The study of the impact of coaching on the efficiency of learning in the higher education

Cover Page

Cite item

Abstract

The article presents the results of the sociological study of the impact of the coaching approach in the educational process in higher education. Based on the theory of coaching by T. Gallwey and J. Whitmore, the authors developed a methodology for improving personal and professional competences of students in the field of management. This methodology consists of fundamental coaching techniques: setting personal goals, identifying existing resources, active listening, providing feedback, and so on. The general principles of this methodology meet the educational standards adopted in Russia’s higher educational institutions. This methodology was tested at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA) and RUDN University. The efficiency of this methodology was assessed with the results of the sociological study conducted as a monitoring of social behavior and activity of students of Bachelor’s and Master’s levels in 2017-2022 (N = 564 undergraduate and Master’s students and 361 PhD students). Undergraduate and graduate students from 2017, 2018 and 2019 courses were selected as a control group (448 students). The coaching method was introduced in 2020, and 477 students took part in the experiment. To assess the efficiency of the proposed methodology of introducing the coaching approach in the higher education system, the authors chose such indicators as attendance and involvement in classroom activities, which were evaluated during both offline and online (under the pandemic) courses. The results allowed the authors to conclude that the proposed methodology has a positive effect on the behavioral and cognitive involvement of students, thus, contributing to the quality of human capital of graduates in the field of management.

About the authors

M. L. Ivleva

RUDN University

Author for correspondence.
Email: ivleva-ml@rudn.ru
Miklukho-Maklaya St., 6, Moscow, 117198, Russia

E. V. Nezhnikova

RUDN University

Email: nezhnikova_ev@rudn.ru
Miklukho-Maklaya St., 6, Moscow, 117198, Russia

N. B. Safronova

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration

Email: safronova@ranepa.ru
Vernadskogo Prosp., 86, Moscow, 119571, Russia

References

  1. Abaev A.L., Maslevich T.P., Safronova N.B. Voprosy vnedreniya protsessnogo upravleniya v praktiku vysshih uchebnyh zavedeniy tekstilnoy otrasli [Issues of implementing process management in the higher educational institutions of textile industry]. Tekhnologiya Tekstilnoy Promyshlennosti: Izvestiya vysshih uchebnyh zavedeniy. 2019; 2. (In Russ.).
  2. Ivleva M.L., Kurilov S.N. Problema formirovaniya sotsialnoy paradigmy ekotsentrizma: opyt filosofskogo osmysleniya sotsiologicheskogo issledovaniya v vuze [The development of the social paradigm of ecocentrism: A philosophical interpretation of the sociological research in university]. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2019; 19 (4). (In Russ.).
  3. Safronova N.B., Urubkov A.R., Maslevich T.P., Minaeva N.L. Rezultativnaya proektnaya komanda: kolichestvenny podkhod k formirovaniju [Productive Project Team: Quantitative Approach to Formation]. Moscow; 2022. (In Russ.).
  4. Shaykhitdinova S.K., Arsentieva Yu.S., Nezhnikova E.V., Simkacheva M.V. Studencheskaya gruppa kak prostranstvo sotsializatsii: usloviya blagopriyatnoy sredy [Student group as a space of socialization: Favorable conditions]. Kazansky Sotsialno-Gumanitarny Vestnik. 2022; 4. (In Russ.).
  5. Bagnasco A. Trust and social capital. Nash K., Scott A. (Eds.). The Blackwell Companion to Political Sociology. Oxford; 2004.
  6. Bourdieu P. La représentation politique (Éléments pour une théorie du champ politique). Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales. 1981; 36 (1).
  7. Centre for the Use of Research and Evidence in Education: Statement of Values // URL: http://www.curee.co.uk/files/shared/CUREE%20Values%202014.pdf.
  8. Cook D.A., Artino Jr. A.R. Motivation to learn: An overview of contemporary theories. Medical Education. 2016; 50 (10).
  9. Crisp P., Raybould R., Holdich K. The role of coaching in vocational education and training. Education and Training. 2013; 55 (1).
  10. Gallwey W.T. The Inner Game of Work. New York; 2000.
  11. Grabmeier St. BANI versus VUCA: A new acronym to describe the world // URL: https:// stephangrabmeier.de/bani-versus-vuca.
  12. Katsikis D., Kassapis S., Kostogiannis C., Bernard M.E. Coaching in schools. Bernard M.E., David O. (Eds.). Coaching for Rational Living. Cham; 2018.
  13. Passmore J. Coaching psychology: Exploring definitions and contribution to coaching research and practice. International Coaching Psychology Review. 2019; 14 (2).
  14. Putnam R.D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York; 2000.
  15. Suvakovic U.V., Narbut N.P., Trotsuk I.V. The youth of Russia and Serbia: social trust and key generational problems. RUDN Journal of Sociology. 2016; 16 (4).
  16. Trotsuk I. “To trust or not to trust” is not the question; “How to study trust” is much more challenging task. Russian Sociological Review. 2016; 15 (4).
  17. Tokuda Y., Jimba M., Yanai H., Fujii S., Inoguchi T. Interpersonal trust and quality-of-life: A cross-sectional study in Japan. PLOS One. 2008; 3 (10).
  18. Turner J. The Formation of Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective. Washington; 2000.
  19. UNESCO International Bureau of Education: Guiding Principle for Learning in the TwentyFirst Century. 2017 // URL: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000262678.
  20. Whitmore J. Coaching for Performance. London; 1996.

Copyright (c) 2024 Ivleva M.L., Nezhnikova E.V., Safronova N.B.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies