M. V. Klimenskih
Professor of the Chair of Education and Psychology of Education Ural Federal University, 19 Mira st., Ekaterinburg, 620002, Russian Federation
A. V. Maltsev, Candidate of Biological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of General and Social Psychology, Ural Federal University, 19 Mira st., Ekaterinburg, 620002, Russian Federation
V. V. Savelyev,
Assistant of the Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychophysics, Ural Federal University, 19 Mira st., Ekaterinburg, 620002, Russian Federation
O. A. Selivanova,
Doctor of Pedagogical Sciences, Professor of the Department of General and Social Pedagogy, Tyumen State University, Doctor of Education Tyumen State University, 6 Volodarskogo st., Tyumen, 625003, Russian Federation
РИНЦ AuthorID: 432217


The study was supported by RFBR as part of a research project No. 17-36-01069 “Study of psychological predictors the effectiveness of distance learning”

The study was supported by RFBR as part of a research project No. 18-013-00268 A “Formation of research competencies of students in the system of multilevel University psychological and pedagogical education and professional development of teaching staff”

Introduction. Nowadays online courses are actively moving from the sphere of additional and corre- spondence courses into the higher education system becoming equal tools for students’ educational compe- tencies formation. On the one hand, education through the Internet makes knowledge more accessible, and on the other hand, there is a risk to depersonalize pedagogy and remove the students’ individual psycholog- ical traits from the focus of attention. It is believed that the main limitation of this format is the replacement of proven pedagogical technologies, first of all, the minimization or even the absence of pedagogical com- munication. This is a problem, since the ideas of modern humanistic pedagogy concerning the learning pro- cess effective organization are formed on the basis of constructive interaction between the teacher and the trainees, especially in the process of forming so-called research competences in the space of multilevel edu- cation. The purpose of the article is to compare the cognitive and emotional-motivational characteristics of students who have studied online and at traditional university courses.

Methodology. The study was based on a survey method using the following techniques: multifacto- rial personality questionnaire “Big Five” Big Five R. McCrae and P. Costa; diagnosis of students’ educa- tional activity motives (T. O. Gordeeva, E. N. Osin, O. A. Sychev); diagnostics of the dominant perceptual modality (S. Efremtseva); diagnostics of the volume and accuracy of short-term verbal and logical memory (according to R. Amthauer); diagnostics of the volume, switchability and distribution of attention according to “Schulte-Gorbov Table”; scale of progressive matrices by J. Raven (diagnosis of the level of intelligence based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of non-verbal tasks).

Results. On the basis of the findings, the following conclusions about the psychological characteris- tics of students achieving success in e-learning are drawn.

Conclusions. The authors came to the conclusion that one must be psychologically ready, a “Сonscientious” student with a formed internal motivation in order to achieve qualitative results in research activities in the online learning situation.

Keywords: massive open online courses, MOOC, Internet-course, adaptive learning, individual edu- cational trajectory, psychological characteristics of students, research activity,researchcompetencies.


  1. Artemenko M. V. Analysis of psychophysiological characteristics of high school applicants of various types of education. Mezhdunarodnyj zhurnal eksperimental`nogo obrazovaniya, 2015. No. 12 (5), pp. 609–613.
  2. Vindeker O. S., Golenduhina E. A., Klimenskih M.V., Korepina N. A., Sheka A. S. On the effectiveness of distance learning: the study of representations. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii, 2017. No. 10, pp. 73–79.
  3. Vorobyova E. V., Stratilatova E. N., Rogozin A. V. On the organizational and methodological support of distance education. Aktualnye problemy prepodavaniya matematiki v texnicheskom vuze, 2014. No. 2, pp. 40–43.
  4. De-Korte E. Innovative perspectives of teaching and teaching in higher education in the 21st century. (translated from the English E. Shadrina. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2014. No. 3. pp. 8–29.
  5. Evtuh T. V. The success of the educational activity of students of a pedagogical university in connection with their individual psychological characteristics. Vestnik Permskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarno- pedagogicheskogo universiteta. Seriya no. 1. Psixologicheskie i pedagogicheskie nauki, 2014. No. 1, pp. 101–108.
  6. Internet i obrazovanie 13.07.2015. FOM. [The Internet and education 13. 07.2015 POF]. Accessed on July 13, 2015. URL:
  7. Karnoj M., Kuzminov Ya. I. Online learning: how it changes the structure of education and the economy of the university. Open discussion. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2015. No 3, pp. 8–43.
  8. Marchuk N. Yu. Psychological and pedagogical features of distance learning. Pedagogicheskoe obrazovanie v Rossii, 2013. No 4, pp. 75–85.
  9. Tret`yakov V. S., Larionova V. A. Open Education as a Strategic Direction. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika i analiz, 2016. no. 102 (2), pp. 51–60.
  10. Tulupova T. V., Kuchinskaya S. P., Gryaznova V. V. Model trainee in the automated learning system. Pro- ceedings of the International symposium “Problemyinformatiki v obrazovanii, upravlenii, ekonomike i texnike”, (November 13–14, 2014, Russia,Penza), 2014. pp. 181–184.
  11. Frumin I. D., Vasilev K. B. Modern trends in the policy of informatization of education. Voprosy obrazovaniya, 2005. No 3, pp. 70–83.
  12. Shutenko A. I. Information technologies of distance learning as tools for increasing accessibility and use- fulness of university training. Vestnik po pedagogike i psixologii Yuzhnoj Sibiri, 2016. No. 4, pp. 56–67.
  13. Brusilovsky P., Karagiannidis C. Sampson D. Layered evaluation of adaptive learning systems. Inter- national Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 2004. No. 14, pp. 402–421.
  14. Singh R., Hurley D. The Effectiveness of Teaching-Learning Process in Online Education as Perceived by University Faculty and Instructional Technology Professionals. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 2017. No. 6, pp. 65–75.
  15. Sussman S., Dutter L. Comparing student learning outcomes in face-to-face and online delivery. Online Journal of Distant Learning Administration, 2013. No. 13 (4), pp. 1–10.