Justification of the didactic status of the competitive approach to education

Importance. Pedagogical practice has accumulated substantial empirical evidence on the effectiveness of competitive forms of learning organisation: meta-analyses consistently report a moderate yet statistically significant positive effect on cognitive outcomes and academic engagement. Nevertheless, the categorical status of competitiveness within didactics remains ambiguous – different researchers describe it as a principle, a method, or a technology, which impedes theoretical synthesis and the comparability of research findings. Resolving this categorical ambiguity constitutes an independent theoretical problem.

Materials and Methods. The study is conducted as a conceptual paper of the Theory Adaptation type: the construct of competitiveness, developed within motivational psychology and competition theory, is transferred into the categorical system of didactics with the necessary theoretical adaptation. The primary method is criterial differentiation of levels of didactic generalisation (approach, principle, method, technology), complemented by typological comparison of related didactic constructs. The theoretical framework draws on works in the methodology of pedagogical knowledge, research on the phenomenon of competitiveness in Russian didactics, and psychological theories explaining the mechanisms through which competition affects learning.

Results and Discussion. An original system of five criteria for distinguishing didactic categories is developed (level of generalisation, system coverage, relation to purpose, normative neutrality, and system-forming role); the correspondence of competitiveness to the criteria of an approach is verified; an original definition of the competitive approach is formulated; a typology is constructed to differentiate the competitive approach from competence-based and activity-based approaches, gamification, and cooperative learning; and a structural model is proposed that integrates the components of the pedagogical system, psychological mechanisms, and implementation conditions into a unified conceptual framework.

Conclusion. Qualifying competitiveness as a pedagogical approach resolves a number of theoretical contradictions present in the literature, provides categorical precision in describing competitive educational practices, and opens prospects for empirical verification of the proposed model in real didactic contexts.

1. Sailer M., Homner L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 77-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w , https://elibrary.ru/iiqqhl

2. Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, vol. 61, article 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 , https://elibrary.ru/ntrras

3. Kohn A. (1992). No Contest: The Case against Competition. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Publ., 324 p.

4. Naumkin N.I., Shekshaeva N.N., Kagramanova R.I., Zabrodin S.V. (2024). Development of the structure of competition and analysis of its forms of manifestation. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psikhologiya = World of Science. Pedagogy and Psychology, vol. 12, no. 5. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/xcmccu

5. Glushchenko O.P. (2026). Conceptual foundations, principles, and limitations of modeling a competitive educational environment in higher education institutions of the Russian ministry of internal affairs. Pedagogika. Voprosy teorii i praktiki = Pedagogy. Theory & Practice, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 175-183. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30853/ped20260022 , https://elibrary.ru/imxxie

6. Baranov V.V., Belonovskaya I.D. (2014). Principle of competition (agona) in formation of the resource of competitiveness of the student. Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya = Modern Problems of Science and Education, no. 2, article 169. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/sbweoz

7. Burguillo J.C. (2010). Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance. Computers & Education, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 566-575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.001

8. Yudin E.G. (1978). A Systematic Approach and the Principle of Activity: Methodological Problems of Modern Science. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 390 p. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/rvpaqz

9. Kraevsky V.V. (1977). Problems of Scientific Substantiation of Education: Methodological Analysis. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 264 p. (In Russ.)

10. Lerner I.Ya. (1981). Didactic Foundations of Teaching Methods. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 186 p. (In Russ.)

11. Zagvyazinsky V.I. (2006). Learning Theory: a Modern Interpretation. Moscow, Akademiya Publ., 192 p. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/qvfmhx

12. Slastenin V.A., Isaev I.F., Shiyanov E.N. (2002). Pedagogy. Moscow, Akademiya Publ., 576 p. (In Russ.)

13. Levchenko V.V. (2010). Competitiveness phenomenon: essence, structure, features and development determinants. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Psikhologiya i pedagogika. = RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics, no. 2, pp. 32-36. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/mstmwv

14. Levchenko V.V. (2012). Determinants of rivalry forms of people’s coactivity. Vestnik Leningradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. A.S. Pushkina = Pushkin Leningrad State University Journal, no. 4, pp. 139-145. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/pxuplz

15. Naumkin N.I., Shekshaeva N.N., Zabrodina E.V. (2021). Innovative engineering training in a competitive educational environment. Obrazovanie i nauka = Education and Science Journal, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 64-98. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-5-64-98 , https://elibrary.ru/yymeor

16. Festinger L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 117-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202 , https://elibrary.ru/jmiugt

17. Dweck C.S., Leggett E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 256-273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256

18. Bandura A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, Freeman Publ., 604 p.

19. Johnson D.W., Johnson R.T. (1989). Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, 257 p.

20. Johnson D.W., Johnson F.P. (2003). Joining Together: Group Theory and Group Skills. Boston, Allyn and Bacon Publ., 607 p.

21. Seligman M.E.P. (1975). Helplessness: on Depression, Development, and Death. San Francisco, Freeman Publ., 250 p.

22. De-Marcos L. et al. (2014). An empirical study comparing gamification and social networking on e-learning. Computers & Education, vol. 75, pp. 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.012

23. Koivisto J., Hamari J. (2019). The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research. International Journal of Information Management, vol. 45, pp. 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013

24. Bai S., Hew K.F., Huang B. (2020). Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review, vol. 30, article 100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322 , https://elibrary.ru/wbxslp

25. Bosch J., Wilbert J. (2023). The impact of social comparison processes on self-evaluation of performance, self-concept, and task interest. Frontiers in Education, vol. 8, article 1033488. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1033488 , https://elibrary.ru/texeot

26. Ramírez Ruiz J.J. et al. (2024). Impact of gamification on school engagement: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, vol. 9, article 1466926. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1466926 , https://elibrary.ru/ekjzfm

27. Bhalla Saluja O., Sharma D., Shukla M.M., Kumar H. (2026). A systematic review of empirical studies on gamified learning environments for women in the last decade (2015–2025). Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, pp. 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06787-y

28. Jaakkola E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: four approaches. AMS Review, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0 , https://elibrary.ru/zktujz

29.