Psychological and Pedagogical Components Forming Innovative Potential in a Higher School Teacher’s Personality

Aim. To consider an innovative potential of a modern university teacher’s personality as a complex integrative dynamic system consisting of significant psychological qualities and pedagogical experience that are important for understanding the effectiveness of the educational process and recognising the contemporary role of a teacher.

Methodology. A systematic, subject-activity, resource, and personal methodological approaches were applied in the research. Analysis, systematization of scientific sources on the specified problem, content analysis of documents, and surveys and tests of teachers and authors of innovative educational practices were the main methods used in the study.

Results. An innovative potential of a modern teacher’s personality is defined as a combination of specific abilities, where teachers use conditions, tools, and essence of their work to realize their potential in practice, depending on the specific features of the university’s educational environment, in addition to internal motives and creativity. The results of the research reveal a correlation between motivational, emotional, cognitive, and organizational personal qualities, which collectively reflect the high psychological readiness of university teachers to generate new ideas and create innovative teaching methods. The article provides a psychological profile of innovative teachers at Sevastopol State University.

Research implications. The article expands the understanding of the scientific concepts of “individual innovative potential” and “person capable of innovative activity.” It describes the structural and functional elements of innovative potential that form a dynamic system. The article examines and identifies the psychological and pedagogical components of innovative potential as personal qualities and professional educational achievements that enable a teacher to effectively participate in the university’s innovative activities.

Conclusions. Thus, from the perspective of the personal, systemic, activity-based, and resource-based approaches, the innovative potential can be objectively viewed as the quality of higher education, which has structural and substantive components. In this work, the psychological and pedagogical components of a teacher’s personality as a set of professional and personal qualities, aimed at optimising and modernising their own teaching activities through the development of their teaching experience, were clarified.

1. Albukhanova-Slavskaya, K. A. (2009). Philosophical and Psychological Legacy of S. L. Rubinstein. In: Psychological Journal, 30 (5), 26–45 (in Russ.).

2. Avakyan, I. B. (2025). Assessment of Psychological Indicators Denoting Pedagogical Conservatism of University Teachers. In: Psychological-Educational Studies, 17 (2), 86–102 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17759/psyedu.2025170206.

3. Avakyan, I. B. & Vinogradova, G. A. (2019). Factor Analysis of the Development of Innovative Readiness of University Teachers. In: Science for Education Today, 9, 1, 43–56 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.15293/2658-6762.1901.03.

4. Aleshina, S. A., Egorova, Yu. N. & Konkina, E. V. (2022). Psychological and Pedagogical Aspects of Professional Deformation of a University Teacher. In: Innovation in Psychological and Pedagogical Studies, 4, 110–118 (in Russ.).

5. Artyukhova, T. Yu., Fedorova, E. P. & Rostovtsevva, M. V., et al. (2024). Innovative Potential of a Modern University Teacher in the Context of Digital Transformation of Education. In: Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 17 (11), 2065–2073 (in Russ.).

6. Vlasova, O. V. (2024). Scientific Approaches to the Study of the Innovative Potential of University Academic Staff. In: Bulletin of the Surgut State Pedagogical University, 2 (89), 65–72 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.69571/SSPU.2024.89.2.010.

7. Zborovsky, G. E. & Ambarova, P. A. (2022). Research and Teaching Staff as a Social Community in the Changing Conditions of Academic Development. In: Education and Science Journal, 24 (5), 147–180 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2022-5-147-180.

8. Kapustina, V. A. & Bykova, E. S. (2019). Typological Approach to the Study of the Structure of an Individual’s Innovative Potential. In: Psychologist, 4, 14–26 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.25136/2409-8701.2019.4.30548.

9. Kudashova, N. N. (2024). Innovative Pedagogy in Russian Higher Education. In: Pedagogical Journal, 14 (11A), 50–57 (in Russ.).

10. Lachina, A. A. (2022). Disclosing the Definitions of Innovation Potential, Innovation Activity, and Innovation Receptivity as Bases for Forming Growth Points in Economic Systems. In: Issues of Modern Science: New Achievements: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference (Sofia, February 14, 2022). Neftekamsk: Mir nauki publ., pp. 55–58 (in Russ.).

11. Lyaudis, V. Ya. (1992). Innovative Learning and Science. Moscow: INION publ. (in Russ.).

12. Nikulina, I. V. (2023). Professional burnout of University Teachers. In: Izvestiya of the Samara Russian Academy of Sciences Scientific Center. Social, Humanitarian, Medicobiological Sciences, 25 (90), 32–37 (in Russ.).

13. Abakumova, I. V., Alekhina, S. V., Andryushkova, O. V., Vlasova, A. A., Galazhinsky, E. V. & Chervonny, M. A. (2020). Pedagogical Education in Modern Russia: Strategic Development Guidelines. Rostov-on-Don: Southern Federal University publ. (in Russ.).

14. Prishchepa, T. A. (2015). Features of the Formation of a Teacher’s Readiness for Innovative Activity Based on the Development of Professional Experience. In: Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 12 (165), 30–35 (in Russ.).

15. Prusakova, M. A. (2021). The Semantic Content of an Individual’s Innovative Potential in a Time Perspective. In: Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology, 10, 4 (37), 356–359 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.26140/anip-2021-1004-0082.

16. Rubinstein, S. L. (1986). The Principle of Creative Amateur Activity. In: Voprosy Psychologii, 4, 88–95 (in Russ.).

17. Slastyonin, V. A. & Podymova, L. S. (1997). Pedagogy: Innovative Activity. Moscow: Magistr publ. (in Russ.).

18. Tunik, E. E. (2013). The Best Creativity Tests. Diagnostics of Creative Thinking. St. Petersburg: Piter publ. (in Russ.).

19. Chikova, O. A. & Nekrasova, I. I. (2023). Assessing the Psychological Readiness of Teachers of Pedagogical Universities for Innovative Activity by Applying Methods of Mathematical Statistics. In: Bulletin of Omsk State Pedagogical University. Humanitarian Research, 3 (40), 201–209 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.36809/2309-9380-2023-40-201-209.

20. Hagen, E. E. (1963). How Economic Growth Begins: A Theory of Social Change. In: Journal of Social Issues, 19 (1), 20–34.