The learning process of students has always been and remains a very complex and individualized process.  There are many definitions of the concept of the learning process based on the expected results. In recent years, research has defined learning as a complex combination of inclinations, experiences, social relationships, values, approaches, and beliefs that collectively shape the nature of a person's use of specific opportunities to gain knowledge.   In this case, the student is considered as the subject of learning.: how he feels about being a trainee and how he interacts with other trainees.

The learning process, whatever it may be, requires students to overcome certain obstacles, which allows them to move on and deeper. Some people can easily cope with them (due to their natural inclinations and personal qualities), while others need support in all respects.

How can we help students overcome learning barriers? What should be the support system in a modern school? We will try to answer these questions based on the results of the conducted research.

The purpose of the study: To develop a comprehensive support system for students with learning barriers

Research objectives:

• Analysis of motivational, affective, socio-cultural theories of learning;
• Identification of the main types of barriers to learning in theory and practice;
• Analysis of the experimental group's student input data to identify learning barriers;
• Creation of a comprehensive support model for the learner;
• Creation and implementation of an algorithm for all members of the school community to work with this category of students;
• The development of the MAD (My academic diary) for the participants of the Experimental group and the selection of appropriate learning strategies in the classroom;
• Conducting coaching sessions for teachers, parents, and psychologists on algorithm-based systematic student support.

The scientific basis of the study is the motivational and affective theories of learning, which are based on humanistic psychology and consider human potential from the perspective of Self-Concept. A. Maslow, who developed a hierarchical model of motivation (1986), believed that learning can be considered as a form of self-expression, which is a specific goal. Developing this idea, Rogers believed that learning should be carried out on the initiative of the student himself, even if it was influenced from the outside, the feeling of understanding and discovering new things comes from the inside. Also interesting is Bandura's approach, which identified 4 factors of self–efficacy: personal experience (success increases self-efficacy), modeling (if they can do it, then I can do it too), social beliefs (positive beliefs increase self-efficacy, negative beliefs decrease), physiological factors (physical sensations in stressful situations affect the level of self-efficacy). For effective work with students who have certain barriers to learning, L. Vygotsky's concept of The zone of Proximal Development is ideally suited because it clearly defines the role of a tutor (mentor) in the learning process. The ideas of scaffolding (Merser, Alexsander, Wells) in the process of student support also formed the basis of tutor support algorithms in the framework of the study.

The study of the theoretical aspects of this problem has shown that there are 4 types of barriers to learning that directly or indirectly affect student learning:

1.  Effective field of activity: behavior, emotional development, psychological aspects
2.  Social field of activity: communication and interaction
3.  Cognition and learning (cognitive, general learning skills, abilities)
4. Physiological barriers (linguistic, auditory, visual, etc.)

Teachers' knowledge of the types of barriers, the ability to interpret them and provide students with support in removing barriers in the immediate development area will help to avoid LAGGING BEHIND IN the PROGRAM MATERIAL.

A working group was created to conduct this study, which included teachers, psychologists, and parents. To achieve the expected results, a research plan was developed with the definition of deadlines and responsible persons. 4 types of barriers formed the basis for identifying the causes of poor academic performance of the students in the experimental group. The types of barriers to learning were determined through interviews, questionnaires, observation, analysis, and statistical data processing. A comprehensive study was conducted: interviews with students (162), interviews with teachers and supervisors (30), interviews with parents (23), psychological diagnosis: G.Gardner (multiple intelligence). Statistical reports on academic performance in subjects and teacher reports on individual consultations for the last 2 years among students of the experimental group were studied. The analysis of all the data made it possible to create a project plan in which the lists of students in the experimental group (23), the lists of assigned tutors (17), and the results of student identification by types of barriers and levels of lag were determined. The working group, which included various representatives of the school community, based on the input data of students and diagnostic results, developed an algorithm for comprehensive support, "My Academic Diary" for students, defined criteria for each type of barrier and developed an observation sheet. According to the motivational and affective theory of learning, MOTIVATION is a key criterion for self-efficacy. Therefore, throughout the experiment, the tutors used the "Admiration teaches better than criticism" approach, and the school's psychologists monitored the students' self-esteem by conducting individual conversations. An important issue was the education of members of the school community. To this end, we have developed coaching session plans for teachers and parents to accompany students on this project: A cycle of coaching sessions for teachers: “Possible barriers to learning”, “Strategies for overcoming barriers to learning”, “Factors affecting the quality of learning”; A cycle of coaching sessions for parents: “Are you able to Do you listen to your child?", "How to help a child overcome learning difficulties?, "Self-regulation and metacognition". The effectiveness of the project was monitored by independent experts from partner schools according to predefined criteria. A comparative analysis of student achievement results before and after the start of the project was discussed by the entire teaching staff at the school's pedagogical council, and a comprehensive student support system was approved for implementation in the educational process of the 2024-2026 academic years.

The study was conducted at the Nazarbayev Intellectual School of Ust-Kamenogorsk, Kazakhstan, during the 2023–2024 academic year. The research involved 23 students identified as underachieving and aimed to analyse learning barriers and evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive support approach. The findings revealed that 33% of students experienced barriers related to the affective domain, 27% to the social domain, 23% to cognition and learning, and 17% to physiological barriers, including linguistic and visual difficulties. The Multiple Intelligences diagnosis (Gardner) showed a predominance of intrapersonal intelligence in more than 67% of students, indicating a tendency toward social withdrawal and preference for independent activities. Based on statistical data and academic reports from the previous two years, students were classified into three categories of academic underachievement: Category I (deep and general lag) – 9.5%, Category II (partial but sustained underachievement) – 38%, and Category III (episodic underachievement) – 52.5%. Following the implementation of targeted interventions, Category I was reduced to 0%, as issues related mainly to disorganisation and low self-regulation were successfully addressed, and students transitioned to Category II. In Category II, where affective and physiological barriers predominated (e.g., hyperactivity, visual and language barriers), the number of students decreased to 26%. Language barriers were partially addressed through CLIL techniques, while behavioural challenges required psychological and medical consultation. In Category III, 31% of students overcame academic difficulties, with tutor support being short-term. Overall, the results demonstrate that a comprehensive student support approach is effective in improving academic performance and student well-being. The study resulted in the development of a clear support algorithm, diagnostic tools, observation maps, an academic diary, and coaching programmes, which can be applied in educational institutions internationally for students aged 10–18 years.

1.Adelman, H. S, & Taylor, L. L. (2018). Addressing barriers to learning: In the classroom and schoolwide.. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/55w7b8x8 2.Barriers to Learning: The Case for Integrated Mental Health Services in Schools https://books.google.kz/books?id=5zi3b27NLXkC&lpg=PR1&ots=8xKwUty6PT&dq=types%20of%20barriers%20to%20learning%20in%20schools&lr&hl=ru&pg=PR7#v=onepage&q=types%20of%20barriers%20to%20learning%20in%20schools&f=false 3.Weare, K. (2003). What works in developing children’s emotional and social competence and wellbeing. 4.Ceryn Evans, Nichola Welton, Jessica Pitman, Zoe Clegg, Darrel Williams, An ethic of care in two community focused schools in Wales, Research Papers in Education, 10.1080/02671522.2024.2381114, (1-18), (2024). 5.Teacher's Guide, Level Three, Centre of Excellence NIS and University of Cambridge; 2012, p 121 6.Gardner, H. (2011 edition). Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books 7.Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: Basic Books. 8.Goswami U (2006), "Neuroscience and education: from research to practice?" Nat RevNeurosci 7(5):406-11 9.Maslow, A. (1968) Towards a Psychology of Being. New York: Van Nostrand 10.Mercer, N. (2005) Sociocultural discourse analysis: analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 2, 137-168 11.Noice, H. (2006) What studies of actors and acting can tell us about memory and cognitive functioning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15 (1) 12.Roediger, HL& Karpicke, JD. (2006). Test-enhanced learning - Taking memory tests improves long- term retention. Psychology Science, 17 (3) 249-255 13.Rogers, C.R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill 14.Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A Triarchic Theory of Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 15.Sternberg, R. J. (1997). A Triarchic View of Giftedness: Theory and Practice. In N. Coleangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of Gifted Education (pp. 43-53). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving and W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of Memory (pp. 381-402). New York: Academic Press. 16.Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic Inquiries in education: Building on the legacy of Vygotsky. Cambridge Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 1-25. 17.Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Psychology and Psychiatry 17. 18.Wood, D. (1998) How Children Think and Learn. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Rogers, C. and Freiberg, H. J. (1993) Freedom to Learn (3rd edn.), New York: Merrill.