Science for Education Today, 2022, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 7–30
UDC: 
371.48

A comparative analysis of moral education forms in the digital learning environment within educational settings and students’ preferences

Matuszak A. F. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Pavlova O. Y. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Akhkamova Y. A. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Zyryanova A. V. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Alekhina N. V. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Gribacheva N. V. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation), Tsilitsky V. S. 1 (Chelyabinsk, Russian Federation)
1 South Ural State Humanitarian Pedagogical University
Abstract: 

Introduction. The paper is devoted to the problem of comparing the readiness of schools, students and future teachers for moral educational activities in the digital learning environment. In order to solve the research problem, it is necessary to compare forms of moral education activities in the digital learning environment which are offered by modern schools and the expectations of students, as well as the preferences and skills of Education students – future teachers. Thus, the purpose of the research is to compare the preferences of students and the forms actually used in the content of education in the digital learning environment.
Materials and Methods. The method of analysis of information from official school websites was applied. Based on its results, a written survey of pupils and future teachers was carried out in order to select / reject the choice of each form of activity for the subsequent ranking of the forms of moral educational work in the digital learning environment. The authors analyzed the websites of selected Chelyabinsk schools where teaching internship of Education students was carried out. The sample included 135 secondary and high school students (59 male and 76 female) and 34 university students (2 male and 32 female). Statistical data processing was carried out on the basis of the Mann-Whitney U- test and the Wilcoxon T-test.
Results. The authors summarized the range of forms of moral educational activities implemented by schools, which included online festivals, workshops, shifts, online theaters, thematic meetings, online projects, class hours, memos, educating activities, video lessons, school media channels, online
newspapers, promotions, publication of collections, competitions, online forums. It was found that a wide range of activities was offered only in one educational setting. The rest limited themselves to participation in municipal events. Meanwhile, it was emphasized that schoolchildren showed interest in the proposed activities. The authors noted that workshops, online projects, promotions, competitions and shifts aroused the greatest interest. The main research result consisted in comparing the preferences of students and future teachers regarding the identified forms of work.
Based on the Mann-Whitney U-criterion (Uemp=116.5 at a significance level of p≤0.01), the authors found that pupils and students had close preferences for the forms of educational activities in the digital learning environment. However, the Wilcoxon T-test (Temp=5.5) showed that students, being prepared to conduct moral educational activities, did not aim at implementing them in the digital learning environment.
Conclusions. As a result of the study, the authors came to the conclusion that the preferences of pupils and future teachers basically coincided, which could potentially give a good result of moral educational work in the digital learning environment. However, firstly, schools have not formed such a wide range of moral educational activities in the digital learning environment as they have done in traditional offline education. Secondly, future teachers consider the digital nature of the educational environment as a demotivating factor, demonstrating the desire to educate offline, by their own example. They do not tend to look for a ‘fundamentally different’ organization of education in a digital educational environment.

Keywords: 

Digital learning environment; Forms of Moral Education; Directions of Moral Educations; Preferences of schoolchildren; Preferences of future teachers

For citation:
Matuszak A. F., Pavlova O. Y., Akhkamova Y. A., Zyryanova A. V., Alekhina N. V., Gribacheva N. V., Tsilitsky V. S. A comparative analysis of moral education forms in the digital learning environment within educational settings and students’ preferences. Science for Education Today, 2022, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 7–30. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15293/2658-6762.2203.01
References: 
  1. Zawacki-Richter O., Marín V. I., Bond M., Gouverneur F. Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 2019, vol. 16 (1), pp. 39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
  2. Yakovleva O. V. Research of the values of the digital educational environment in the context of future teachers professional education. Ivzestia of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, 2020, no. 3, pp. 8–16. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42708381    
  3. Ovinova L. N., Shraiber E. G. SWOT analysis of educational process in digital educational environment of university. Pedagogy. Theory & Practice, 2021, vol. 6 (4), pp. 700–707. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=46531571
  4. Roman P. G., Ballesteros C. R., Noguera M. D. D. Academic whatsapp groups as alternative communication and motivation systems in higher education. Revista Espacios, 2019, vol. 39 (10), pp. 29. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a18v39n10/18391029.html
  5. Romero Oliva M. F., Corpas Martos A. Students' perception of virtual learning environments and the development of oral communication competence. A case study. Revista Espacios, 2019, vol.  40  (5), pp. 2. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n05/19400502.html
  6. Podemska-Kałuża A. Gamification in Polish language education: From the theoretical model to school practice. General and Professional Education, 2018, vol. 4, pp. 29–34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26325/genpr.2018.4.5 
  7. Safronova A. N., Verbitskaya N. O., Molchanov N. A. Education in digital environment: Preservation of health. Modern Problems of Science and Education, 2018, no. 6, pp. 236. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=36871166
  8. Razzaque A., Hamdan A. Students’ learner-readiness empowers their imaginative-capacity as they interact while e-learning. Revista Espacios, 2019, vol. 40 (41), pp. 10. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n41/19404110.html
  9. Dahlström H. Students as digital multimodal text designers: A study of resources, affordances, and experiences. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2022, vol. 53, pp. 391–407. DOI: https://doi.org/10/1111/bjet.13171
  10. Petsuwan S., Pimdee P., Pupat P. Strategies for using the satellite distance education system in Thailand that affect student quality of marginal schools in the lower north region. Revista Espacios, 2019, vol. 40 (41), pp. 19. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n41/19404119.html
  11. Osmańska-Furmanek W., Solecka B. Wykorzystanie cyfrowych naredzi w procesie edukacyjnym. General and Professional Education, 2018, vol. 4, pp. 20–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26325/genpr.2018.4.4
  12. Nikolaev M. V. Some aspects of forming students citizenship in a digital society. The Surgut State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2020, no. 4, pp. 126–132. (In Russian) DOI https://doi.org/10.26105/SSPU.2020.40.79.013 URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44184706
  13. Belyaev G. Yu. Assessing the potentials and risks of internet resources shaping the social-digital environment of network interaction among the subjects of socialization and youth education. Personality Formation, 2020, vol. 1-2, pp. 72–81. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=44221622
  14. Frolova E. V., Rogach O. V. Digitalization of higher education: Advantages and disadvantages in student assessments. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2021, vol. 10 (3), pp. 616–625. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2021.3.616 URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=47199798
  15. Sirotová M., Michvocíková V. Virtual reality – part of supervised teaching practice for university students – future teachers? European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2021, vol. 10 (1), pp.  127–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2021.1.127
  16. Gómez-Galán J., Martínez-López J. Á., Lázaro-Pérez C., Fernández-Martínez M.a del M. Usage of internet by university students of Hispanic countries: Analysis aimed at digital literacy processes in higher education. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2021, vol. 10 (1), pp. 53–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2021.1.53
  17. Al-Mutairi A. A., Arouri Y. M. The problems of contemporary education the ethics of digital technology usage among secondary stage students. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2022, vol. 11 (1), pp. 4–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2022.1.4
  18. Záhorec J., Hašková A., Munk M. Self-Reflection of digital literacy of primary and secondary school teachers: Case study of Slovakia. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2021, vol.  10 (2), pp. 496–508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2021.2.496
  19. Perzycka E. Teachers’ learning processes of information competences in the network society – Proposed theoretical and methodological solutions. The New Educational Review, 2015, vol.  40  (2), pp. 180–188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2015.40.2.15
  20. Paez F. A., Luzardo M., Vera P. E. Use of social networks in adolescent population in the vunicipality of Columbian East. Revista Espacios, 2019, vol. 40 (5), pp. 12. URL: http://www.revistaespacios.com/a19v40n05/19400512.html
  21. Kulikova S. S., Yakovleva O. V. Pedagogical management in the digital educational environment: Issues of professional training for future teachers. The Education and Science Journal, 2022, vol.  24 (2), pp. 48–83. (In Russian) DOI: https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2022-2-48-83 URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=48046709
  22. Cohen L., Manion L. Morrison K. Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge. 8th Edition. 2017. 944 p. ISBN: 9781315456539 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
  23. Kimberg A. N. Social psychologist on the methodology of education. Public Education, 2010, no.  9, pp. 229–234. (In Russian) URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=15415683
  24. Qu X. M., Miao R. Research of learning strategies in flipped classroom. Open Access Library Journal, 2021, vol. 8, pp. e7398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107398
  25. Player-Koro C. Factors influencing teachers’ use of ICT in education. Education Inquiry, 2012, vol. 3 (1), pp. 93–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v3i1.22015
  26. Jones K. M. L. “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should”: Practitioner perceptions of learning analytics ethics. Libraries and the Academy, 2019, vol. 19 (3), pp. 407–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2019.0025
Date of the publication 30.06.2022