Next-generation universities: the digital evolution of communication

Introduction. The challenges associated with the digital transformation of the university environment are becoming increasingly significant in the current context of the growing prevalence of distance and hybrid learning formats. Aim. The present study aims to analyse students’ digital communication in both formal and informal educational contexts, as well as to identify its thematic and emotional structures based on digital footprints. Methodology and research methods. The research is grounded in systemic and socio-communicative approaches, which enable communication to be understood as a multi-layered socio-pedagogical system. The empirical data comprise over four million messages and comments collected from university online environments, analysed using automated topic and sentiment analysis tools. Methods from digital linguistics, statistical validation, and case study analysis of university communities were employed. Results and scientific novelty. For the first time, this study identifies stable types of digital interaction based on an extensive collection of digital footprints from students at Russian universities. These footprints reflect emotional fluctuations, responses to external events, and characteristics of self-organisation within the networked educational environment. A conceptual model is presented that systematises the levels of university communication – formal, informal, networked, and analytical – as a methodological tool for analysing digital communication. Practical significance. The research findings can be applied to the management of university educational environments, the analysis of academic motivation and students’ emotional states, and the design of monitoring programmes and support systems for students’ digital well-being. 

1. Holmes W., Bialik M., Feidl C. Iskusstvennyy intellekt v obrazovanii: perspektivy i problemy dlya prepodavaniya i obucheniya = Artificial Intelligence in Education: Prospects and Challenges for Teaching and Learning. Moscow: Publishing House Alpina PRO; 2022. 304 p. (In Russ.)

2. Westera M., Amidei J., Mayol L. Similarity or deeper understanding? Analyzing the TED–Q dataset of evoked questions. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics; 2020. Barcelona: International Committee on Computational Linguistics; 2020:5004–5012. doi:10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.439

3. Shtern O.V. History of the formation of the concept of “Educational Communication”. Pedagogical Review. 2018;2(20). (In Russ.) Accessed September 09, 2024. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/ istoriya-stanovleniya-ponyatiya-obrazovatelnaya-kommunikatsiya

4. Hyland K. Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London; New York: Continuum; 2009. 215 p. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.009

5. Sergеeva Yu. Vsya statistika interneta na 2020 god: tsifry i trendy v mire i v Rossii = All Internet Statistics for 2020: Figures and Trends in the World and in Russia. 2020. (In Russ.) Accessed July 20, 2024. https://www.web-canape.ru/business/internet-2020-globalnaya-statistika-i-trendy/

6. Jia Y., Gesing P., Jun H.J. Exploring the impacts of learning modality changes: validation of the learning modality change community of inquiry and self-efficacy scales. Education and Information Technologies. 2023;28:1763–1781. doi:10.1007/s10639-022-11258-3

7. Cherkasova V.Yu. Online communication between teachers and students in the system of higher education: problems and prospects. Vestnik Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta = Vestnik of Orenburg State Pedagogical University. 2021;(2):132–143. (In Russ.) doi:10.26170/2079-8717_2021_02_16

8. Rudenko A.N. Digitalization of the educational process in a higher education institution. Vestnik Juzhno-Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo tehnicheskogo universiteta (NPI). Serija: Social’no-jekonomicheskie nauki = Bulletin of the South Russian State Technical University (NPI). Series: Socio-Economic Sciences. 2020;13(4):31–36. (In Russ.) doi:10.1713/2075-2067-2020-4-31-36

9. Voogt J., Fisser P., Pareja Roblin N., Tondeur J., van Braak J. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2013;29:109–121. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x

10. Nonko N.A., Grunin I.O. Methods of developing the ability for social interaction of students in the digital educational environment. Upravlenie obrazovaniem: teoriya i praktika = Education Management Review. 2023;13(5):57–65. (In Russ.) doi:10.25726/s0213-2197-5045-v

11. Storozheva S.P., Mikidenko N.L. Professional activity in the digital educational environment: contradictions in possibilities. Filosofiya obrazovaniya = Philosophy of Education. 2023;23(2):178. (In Russ.) doi:10.15372/PHE20230211

12. Sedov D.N. Digitalization of education in Russia: risks and problems. Vestnik Bashkirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija: Filosofija = Bulletin of Bashkir State University. Series: Philosophy. 2021;(2):42–47. (In Russ.) doi:10.18101/1994-0866-2021-2-42-47

13. Fatenkov A.N. With digital technologies – into an inhumane future. Juridicheskaja nauka i praktika. Vestnik Nizhegorodskoj akademii MVD Rossii = Legal Science and Practice: Journal of Nizhny Novgorod Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. 2020;(1):49. (In Russ.) Accessed December 08, 2020. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/s-tsifrovymi-tehnologiyami-v-beschelovechnoe-buduschee

14. Strokov A.A. Digitalization of education: problems and prospects. Vestnik Mininskogo universiteta = Vestnik of Minin University. 2020;8(2). (In Russ.) Accessed December 08, 2020. https://cyberleninka. ru/article/n/tsifrovizatsiya-obrazovaniya-problemy-i-perspektivy

15. Manapova O.N., Podin M.S. Modern messengers in the educational process of a vocational educational organization: strengths and weaknesses. Innovatsionnoe razvitie professional’nogo obrazovaniya = Innovative Development of Vocational Education. 2021;3(31):54–59. (In Russ.)

16. Aleksandrova Yu.K., Bogdanova A.V., Vasendina I.S., Goiko V.L., Mityagina E.V., Rogov A.V., et al. Posty po oseni schitayut: chto govoryat bol’shie dannye o kachestve obrazovaniya v postpandemicheskiy period: analiticheskiy doklad = Posts are counted in Autumn: What Big Data Says About the Quality of Education in the Post-Pandemic Period – An Analytical Report. Tomsk: Tomsk State University; 2022. 40 p. (In Russ.)

17. Popov D., Fokina V., Obukhova I., Nekrasova A. Students’ preferences in choosing the form and means of interaction with professors: innovation or tradition? In: Bylieva D., Nordmann A., eds. Technology, Innovation and Creativity in Digital Society. PCSF 2021. Cham: Springer; 2022:485–494. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89708-6_54

18. Gueye A.D., Mballo M.H.W., Kasse O., Gueye B., Ba M.L. Model of integration of distance education in a traditional university: migration of cross-cutting courses to distance learning. In: Auer M.E., Tsiatsos T., eds. The Challenges of the Digital Transformation in Education. ICL 2018. Cham: Springer; 2019:13–24. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-11935-5_2

19. Lahuerta-Otero E., Cordero-Gutiérrez R., Izquierdo-Álvarez V. Like it or die: using social networks to improve collaborative learning in higher education. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM 2018); 2018. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2018:930–935. doi:10.1145/3284179.3284336

20. Lewin C., Lai K.W., van Bergen H., et al. Integrating academic and everyday learning through technology: issues and challenges for researchers, policy makers and practitioners. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 2018;(23):391–407. doi:10.1007/s10758-018-9381-0

21. Christensen M.K., Møller J.E., Pedersen I.M. How facilitated multi-source feedback constructs new conversations about teaching: a positioning theory study. International Journal for Academic Development. 2023;28(3):272–286. doi:10.1080/1360144X.2021.2016413

22. Shakirov A.A., Zaripova R.S. Modern trends in web development. Russian Journal of Education and Psychology. 2019;(3). (In Russ.) Accessed June 17, 2025. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-tendentsii-web-razrabotki

23. Zaripova R.S., Khalueva V.V. Analysis of the functioning of the student knowledge assessment system. Russian Journal of Education and Psychology. 2019;(5). (In Russ.) Accessed June 17, 2025. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/analiz-funktsionirovaniya-sistemy-otsenki-znaniy-obuchayuschihsya

24. Zverkova S.A. Portrait of youth in the information society. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie yavleniya i protsessy = Socio-Economic Phenomena and Processes. 2016;11(3):21–25. (In Russ.)

25. Prayaga C. Comparing sentiment analysis from social media platforms – insights and implications. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Networks, Big Data and IoT (ICCBI – 2019); 2020. Cham: Springer; 2020. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43192-1_15

26. Dennehy R., Cronin M., Arensman E. Involving young people in cyberbullying research: the implementation and evaluation of a rights-based approach. Health Expectations. 2018;22(1):54–64. doi:10.1111/hex.12830

27. Koi-Akrofi G., Owusu-Oware E., Tanye H. Challenges of distance, blended, and online learning: a literature based approach. International Journal on Integrating Technology in Education. 2020;(9):27– 39. doi:10.5121/ijite.2020.9403

28. Liu H., Spector J.M., Ikle M. Computer technologies for model-based collaborative learning: a research-based approach with initial findings. Computer Applications in Engineering Education. 2018;26(5):1383–1392. doi:10.1002/cae.22049

29. Ascione L. The Future of Education Is Blended and Hybrid Learning. Accessed June 16, 2025. https://www.eschoolnews.com/classroom-innovations/2022/06/02/the-future-of-education-is-blendedand-hybrid-learning/

30. Bergdahl N., Bond M., Sjöberg J., et al. Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: a systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2024;21(63). doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y