks/Cole Publishing, Monterey, 1984. 358 p.
  7. Castro M.D.B., Tumibay G.M. A literature review: efficacy of online learning courses for higher education institution using meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 2019. Vol. 24, pp. 1—19. DOI:10.1007/s10639-019-10027-z
  8. Chudzicka-Czupała A. et al. Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior in Academic Cheating Research—Cross- Cultural Comparison. Ethics & Behavior, 2016. Vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 638—659. DOI: 10.1080/10508422.2015.1112745]
  9. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row, 1990. 336 p.
  10. Dremova O.V. Student academic dishonesty: Review of theoretical frameworks and methods of prevention. Pedagogy and Psychology of Education, 2020, no. 2, pp. 93—111 (In Russ.) DOI:10.31862/2500-297X-2020-2-93-111
  11. Dremova O.V., Maloshonok N.G., Terentiev E.A. Seeking Justice in Academia: Criticism and Justification of Student Academic Dishonesty. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes, 2020, no. 4, pp. 366—394 (In Russ.). DOI:10.14515/monitoring.2020.4.972.
  12. Dubovitskaya T.D., Krylova A.V. Method of Research of Students Adaptability in the Higher Educational Establishment. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2010, no. 2 (In Russ.) DOI:10.17759/psyedu.
  13. France D. et al. Should you be using mobile technologies in teaching? Applying a pedagogical framework. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 2020. Vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 221— 237 DOI:10.1080/03098265.2020.1773417.
  14. Gonzalez Rey F. Human Motivation in Question: Discussing Emotions, Motives, and Subjectivity from a Cultural-Historical Standpoint. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 2014, no. 45(3), pp. 1—18. DOI:10.1111/jtsb.12073.
  15. Gordeeva T., Sychev O., Osin E. “Academic motivation scales” questionnaire. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2014, no. 35, pp. 96—107 (In Russ.).
  16. Jia F., Krettenauer T. Recognizing Moral Identity as a Cultural Construct. Frontiers in psychology, 2017, no. 8, p. 412. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00412.
  17. Ledovaya Y. et. al. Moral disengagement: the psychological construct and its measurement. Vestnik of St Petersburg University. Series 16. Psychology and Education, 2016, no. 6, pp. 23—39 (In Russ.). DOI:10.21638/11701/spbu16.2016.
  18. Leontiev D.A. et al. Study-Related Experiences and Their Association with Psychological Well-Being. Psychological Science and Education, 2018. Vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 55—66 (In Russ.). DOI:10.17759/pse.2018230605.
  19. Leontiev D.A., Klein K.G. The quality of motivation and the quality of experiences as characteristics of learning activity. Moscow university psychology bulletin, 2018, no 4, p. 106—119 (In Russ.). DOI:10.11621/vsp.2018.04.106
  20. Leybina A.V., Shukuryan G.A. Ways to enhance the effectiveness of online education. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psikhologiya = Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 2020. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 21—33 (In Russ.). DOI:10.17759/ jmfp.2020090302.
  21. Malesky A. et al. The Effects of Peer Influence, Honor Codes, and Personality Traits on Cheating Behavior in a University Setting. Ethics & Behavior, 2021, 1—11. DOI:10.10 80/10508422.2020.1869006
  22. Olafson L. et al. Exploring the Judgment—Action Gap: College Students and Academic Dishonesty. Ethics & Behavior, 2013. Vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 148—162. DOI:10.1080/105 08422.2012.714247
  23. Orosz G. et al. Linking cheating in school and corruption. European Review of Applied Psychology, 2018. Vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 89—97. DOI:10.1016/j.erap.2018.02.001.
  24. Patyaeva E.Yu. Towards a Cultural-Historical Theory of Motivation: Pierre Janet’s Conception of Levels in Human Actions. Kul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural- Historical Psychology, 2011. Vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 49—62 (In Russ.).
  25. Purzycki B.G. et al. The cognitive and cultural foundations of moral behavior. Evolution and Human Behavior, 2018. Vol. 39, Issue 5, pp. 490—501, DOI:10.1016/j. evolhumbehav.2018.04.004.
  26. Quinlan J.R. Induction of Decision Trees. Machine Learning, 1986, no. 1, pp. 81—106.
  27. Saraf M.Ya. Measuring of the cultural space. Prostranstvo i vremya — Space and Time, 2013, no. 1. pp. 58—68 (In Rus).
  28. Saucier G. Culture, morality and individual differences: comparability and incomparability across species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society b, 2018. Vol. b373: 20170170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0170
  29. Soldatova G.U. Digital socialization in the cultural-historical paradigm: a changing child in a changing world. Social psychology and society, 2018. Vol. 9, no. 3, рр. 71—80 (In Rus). DOI:10.17759/sps.2018090308.
  30. Sorokova M.G. Skepticism and learning difficulties in a digital environment at the Bachelor’s and Master’s levels: are preconceptions valid? Heliyon, 2020. Vol. 6, no. 11, E05335 (In Rus). DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05335.
  31. Sorokova M.G., Odintsova M.A., Radchikova N.P. AUDEE Scale Data. RusPsyData, 2021. IN PRESS Replaced: Sorokova M.G., Odintsova M.A., Radchikova N.P. AUDEE Scale: validation database. Psychological Research Data & Tools Repository. Dataset, 2021. DOI:10.25449/ ruspsydata.14742816
  32. Sorokova M.G., Odintsova M.A., Radchikova N. Scale for Assessing University Digital Educational Environment (AUDEE Scale). Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2021. Vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 52—65. DOI:10.17759/pse.2021260205. (In Russ.)
  33. Stephens J.M., Young M.F., Calabrese T. Does Moral Judgment Go Offline When Students Are Online? A Comparative Analysis of Undergraduates’ Beliefs and Behaviors Related to Conventional and Digital Cheating. Ethics & Behavior, 2007. Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 233—254. DOI:10.1080/10508420701519197
  34. Suler J. The Online Disinhibition Effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2004, no. 7 (3), pp. 321—326. DOI:10.1089/1094931041291295
  35. Vygotskii L.S. Luriya A.R. Etyudy po istorii povedeniya: obez’yana. Primitiv. Rebenok. [Studies in the history of behavior: monkey. Primitive. Child]. Moscow: Pedagogika-Press, 1993. 224 p. (In Rus).

Information About the Authors

Nataly P. Radchikova, PhD in Psychology, Leading Researcher of Scientific and Practical Center for Comprehensive Support of Psychological Research «PsyDATA», Moscow State University of Psychology & Education, Chief Specialist of the Laboratory of Biophysics of Excitable Media, Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Biophysics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Pushchino;, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5139-8288, e-mail: nataly.radchikova@gmail.com

Maria A. Odintsova, PhD in Psychology, Docent, Head of the Department of Psychology and Pedagogy of Distance Learning, Faculty of Distance Learning, Moscow State University of Psychology & Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3106-4616, e-mail: mari505@mail.ru

Marina G. Sorokova, Doctor of Education, PhD in Physics and Matematics, docent, Head of Scientific and Practical Center for Comprehensive Support of Psychological Research "PsyDATA", Head of the Department of Digital Education, Moscow State University of Psychology and Education, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1000-6487, e-mail: sorokovamg@mgppu.ru

Metrics

Views

Total: 594
Previous month: 9
Current month: 18

Downloads

Total: 222
Previous month: 5
Current month: 3