Socio-psychological mechanisms of the development of university teachers’ autonomy under crisis conditions

The article presents a comprehensive theoretical–methodological analysis of the mechanisms through which university teachers’ autonomy develops under crisis conditions (wartime context, emergency digitalization, resource constraints). The problem addressed is the gap between teachers’ need for autonomous professional action and the intensification of external control and regulatory demands, which affects instructional quality and the well-being of all participants in the educational process. We propose an integrated model of autonomy formation combining five levels-motivational-need, cognitive-actional, social-identificational, organizational-resource, and institutional-normative. Autonomy is conceptualized as an emergent outcome of the interaction among need support, available resources, individual action strategies, group norms, and legitimized organizational rules. The roles of specific mechanisms are specified as follows: at the cognitive–actional level – schematization (which should be regularly “refreshed” via reflection and micro-experiments), modeling and reinforcement (which entrench autonomy-supportive vs. controlling patterns), and job crafting; at the social–identificational level – categorization and group identification, as well as evaluative/group polarization that narrows the space for flexible decisions; at the organizational–resource level – segregation as a barrier to support access, whereas psychological safety and fair procedures legitimize initiative; at the institutional–normative level – institutionalization and legitimation of autonomy/accountability, which render autonomous action the “default norm.” A cross-cutting mechanism – causal attribution – shapes the locus of control and readiness for job crafting. We argue that conformity, rigid schemas, polarization, and segregation are not fatal: when reflective practices, horizontal networks and mentoring, transparent procedures, and reinforcement “for the quality of decisions” are present, these factors can be converted into resources of autonomy.