For a long time, it was believed that academic achievement was determined almost exclusively by the level of general intelligence. A high IQ, good memory, and the capacity for logical thinking — these were traditionally placed at the forefront. In practice, however, something different is observed: many students with high cognitive indicators experience serious difficulties in their studies, while others — far from the most “capable” in the classical sense — demonstrate stable results and high levels of engagement. This contradiction prompted researchers to turn their attention to the emotional sphere of the personality.

The concept of “emotional intelligence” was first introduced into scholarly discourse by American psychologists J. Mayer and P. Salovey in 1990–1993. By it, the scholars understood the ability to perceive and understand one’s own emotions and the emotions of others, as well as to manage them with the aim of directing thought and behavior [4, p. 31]. Somewhat later, in 1995, D. Goleman proposed the so-called “mixed” model, expanding the concept through the inclusion of self-motivation, empathy, and social skills [3, p. 196]. Today these concepts have become the starting point for an entire body of pedagogical research.

The relevance of the topic is conditioned by several circumstances. First, the contemporary educational environment is becoming increasingly demanding in terms of interpersonal communication, stress tolerance, and the ability to build cooperative interaction. Second, research in recent years records a positive correlation between the level of emotional intelligence among students and their academic achievement [4, p. 29]. Third, the educational community itself is beginning to acknowledge: knowledge without the skills of emotional regulation ensures neither the quality of learning nor successful professional activity.

Before speaking of the influence of emotional intelligence on academic achievement, it is worth clarifying what exactly is understood by this phenomenon. The models proposed by different researchers emphasize different facets of it.

The Mayer–Salovey–Caruso model distinguishes four components: the perception and expression of emotions, their use in optimizing thinking, the identification and analysis of emotional states, and the conscious management of them [3, p. 196]. This is a predominantly cognitive conception: emotions are regarded as a source of information that can and should be processed. D. Goleman went further and added to this list self-motivation, empathy, and relationship management, calling these qualities decisive for success in life and in the professions — possibly more significant than a high IQ [4, p. 30].

R. I. Izakson examines the structure of emotional intelligence as it applies to the professional activity of a teacher and identifies self-awareness, self-regulation, social sensitivity, and relationship management [2, p. 16]. Each of these components, in the author’s view, directly influences the quality of pedagogical communication: the capacity to create a trusting atmosphere, to motivate students, and to defuse conflicts before they escalate. Importantly, R. I. Izakson emphasizes that emotional intelligence is not an innate property, but a skill that is amenable to purposeful development [2, p. 17].

A somewhat different emphasis is made by O. V. Gukalenko. In her conception, the emotional intelligence of a teacher is regarded not merely as a personal quality, but as an instrument for managing the educational process and preventing professional burnout [1]. This is a fundamentally important position: if a teacher is emotionally exhausted, no methodological innovations will yield results. A high level of emotional intelligence allows the teacher to maintain a resourceful state and to transmit it to students. It is precisely in this, according to the researcher, that one of the mechanisms of emotional intelligence’s influence on academic indicators lies — through the personality of the teacher.

The question of precisely how emotional intelligence influences learning is resolved in the research literature in an ambiguous manner. Some authors focus on the motivational mechanism, others on the role of self-regulation, and still others examine this phenomenon through the lens of interpersonal relations within the study group.

The motivational aspect is addressed by R. I. Izakson: a teacher with well-developed emotional intelligence is able to awaken in students a sustained interest in the subject. This involves the emotional engagement of the teacher, their readiness for constructive feedback, and the creation of an atmosphere of psychological safety, in which a mistake is perceived not as a failure but as a step in learning [2, p. 18]. This fundamentally changes the student’s relationship to academic activity — from avoidance of failure to a striving for achievement.

The question of self-regulation is taken up by Sh. S. Sharipova and L. G. Fazilova in their analysis of emotional upbringing at school age. According to their data, children with a low level of empathy and a weak motivational-volitional sphere more frequently demonstrate deviant behavior, which inevitably affects academic indicators [5, p. 308]. The inability to manage one’s own anxiety and impulsivity is regarded by the authors as a predictor not only of behavioral disturbances but also of academic failure. At the same time, it is emphasized that empathy is a skill acquired in the process of upbringing, not a biologically fixed constant [5, p. 309]. From this follows an optimistic conclusion: with appropriate pedagogical work, the level of emotional intelligence can be raised, and consequently academic results can be indirectly influenced as well.

E. V. Sizova, in her study devoted to students of a faculty of journalism, recorded a positive relationship between the level of emotional intelligence and academic achievement [4, p. 29]. Particular attention is deserved by her observation concerning the role of emotions in the process of learning a foreign language: a high level of emotional intelligence makes it possible to minimize anxiety during intercultural interaction and strengthens academic motivation [4, p. 35]. In other words, the better a student manages their emotional reactions, the more effectively they master the cultural-linguistic context that is new to them.

It should be noted that the connection between emotional intelligence and academic achievement is not linear in character, but mediated. The intermediate links are motivation, self-regulation of behavior, the quality of interpersonal relations within the study group, and the psychological climate in the classroom. This renders the problem multidimensional and requires a systemic approach from teachers.

The recognition of the fact that emotional intelligence is developable opens a broad field for pedagogical experimentation. Several directions of work have taken shape in contemporary practice.

One non-standard yet well-proven method is film training. L. V. Neklyudova developed and tested it within the framework of pre-professional psychological and pedagogical preparation of adolescents. The essence of the method is the joint viewing of a feature film followed by group discussion [3, p. 197]. The value of film training lies in its metaphorical quality: cinema creates a safe space in which an adolescent can “try on” the emotional states of others without threat to their own sense of self. According to the empirical data of L. V. Neklyudova, in the experimental group where film training was applied, the number of students with a high level of intrapersonal emotional intelligence increased by 22 %, while in the control group the same indicator declined [3, p. 208]. This constitutes a weighty argument in favor of the method.

Among other approaches, Sh. S. Sharipova and L. G. Fazilova highlight role-playing games, work with literary texts, art-therapeutic techniques, group discussions, and the keeping of emotional diaries [5, p. 311]. Each of these methods engages different mechanisms: role-playing teaches one to identify and live through emotions in a hypothetical situation, literature provides ready-made models for making sense of one’s own experience, and art therapy allows one to express what is difficult to put into words. Importantly, all of the enumerated techniques presuppose reflection — a conscious return to what has been experienced and its analysis.

A fundamentally different context is examined by E. V. Sizova. Her pedagogical experiment was conducted in foreign language classes: students were offered authentic emotionally rich texts of a publicistic style, through which skills of recognizing and interpreting emotions were practiced [4, p. 40]. The researcher records a positive dynamic along the parameter of empathy, though with the caveat that one or two semesters are clearly insufficient for sustainable growth of emotional intelligence. This conclusion is consistent with the general logic: skills of emotional regulation are formed slowly and require systematic, rather than episodic, work [4, p. 42].

With respect to higher education, O. V. Gukalenko insists on the necessity of a personified approach. In her view, the most effective formats for students of pedagogical specializations are socio-psychological trainings, project-based technologies, and multicultural programs that include real interaction with representatives of different cultures [1]. It is telling that 86 % of the students she surveyed regard communication in the digital environment as an instrument for broadening cultural horizons — this opens additional possibilities for developing emotional intelligence even under conditions of distance learning.

A separate question deserving consideration is that of the role of the teacher themselves. If one accepts the thesis that the emotional intelligence of a teacher directly influences the quality of the educational process, then the task of developing it becomes no less important than the task of developing emotional intelligence in students.

R. I. Izakson identifies several practical instruments for this purpose. Reflection and the keeping of an emotional diary help the teacher to become aware of their own reactions in difficult pedagogical situations. Active listening techniques — paraphrase, clarifying questions, the mirroring of feelings — allow for a deeper understanding of students and the building of trusting relationships with them [2, p. 18]. Finally, stress management and the prevention of burnout — without this, in the author’s view, all other efforts lose their meaning. A teacher who is in a state of chronic emotional exhaustion is physically incapable of creating the atmosphere in which learning proceeds effectively.

O. V. Gukalenko approaches the same problem from a different angle. She points to a systemic gap: Russian pedagogical universities lack specialized courses for developing the emotional intelligence of future teachers, and the formation of this quality is still spontaneous in character rather than purposeful [1]. In her view, the development of centralized programs is necessary, encompassing all levels of continuous education — from preschool to doctoral study. This sounds ambitious; however, the logic here is simple: if emotional intelligence is a predictor of professional success, its development must be attended to systemically, and not left to chance.

Emotional intelligence has long moved beyond the confines of psychological laboratories and has become a genuine pedagogical resource. The ability to perceive one’s own and others’ emotions, to manage them, and to build constructive relationships — these are not abstract virtues, but concrete skills that affect how a person learns, how they interact with the teacher and fellow students, and how they cope with the difficulties of the educational process.

The analysis of contemporary research allows several conclusions to be formulated. First, the connection between emotional intelligence and academic achievement is mediated in character and operates through the mechanisms of motivation, self-regulation, and the quality of educational interaction. Second, emotional intelligence is developable — film training, work with literary texts, and foreign language instruction are all capable of producing measurable results, provided the work is systematic and of sufficient duration. Third, the development of the emotional intelligence of the teacher is no less important than analogous work with students: a teacher who is able to manage their own emotions and sensitively read the state of the class creates an environment in which learning becomes significantly more effective.

The question of developing standardized programs for forming emotional intelligence across different levels of education remains open. As O. V. Gukalenko rightly notes, systemic work in this direction can become a genuine mechanism for improving the quality of education — not as a declaration, but as a practical result.

References:

1. Gukalenko, O. V. (2022). Razvitie jemocional’nogo intellekta budushhih uchitelej kak instrument povyshenija kachestva vysshego pedagogicheskogo obrazovanija. Otechestvennaja i zarubezhnaja pedagogika, 1 (6), 33–42. (In Russian).
2. Izakson, R. A. (2025). Razvitie jemocional’nogo intellekta kak komponenta psihologo-pedagogicheskoj kul’tury prepodavatelja vysshej shkoly. Akademicheskaja mysl’, 332, 16–19. (In Russian).
3. Nekljudova, L. V. (2024). Kinotreningas metod razvitija jemocional’nogo intellekta uchashhihsja doprofessional’noj psihologo-pedagogicheskoj podgotovki. Problemy sovremennogo obrazovanija, 4, 196–210. (In Russian).
4. Sizova, E. V. (2023). Metody formirovanija jemocional’nogo intellekta studentov fakul’teta zhurnalistiki sredstvami inojazychnoj podgotovki. Koncept, 3, 29–45. (In Russian).
5. Sharipova, Sh. S., Fazilova, L. G. (2025). Jemocional’noe vospitanie ili kak nauchit’ detej jempatii? Pedagogicheskie prijomy razvitija jemocional’nogo intellekta. Vestnik nauki, 4 (384), 307–315. (In Russian).