Individualization of educational trajectories (IET): problems, opportunities, and implementation practices

Abstract: Problem. Expanding the variety of educational programs and increasing the number of elective components are not sufficient conditions for meaningful individualization of learning. The research problem is to identify a configura-tion of organizational, advisory, and digital mechanisms that ensures informed choice and subsequent adjustment of the student's educational trajectory. Aim. To determine the management conditions under which student selection of educational program elements ensures meaningful individualization, rather than being limited to a formal expansion of the list of electives. Methods. The study was conducted using qualitative comparative case study analysis with targeted document analysis of Russian and international practices. Cross-case comparison, methodological synthesis, and triangulation of data from peer-reviewed publications, regulatory legal acts, and official university documents were used. Results. It was established that meaningful individualization is determined by the consistency of four inter-connected mechanisms: the architecture of the educational program with transparent choice points, academic support, digi-tal recording of the educational route, and management monitoring. A three-loop, resource-adapted model was developed, including mandatory, extended, and digital-analytical loops, as well as a six-stage algorithm for designing an individual educational trajectory and a system of indicators for assessing its implementation. Conclusions. Individualization of edu-cational trajectories should be viewed not as a set of individual elective opportunities, but as a holistic management con-figuration linking educational choice, support, digital recording, responsibility distribution, and outcome assessment. The proposed model forms a methodological basis for pilot implementation, although verification of its resource feasibility and educational effects requires subsequent empirical testing.