Cited by 33Higher Education Practises and EngagementService and Product InnovationHigher Education Research Studies

Student roles and behaviors in higher education co-creation – a systematic literature review

Zarandi, Negin, Soares, Ana Maria, Alves, Helena·2022·International Journal of Educational Management

Abstract

Purpose In today’s global and highly competitive climate among universities, educational developers and instructors have focused more on trying to make the student experience more engaging. In this manner, student co-creation activities have recently become a major research priority in marketing and higher education (HE) research. The purpose of this study is to present a systematic review of the literature on student co-creation roles and behaviors in HE in order to map extant research on this topic and offer a consolidated view of the co-creation process and approaches that can be employed by HEIs to motivate students to co-create their HE experience. Design/methodology/approach A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach was followed to classify, select, synthesize, analyze and assess the most relevant studies on student participation in co-creation in HE. Findings This study’s analysis has identified that the co-creation process in HE includes dialog, access, risk and transparency. The main approaches used by higher education institutions (HEIs) to motivate students to co-create their HE experience are student involvement, cognitive engagement, university affiliation and emotional engagement. Our review also shows that student co-creation behaviors are mainly participation and citizenship behavior, and their co-creation roles include those of co-producers, participants, change agents and partners. Originality/value This systematic literature review analyses and critically discusses the state of the art in student co-creation roles in HE and the approaches HEIs use. By providing a map of existing research, the paper contributes both to the clarification of student co-creation roles and behaviors in HE and the identification of research gaps and opportunities for further research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/ijem-08-2021-0317

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Students who actively participate in co-creation initiatives take full responsibility for their learning and use teachers and other resources to help them succeed.

    “Students who actively participate in co-creation initiatives 'take full responsibility for their learning and use teachers and other resources to help them succeed' (Mavondo et al., 2004, p. 46; Zarandi et al., 2022, p. 1299).”

    From Assessment design through co-creation (2025) · cites this paper as Zarandi et al., 2022

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zarandi, N., Soares, A. M., & Alves, H.
Affiliations
University of Minho (PT)
Venue
International Journal of Educational Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2022-10-05
Volume
36
Issue
7
Pages
1297-1320
ISSN
0951-354X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4301395122
Cited by
33
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Educational Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
Keywords
student co-creation, higher education, student participation, student engagement, student involvement, cognitive engagement, emotional engagement, university affiliation, change agents, higher education marketing, student experience

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review