Review of modern technologies for assessing knowledge and professional competencies in higher online education

Introduction. The digital transformation of higher education and the expansion of online learning formats have highlighted the need to revise established models of pedagogical assessment. Ensuring the validity and reliability of distance assessments is essential for maintaining academic standards and sustaining students’ cognitive engagement. Aim. The present study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of Russian and international assessment technologies within the higher online education system. Methodology and research methods. The comparison was conducted according to four criteria: accessibility of tools, adaptability to individual learning trajectories, interactive potential, and the applicability of results within the professional domain. Particular attention was paid to the limitations of extrapolating international models into Russian pedagogical practice, taking into account national educational specificities. The study employed methods of comparative analysis and typologisation of assessment tools. Results. The advantages and limitations of various assessment approaches are analysed, along with their impact on the quality of education and student motivation. It is demonstrated that the Russian distance education system, while actively incorporating advanced international practices, retains distinctive characteristics shaped by national cultural and pedagogical traditions. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty resides in the systematisation of criteria for comparing diverse assessment systems and in substantiating the adaptive potential of international approaches for Russian higher education. Practical significance. The practical significance of the research findings is demonstrated by the development of a framework of recommendations for educational policymakers, university administrators, academic staff, and designers of EdTech solutions.

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;16(1):1–27. doi:10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0

2. Crompton H., Burke D. Artificial intelligence in higher education: the state of the field. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2023;20(1):22. doi:10.1186/s41239-023-00392-8

3. Bearman M., Ryan J., Ajjawi R. Discourses of artificial intelligence in higher education: a critical literature review. Higher Education. 2023;86(3):567–585. doi:10.1007/s10734-022-00937-2

4. Vlasov D.V. Automation of student testing using generative artificial intelligence and modern integration platforms. Elektronnyy nauchno-metodicheskiy zhurnal “Pedagogika informatiki” = Electronic Scientific and Methodological Journal “Pedagogy of Informatics”. 2025;1–2. (In Russ.) Accessed April 28, 2026. http://pcs.bsu.by/2025_1-2/3ru.pdf

5. Muntinov K.D. Applying LLMs like ChatGPT, Deepseek, Grok for student work evaluation. Vestnik Severo-Kazakhstanskogo universiteta imeni Manasha Kozybaeva = Bulletin of Manash Kozybayev North Kazakhstan University. 2025;2(66):220–230. (In Russ.) doi:10.54596/10.54596/2958-0048-2025-2-220-230

6. Integrity Advocate. State of Online Proctoring Report 2025. 2025. Accessed April 28, 2026. https://integrityadvocate.com/report2025

7. Isaeva E.S. Modern LMS platforms for distance education: analysis and comparison. Pedagogika. Voprosy teorii i praktiki = Pedagogy. Theory and Practice. 2021;6(6):1045–1050. (In Russ.)

8. Mironova Yu.N. Using remote technologies during classes: LMS MOODLE, GOOGLE CLASSROOM, MICROSOFT TEAMS. Azimut nauchnykh issledovaniy: pedagogika i psikhologiya = Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology. 2020;9(4):182–185. (In Russ.) doi:10.26140/anip-2020-0904-0037

9. Pelletier K., McCormack M., Muscanell N., Reeves J., Robert J., Arbino N. 2024 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition. Boulder (CO): EDUCAUSE; 2024. 46 p. Accessed April 28, 2026. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2024/5/2024-educause-horizon-report-teaching-and-learning-edition

10. Fahd K., Venkatraman S., Miah Sh.J., Ahmed Kh. Application of machine learning in higher education to assess student academic performance, at-risk and attrition: a meta-analysis of literature. Education and Information Technologies. 2022;27:3743–3775. doi:10.1007/s10639-021-10741-7

11. Zykova T.V., Vainshtein Yu.V., Noskov M.V. Assessment of educational results in the e-learning system based on Bloom’s taxonomy. In: Novye obrazovatel’nye strategii v otkrytom tsifrovom prostranstve. Sbornik nauchnykh statey po materialam mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii = New Educational Strategies in the Open Digital Space. Collection of Scientific Papers Based on the Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference. St Petersburg: Asterion Scientific and Information Technology Centre; 2025:51–56. (In Russ.) Accessed April 28, 2026. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=82273842&pff=1

12. Black P., Wiliam D. Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice. 1998;5(1):7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102

13. Pusa E.T., Dinçer S. A meta-synthesis study on the use of e-assessment tools in education. SAGE Open. 2025;15(1):1–18. doi:10.1177/21582440251318459

14. Hanus M.D., Fox J. Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom. Computers & Education. 2015;80:152–161. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019

15. Vuorikari R., Kluzer S., Punie Y. DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens (EUR 31006 EN). Publications Office of the European Union; 2022. doi:10.2760/115376

16. Sukhomlin V.A., Yakushin A.V. Concept and standards of digital skills and their application for developing educational trajectories. Sovremennye informatsionnye tekhnologii i IT-obrazovanie = Modern Information Technologies and IT‑Education. 2025;21(3):201–215. (In Russ.) doi:10.25559/SITITO.021.202503.658-667

17. Schmidt D.A., Alboloushi B., Thomas A., Magalhaes R. Integrating artificial intelligence in higher education: perceptions, challenges, and strategies for academic innovation. Computers and Education Open. 2025;9:100274. doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100274

18. Verboom A.D.P.R., Pais L., Zijlstra F.R., Oswald F.L., Santos N.R.D. Perceptions of artificial intelligence in academic teaching and research: a qualitative study from AI experts and professors’ perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2025;22(1):46. doi:10.1186/s41239-025-00498-1

19. Zhang X., Liu H. Reflections on enhancing higher education classroom effectiveness through the introduction of large language models. Journal of Modern Educational Research. 2024;3:19. doi:10.53964/jmer.2024019

20. Sysoev P.V. A modern teacher’s competence in the field of artificial intelligence: structure and content. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2025;34(6):58–79. (In Russ.) doi:10.31992/0869-3617-2025-34-6-58-79

21. Lee S., Song K. Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of AI-generated concept explanations: implications for integrating generative AI in computer science education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2024;7:100283. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100283

22. Qian Y. Prompt engineering in education: a systematic review of approaches and educational applications. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2025;63(7–8):1782–1818. doi:10.1177/07356331251322471

23. Melisa R., Ashadi A., Triastuti A., Hidayati S., Salido A., Ero P.E.L., et al. Critical thinking in the age of AI: a systematic review of AI’s effects on higher education. Educational Process: International Journal. 2025;14:e2025031. doi:10.22521/edupij.2025.14.31

24. Hikmawati A., Mohammad N.K. Enhancing critical thinking with Gen AI: a literature review. Buletin Edukasi Indonesia. 2025;4(1):40–46. doi:10.56741/bei.v4i01.567

25. Salido A., Syarif I., Sitepu M.S., Suparjan, Wana P.R., Taufika R., et al. Integrating critical thinking and artificial intelligence in higher education: a bibliometric and systematic review of skills and strategies. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 2025;12:101924. doi:10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101924

26. Morales-Chan M., Amado-Salvatierra H.R., Hernandez-Rizzardini R. AI-driven content creation: revolutionizing educational materials. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. New York, NY: ACM; 2024:556–558. doi:10.1145/3657604.3664701

27. Khalil M., Liu Q., Jovanovic J. AI for data generation in education: towards learning and teaching support at scale. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2025;56(3):993–998. doi:10.1111/bjet.13500

28. Danilov A.V., Zaripova R.R., Lukoyanova M.A., Batrova N.I., Salekhova L.L. Effectiveness of prompt engineering strategies in generating mathematics educational content: an experimental study. Science for Education Today. 2025;4:113–135. (In Russ.) doi:10.15293/26586762.2504.05

29. Song T., Zhang H., Xiao Y. A high-quality generation approach for educational programming projects using LLM. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 2024;17:2296–2309. doi:10.1109/TLT.2024.3428956

30. Schorcht S., Buchholtz N., Baumanns L. Prompt the problem: investigating the mathematics educational quality of AI-supported problem solving by comparing prompt techniques. Frontiers in Education. 2024;9:1386075. doi:10.3389/feduc.2024.1386075

31. Meissner R., Pögelt A., Ihsberner K., Grüttmüller M., Tornack S., Thor A., et al. LLM-generated competence-based e-assessment items for higher education mathematics: methodology and evaluation. Frontiers in Education. 2024;9:1427502. doi:10.3389/feduc.2024.1427502

32. Huang Q., Lv C., Lu L., Tu S. Evaluating the quality of AI-generated digital educational resources for university teaching and learning. Systems. 2025;13(3):174. doi:10.3390/systems13030174

33. Dickey E., Bejarano A. GAIDE: a framework for using generative AI to assist in course content development. In: Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE; 2024:10893132. doi:10.1109/FIE61694.2024.10893132

34. Sinha A., Goyal S., Sy Z., Kuperus R., Dickey E., Bejarano A. BoilerTAI: a platform for enhancing instruction using generative AI in educational forums. In: Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE; 2024:10893137. doi:10.1109/FIE61694.2024.10893137

35. Aperstein Y., Cohen Y., Apartsin A. Generative AI-based platform for deliberate teaching practice: a review and a suggested framework. Education Sciences. 2025;15(4):405. doi:10.3390/educsci15040405

36. Wessel M., Adam M., Benlian A., Majchrzak A., Thies F. Generative AI and its transformative value for digital platforms. Journal of Management Information Systems. 2025;42(2):346–369. doi:10.1080/07421222.2025.2467892

37. Zakharov A.A., Zakharova I.G., Shabalin A.M., Khanbekov Sh.I., Dzhalilzoda D.B. Intelligent voice assistant as an example of inclusive design methodology implementation. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2024;26(3):149–175. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2024-3-149-175

38. Zakharov A.A., Zakharova I.G., Shabalin A.M., Nguyen Q.H. Designing an AI assistant to support independent learning in first- and second-year students. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2026;28(6):163–200. (In Russ.) doi:10.17853/1994-5639-2026-6-163-200

39. Zulpykhar Z., Rakhmetov M., Jugembayeva B., Kapanova D., Zhilmagambetova R. Assessment using artificial intelligence in higher education: innovations and ethical challenges in the Ibero-American and Kazakh contexts. 2026;11:1798126. Frontiers in Education. doi:10.3389/feduc.2026.1798126