Дизайн сравнительного эмпирического исследования роли цифровых технологий в развитии профессиональных компетенций студентов социогуманитарных направлений на примере вузов Китая и России

Xiaoyu Hao

doi:10.25726/o7961-2321-1846-l

Authors

Xiaoyu Hao Saint Petersburg State University, 199034, Saint Petersburg, Universitetskaya Embankment, 7–9

DOI: 10.25726/o7961-2321-1846-l EDN: IMKBDA

How to cite

GOST Hao X. Design of a comparative empirical study on the role of digital technologies in the development of professional competencies of students in social sciences and humanities: a case study of universities in China and Russia // Education Management Review. 2026. Vol. 16. No. 10. P. 294-305. DOI: 10.25726/o7961-2321-1846-l

APA Hao, X. (2026). Design of a comparative empirical study on the role of digital technologies in the development of professional competencies of students in social sciences and humanities: a case study of universities in China and Russia. Education Management Review, 16(10), 294-305. https://doi.org/10.25726/o7961-2321-1846-l

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to use Chinese and Russian universities as examples to confirm the idea of a comparative empirical study of the role of digital technologies in the development of students' professional abilities in the socio-humanitarian field. The design is based on a hybrid approach that combines quantitative (student questionnaires) and qualitative (semi-structured interviews with teachers) methods. The sample includes four universities, two in each country, balanced by type (classical and professional universities). The planned size of the quantitative sample is 80 to 100 respondents for each field of study, from the second to the fourth year; the qualitative stage includes at least 16 semi-structured interviews with teachers. The key principle in choosing a field of study is functional equivalence, which allows for comparability of data in the case of differences in the educational systems of the two countries. Unlike previous theoretical works, which systematized conceptual methods and identified differences in national teaching traditions, the proposed design brings comparative analysis to an empirical level and provides tools for verifying established theoretical positions. The developed design can be used as a methodological basis for cross-border comparative research in the field of digital pedagogy and higher education pedagogy.

Keywords

research design mixed methodology functional equivalence digital technologies professional competencies social sciences and humanities students comparative research China and Russia

Funding

The authors did not declare any external funding for this research.

References

Brazhnik E.I., Meng T.V., Bochkareva I.A., Taramzhina L.V., Piskunova E.V. Features of the formation and current trends in the development of the methodology and methods of comparative pedagogical research // Science for Education Today. 2025. vol. 15. no. 3. pp. 107-137.

Golovchin M.A. Institutional traps of the digitalization of Russian higher education // Higher Education in Russia. 2021. vol. 30. no. 3. pp. 59-75.

Kapterev A.I. Phygitalization of educational technologies in Russia: directions, examples, problems // RUDN Journal of Informatization in Education. 2024. vol. 21. no. 3. pp. 308-327.

Salganova E.I., Osipova L.B. Digital literacy of students: a competency-based approach // Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2023. vol. 16. no. 1. pp. 227-240.

Abubakari M.S., Zakaria G.A.N., Musa J. Comparative assessment of digital competences among students in higher education using DigComp 2.1 framework // Cogent Education. 2026. Vol. 13. no. 1. Article 2620198.

Beaton D.E., Bombardier C., Guillemin F., Ferraz M.B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures // Spine. 2000. Vol. 25. no. 24. pp. 3186-3191.

Belyaeva E.A. The Chinese students’ digital competencies formation in the educational space of the Russian university // Conference materials. KnE Social Sciences. 2021. Vol. 5. no. 2. pp. 681-691.

Bray M., Thomas R.M. Levels of comparison in educational studies: different insights from different literatures and the value of multilevel analyses // Harvard Educational Review. 1995. Vol. 65. no. 3. pp. 472-490.

Caves K.M., Rageth L., Renold U. Apples inside orange peels: exploring the use of functional equivalents for comparing curriculum processes across contexts // Research in Comparative and International Education. 2024. Vol. 19. no. 3. pp. 261-280.

Creswell J.W., Creswell J.D. Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 5th ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, 2018. 275 p.

Kim A., Lim E.-Y. How critical is back translation in cross-cultural adaptation of attitude measures? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Montreal, 1999. 38 p.

Krejcie R.V., Morgan D.W. Determining sample size for research activities // Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1970. Vol. 30. no. 3. pp. 607-610.

Ma J., Guo X. Constructing a support system for digital skills talent development in the digital economy era // Journal of Hebei Normal University (Educational Science Edition). 2025. Vol. 27. no. 3. pp. 89-98.

Narbut N.P., Wang B. Features of university management in Russia and China // Peoples' Friendship University of Russia Journal of Sociology. 2026. Vol. 26. no. 1. pp. 67-76.

Ozan Ö., Ozarslan Y. Investigating factors influencing faculty members’ digital competence for capacity building on open and distance education in HEIs // Open Praxis. 2025. Vol. 17. no. 2. pp. 363-375.

Phillips D., Schweisfurth M. Comparative and international education: an introduction to theory, method and practice. 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. xiv, 222 p.

Ruschitskaya O.A., Kulikova E.S., Kruzhkova T.I., Kot E.M. Typology of digital pedagogical practices in agricultural higher education: a comparative analysis of Russia and China // Bulletin of Pedagogical Sciences. 2026. no. 5. pp. 170-175.

Schleicher A., Ikeda M., Thorn W., Tremblay K. OECD studies and the case of PISA, PIAAC and TALIS // International Handbook of Comparative Large-Scale Studies in Education: Perspectives, Methods and Findings. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. pp. 1-42.

Bruno S.S. University 4.0 and educational technology for sustainable development: best practices and perspectives in Russia and Central Asia. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2025. 380 p.

Sam S. Research and education: an introduction to methods, approaches and processes. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2024. 212 p.

Tashakkori A., Teddlie C. SAGE Handbook of mixed methods in social and Behavioral research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, 2010. 893 p.

Vuorikari R., Kluzer S., Punie Y. DigComp 2.2: The Digital competence framework for citizens: with new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2022. 134 p.

Xiao Su. Research on strategies for modernization and development of education in China and Russia and their promotion from the perspective of an educational center. Wuzhou: Wuzhou Communications Publishing House, 2026. 370 p.

Design of a comparative empirical study on the role of digital technologies in the development of professional competencies of students in social sciences and humanities: a case study of universities in China and Russia

Authors

How to cite

Abstract

Keywords

Funding

References

Issue

Section

Metrics

Rights and terms of use

Most read articles by the same author(s)