Sapaev Umidbek Abdullaevich


This article is a scientific study of the mechanisms of formation of a culture of innovative activity of students of technical higher education. A number of references have been analyzed in defining the directions of scientific research, and the creation of educational technologies that allow students to dramatically increase the innovative learning environment and mastery indicators that can lead to a culture of innovative thinking has been identified as the main direction and goal of our research. As a result of our research, the need to create opportunities for students to use modern literature to increase their interest in science and improve their mastery. The article provides information on how to solve this problem, as well as the creation of electronic textbooks, manuals, task sets and electronic manuals for students of technical disciplines in several branches and their capabilities. Recommendations and suggestions are also made on the mechanisms of formation and development of integration of higher education institutions and industrial enterprises, the introduction of innovative technologies in the educational process and the formation of an innovative environment.

Keywords:  innovation, integration, innovative learning environment, e-literature, innovative ability, learning process, independent learning, e-learning, mastery indicators, innovative thinking culture, learning development mechanisms, innovative practice platform, student personal indicators, self-assessment system and individual control.

Full Text:



Shelton K. A. and Arciszewski T. 2007. Formal innovation criteria. International Journal of Computer Applications in Technology IJCAT 30(1/2).

Amabile, T. M., R. Conti, H. Coon, J. Lazenby and M. Herron. 1996. Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal 39(5): 1154‒1185.

Shavinina, V. S. 2003. Understanding innovation: Some important issues. London: Elsevier Science.

Engeström, J. 2005. Why some social network services work and others don’t ‒ or: the case for objectcantered sociality. 04/why_some_social.html (Accessed 20 October 2008).

Laursen, K. and A. Salter. 2006. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 27(2): 131‒150.

Brewer, D. and Tierney, W. (2012), “Barriers to innovation in the US education”, in Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. and Carey, K. (Eds), Reinventing Higher Education: The Promise of Innovation, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 11-40.

Su Wangchu, Diao Hailin, Peng Qiong. Construction and practice of practical teaching system for innovative education [J]. Higher Education Forum, 2012, 7:37 -39.

Zhaoji Yu Shenyang, Songtao Zhou Shenyang. “An Analysis of Influencing Factors of Innovative Education and Development Proposals” International Conference on Education Reform and Modern Management. The authors - Published by Atlantis Press. 2014.

Osolind, K. (2012), “Revolutionary vs evolutionary innovation”, Reinvention Consulting, available at: (accessed October 16, 2016).

Yu, D. and Hang, C.C. (2010), “A reflective review of disruptive innovation theory”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 435-452, available at: http://onlinelibrary.

Meyer, A., Rose, D. and Gordon, D. (2014), Universal Design of Learning: Theory and Practice, CAST Professional Publishing, Wakefield, MA.

Extreme Learning (2012), available at: (accessed September 22, 2016).

Copyright (c) 2021 Author(s)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

© 2012-2022 ANGLISTICUM. Journal of the Association-Institute for English Language and American Studies,Tetovo, North Macedonia.

ISSN (print): 1857-8179. ISSN (online): 1857-8187.

Disclaimer: Articles on Anglisticum have been reviewed and authenticated by the Authors before sending for the publication.

The Journal, Editors and the editorial board are not entitled or liable to either justify or responsible for inaccurate and misleading data if any. It is the sole responsibility of the Author concerned.