Online public engagement is the New Deal! Along the distinctive pathway of the Italian University
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7433/s115.2021.06Keywords:
public engagement; web communication; managerial perspective; stakeholder; third mission; cultural engagementAbstract
Frame of the research: A managerial perspective of public engagement can help universities to strengthen the communication of university identity from a social, scientific, or accessibility point of view.
Purpose of the paper: The goal of this paper is to investigate the concept of the online university public engagement from a managerial standpoint by examining those Italian universities that have engaged in Third Mission activities thanks also to recent ministerial decrees issued on the subject.
Methodology: A content analysis of the main official websites of 50 Italian universities was performed. An exploratory factorial analysis made it possible to identify the main approaches to online public engagement.
Findings: There are 4 main dimensions of online public engagement that have been communicated on Italian websites (social, cultural, research and widening engagement), each referring to a specific target. A so-called “Cultural engagement” approach emerges which underlines the role of the university as a pole of cultural and artistic attraction.
Research limits: The research explores public engagement only in the Italian context. Although the article investigates more than 50% of the Italian universities, it does not allow the extension of the results to the reference population.
Practical implications: Research results contribute to the understanding of online public engagement and map the current uses of stakeholder engagement activities in the university context to date.
Originality of the paper: The research enriches the knowledge of the online public engagement construct thanks to the identification of a new dimension “Cultural engagement”, that had not yet emerged in international contexts.
References
BACCARANI C. (1995), “La complessità delle relazioni tra i soggetti istituzionali locali preposti allo sviluppo: il possibile ruolo dell’università”, Sinergie italian journal of management, n. 36/37, pp. 95-110
BANDELLI A., KONIJN E.A. (2013), “Science centers and public participation: Methods, strategies, and barriers”, Science Communication, vol. 35, n. 4, pp. 419-448.
BOFFO S., MOSCATI R (2015), “La Terza Missione dell’università. Origini, problemi e indicatori”, Scuola Democratica, n. 2, pp. 251-272.
BOLAND J.A. (2014), “Orientations to civic engagement: insights into the sustainability of a challenging pedagogy”, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 39, n. 1, pp. 180-195.
BORUM CHATTOO C., FELDMAN, L. (2017), “Storytelling for social change: Leveraging documentary and comedy for public engagement in global poverty”, Journal of Communication, vol. 67, n. 5, pp. 668-701.
BRUNING S.D., MCGREW S., COOPER M. (2006), “Town-gown relationships: Exploring university-community engagement from the perspective of community members”, Public Relations Review, vol. 32, n. 2, pp. 125-130.
CAPURRO G., DAG H., LONGSTAFF H., SECKO D.M. (2015), “The Role of Media References During Public Deliberation Sessions”, Science Communication, vol. 37, n. 2, pp. 240-269.
CHILVERS J. (2013), “Reflexive Engagement? Actors, Learning, and Reflexivity in Public Dialogue on Science and Technology”, Science Communication, vol. 35, n. 3, pp. 283-310.
COGNETTI F. (2013), “La third mission delle università. Lo spazio di soglia tra città e accademia”, Territorio, n. 66, pp. 18-22.
CURTIS V. (2014), “Public engagement through the development of science-based computer games: The Wellcome Trust’s “Gamify Your PhD” initiative”, Science Communication, vol. 36, n. 3, pp. 379-387.
DAVIES S.R. (2013a), “Constituting Public Engagement: Meanings and Genealogies of PEST in Two U.K. Studies”, Science Communication, vol. 35, n. 6, pp. 687-707.
DAVIES S.R. (2013b), “Research staff and public engagement: A UK study”, Higher Education, vol. 66, n. 6, pp. 725-739.
DEBORAH J., HESS H.L., WINSTON V. (2007), “Educating for Equity and Social Justice: A Conceptual Model for Cultural Engagement”, Multicultural Perspectives, vol. 9, n. 1, pp. 32-39.
DENSON N., BOWMAN N (2013), “University diversity and preparation for a global society: the role of diversity in shaping intergroup attitudes and civic outcomes”, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 38, n. 4, pp. 555-570.
DICKERSON-LANGE S.E., EITEL K.B., DORSEY L., LINK TE, LUNDQUIST J.D. (2016), “Challenges and successes in engaging citizen scientists to observe snow cover: from public engagement to an educational collaboration”, Journal of Science Communication, vol. 15, n. 1, pp. 1-14.
DOYLE L. (2010), “The Role of Universities in the ‘Cultural Health’ of their Regions: universities’ and regions’ understandings of cultural engagement”, European Journal of Education, vol. 45, n. 3, pp. 466-480.
DOMEGAN C.T. (2008), “Social marketing: implications for contemporary marketing practices classification scheme”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, vol. 23, n. 2, pp. 135-141.
FALL L. (2006), “Value of engagement: Factors influencing how students perceive their community contribution to public relations internships”, Public Relations Review, vol. 32, n. 4, pp. 407-415.
FURCO A. (2010), “The Engaged Campus: Toward a comprehensive approach to Public engagement”, British Journal of Educational Studies, vol. 58, n. 4, pp. 375-390.
GLEESON R.E. (2010), “The Third Mission and the History of Reform in American Higher Education”, in Inman P., Schuetze H.G. (eds), The Community Engagement and Service Mission of Universities, Niace, Leicester, pp. 121-137.
GOLDNER L., GOLAN D. (2018), “What is meaningful civic engagement for students? Recollections of Jewish and Palestinian graduates in Israel”, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 44, n. 3, pp. 1-15.
GORDON J., BERHOW S. (2009), “University websites and dialogic features for building relationships with potential Students”, Public Relations Review, vol. 35, n. 2, pp. 150-152.
HART A., NORTHMORE S. (2011), “Auditing and Evaluating University-Community Engagement: Lessons from a UK Case Study”, Higher Education Quarterly, vol. 65, n. 1, pp. 34-58.
HINCHLIFFE S., LEVIDOW L., ORESZCZYN S. (2014), “Engaging Cooperative Research”, Environment and Planning A, vol. 46, n. 9, pp. 2080-2094.
KERR C. (2001), The uses of the university, Boston, Harvard University Press.
KIM H.S. (2007), “PEP/IS: A new model for communicative effectiveness of science”, Science Communication, vol. 28, n. 3, pp. 287-313.
KIMMEL C.E., HULL R.B., STEPHENSON M.O., ROBERTSON D.P., COWGILL K.H. (2012), “Building community capacity and social infrastructure through landcare: a case study of land grant engagement”, Higher Education, vol. 64, n. 2, pp. 223-235.
KRABBENBORG L., MULDER H.A. (2015), “Upstream public engagement in nanotechnology: Constraints and opportunities”, Science Communication, vol. 37, n. 4, pp. 452-484.
LO PRESTI L., MARINO V. (2020), “Is on line public engagement a new challange in the unversity communication plan? A managerial perspective”, Studies in Higher Eduction, vol. 45, n. 7, pp. 1380-1397.
MARINO V., LO PRESTI L. (2018), “Approaches to university public engagement in the online environment: insights from Anglo-Saxon Higher education”, International Journal of Educational Management, vol. 32, n. 5, pp. 734-748.
MARINO V., LO PRESTI L. (2017), “Towards an online approach to university public engagement: An exploratory analysis of website content”, Mercati e Competitività - The Journal of the Italian Marketing Association, vol. 2, pp. 75-98.
MILLER S., FAHY D., ESCONET TEAM. (2009), “Can science communication workshops train scientists for reflexive public engagement? The ESConet experience”, Science Communication, vol. 31, n. 1, pp. 116-126.
MORCELLINI M. (2005), Contro il declino dell’Università. Appunti e idee per una comunità che cambia, Il Sole 24 Ore, Milano.
OSTRANDER S.A. (2004), “Democracy, civic participation, and the university: A comparative study of civic engagement on five campuses”, Nonprofit and voluntary sector quarterly, vol. 33, n. 1, pp. 74-93.
PERSELL C.H., WENGLINSKY H. (2004), “For-Profit Post-Secondary Education and Civic Engagement”, Higher Education, vol. 47, n. 3, pp. 337-359.
PICCALUGA A. (2000), La valorizzazione della ricerca scientifica, Franco Angeli, Milano.
POLIAKOFF E., WEBB T.L. (2007), “What factors predict scientists’ intentions to participate in public engagement of science activities?”, Science Communication, vol 29, n. 2, pp. 242-263.
POLILLO R. (2013), “Il check up dei siti web delle organizzazioni non profit”, I Quaderni di THINK!, n. 3.
POLILLO R. (2005), “Un modello di qualità per i siti web, Mondo Digitale”, vol. Giugno, n. 2, pp. 32-44, Associazione Italiana per l’Informatica e il Calcolo Automatico (AICA).
RETZBACH A., MAIER M. (2015), “Communicating Scientific Uncertainty: Media Effects on Public Engagement With Science”, Communication Research, vol. 42, n. 3, pp. 429-456.
SCHOERNING E. (2018), “A no-conflict approach to informal science education increases community science literacy and engagement”, Journal of Science Communication, vol. 17, n. 3, pp. 1-16.
SCHMIDT S., CANTALLOPS A.S., DOS SANTOS C.P. (2008), “The characteristics of hotel websites and their implications for website effectiveness”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 27, n. 4, pp. 504-516.
STEPHENSON M. (2011), “Conceiving land grant university community engagement as adaptive leadership”, Higher Education, vol. 61, n. 1, pp. 95-108.
TANG J.J., MAROOTHYNADEN J., BELLO B., KNEEBONE R. (2013), “Public Engagement Through Shared Immersion: Participating in the Processes of Research”, Science Communication, vol. 35, n. 5, pp. 654-666.
TØSSE S.E. (2013), “Aiming for social or political robustness? Media strategies among climate scientists”, Science Communication, vol. 35, n. 1, pp. 32-55.
VARGO S.L., LUSCH R.F. (2016), “Institutions and Axioms: An Extension and Update of Service-Dominant Logic”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 44, n. 1, pp. 5-23.
VARGO S.L., LUSCH R.F. (2008), “Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 36, n.1, pp. 1-10.
VARGO S.L., LUSCH R.F. (2004), “Evolving to a new Dominant Logic”, Journal of Marketing, vol. 68, n. 1, pp. 1-17.
WAN C.S. (2002), “The web sites of international tourist hotels and tour wholesalers in Taiwan”, Tourism Management, vol. 23, n. 2, pp. 155-160.
WARD V., HOWDLE P., HAMER S. (2008), “You and Your Body A Case Study of Bioscience Communication at the University of Leeds”, Science Communication, vol. 30, n. 2, pp. 177-208.
WATERMEYER R., LEWIS J. (2018), “Institutionalizing public engagement through research in UK universities: perceptions, predictions and paradoxes concerning the state of the art”, Studies in Higher Education, vol. 43, n. 9, pp. 1612-1624.
WATERMEYER R. (2012), “Measuring the impact values of public engagement in medical contexts”, Science Communication, vol. 34, n. 6, pp. 752-775.
WILKINSON C., BULTITUDE K., DAWSON E. (2011), “Oh yes, robots! People like robots; the robot people should do something: perspectives and prospects in public engagement with robotics”, Science communication, vol. 33, n. 3, pp. 367-397.
WILLIAMS R. (1958) Culture is ordinary, in: n. Mckenzie (Ed) Convictions (London, MacGibbon and Kee).
WINTER E. (2004), “Public Communication of Science and Technology German and European Perspectives”, Science Communication, vol. 25, n. 3, pp. 288-293.
WOODSIDE A.G., VINCENTE R.M., DUNQUE M. (2011) “Tourisms destination dominance and marketing website usefulness”, International Journal Contemporary Hospitality Management, vol. 23, n. 4, pp. 552-564.
