University of Ciego de Ávila Máximo Gómez Báez
|
ISSN: 2309-8333
|
RNPS: 2411
|14|2026|
This is an Open Access article under the license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/)
Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria EGU
Scientific and technological
research article
How to cite:
Pérez Rivera, J., Tarango,
J., & Machin-Mastromatteo, J. D. (2026).
Identidad institucional en universidades
públicas estatales de México: un análisis
desde su proyección usando páginas web.
Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria
, 14,
e9063.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18155285
Received: 23/11/2025
Accepted: 03/01/2026
Published: 07/01/2025
Corresponding author:
jtarango@uach.mx
Conflict of interest:
the authors declare
that they have no conflict of interest,
which may have influenced the results
obtained or the proposed interpretations
.
Institutional identity in Mexican state
public universities: an analysis from its
projection using web pages
Identidad institucional en universidades
públicas estatales de México: un análisis
desde su proyección usando páginas web
Identidade institucional em
universidades públicas estaduais
mexicanas: uma análise a partir de sua
projeção por meio de páginas da web
Abstract
Introduction: institutional identity in universities can elicit a
range of affective responses among stakeholders, including
feelings of belonging, appreciation, and pride. Through
electronic media, institutional identity also functions as a
channel for disseminating and enhancing recognition of an
institution’s prestige. Objective: to characterize the
elements that constitute university identity, using the
construction of a purpose-built evaluation model as the
analytical basis.
Method: the study was grounded in the
qualitative paradigm and employed content analysis carried
out in two phases: (1) documentary research to identify
recurrent traits of institutional university identity; and (2) a
review of the websites of the 34 Mexican state public
universities. Results: according to the initially proposed
model, the constitution of university identity comprises
elements that are unevenly distributed across the institutions
evaluated; consequently, there is no consistent structure that
characterizes educational processes. Conclusion: a marked
absence of uniformity and standardization in the promotion of
university identity was observed among the participating
institutions. The study therefore proposes the establishment
of public policies that define the basic elements to be included
in the website structure of higher education institutions,
particularly public universities.
Keywords: university identity, institutional culture, public
universities, Mexico
Resumen
Introducción: la identidad institucional en universidades
puede generar diversos aprecios entre las personas
involucradas, las cuales van desde sentimientos de
pertenencia, aprecio y orgullo; además, con el uso de los
medios electrónicos, se convierte en un medio que propicia la
difusión y el reconocimiento de su prestigio.
Jesi Pérez Rivera
1
Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8613-0871
jesiperezrivera@gmail.com
México
Javier Tarango
2
Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0416-3400
jtarango@uach.mx
México
Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo
3
Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4884-0474
jmachin@uach.mx
México
Estrategia y Gestión Universitaria
|
ISSN
: 2309-8333
|
RNPS:
2411
| Vol. 14|2026|
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
Objetivo:
caracterizar los elementos que constituyen la identidad universitaria,
tomando como base la construcción de un modelo de evaluación ex profeso.
Método:
se sustentó en el paradigma cualitativo tomando como referencia el
análisis de contenido, llevado a cabo en dos fases: (1) usando la investigación
documental para identificar rasgos recurrentes de identidad institucional
universitaria; y (2) revisión de páginas web de las 34 universidades públicas
estatales mexicanas.
Resultados:
de acuerdo al modelo inicial propuesto, la
constitución de la identidad universitaria se compone de elementos dispersos en
las distintas instituciones evaluadas, por lo que no se sigue una estructura
constante que caracterice los procesos educativos.
Conclusión:
se observa una
marcada ausencia de uniformidad y estandarización en la promoción de la
identidad universitaria entre las instituciones participantes. Así, se propone el
establecimiento de política públicas que definan los elementos básicos que debe
comprender la estructura de las páginas web de entidades educativas de nivel
superior, especialmente las de carácter público.
Palabras clave:
identidad universitaria, cultura institucional, universidades
públicas, México
Resumo
Introdução: a identidade institucional nas universidades pode gerar diferentes
apreciações entre os atores envolvidos, que vão desde sentimentos de
pertencimento, apreço e orgulho. Com o uso dos meios eletrônicos, a identidade
institucional também se torna um meio para a divulgação e o reconhecimento do
prestígio institucional. Objetivo: caracterizar os elementos que constituem a
identidade universitária, tomando como base a construção de um modelo de
avaliação ex profeso. Método: o estudo apoiou-se no paradigma qualitativo e
utilizou a análise de conteúdo realizada em duas fases: (1) pesquisa documental
para identificar traços recorrentes da identidade institucional universitária; e (2)
revisão das páginas web das 34 universidades públicas estaduais mexicanas.
Resultados: de acordo com o modelo inicial proposto, a constituição da identidade
universitária é composta por elementos dispersos nas diferentes instituições
avaliadas; por isso, não se observa uma estrutura constante que caracterize os
processos educativos. Conclusão: observa-se uma marcada ausência de
uniformidade e padronização na promoção da identidade universitária entre as
instituições participantes. Propõe-se, assim, o estabelecimento de políticas
públicas que definam os elementos básicos que devem compor a estrutura das
páginas web das instituições de ensino superior, especialmente as de caráter
público.
Palavras-chave:
identidade universitária, cultura institucional, universidades
públicas, México
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
Introduction
Studies on institutional identity are often associated with commercial or
industrial organizations that utilize such strategies to achieve positioning within
various social spheres, typically seeking commercial recognition for their products
and services. This perspective has become limited, particularly in contemporary
times, given the pervasive presence of social media. The application of promotional
and institutional recognition processes is increasingly relevant to educational
sectors, including public higher education institutions.
Defining the term ‘identity’ is complex, as it encompasses multiple facets
that may be viewed through different scientific disciplines such as psychology,
sociology, or interdisciplinary approaches that incorporate elements from both
fields. This application is relevant in any institutional context. Higher education
institutions serve as an ideal setting for constructing identities, whether individual,
collective, or even social (Covarrubias, 2024; Shukla & Srivastava, 2025). Notably,
universities often facilitate the symbolic construction of identities associated with
ideological profiles, interpersonal relationships, and group connections, which
solidify in relation to a specific space and achieve enduring recognition (Carvalho &
Freeman, 2022).
The specificity of the concept of institutional identity pertains either to the
individuals or the groups represented by institutions distinguished by their type, size,
or functional activity. This implies that each organization is unique (Knorr & Hein-
Pensel, 2022). The identity of organizations can manifest in various forms, both
individually and collectively, particularly through perceptions, feelings, and
thoughts that, while intangible, delineate entities through other tangible
expressions such as symbols, objectives, goals, and the articulation of values and
purposes (Knorr & Hein-Pensel, 2022; Bracho-Fuenmayor et al., 2023; Petrovska &
Partyko, 2024). When a consolidated identity is achieved, it is regarded as a strength
for the institution, especially when reflected in the actions of its members within
that particular community.
It is undeniable that the projection of university identity can become an
educational ethos through which institutions attain significance and secure a basis
for enduring recognition and distinction among others (Dorado Martínez et al., 2024).
Moreover, institutions strengthen not only through their permanence but also by
distinguishing themselves from similar entities, especially as they strive to
implement best practices that project elements ensuring academic success (Steiner
et al., 2012).
It is important to note that the construction of a robust university identity
does not always occur with similar objectives across educational entities. Some
initiatives may focus on producing concrete outcomes related to specific interests,
such as: (1) financial issues, sometimes regarded as part of a profitable cultural
industry, which can also be viewed as an academic or scientific industry; (2) the
development of a heritage through public policies and institutional strategies that
conserve, restore, or utilize cultural assets for economic benefit; and (3) human
relationships as a means of integrating power groups under conditions of social
cohesion that, in turn, influence historical memory and the self-esteem of their
members (Gusman & Sandry, 2022). While each focus or interest of individuals and
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
organizations holds significance, two important considerations emerge: first, over
time, each focus or interest can be conceptualized and prioritized differently; and
second, it is anticipated that universities would adopt a more human-centered
perspective (Carayannis & Morawska-Jancelewicz, 2022; Mielkov & Pinchuk, 2024).
Critically examining previous perspectives, it is inappropriate to view the
construction of an institutional image solely for material purposes, as universities
are fundamentally considered cultural institutions. Their primary aim is to cultivate
attitudes, encourage the analysis of beliefs, and promote the generation of values
rooted in sentiment towards the organization. This construct is also embedded in
how the institution defines itself and behaves within a specific context,
encompassing its institutional values, organizational rules and laws, along with its
traditions, culture, and history (Mutch, 2018; Díaz-Romero et al., 2025; Kola &
Molise, 2025).
To study the subject of university identity, we begin with the assumption
that most universities value different elements that they believe best promote
enhanced conditions of institutional identity. In line with this reasoning, the current
proposal aims to characterize university identity based on an analysis of the
elements presented on the websites of public higher education institutions in
Mexico. These institutions display a widespread and equitable presence across the
national territory, suggesting that they exert a direct and profound influence on
mass higher education.
The research objective focuses on the potential to characterize the elements
constituting university identity in state public universities in Mexico, differentiating
those traits that influence educational processes and institutional strengthening.
This analysis will encompass the elements exhibited on the websites of the
institutions themselves. Additionally, it includes the following specific aspects: (1)
the development of a taxonomic model of dimensions and indicators related to
university identity; (2) identification of recurring elements of university identity; (3)
assessment of the identity elements in public state higher education institutions in
Mexico; and (4) definition of factors that impact the formation of university identity,
as well as their influence on aspects related to educational processes.
University identity as a means of institutional positioning
The elements that constitute university identity have a significant impact on
individuals during two critical phases: as students and as graduates. These phases
present a greater likelihood of fostering a sense of belonging to the institution,
thereby enhancing its status. This is particularly important when considering that a
sense of belonging manifests as an individual's identification with a group of people
or specific physical spaces, leading to the formation of emotional bonds, symbolism,
and positive attitudes that become part of their personal and collective memory
(Pedler et al., 2021; Mellinger et al., 2023).
Recognizing graduates as key stakeholders in the integration of university
identity processes is crucial, especially in relation to their labor market positioning.
It is presumed that the positive actions graduates undertake will be linked to their
prior education and will be reflected in behaviors, practices, and actions that
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
highlight the quality of the institution from which they graduated (Pedler et al.,
2021; Githinji & Nyangoma, 2025). The human needs addressed in this context are
closely related to psychological and security needs, as well as the pursuit of their
possible fulfillment, where the needs for love, affection, and a sense of belonging
emerge (Gimeno-Bayón, 2020).
Institutional identity must be both sustainable and continuous, encompassing
students, teachers, administrators, and staff. Therefore, there must be a
commitment from the institution itself to motivate and maintain this connection,
developing innovative strategies for its enhancement (Borja-Gil et al., 2024).
University identity is an essential resource for driving placement actions, marketing
efforts, and competitiveness within higher education institutions (Yaping et al.,
2023; Dwitasari et al., 2025).
It is posited that studying university identity is valuable, as understanding
the predominant identity factors in state public universities in Mexico allows for
differentiation among those that hold greater significance for institutions, based on
the importance attributed to them on institutional websites. This approach will
provide pertinent information for developing strategies and activities aimed at
strengthening university identity, which influences important issues such as dropout
rates, appreciation for institutions and their infrastructure, sense of belonging, and
the perception of this topic as significant in promoting institutional prestige.
Although this topic has been studied previously, the current research seeks
to enrich existing studies. Through the development of a documentary investigation,
it has become clear that there is considerable interest in building a university
identity not only in state public higher education institutions but also in major
universities (referred to as federal public universities), such as the National
Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), the Metropolitan Autonomous University
(UAM), and the National Pedagogical University (UPN), among others (Jiménez
Moreno et al., 2020; Ortiz Barrera, 2023). However, no sources of information have
been identified that specifically address the analysis of state public university
websites regarding this topic.
An important finding in the context of documentary research on university
identity is that it remains a relatively understudied area, particularly from a
pedagogical or educational perspective. Nevertheless, it can also be inferred that
the existence of such media supports educational innovation. For instance, in light
of this proposal, Mexican universities may consider substantial changes to their
current practices with a view toward continuous improvement, incorporating
elements linked to transdisciplinary approaches, power analysis, and contributions
to both social cohesion and division. Furthermore, the connections among individuals
and groups based on behavioral patterns and discourse construction generate a
certain identity, as distinctive traits emerge that foster social recognition and a
sense of belonging, particularly prevalent in educational environments (Pach et al.,
2025).
Access to information through content provided by educational institutions
via their websites is a necessary, attractive, and functional source of consultation.
The design of a website in all institutions has transformed into a digital marketing
medium, where the information structure (tabs, links, and content) must fulfill its
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
objectives (Resmini, 2025). Websites have become the calling card of any institution,
especially under current conditions where virtual engagement has reached
unprecedented levels compared to previous years. The primary goal of website
access is to reach the widest audience possible, regardless of academic background,
skills, or capabilities, and it is not limited by individuals’ levels of knowledge or
technical skills (Barrientos Oradini, 2022). Thus, it serves as a strategy for
disseminating educational offerings, content, and services, as well as enhancing
institutional prestige.
Websites and their importance in promoting university identity
Technological advancements and the integration of Information and
Communication Technologies (ICT) into education have facilitated the incorporation
of educational settings into a global arena that operates online. During this process,
websites have emerged as the most effective means to showcase the potential of
each educational institution. They serve as promotional tools for various centers,
presenting their content, services, and notable areas to diverse audiences.
Websites are synonymous with digital pages, electronic pages, and, less
commonly, cyber pages. They are defined as electronic information or
representations of documents constituted by texts, sounds, videos, moving images,
still images, and hyperlinks, all accessible through computers or similar devices using
web browsers. The existence of these electronic windows is critically important for
any organization or institution. Consequently, nearly all higher education institutions
now have websites through which they connect with information users, addressing
their specific needs (Mutimukee et al., 2025).
As institutional portals, websites should consistently offer relevant
information that benefits both members of the academic community and external
agents seeking insights about the institution (Campoverde-Molina et al., 2021). A
school website is functional when it meets its objectives of introducing the
institution—providing clarity on its educational mission at any level (Konopyanova et
al., 2023)—while supplying useful and relevant data, offering publishing
opportunities for students, providing familial information on organizational matters
and educational projects, and keeping teachers informed. Furthermore, it must
address various dimensions related to content (texts), document architecture, clear
accessibility, aesthetics, differentiation from similar pages, swift identification and
localization, as well as practicality for resolving everyday informational challenges
(Gharibe Niazi et al., 2020).
Websites play a fundamental role in enhancing institutional image, which
has gained significant importance for organizations today and serves as an
identification tool that can confer competitive advantages. The current dynamics of
the market compel every institution to consider its attributes and defining
characteristics to strengthen its position against competitive pressures (Xu & Sit,
2024; Irshad, 2025).
This is where websites are recognized as marketing strategies, which should
not be underestimated given the significance of technology and digital media today.
For universities, they act as crucial vehicles for promoting institutional image, as
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
these media have become the most effective channels for disseminating information
and are the most commonly used mechanisms for information retrieval by the
general population, characterized by their attractive and accessible designs
(Jasmine & Kissvar, 2025).
The image perceived by audiences may or may not correlate with the
intended projection, hence it is essential to generate effective and coherent
communication if specific institutional conditions are to be made known (Singun,
2025). Particularly in the current context, where universities not only require
updated curricula and innovative teaching methods but also fundamentally need
extensive institutional communication. Communication can no longer rely solely on
traditional methods; it must leverage technological tools capable of reaching the
target audience. The use of institutional portals allows for the incorporation of a
wide array of possibilities and strategies to disseminate institutional prestige and
identity.
One of the primary communication tools for universities is their websites,
which serve as efficient vehicles for disseminating institutional components. They
provide information on curricula, mission, vision, history, values, key figures,
services, contact details, publications, as well as cultural and athletic aspects,
representing the most significant features of the university community (Segura-
Mariño et al., 2020; Campoverde-Molina et al., 2021; Konopyanova et al., 2023).
They offer users the opportunity to engage with information at any time of day. The
content can be easily tailored to meet the needs and interests of individuals,
presenting information attractively to all site visitors.
University identity is an indispensable element for establishing a
consolidated sense of belonging that enhances the development of higher education
institutions in all areas related to their mission (Pedler et al., 2021). For a
strengthened university identity to exist, it is essential to enhance academic,
linguistic, symbolic, intangible, infrastructural aspects, as well as human
relationships (Ahn & Davis, 2019). Nowadays, where technology has permeated all
aspects of human activity, it is crucial for universities to leverage their electronic
windows to display their distinctive features, setting them apart from others and
thereby fostering robust institutional development (Konopyanova et al., 2023;
Yaping et al., 2023; Gharibe Niazi et al., 2020; Xu & Sit, 2024; Irshad, 2025).
Methods and materials
Regarding the characteristics of the research, it was classified as basic
research, as the aim was not to generate a specific action proposal but rather to
diagnose a topic that has been largely overlooked in educational and scientific
perspectives, serving primarily as a means to facilitate decision-making.
Additionally, given its characteristics, the study was developed within a qualitative
paradigm, which allowed for the identification of perspectives focused on describing
phenomenological elements for the subsequent interpretation of the university
identity aspects expressed by universities through their websites.
In terms of methodology, the research employed a non-experimental design
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
that was both exploratory and descriptive, meaning that data collection occurred at
a single point in time. The primary characterization involved thematic analysis,
enabling the identification and organization of major themes corresponding to
institutional identity as the central meaning within the narratives, followed by the
coding and grouping of data into themes and subthemes.
Although the population of interest for this research was state public
universities, it is important to emphasize that the public higher education system in
Mexico is exceptionally complex, comprising various groups and types of institutions,
including federal public universities, technological institutes, teacher training
colleges (normal schools), technological universities, polytechnic universities,
intercultural universities, and public research centers, among others. This
complexity leads to a considerable diversity of less prominent educational categories
(Secretaría de Educación Pública [SEP], 2025).
From this context, the research sample considered state public universities
in Mexico as the working domain, with the websites of each participating institution
serving as the primary data source. The sampling method employed was non-
probabilistic and convenience-based, reflecting the operational capacity for data
collection from the selected units of analysis, the number of cases being studied,
and the accessibility of information. The samples were classified as homogeneous
since these units share similar characteristics.
Websites were specifically chosen because these electronic windows are
instrumental for higher education institutions, primarily to promote their university
identity. This choice is justified by the essential role these sites play in disseminating
information and managing processes. The study focused on the 34 state public
universities, which are distributed across all Mexican states, allowing for a broader
analysis of the subject from a regional perspective, especially given that these
institutions are recognized in most states as the premier centers of higher learning.
The process of data collection from the identified scientific literature
enabled the analysis, synthesis, and clarification of existing information and the
construction of a framework connecting various dimensions, leading to the
development of a conceptual matrix on university identity. The integration of
dimensions based on characteristic concordance allowed grouping into six
overarching categories:
a) Academic dimension: this dimension is regarded as the most intellectually
enriching aspect of higher education institutions, encompassing educational,
pedagogical, and scientific research elements (Pino-Vera et al., 2019; Jiménez
Moreno, 2020). The outcomes of this dimension are manifested through academic
achievements, successful experiences among students and alumni, among various
elements linked to educational processes (Githinji & Nyangoma, 2025).
b) Linguistic dimension: the use of language in promoting university identity
is crucial, as it conveys feelings, ideas, and emotions through both oral and written
communication (including formal alphabetic and sign language). Moreover,
employing a distinctive language fosters group identity, encourages unity, and
highlights unique characteristics (Woltran & Schwab, 2025). The principal attributes
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
of the linguistic dimension include: (1) its role as the most representative symbolic
element in human communication; (2) its various modes of expression, including
articulated or formal language, gestures, artistic representations, and expressions
through diverse cultural codes among participant groups, allowing individuals to
recognize and identify with how others convey their knowledge, skills, and
experiences (Tenzer et al., 2021; Woltran & Schwab, 2025).
c) Human relations dimension: while language is the most viable medium for
establishing human connections, this dimension requires consideration from a
different perspective, focusing on human capital conditions, including potentialities,
innovation capabilities, and idea expression forms, all aimed at constructing and
subsequently strengthening university identity (Valtonen et al., 2023; Wolniak,
2023). Another form of capital involved in this dimension is relational capital, which
encompasses interactions within and beyond educational institutions, integrating
groups identified by specific characteristics—be they formative, academic,
intellectual, or research-oriented—thus facilitating the generation of epistemic
communities, working groups, academic bodies, or collegiate groups. The levels of
interaction vary in characteristics and intensity, ultimately fostering a sense of
belonging.
d) Infrastructure dimension: while this dimension may appear to consist only
of tangible elements, university infrastructure is pivotal in defining identity and
represents, beyond physical elements, the construction of organizational or
structural capital. This involves not just artifacts but a strong connection to
organizational knowledge utilized internally and projected externally through
processes and organizational culture. For instance, the scientific knowledge
generated by higher education institutions significantly enhances social recognition,
positioning entities favorably due to their role in producing not isolated acts but
rather systematic new scientific knowledge, which formulates one of the prestigious
elements associated with knowledge entities (Larregue & Pavie, 2025).
e) Symbolic dimension: universities typically possess distinctive symbols,
including at least a logo, distinctive colors, a motto, or a mascot, which help
differentiate them from others. There are two types of symbols: (1) diachronic
symbols, associated with institutional history and developed over time, including
frequently found elements such as coats of arms, flags, and anthems; and (2)
synchronic symbols, tied to specific eras, which include notable individuals
connected with the institution, such as teachers, artists, intellectuals, and
recognized cultural figures, especially those who contributed to knowledge during
their time at the university (Deng & Feng, 2022).
f) Intangible elements dimension: this dimension often overlaps with the
linguistic dimension but can be distinguished depending on the situation. One of its
primary characteristics is its imperceptibility through touch; for example, elements
such as the institutional mission, vision, and values, as well as the institutional
history, are primary aspects. This dimension includes elements related to
relationships and developmental networks (academic, scientific, social, and
political), allowing for the creation of power and influence groups (Miotto et al.,
2020; Aldosari, 2021).
The comprehensive categorization identified allowed for the specification of
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
sub-dimensions and specific indicators, transitioning from a free-form language to a
standardized one, thereby providing a basis for analyzing the websites of
participating universities, classifying results based on their frequency of occurrence
in a matrix that integrates a taxonomy of the identified elements for constructing a
model of university identity.
Results and discussion
The results obtained from the websites of state public universities in Mexico
concerning their institutional identity are presented as follows: (1) divided into six
dimensions; (2) each dimension containing respective subdimensions; (3) each
subdimension further divided into indicators. The number of subdimensions and
indicators varies according to the elements identified in the evaluation model's
construction. Additionally, the description of the results includes brief theoretical
elements and an assessment of traits according to levels of presence: high, medium,
and low; absences are also noted.
Before detailing the results, it is important to clarify that the identification
of presence or absence of elements maintained congruence with the research
objectives. An abundant presence of information was identified, dispersed across
multiple elements, thus initially supporting the application of the proposed
evaluation model without achieving specific contrasts with the results, leading to
only a data systematization characterized by descriptive analysis. Although this
remains a documentary-descriptive investigation with a qualitative focus,
subsequent analyses are required to ensure the evaluation of institutions under a
tangible perspective regarding their institutional identity, wherein precise present
elements are equated with absences, supplemented by concrete action proposals for
improvement.
1. Academic dimension
This dimension is divided into five subdimensions (teacher competence;
academic management; teaching and learning strategies; curriculum; and
competency development) and comprises 11 indicators. It is the most comprehensive
dimension in terms of the breadth of subdimensions and indicators. The most notable
results from 31 of the 34 evaluated entities are as follows:
a) High presence activities: A significant number of recognized researchers;
presence and structure of academic bodies and research groups; generation of
scientific publications; funded research projects; precise definition of research
lines; thesis supervision; research laboratories; scholarship systems; comprehensive
training; medical services; professional development; academic procedures;
educational offerings; alumni tracking programs; graduation and degree certification
processes; curriculum development; certification of educational programs; and
programs for integral training.
b) Medium frequency activities: Departments, sections, or bodies linked to
research; collaboration with national science organizations; quality postgraduate
programs; internally generated scientific journals; development of scientific
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
dissemination events (congresses, symposia, forums, etc.); patents; labor market
relations; programs to cultivate a sense of belonging; and language training and ICT
programs.
c) Low frequency activities: Awards and recognitions; doctoral training
processes for the institution's teachers; interactions among academic bodies;
student mobility programs; tutoring programs; engagement with social sectors;
creation of institutional repositories; citations of researchers' publications; visiting
professors; internationalization of teaching programs; scholarship systems;
comprehensive training; medical services; and professional development.
2. Linguistic dimension
The analysis of this dimension identified various evaluation criteria, such as
historical data, institutional activities, university identity elements, student
messages, and expressed opinions and distinctive words. The results obtained
regarding this dimension were minimal, largely due to limited presence across most
participating state public universities.
The collected data for this dimension is as follows: (1) historical data of the
institution (5 of 34 include information); (2) activities undertaken by the institution
(2 of 34 present this criterion); (3) elements that identify the university (4 of 34
consider these); (4) expressed opinions and distinctive words (6 of 34 universities
mention them briefly); and (5) welcome messages to students (7 entities provide
these messages, while 27 do not).
3. Intangible elements dimension
This dimension encompasses elements related to the forms and purposes of
the institutions, as well as their values and principles, mission and vision, and history
and traditions. The behaviors identified are as follows:
a) Institutional values: (17 of 34 universities) High frequency values include
responsibility, honesty, justice, freedom, respect, equity, and solidarity; medium
frequency values encompass integrity, tolerance, commitment, non-discrimination,
social responsibility, dignity, equality, and ethics; and low frequency values
identified comprise 47 linguistic terms.
b) Principles: Understood as the ethical parameters guiding life and actions
at the university. Six of the analyzed websites contain institutional principles, while
28 do not provide this information. The behaviors noted are: high frequency
(autonomy and quality); medium frequency (inclusion, creativity, innovation,
relevance, pluralism, transparency, legality, and efficiency); and low frequency
(freedom, justice, equity, service, social commitment, critical spirit,
regionalization, sustainability, linkage, multidisciplinarity, gender equality,
flexibility, humanism, solidarity, environmental protection, and coherence).
c) Institutional mission and vision: Among the universities studied, 28
describe their mission and vision on their websites, while six do not present such
information. According to the frequency with which these are declared online, they
are categorized as follows: high frequency (generate, disseminate, and apply
knowledge; quality; socially responsible actions; technological development; human
capital; linkage; and scientific research); medium frequency (sustainable
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
development; cultural promotion; integral training; sense of social responsibility);
and low frequency (teacher training; proactivity; social inclusion, diversity, and
human rights).
d) Institutional history: The websites of 30 of the evaluated institutions
provide sections aimed at sharing their history, while four do not present such
information. The content typically includes background, foundation, significant
events, and historical elements.
e) Traditions recognized and represented by institutions: Twelve of the 34
universities studied reflect practices carried out through their websites to preserve
traditions and customs. Notable traditional activities include: festivals; university
fairs; folk ballet; anniversaries; raffles; and welcome events for new students.
4. Symbolic dimension
Symbolic elements are divided into four types: diachronic, synchronic,
properties that confer value and recognition to the institution, and elements of
virtual identity, as described below:
a) Diachronic elements: These are understood as official symbolic elements
and figures, with 25 of the 34 participating entities promoting them. Presence levels
vary: high (motto, anthem, and coat of arms); medium (logo and mascot); and low
(cheer, heraldry, university marks, banner, flag, official colors, and sports team
crest).
b) Synchronic elements: This category refers to the recognition of individuals'
trajectories, with 15 of the 34 universities mentioning such elements. They include
honored personalities, medals and awards, recognition of founders, benefactors,
rectors, and acknowledgments of academic trajectories.
c) Visual identity elements: These are related to institutional image, with 11
out of 34 universities demonstrating presence. Considered elements include
university identity or graphic identity manuals, images of sports teams and official
mascots, stationery, uniforms, vehicles, and promotional items.
d) Properties that add value and recognition to the institution: These are
present in 15 of the 34 universities. Elements promoted here include notable
buildings, museums, historical structures, artistic groups, sports teams, art works,
and media outlets.
5. Infrastructure dimension
This dimension was noted to have the least prominence among the
participating universities. The data collected regarding subdimensions with presence
is characterized as follows:
a) Architectural profile: Presence in only 2 of 34 studied university websites.
It encompasses various symbolic elements in sculptures, paintings, and murals.
b) Functionality of physical plant: Eight out of 34 participating universities
reference this subdimension, mentioning libraries, buildings, maintenance services,
educational facilities, computer centers, laboratories, sports facilities, and
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
technological advancements. The analysis generally focuses on the sufficiency of
spaces and facilities.
c) Spaces for social interaction, leisure, and cultural and sports activities:
Twenty-three universities refer to this aspect. Among the highlighted features are
sports facilities, spaces for cultural and artistic development, and recreational areas
such as parks, botanical gardens, and cafeterias.
d) Furniture and equipment conditions: Information regarding this
subdimension is provided on the websites of six public state universities in Mexico,
while 28 do not offer such details. Analysis indicates conditions such as enhancement
of technological infrastructure through new equipment, classroom equipment and
conditions, and academic spaces with internet access and use of digital resources.
e) Orientation and communication systems: Nine of the 34 analyzed
university websites mention the existence of digital maps and layouts that provide
the university community or visitors with exact locations of all buildings within the
institution. In contrast, 100% of the analyzed units have elements that facilitate
internal and external communication, utilizing various channels such as institutional
email, internet services, and telecommunication networks.
6. Human relations dimension
This dimension is characterized by how participating higher education
institutions document the relationships among their various actors (students,
teachers, and moments of interaction), which they consider important for their
positioning in electronic media. The indicators displayed the following behaviors:
a) Evidence of interaction through sports, artistic events, and student
societies: Evidence of interaction among university community members is
represented on the websites of 29 of the 34 state public universities. These social
relationships are manifested through cultural, artistic, student, sporting, and
community activities.
b) Effective communication channels among members: All 34 university
websites present means of communication to keep community members informed;
these serve as vehicles for effective communication. The media utilized include
updated news, newsletters, institutional newspapers and magazines, radio and
television channels, digital spaces, institutional email, directories, and social media.
c) Perception of student-student and teacher-student relationships: Based
on the information provided by the websites of state public universities in Mexico,
it becomes evident that students engage with their peers and instructors through
cultural, sports, community, academic, and research activities. However, the data
provided do not constitute sufficient tools to identify the level, quality, and depth
of these relationships.
While the research process facilitated the generation of a taxonomy derived
from the documentary analysis of scientific literature, potential biases may exist in
its construction due to disparities in perspectives based on the interests of higher
education institutions, defined goals, the characteristics of the studied population,
and data collection instruments.
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
This variety of interests in defining elements of university identity can be
attributed to various methodological axes focused on community organizational
culture and infrastructure as the more tangible elements. However, intangible
elements such as symbols, history, culture, and social responsibility are also
considered (Pérez-Ribera et al., 2020). Other perspectives may assign greater
importance to human relationships, curricular structure, affinities, institutional
projection as a unit, past school experience, territoriality, regulations, connections,
and even challenges related to admission, symbolizing prestige (Barrow et al., 2020;
Marques et al., 2024). Additionally, some proposals emphasize the role of language
in building university identity, considering the constant use of semantic fields
(Philippczyck et al., 2025). Thus, factors such as social, emotional, academic,
organizational, and physical interactions among individuals are seen as ideal
elements (Crocetti et al., 2022).
The elements that constitute university identity have a significant impact on
individuals involved or interested in the disseminated content at two critical
moments: first, when one is a student, and second, as an alumnus. This fosters
institutional enhancement and a personal identification with a specific group or
place, leading to long-term emotional bonds and encouraging interest in
participating in the development and construction of meanings within a collective
memory (Mora & Laporte, 2024). Additionally, this will guide actions, behaviors, and
daily practices both within and outside educational organizations. The human needs
addressed here are closely associated with psychological and safety concerns, as well
as the pursuit of possible fulfillment, where the need for love, affection, and
belonging emerges (Gimeno-Bayón, 2020).
The construction of university identity involves multiple stakeholders, not
only students but also teachers, administrative staff, and management. Collectively,
these groups contribute to developing commitments to the institution and motivate
the construction and application of strategies aimed at strengthening it (Navarrete
Cazales, 2024).
University identity is a crucial resource for enhancing placement, marketing
(often referred to as digital marketing), and competitiveness in higher education
institutions (Yaping et al., 2023). This condition is typically associated with private
institutions; however, the promotion of university identity is also gaining traction in
public universities, which recognize the potential of their websites as an effective
means to communicate the importance of their organizations using relevant
information. This encompasses institutional appreciation, infrastructure, a sense of
belonging, and institutional prestige (Ocasio, 2023).
The use of websites in promoting university identity is grounded in the
following elements: (1) these tools have become the calling card for all higher
education institutions, achieving unprecedented significance compared to previous
eras; (2) their accessibility allows a greater number of individuals to obtain accurate
information, regardless of their knowledge level, personal abilities, or technical
competencies; and (3) these tools have transformed into mediums for disseminating
educational offerings, academic content, and educational services, thereby focusing
on projecting institutional prestige (Yaping et al., 2023; Astleitner, 2024).
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
Conclusions
The positioning of universities through the construction of their institutional
image significantly influences their visibility processes and social recognition,
distinguishing them from similar institutions, particularly through websites as a
contemporary means for this purpose. The findings observed from the conducted
research are as follows:
The derivation of a taxonomy of dimensions, subdimensions, and indicators
for an evaluation model of institutional identity from the literature review is, in
itself, a contribution. Nonetheless, the generation of this product may exhibit biases
in its construction based on the information available, revealing inequalities in how
elements are constructed.
Data collection showed that Mexican state public universities do not offer a
uniform structure regarding the elements representing their institutional image on
their websites, with high presence in some areas while in many cases displaying
vague, dispersed data, or even having no presence at all.
These findings allow for the identification of the following: (1) the need for
generating an educational policy regarding the uniform construction of elements of
university institutional image, particularly across various effective and current
electronic media for instant and broad promotion; (2) the proposed taxonomy, due
to its breadth, needs adaptation to the requirements and interests of each
educational sector; and (3) future research is required concerning more precise
measurement methods for the criteria involved in constructing institutional images,
which should go beyond merely recording the presence of each criterion to include
quantitative and qualitative evaluations that specify comparative conditions and
areas for improvement.
References
Ahn, M. Y. y Davis, H. H. (2019). Four domains of students’ sense of belonging to
university. Studies in Higher Education, 45(3), 622–634.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1564902
Aldosari, A. M. (2021). The level of academic leaders’ mastery of the intangibles
management skills and its role in achieving the competitive advantage of
Saudi universities: A field study. International Journal for Research in
Education, 45(1), 8. http://doi.org/10.36771/ijre.45.1.21-pp235-265
Astleitner, H., & Schlick, S. (2024). The social media use of college students:
Exploring identity development, learning support, and parallel use. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 26(1), 231-254.
https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874241233605
Barrientos Oradini, N., Yáñez Jara, V., Barrueto Mercado, E. y Aparicio Puentes, C.
(2022). Análisis sobre la educación virtual, impactos en el proceso formativo
y principales tendencias. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 37(4).
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
https://www.redalyc.org/journal/280/28073811035/html/
Barrow, M., Grant, B. y Xu, L. (2020). Academic identities research: mapping the
field’s theoretical frameworks. Higher Education Research & Development,
41(2), 240–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1849036
Borja-Gil, J., Castellanos Verdugo, M. y Oviedo-García, M. Á. (2024). Engagement
and commitment in higher education: Looking at the role of identification
and perception of performance. European Journal of Education, 59(2),
e12642. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12642
Bracho-Fuenmayor, P. L., Guillén, J., Boscán, M. y Pulido-Iparraguirre, C. (2023).
Justicia, oportunidades y capacidades en Educación inclusiva universitaria,
perspectivas según Rawls y Sen. Revista De Filosofía, 13(38), 192-213.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7860144
Campoverde-Molina, M., Luján-Mora, S. y Valverde, L. (2021). Accessibility of
university websites worldwide: A systematic literature review. Universal
Access in the Information Society, 22(1), 133-168.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00825-z
Carayannis, E. G. y Morawska-Jancelewicz, J. (2022). The futures of Europe: Society
5.0 and Industry 5.0 as driving forces of future universities. Journal of the
Knowledge Economy, 13(4), 3445-3471.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-
021-00854-2
Carvalho, L. y Freeman, C. G. (2022). Materials and places for learning: Experiences
of doctoral students in and around university spaces. Postdigital Science and
Education, 5(3), 730-753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00328-x
Covarrubias, R. (2024). On being accepted: Interrogating how university cultural
scripts shape personal and political facets of belonging. Educational
Psychology Review, 36, 136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09970-2
Crocetti, E., Albarello, F., Meeus, W. y Rubini, M. (2022). Identities: A
developmental social-psychological perspective. European Review of Social
Psychology, 11(34), 161-201.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2022.2104987
Díaz-Romero, Y., De La Paz-Rosales, M. T. de J., Callan-Bacilio, R., & Bracho-
Fuenmayor, P. L. (2025). Análisis teórico-conceptual de la calidad en la
educación superior y sus dimensiones: Un estudio comparado. Revista
Arbitrada Interdisciplinaria Koinonía, 10(19), 110–133.
https://doi.org/10.35381/r.k.v10i19.4379
Deng, Y. y Feng, D. (2022). From researchers to academic entrepreneurs: A
diachronic analysis of the visual representation of academics in university
annual reports. Visual Communication, 23(4), 583-609.
https://doi.org/10.1177/14703572221102180
Dorado Martínez, Á. D., Tabares Díaz, Y. A., Estrella Delgado, C. V. y Velasco
Santacruz, D. E. (2024). Revisión sistemática de factores protectores y de
riesgo que influyen en la permanencia estudiantil en el contexto
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
latinoamericano. Actualidades Pedagógicas, 83, 1-30.
https://doi.org/10.19052/ap.vol1.iss83.5199
Dwitasari, P., Zulaikha, E., Hanoum, S., Alamin, R. Y. y Lee, L. (2025). Internal
perspectives on visual identities in higher education: A case study of top-
ranked universities in Indonesia. F1000Research, 13, 1535.
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.159232.2
Gharibe Niazi, M., Karbala Aghaei Kamran, M. y Ghaebi, A. (2020). Presenting a
proposed framework for evaluating university websites. The Electronic
Library, 38(5/6), 881-904. https://doi.org/10.1108/el-06-2020-0141
Gimeno-Bayón, A. (2020). Psicología y psicoterapias transpersonales: reflexiones y
propuestas. Revista de Psicoterapia, 31(117), 5-41.
https://doi.org/10.33898/rdp.v31i117.446
Githinji, L. y Nyangoma, D. (2025). Systematic review of institutional belonging and
motivation as predictors of long-term student success. International Journal
of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information
Technology, 11(3), 324-344. https://doi.org/10.32628/cseit2511421
Gusman, I., & Sandry, A. (2022). The economies of identities: Recognising the
economic value of the characteristics of territories. Sustainability, 14(14),
8429. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148429
Irshad, M. (2025). An examination of website factors affecting branding of
universities. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jarhe-03-2024-0116
Jasmine, N. y Kissvar, D. (2025). Digital Marketing and it’s Effectiveness in Higher
Education. International Journal of Engineering Technologies and
Management Research,12(9), 42–48.
https://dx.doi.org/10.29121/ijetmr.v12.i9.2025.1647
Jiménez Moreno, J. A., Caso Niebla, J. y Díaz López, C. D. (2020). Diagnóstico de
competitividad académica y acreditación de programas educativos de la
Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, México. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 28(22), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.28.4598
Knorr, K. y Hein-Pensel, F. (2022). Since Albert and Whetten: The dissemination of
Albert and Whetten’s conceptualization of organizational identity.
Management Review Quarterly, 74(2), 597-625.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00311-7
Kola, M. y Molise, H. (2025). Understanding the influence of the university’s values
on staff performance: A conceptual study. E-Journal of Humanities Arts and
Social Sciences, 6(5), 467-483. https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.2025658
Konopyanova, G. A., Baikenov, Zh. Y., Mambetkaziyev, A. A. y Mukhambetova, Z. S.
(2023). Analysis of using social networks in promoting university educational
services. Economics: The Strategy and Practice, 18(2), 107-122.
https://doi.org/10.51176/1997-9967-2023-2-107-122
Larregue, J. y Pavie, A. (2025). Prestige at play: University hierarchies and the
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
reproduction of funding inequalities. Canadian Review of Sociology.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.70012
Marques, R. M. G., Lopes, A. y Magalhães, A. M. (2024). Academic identities and
higher education change: Reviewing the evidence. Educational Research,
66(2), 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2024.2334760
Mellinger, C., Fritzson, A., Park, B. y Dimidjian, S. (2023). Developing the sense of
belonging scale and understanding its relationship to loneliness, need to
belong, and general well-being outcomes. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 106(3), 347-360.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2023.2279564
Mielkov, Y. y Pinchuk, Y. (2024). Humanist foundations for the transformations of
higher education under supercomplexity. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of
Education, 30(1), 90-109. https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2024-30-1-6
Miotto, G., Del-Castillo-Feito, C. y Blanco-González, A. (2020). Reputation and
legitimacy: Key factors for higher education institutions’ sustained
competitive advantage. Journal of Business Research, 112, 342-353.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.076
Mora, J. M. y La Porte, J. M. (2024). Relevance of universities in a complex context:
Purpose and identity as strategic and inspirational elements of institutional
communication. Church, Communication and Culture, 9(2), 435–451.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23753234.2024.2407475
Mutch, A. (2018). Practice, substance, and history: Reframing institutional logics.
Academy of Management Review, 43(2), 242-258.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2015.0303
Mutimukwe, C., Viberg, O., McGrath, C. y Cerratto-Pargman, T. (2025). Privacy in
online proctoring systems in higher education: Stakeholders’ perceptions,
awareness and responsibility. Journal or Computing in High Educ, preprint.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-025-09461-5
Navarrete Cazales, Z. (2024). Studies on identity and formation of university studies
in Mexico.
Revista Praxis Educacional, 20(51), e12487.
https://doi.org/10.22481/praxisedu.v20i51.12487
Ocasio, W. (2023). Institutions and their Social Construction: A Cross-Level
Perspective. Organization Theory, 4(3).
https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877231194368
Ortiz Barrera, M. (2023). Tacit and explicit knowledge: Drivers of the
competitiveness of universities. Mercados y Negocios, 50, 51-70.
https://doi.org/10.32870/myn.vi50.7708
Pach, P., Stoffels, M., Schoonmade, L., Ingen, E. y Kusurkar, R. A. (2025). The impact
of educational activities on professional identity formation in social sciences
and humanities: A scoping review. Educational Research Review, 48, 100704.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100704
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
Pedler, M. L., Willis, R. y Nieuwoudt, J. E. (2021). A sense of belonging at university:
Student retention, motivation and enjoyment. Journal of Further and Higher
Education, 46(3), 397-408.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2021.1955844
Pérez-Rivera, J., Tarango, J., y González-Quiñonez, F. (2020). Caracterización de la
identidad universitaria y su importancia en el desarrollo institucional. RECIE.
Revista Electrónica Científica de Investigación Educativa, 5(1), 329-341.
http://doi.org/10.33010/recie.v5i1.955
Petrovska, I. R. y Partyko, A. Z. (2024). Structural model of organizational identity.
Journal of Modern Psychology, 1, 99-107.
https://doi.org/10.26661/2310-
4368/2024-1-11
Philippczyck, N., Hoffmann, H. y Oertel, S. (2025). The role of institutional factors
in shaping university misión statements: A topic-modeling approach. Public
Admin Rev., 85, 1187-1216. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13921
Resmini, A. (2025). Information architecture. En D. Baker y L. Ellis (Eds.),
Encyclopedia of libraries, librarianship, and information science (vol. 2, pp.
212–229). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-95689-5.00198-x
Secretaría de Educación Pública (2025). Instituciones de Educación Superior. SEP.
https://www.gob.mx/sep/acciones-y-programas/instituciones-de-
educacion-superior
Segura-Mariño, A. G., Paniagua-Rojano, F. J. y Piñeiro-Naval, V. (2020).
Comunicación interactiva en sitios Web universitarios de Ecuador. Revista
de Comunicación, 19(1), 259-273. https://tinyurl.com/mr2223r9
Shukla, A. y Srivastava, V. (2025). Influence of social interaction on self-concept
development of university students: A symbolic interactionist perspective.
International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research, 7(2), 1-7.
https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i02.42754
Singun, A. (2025). Unveiling the barriers to digital transformation in higher education
institutions: A systematic literature review. Discover Education , 4, 37.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00430-9
Steiner, L., Sundström, A. C. y Sammalisto, K. (2012). An analytical model for
university identity and reputation strategy work. Higher Education, 65(4),
401-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9552-1
Tenzer, H., Pudelko, M. y Zellmer-Bruhn, M. (2021). The impact of language barriers
on knowledge processing in multinational teams. Journal of World Business,
56(2), 101184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101184
Valtonen, A., Kimpimäki, J. y Malacina, I. (2023). From ideas to innovations: The
role of individuals in idea implementation. Creativity and Innovation
Management, 32(4), 636-658. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12577
Wolniak, R. (2023). Traits of highly innovative people. Scientific Papers of Silesian
University of Technology. Organization and Management Series (166), 877-
891. https://doi.org/10.29119/1641-3466.2022.166.55
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
e9063
Woltran, F. y Schwab, S. (2025). Language as a distinguishing feature or common
ground? A participatory study on manifestations of intergroup relations in
the lived experiences of multilingual students. Linguistics and Education,
85, 101379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2024.101379
Xu, X., y Sit, H. (2024). Using websites to become global players in international
education: Insights from a Chinese university. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 29(3), 455-473.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153241293575
Yaping, X., Huong, N. T. T., Nam, N. H., Quyet, P. D., Khanh, C. T. y Anh, D. T. H.
(2023). University brand: A systematic literature review. Heliyon, 9(6),
e16825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16825
| Jesi Pérez Rivera | Javier Tarango | Juan D. Machin-Mastromatteo |
About the main author
Jesi Pérez Rivera
:
She holds a Bachelor's degree in History, a Master's degree in
History and Anthropology (University of Cienfuegos, Cuba), and a Master's degree in
Educational Innovation. She is currently pursuing a Doctorate in Education, Arts, and
Humanities (both at the
Autonomous University of Chihuahua, Mexico). She
previously worked as a Professor
-
Researcher in the History Department at the
University of Sancti Spíritus “José Martí”, Sancti Spíritus, Cuba.
Declaration of author responsibility
Jesi
Pérez Rivera: 1:
Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Research,
Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation/Verification,
Visualization, Writing/original draft and Writing, review and editing.
Javier Tarango
2:
Supervision, Validation/Verification, Visualization,
Drafting/Original Draft, and Writing, Review and Editing
.
Juan D. Machin
-Mastromatteo 3:
Methodology, Resources, Software, Supervision,
Validation/Verification, Visualization, Original Drafting, and Writing, Review and
Editing
.
Financing:
National Postgraduate Scholarship Program of the Secretariat of Science,
Humanities, Technology and Innovation (SECIHTI) of Mexico.
Special Acknowledgments:
