Communication Preferences of Students in Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55707/ds-po.v41i1.192Keywords:
communication preferences, student satisfaction, higher education institutions, institutional communication, social presence, relationship marketing, digital communicationAbstract
The study provides a comprehensive examination of communication practices in the Slovenian higher education institutions and analyses students’ use of, preferences for, satisfaction with, and relationship with institutional communication. The theoretical framework is grounded in dialogic and relational communication approaches, which emphasise responsiveness, transparency, and two-way communication as essential conditions for a high-quality institutional interaction. The research utilises a quantitative design and an online survey including 688 students from various higher education institutions and fields of study. It offers a systematic insight into the communication patterns and the influence of demographic and content-related factors on students’ communication behaviour. The findings reveal significant discrepancies between students’ expectations and existing institutional practices, particularly in the area of extracurricular communication, where the greatest communication gap is observed. Gender, age, and field of study significantly shape the use of and satisfaction with communication channels, while the content of communication emerges as the strongest determinant of communication preferences. Satisfaction with communication is the most important predictor of students’ relationship with the institution, emphasising the central role of strategic, transparent, and consistent communication in fostering trust, belonging, and positive institutional relationships in higher education.
References
1. Ahmad, N. N. in Masroor, F. (2020). The study of generic patterns of mission and vision statements of the universities. Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ), 4(2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.47264/idea.lassij/4.2.13
2. Blažič, Mojca (2021). Prispevek visokošolskega učnega okolja h kariernemu razvoju študentov. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 36(1), 93–113. https://www.dspo.si/index.php/dspo/article/view/67
3. Cole, A. W., Lennon, L. in Weber, N. L. (2019). Student perceptions of online active learning practices and online learning climate predict online course engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(2), 866–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619593
4. De Sabando, R., Lafuente, A., Forcada Sainz, F. J. in Zorrilla Calvo, M. P. (2018). The marketing orientation as a university management philosophy: A framework to guide its application. Cuadernos de Gestión, 18(2), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.5295/cdg.150576al
5. Elken, M. (2019). Marketing in higher education. V J. C. Shin in P. Teixeira (ur.), Encyclopedia of international higher education systems and institutions (str. 1–5). Springer.
6. Grunig, J. E. in Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
7. Hall, H. (2018). The marketisation of higher education: Symptoms, controversies, trends. EiP, 17(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2018.003
8. Hon, L. C. in Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations. Institute for Public Relations.
9. Karahasanović, D., Šterk, A., Nuhić, M., Nuhić, A., Prosen, M. in Ličen, S. (2025). Digitalna pismenost študentov v visokošolskem izobraževanju: pilotna raziskava. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 40(1), 124–138. https://doi.org/10.55707/ds-po.v40i1.165
10. Kaufmann, R. in Vallade, J. I. (2022). Exploring connections in the online learning environment: Student perceptions of rapport, climate, and loneliness. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(10), 1794–1808. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1749670
11. Looney, K. E. (2022). Computer mediated communication: Perceptions of academic advisors regarding text messaging in higher education [Doktorska disertacija, Franklin University). https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=frank1646054773542189&disposition=inline
12. Miletić, J. (2020). Uloga marketinga u upravljanju odgojnoobrazovnom ustanovom. Školski vjesnik, 69(1), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.38003/sv.69.1.7
13. Petre, I. L., Hristache, D. A., Dobrescu, M. M., Constantin, A., Dumitra, E.-C. in Radu, C.-G. (2025). Digital communication in higher education settings: A pilot study on students’ behavioural trends. Sustainability, 17(7), članek 3038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17073038
14. Swanson, J., Renes, S. L. in Strange, A. T. (2020). The communication preferences of collegiate students. V: P. Isaias, D. G. Sampson in D. Ifenthaler (ur.), Online teaching and learning in higher education (sstr. 65–78). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48190-2_4
15. Šimec, M., Erjavec, K. in Blažič, M. (2022). Inovativna didaktična metoda: meduniverzitetno online projektno delo. Didactica Slovenica – Pedagoška obzorja, 37(3-4), 3–22. https://www.dspo.si/index.php/dspo/article/view/88
16. Tankosic, M., Manic, L. in Mikić, A. (2024). Students’ perceptions and satisfaction in evaluating communication channels. Društvene i humanističke studije, 9(2), 1463–1484. https://doi.org/10.51558/2490-3647.2024.9.2.1463
17. Taylor, M. in Kent, M. L. (2014). Dialogic engagement: Clarifying foundational concepts. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(5), 384–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.956106
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ksenija Korenjak Kramar, Karmen Erjavec
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
