Today, in the context of economic globalization, increasing complexity of Today, the issues of involving the younger generation in socially significant activities have become a strategic priority for the Russian Federation. This fact is reflected in a number of documents. Thus, the passport of the national project «Youth and Children», approved for the period 2025-2030, defines as one of the key goals «the realization of the potential of each young person, his talents, education of a patriotic and socially responsible person» [5]. Along with this, Federal Law No. 489-FZ of December 30, 2020 «On Youth Policy in the Russian Federation» establishes the legal framework for youth policy implementation and outlines key principles, including voluntary participation, the balance between public and individual interests, and support for youth initiatives [2]. On this basis, the task of higher education institutions is not just to train qualified personnel with the necessary professional competencies, but also to form a holistic system of values among students, develop leadership qualities and activate participation in social changes.

However, it should be noted that there is a significant gap between the attention paid to this issue at the state level and its practical implementation in most universities. According to the monitoring of the effectiveness of higher education institutions for 2021, out of 1,208 Russian universities, approximately 950 (about 79%) have formed some kind of student self-government bodies. At the same time, based on the results of in-depth interviews with the heads of such bodies, only a small part of students participate in self-government most actively, and approximately 15-20% of students are only occasionally involved in such activities [12]. In other words, the formal presence of, for example, a student council does not guarantee real and full-fledged involvement in public processes.

The aim of this study is a theoretical and applied analysis of student self-government as a mechanism for involving young people in socially significant activities. Special attention should be paid to the issue of identifying effective directions for its implementation in the university environment. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to systematize existing approaches to the content of student self-government, identify its socialization potential and characterize the main directions, analyze the motives and barriers to inclusion of students, and, finally, consider the practical experience of organizing student self-government on the example of one of the leading creative universities in the country – Saint Petersburg State University of Industrial Technologies and Design (SPbSUITD).

The methodological basis of the work is an integrated approach that combines several complementary methods. This paper provides a theoretical analysis of the scientific literature on youth policy, higher school pedagogy, and student sociology, alongside an examination of the results of empirical studies on student involvement in self-government conducted in 2022-2024. Among them is, first of all, the research project of the Higher School of Economics «Student Self-government in Russia: driving forces (de-)motivations of students» (authors: D. B. Efimov, A. A. Kostyuk, A. S. Batishchev, A.M. Makhson, M. Yu. Svoiskiy), a comprehensive sociological study «Student self-government in higher education institutions. Features and growth points», made by the State University of Management and the Russian Youth Union on the order of the Committee on Youth Policy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation and with the support of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (covering more than 14 thousand students from all regions of the country). To study the experience of organizing youth policy and student self-government in SPbSUITD, the case study method was used. This approach allowed us to generalize theoretical ideas about the phenomenon and illustrate them with practical results obtained in the actual system of student self-government.

First of all, it should be noted that in the modern sociological scientific literature there is no universal definition of the concept of «student self-government». In itself, it is extremely complex and multifaceted, and at the same time it is considered both as a social institution, as a specific educational technology, as a form of leisure organization, and, finally, as a mechanism for implementing state policy. Summarizing the data of a number of theoretical studies, it is possible to identify several main directions in which scientists consider this phenomenon.

An interesting approach is that of L. F. Shalamova, who considers student self-government bodies as an agent of activating the social potential of students. She notes that current federal state educational standards are focused not only on the formation of future graduates’ professional knowledge, skills and abilities, but also on the development of universal competencies related to an active life position, organizational and communication skills, the ability to work in a team and to lead it. It is important that it is not possible to acquire such skills solely through lectures, seminars, and laboratory classes. Based on this, various forms of social activity are needed that will allow students to test themselves in certain managerial and organizational situations. One of these forms is student self-government. In her works, Shalamova also highlights such essential characteristics of student self-government as voluntariness, electability, collegiality of decision-making, transparency and accountability to the student body of the organization [8].

Shishkovskaya I. P. in one of her scientific works considers student self-government in the context of the formation of social maturity of the bachelor. She identifies three main concepts of this phenomenon [9].

The social concept considers student self-government as an institution of civil society formation. The pedagogical concept interprets it as a resource of educational work and a means of developing students’ independence, initiative, and responsibility. The psychological concept emphasizes the fact that participation in student self-government activates the student’s interest in finding optimal forms of self-realization, promotes the development of reflection and self-awareness.

Special attention should be paid to the substantiation of the pedagogical capabilities of student self-government in three main areas: semantic (implies awareness of the social significance of one’s own activities), informational (obtaining knowledge about how management activities are organized) and transformative (direct participation in changing the social environment). In addition, the researcher identifies the key functions of student self-government:

—   adaptive, helping first-year students integrate into the university environment;

—   communicative, developing communication and interaction skills;

—   stimulating, encouraging self-development and self-education;

—   informational, ensuring the dissemination of information about the life of the university;

—   organizational skills, which form practical skills of planning, coordination and control [9].

These theoretical approaches are clearly illustrated by the results of an empirical study conducted by E. V. Kargapolova, I. A. Musayeva, V. V. Dyakova, E. V. Anufrieva, and E. V. Andrianova in 2023 at the universities of Moscow, Volgograd, Astrakhan, and Tyumen. The study involved more than 1,200 students studying in various fields of study. As a result, we obtained data that students have formed a stable request for the functioning of student self-government bodies at the university. The overwhelming majority of respondents (about 78%) agreed with this statement. However, this highlights a rather paradoxical situation. Students of regional universities (Volgograd, Astrakhan, Tyumen) were less aware of the activities of student self-government bodies than representatives of Moscow organizations. Only 34% were able to name specific projects or events held by the student council, compared to 52% in Moscow. At the same time, it was regional students who showed more interest in participating in the activities of student self-government. This is especially true for the implementation of scientific projects (67% against 49% in the capital) [4]. In other words, regional universities have a significant reserve, but face the problem of low awareness and weak organizational support.

It is important to note that this study revealed a significant discrepancy between the priorities of youth policy at the state level and the real needs of students. So, for example, civil-patriotic and sports and wellness activities were the least attractive for students. Only 18% of respondents named the patriotic direction among the three most interesting for themselves, and the sports one – 22%. At the same time, research and mass culture areas received significantly higher ratings (64% and 58%, respectively). In Moscow, for their part, students place less trust in student self-government bodies leaders and attach more importance to areas related to the satisfaction of their personal interests and career ambitions. At the same time, the initiatives imposed from above are perceived as less relevant [4]. Based on this, it becomes clear that when forming the agenda of student self-government bodies, it is necessary to find a balance between the requests of students and the interests of higher-level bodies.

Special attention should be paid to the results of a large-scale study within the framework of the HSE strategic project «Human Success and Independence in a Changing World». The scientific analysis of D.B. Efimov, A.A. Kostyuk, A.S. Batishchev, A.M. Makhson and M.Yu. Svoiskiy was implemented in two stages. At the first stage, open data from 1208 Russian universities – all higher education institutions included in the 2021 Performance Monitoring, were studied and at the second stage, 72 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with student government activists from different universities. Moreover, they represented various types of educational institutions – both classical universities, technical universities, and pedagogical and creative ones. Based on the results of the study, the authors identified three main cultures of involvement in student self-government [1].

The first – socialization – is characterized by the predominance of motivation for individual development and personal socialization. Students of this type come to the student council to make new friends, learn to communicate, and overcome their inner shyness and self-doubt. For them, self-government is seen as a platform for informal communication and emotional support. This culture is most widespread among first-year and junior students who have not yet decided on their career paths and consider participation in self-government as a test of their own capabilities.

The second – pragmatic – is based on material and career incentives. The motivation is to receive an increased state academic scholarship (it can exceed the basic one by 30-50% or more), an asset to their CV, a convenient work schedule, access to closed resources of the university, a letter of recommendation for admission to a master’s program or employment. Such students clearly relate the time and effort spent to the measurable benefits received. This type of motivation becomes more common in senior years, when students are more actively thinking about their career prospects.

The third – civil – is aimed at social recognition, helping other people, and solving socially significant problems. Students with this motivation see student self-government as a tool for real transformation. They may be related to improving the quality of education, solving problems in dormitories, creating an accessible environment for students with disabilities, and developing volunteerism. Students of this type most often become initiators of socially significant projects and grant applications.

Separately, the authors of the study note that the designated cultures are not strictly assigned to specific people. The same student can combine elements of all three types of motivation at different stages of their participation in student self-government. However, for more effective involvement of young people, it is necessary to take into account such differentiation and offer a wide range of activity formats for different motivational groups.

An important addition to this situation is made by the results of the comprehensive study «Student self-government in higher education institutions. Features and growth points». It was held in 2023 by the State University of Management and the Russian Youth Union. It covers more than 14,000 students from all regions of Russia, which makes it one of the most representative in this field in recent years. According to the results, the majority of students consider student self-government bodies necessary, clear and open, working for the benefit of all students, and are generally satisfied with their effectiveness. At the same time, about 40% of respondents do not have information about which student self-government bodies they have at their university and what functions they perform. In their answers, students expressed the opinion that the leadership of a self-government body should be elected on a competitive, alternative basis, and not appointed «from above». However, in practice, such elections are not always transparent [3].

Respondents also noted the lack of material, technical and financial resources to improve the functioning of student councils. At the same time, it is emphasized that self-government is based primarily on non-material, internal resources. Experts who developed a profile of a student activist were involved in the study. Among its key features, activity, responsibility, organization, sociability, initiative, competence, ability to work in a team, ability to solve conflict situations, decency, ambition and critical thinking were highlighted. As the authors of the study noted, this picture largely coincides with the «ideal graduate» presented by modern employers.

The analysis of barriers that prevent students ‘ involvement in student self-government shows a number of important factors. Thus, according to a number of studies, about 60% of students combine their studies with part-time work, which means that they do not have time to participate in such bodies and events held by them [3]. Of course, participation in the activities of the student council and other associations on a full-fledged basis is comparable in labor costs to the main work or study. In this regard, it is important to develop such universal skills in the field of time management, self-discipline and the ability to set priorities. However, there are other important barriers indirectly related to the lack of time resources. This includes students’ lack of understanding of the goals and objectives of student self-government bodies, and frustration with their effectiveness when a student sees that their initiatives are not being implemented or face bureaucracy, and disinterest in the life of the university as a whole, and, finally, the infantile nature of some of the student youth.

Special attention should be paid to the attitude of the teaching staff to student self-government. A number of surveys show that for a significant proportion of potentially active young people, a deterrent factor is the openly or covertly broadcast negative opinion on the part of teachers. Teachers in some cases perceive student activity as an obstacle to learning, which, in their view, distracts students from their primary academic responsibilities of acquiring knowledge. Overcoming this barrier requires purposeful explanatory work with the academic staff of the university and the inclusion of indicators of student participation in self-government activities in the criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of departments, faculties and institutes.

At the same time, students’ involvement in student self-government is strongly and sometimes negatively affected by the internal conflict of the environment. Moreover, conflicts can occur both within one body between individual students, and between different bodies, if there are parallel student structures. Special attention should be paid to the contradictions between the student self-government bodies and the university administration. But one way or another, all this significantly reduces the motivation of students and leads to the loss of the most proactive participants.

It is important to note that today there is no universal model of student self-government suitable for any university. Educational organizations differ in the number of students, training areas, location, and so on. In each specific situation, individual design is required, taking into account the specifics of a particular university. As practical recommendations, the methodological recommendations of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education on the creation of student councils, the consolidation of councils of educational units (faculties, institutes) and councils of dormitories provide valuable guidance. The issue of mandatory internal elections at all levels is reflected separately.

In support of the theoretical approaches and research described, we will analyze the practical experience of specific universities in terms of student self-government and its role in the development of personality and social activity of young people. One of the most successful examples is the activity of the student self-government system at the Saint Petersburg State University of Industrial Technologies and Design (SPbSUITD). In recent years, this university has developed a multi-level, institutionalized system of involving students in management and project activities, which brings concrete, measurable results.

In April 2025, the presentation of the comprehensive program for the development of youth policy «PROMTECHDESIGN» was held at SPbSUITD. Its key areas are project-based learning, sports, creativity, academic training, media production, and volunteering. The key goal is to create a favorable environment for students’ self-realization. The university is turning from a place of formal knowledge acquisition into a space for personal growth and first professional experiences. A distinctive feature of this project is the fact that the formulated initiatives are the result of students’ hard work and close interaction with representatives of various structures of SPbSUITD. Among them are the Department for the Development of Student Initiatives, the Department of Media Content and Social Design, the Department for Youth Policy, etc. Thus, this example is a successful case of implementing the principle of co-management in practice. Students in this case become not just passive recipients of services, but equal partners of the university administration [6]. This program took part in the All-Russian competition of youth projects among educational organizations of higher education «Rosmolodezh.Grants».

It is important to note that following the results of the 1st season of this competition in 2024, projects created by students and employees of SPbSUITD received grant support totaling more than 11 million rubles. Among the winners are 16 projects aimed at improving various spheres of student life. These are the adaptation cluster for first — year students «START» (grant amount – 810,664 rubles), the innovative laboratory «PROJECTOR» (738,827 rubles), the humorous workshop «NEVA» (733,040 rubles), the festival of creativity «GlowFest» (550,080 rubles), an educational course on media «toсhka.media» (823517 rubles), an adaptation course for residents of dormitories «DORM» (958,051 rubles), a program for schoolchildren «My future profession» (805,526 rubles), Academy of Media Mentoring «Higher School of SMM» (619,800 rubles), festival of student Science (540,280 rubles), etc [7].

Special attention should be paid not so much to the amount of grant support, but to the diverse thematic focus. It shows that student self-government at SPbSUITD does not work in a single, narrow profile, but covers almost all areas of student life, from everyday life and leisure to science and professional orientation.

Separately, I would like to focus on the project «START.Communities», which is implemented on the basis of SPbSUITD with grant support from the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs (Rosmolodezh). This program involves implementation in three stages and is aimed at practical improvement of the student self-government system among students of colleges and technical schools in St. Petersburg, which are primarily targeted by the project. Its key goal is to involve first-year students in the creative, sports and social and legal life of the educational organization, as well as to create a friendly and efficient student team, in which every student can find opportunities that match their interests and abilities for themselves and the scope of their talents and skills.

As part of the project, participants analyze the existing student self-government systems in their organizations, identify strengths and weaknesses, and develop their own development strategies. Within the framework of theoretical and practical training, experts help to master skills in the field of strategic planning, discuss risks and prospects, and evaluate the effectiveness of student councils using quantitative and qualitative indicators. Finally, special attention is paid to discussing the effective strategies for building sustainable student communities that do not break up after the first change of assets.

This project is extremely important from the point of view of horizontal dissemination of best practices, when the student self-government of SPbSUITD becomes a driver of development for the whole region, helping to build such an effective system in dozens of colleges and technical schools.

Along with this, the university regularly hosts project schools for college students, where participants get acquainted with the possibilities of grant support, develop their projects under the guidance of mentors and defend them before the jury. Special importance is attached to teamwork, developing a clear project structure, reflection and receiving high-quality feedback from experts.

Thus, the analysis of the activities of student self-government bodies in SPbSUITD allows us to draw several important conclusions about the possibilities of improving the efficiency of such structures. First of all, it is necessary to create an institutional environment in which student initiatives will receive comprehensive support, starting with methodological issues (for example, training in social project development), ending with the financial part (support of grant applications, co-financing). At the same time, students should not only have the right to self-realization, but also systematically learn to do so. For example, how to turn your idea into a project and apply for a grant to implement it. The variety of implemented projects shows that student self-government is able to involve young people with very different interests and inclinations. At the same time, such projects do not have an abstract, but a very real, measurable social effect, which may even go beyond the university. An example is career guidance work with schoolchildren, adaptation of out-of-town students, and development of volunteerism. In this regard, a well-built system of student self-government becomes not just an element of extracurricular work, but a real resource for the personal and professional development of future specialists and a tool for involving young people in socially significant activities.

Summing up, we can formulate several key conclusions. First of all, student self-government is a multi-faceted social and pedagogical phenomenon. Its most important functions are adaptive, communicative, stimulating, informational and organizational. This allows us to consider student self-government as one of the basic elements of forming a student’s social maturity and readiness for full-fledged professional and social activities [10].

At the same time, the effectiveness of student self-government as a tool for involving young people in socially significant activities directly depends on taking into account the real motives and interests of students. It is important to remember that the active core is just a few percent of the total number of students. The main barriers that reduce student engagement are lack of time, lack of understanding of the goals and objectives of student self-government, frustration with its effectiveness, and, most importantly, negative or skeptical attitude on the part of the teaching staff. Overcoming these difficulties is associated with both improving students ‘ awareness and purposeful work with teachers.

Analysis of the successful experience of SPbSUITD demonstrates a set of conditions under which student self-government achieves high efficiency. As proof of this, today’s student activists can be real actors of social change who are able to attract significant resources and achieve concrete, measurable results that are important not only for the university, but also for the city and region.

In turn, the potential of student self-government is not fully realized in the entire Russian higher education system, as evidenced by the statistics of a number of studies. With formal reports about the presence of a student council, the actual involvement of students remains low, and the work of such bodies is carried out sporadically or, in the worst case, simply imitated. In this regard, a promising direction for further research and practical work in this area is to develop as universal as possible, but at the same time adaptable to different types of universities, models of student councils’ activities, including an assessment of their effectiveness. Investing in the development of student self-government is an investment in the future. After all, it is from today’s leaders of student collectives that tomorrow’s leaders, specialists and citizens in general will grow, determining the shape and future of the country.