Determinants of Student Governments’ Promotional Activity

Open access

Abstract

The subject of marketing activity of students’ governments hasn’t been present in scientific literature up till now. There have been only few publications devoted to chosen areas of functioning of students’ organizations. However, they generally skipped the promotional dimension. In association with this, the goal of this article is partially filling the existing gap by highlighting the factors which determine the effects achieved when students’ governments communicate with the environment. On the basis of own participatory observations and experiences gathered during many years of participating in the work of the student government of a Polish university, the authors have identified three main determinants of efficient marketing communication of students’ governments. Among these three factors there are: the attitude and engagement of students, the choice of contents and promotion tools (forming the system of communicating with the environment), the available financial resources. Each of the three mentioned elements has been presented in detail. Among others, the typology of people engaged in promotional activity of students’ organizations has been presented. Also, the contents that should be conveyed to diversified groups in the environment of students’ governments have been defined. Taking into consideration the fact that this paper is the first work of its kind devoted to the promotional activity of students’ governments, it serves as an introduction to the subject areas and may constitute a basis for deeper exploration of the subject in future theoretical and research works.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Abrahamowicz D. (1988). College involvement perceptions and satisfaction: A study of membership in student organizations. Journal of College Student Development29 (3) 233–238.

  • 2. Alimbekova A.A. Bakyt A.Z. Kyyakbaeva U.K. Suranshieva M.K. (2015). Leadership Development University Students in the Activities of Student Government. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences197 2131–2136.

  • 3. Antonowicz D. Pinheiro R. Smużewska M. (2014). The changing role of students’ representation in Poland: an historical appraisal. Studies in Higher Education39 (3) 470–484.

  • 4. Bielecki P. (red.) (2010). Rola studentów w zarz ądzaniu szkołą wyższą. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH.

  • 5. Centek B. (2016). „Niech sobie piszą…” działalność wydawnicza Samorządu Studenckiego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego w ostatniej dekadzie PRL. Folia Toruniensia16 9–34.

  • 6. Dańczak P. (2015). Wybrane aspekty udziału organizacji społecznej w postępowaniach dotyczących indywidualnych spraw studentów i doktorantów. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica75 89–98.

  • 7. Dorozhkin E.M. Zaitseva E.V. Tatarskikh B.Y. (2016). Impact of student government bodies on students’ professional development. Mathematics Education11 (7) 2666–2677.

  • 8. Fendrich J.M. Turner R.W. (1989). The Transition from Student to Adult Politics. Social Forces67 (4) 1049–1057.

  • 9. Golden D.C. Schwartz H.L. (1994). Building an ethical and effective relationship with student government leaders. New Directions for Student Services 1994 (66) 19–30.

  • 10. Grzonka P. (2012). Struktura i funkcjonowanie samorządu studenckiego na przykładzie Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. W: A. Turska-Kawa (red.) Polityka w opinii młodych. Idee–Instytucje–Obywatele (s. 183–200). Katowice: Uniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach.

  • 11. Krashchenko Y. Sorokina H. Degtyarova I. (2017). The Conditions of Adaptation of „Internally Displaced Persons” to University Environment by Means of Students’ Self-Government. Studia Warmińskie54 385–393.

  • 12. Lewis K.M. Rice T.W. (2005). Voter Turnout in Undergraduate Student Government Elections. PS: Political Science and Politics38 (4) 723–729.

  • 13. Lizzio A. Wilson K. (2009). Student participation in university governance: the role conceptions and sense of efficacy of student representatives on departmental committees. Studies in Higher Education34 (1) 69–84.

  • 14. May W.P. (2010). The History of Student Governance in Higher Education. College Student Affairs Journal28 (2) 207–220.

  • 15. McFarland D.A. Starmanns C. (2009). Inside Student Government: The Variable Quality of High School Student Councils. Teachers College Record111 (1) 27–54.

  • 16. Miller C.D. Kraus M. (2004). Participating but Not Leading: Women’s Under-Representation in Student Government Leadership Positions. College Student Journal38 (3) 423–427.

  • 17. Miller M.T. Nadler D.P. (red.) (2006). Student Governance and Institutional Policy: Formation and Implementation. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.

  • 18. Muś A. Depta A. (2017). Partycypacja studentów w życiu wspólnoty akademickiej na przykładzie Uniwersytetu Śląskiego w Katowicach. Raport z badań. Górnośląskie Studia Socjologiczne. Seria Nowa 8 202–2019.

  • 19. Oxendine B. (red.). (1997). So You Want to Be President… How to Get Elected on Your Campus. Gainesville: Oxendine Publishing.

  • 20. Pabian P. Minksová L. (2013). Students in Higher Education Governance in Europe: Contrasts commonalities and controversies. Tertiary Education and Management17 (3) 261–273.

  • 21. Planas A. Soler P. Fullana J. Pallisera M. Vila M. (2011). Student participation in university governance: the opinions of professors and students. Studies in Higher Education. 38 (4) 571–583.

  • 22. Pustelnik Z. Wołoch J. (1976). Samorząd studencki w teorii i praktyce: założenia oraz poglądy studentów na temat organizacji samorządowych. Wrocław: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.

  • 23. Saha L.J. Print M. (2010). Student school elections and political engagement: A cradle of democracy? International Journal of Educational Research 49 22–32.

  • 24. Terrell M.C. Cuyjet M.J. (red.) (1994). Developing Student Government Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • 25. Tilton S. (2008). Virtual polling data: A social network analysis on a student government election. Webology5 (4) 1–8.

  • 26. Urbański L. (2012). Procesy osobotwórcze w szkole wyższej. Homines Hominibus 8 43–76.

  • 27. Wiktor J.W. (2001). Promocja: system komunikacji przedsiębiorstwa z rynkiem. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 50 50 5
PDF Downloads 37 37 3