INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Constructing Institutional Identities: The Case of the Slogans of

Selected Public and Private Universities in Ghana

³Priscilla Aboagye Aryeh

²Gladys K. Sombonah,

¹Gabriel Kwame Ankrah (PhD),

¹University of Mines and Technology, Department of Technical Communication, Tarkwa, Ghana.

²Akrokerri College of Education, Ghana

³University of Mines and Technology, Tarkwa.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2026.100300433

Received: 08 November 2025; Accepted: 15 November 2025; Published: 11 April 2026

ABSTRACT

University slogans serve as potent semiotic tools through which higher education institutions communicate their

identities, philosophies, and aspirations to the public. In Ghana, both public and private universities employ

slogans to construct and project institutional identities that align with national development goals, cultural

expectations, and global competitiveness. Drawing on data from the official slogans of ten public and ten private

universities in Ghana, this study investigates the linguistic and ideological features that underlie the construction

of institutional identities. Employing a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework and Halliday’s Systemic

Functional Linguistics (SFL) as analytical lenses, the study examines how language choices in these slogans

reflect particular institutional values, power relations, and socio-cultural orientations. The analysis reveals that

public universities tend to emphasize national service, knowledge production, and moral responsibility, while

private universities foreground spirituality, entrepreneurship, and global citizenship. The findings highlight the

intersection of education, ideology, and discourse in the Ghanaian higher education landscape, offering insights

into how institutional communication serves as a microcosm of broader societal narratives.

Keywords: Institutional Identity; University Slogans; Ghana; Systemic Functional Linguistics; Critical

Discourse Analysis; Higher Education Discourse

INTRODUCTION

Language constitutes one of the most powerful resources for constructing and negotiating social identities. In

institutional contexts, linguistic choices are rarely arbitrary; rather, they are strategically selected to embody,

sustain, and communicate values, missions, and ideologies (Norman Fairclough 1995; Teun A. van Dijk 1998).

Within higher education, slogans function as condensed linguistic artefacts through which universities project

their institutional identity and brand ethos. Slogans capture the self-representation of universities, often serving

as a linguistic gateway through which the public perceives and evaluates them. In Ghana, as in many other

postcolonial societies, the discursive practices of universities are deeply intertwined with historical, political,

and cultural narratives of nationhood, moral responsibility, and global aspiration (Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o 1986;

Kwame Anthony Appiah 1992). Examining how universities linguistically position themselves through slogans

thus offers an important window into the dynamics of institutional identity construction.

Institutional identity refers to the composite of symbolic meanings, values, and discursive resources through

which an organization differentiates itself and is recognized by others. This identity is constructed through

multiple semiotic modes—logos, mottos, mission statements, and slogans—but language remains central (Pierre

Bourdieu 1991; James Paul Gee 2011). University slogans, typically short and memorable phrases, condense

institutional values and ideologies into succinct linguistic forms that are easily communicable to internal and

external audiences. While they share certain characteristics with advertising slogans, university slogans go

beyond marketing: they constitute ideological artefacts that project epistemic authority, moral credibility, and

social purpose (Vijay K. Bhatia 2004; Ken Hyland 2012).

Page 5985

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

In Ghana, university education has expanded dramatically since the early 2000s, with the establishment of

numerous private universities alongside long-standing public ones. This proliferation has generated a

competitive educational marketplace in which institutions must distinguish themselves not only through

academic programs but also through the symbolic capital of their names, logos, and slogans. Slogans thus operate

as strategic discourse, simultaneously reflecting institutional histories and aspirations while appealing to

prospective students, parents, and the wider society (Fairclough 2003; Bourdieu 1991). For public universities,

identity is often tied to national development and civic responsibility; for private universities, it frequently

integrates moral, entrepreneurial, or spiritual orientations. This duality makes Ghana an ideal sociolinguistic

space in which to examine the linguistic construction of institutional identity.

Despite their importance, university slogans have received limited scholarly attention in African linguistics and

discourse studies. While existing research has examined advertising language, political discourse, and

educational policy texts, the semiotics of institutional self-presentation through slogans remains underexplored.

Most Ghanaian linguistic studies have focused on political slogans, religious discourse, and media

communication (e.g. Ruth Wodak 2011; van Dijk 1998). Yet, the slogans of higher education institutions—

where the ideologies of knowledge, morality, and modernity intersect—offer a rich site for exploring the

interplay between discourse, ideology, and identity.

This paper, therefore, aims to investigate how the slogans of selected public and private universities in Ghana

construct institutional identities. Specifically, it seeks to:

1. Identify the linguistic and rhetorical features used in the slogans.

2. Analyse the dominant themes and processes (material, mental, relational, verbal) encoded in the slogans.

3. Examine the ideological orientations reflected in these linguistic constructions.

4. Compare the identity discourses of public and private universities to uncover their ideological and

communicative differences.

Grounded in Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough 1995; van Dijk 2008) and Systemic Functional Linguistics

(Halliday & Matthiessen 2014), this study conceptualizes slogans as sites of ideological struggle and social

representation. CDA provides the theoretical lens for understanding how power, ideology, and identity are

embedded in language, while SFL offers the analytical framework for exploring the relationship between

linguistic choices and meaning-making functions. The intersection of these two frameworks allows for both

textual and contextual analyses—tracing how language constructs reality within specific institutional and socio-

political contexts.

The study contributes to the growing scholarship on educational discourse in Africa by highlighting how

university slogans, as linguistic artefacts, encode institutional ideology and project distinct social personas. It

also offers a framework for analysing institutional discourse that integrates linguistic form with socio-cultural

function. The findings are expected to advance understanding of how Ghanaian universities position themselves

within local and global academic hierarchies through language, and how these linguistic constructions mirror

broader ideological and cultural orientations within Ghanaian society.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Institutional Identity and Discourse

The concept of institutional identity has been widely discussed in organizational communication, sociology, and

discourse studies. It refers to the symbolic and linguistic practices through which institutions define and represent

themselves to various audiences (Fairclough 1992; van Leeuwen 2008). Identity is not an inherent property of

institutions but a discursively constructed phenomenon achieved through language and other semiotic resources.

In educational contexts, identity construction manifests in mission statements, mottos, prospectuses, and

slogans—texts that condense complex institutional values into accessible linguistic forms (Higgins 2011).

Page 5986

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Fairclough (1995) argues that institutions reproduce and legitimize social structures through discourse, using

linguistic forms to naturalize specific ideologies. Universities, as knowledge-producing institutions, use

discourse not only to communicate their values but also to maintain symbolic authority. Their slogans, though

brief, play a role in this process by representing institutional philosophies in a condensed, memorable form. In

the context of higher education, these discursive practices are influenced by broader social, political, and

economic factors, including globalization, marketization, and national development agendas.

From a sociolinguistic perspective, institutional identity is also relational—it emerges through differentiation

from other institutions. As Bucholtz and Hall (2005) note, identity is the product of positioning within

interactional, cultural, and ideological fields. Thus, when universities proclaim slogans such as “In Wisdom We

Build” or “Empowering Minds for the Future,” they are not merely describing themselves but constructing

distinctive personae vis-à-vis other institutions and the broader society. The repetition of certain lexical and

thematic choices across institutions also signals shared ideological orientations—for instance, toward

knowledge, service, or faith.

University Discourse and Linguistic Branding

Research on university discourse has expanded alongside the globalization and commercialization of higher

education. Scholars such as Fairclough (1993) and Bhatia (2008) have highlighted the increasing marketization

of academic discourse, whereby universities adopt promotional and corporate communication strategies to attract

students and funding. Linguistic branding—the use of language to project institutional image—has thus become

a key element of university identity construction (Piller 2001; van Leeuwen 2005).

Studies on university slogans, though fewer in number, have underscored their role in articulating institutional

missions and values. Thurlow and Jaworski (2010) describe slogans as “compressed narratives” that encapsulate

institutional ideology. In the African context, where universities operate amid competing pressures of tradition,

modernization, and global ranking systems, linguistic branding often serves both promotional and ideological

purposes. A university slogan may simultaneously appeal to national pride and global competitiveness—

illustrating what Fairclough (2001) calls “the hybridity of discourses” in neoliberal educational spaces.

In Ghana, university discourse reflects both postcolonial legacies and contemporary aspirations. Early public

universities, such as the University of Ghana and Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology

(KNUST), were founded to advance national development and human capital. Their slogans typically emphasize

service, wisdom, and leadership—values aligned with civic responsibility. Conversely, newer private

universities, often established by religious organizations, foreground moral, spiritual, and entrepreneurial values.

This ideological contrast mirrors broader educational discourses in Ghana, where faith-based and secular

worldviews coexist and compete for legitimacy (Oduro 2019).

Critical Discourse Analysis and Educational Institutions

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) offers a powerful theoretical and methodological approach for examining

how power, ideology, and social relations are constructed in institutional language. According to Fairclough

(1992), CDA involves three interrelated dimensions: text, discourse practice, and social practice. This triadic

model allows analysts to move beyond surface linguistic patterns to explore how discourses reproduce social

structures and ideologies. Wodak and Meyer (2016) further argue that institutional discourse must be studied in

its socio-political context, as texts are shaped by the institutional settings in which they are produced and

consumed.

In educational discourse research, CDA has been used to reveal how language encodes hierarchies of knowledge,

authority, and legitimacy. For example, Rogers et al. (2005) demonstrate how institutional texts reflect and

reinforce power relations between administrators, teachers, and students. Similarly, van Dijk (2008) contends

that educational institutions are key sites for ideological reproduction, as they define the norms of legitimate

knowledge. Within the Ghanaian context, slogans can thus be seen as part of an ideological apparatus that

projects specific visions of education, citizenship, and development.

Page 5987

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Systemic Functional Linguistics and the Grammar of Meaning

While CDA focuses on ideology and power, Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) provides the analytical tools

for examining how linguistic structures realize meaning in context. Halliday’s (1985, 1994) model of language

as a social semiotic system identifies three metafunctions—ideational, interpersonal, and textual—which

together explain how language constructs reality. Of particular relevance to slogan analysis is the ideational

metafunction, which is realized through transitivity: the configuration of processes (verbs), participants, and

circumstances that represent experience.

Transitivity analysis enables researchers to identify whether a slogan represents action (material processes),

cognition or emotion (mental processes), description or identity (relational processes), or communication (verbal

processes). For example, the slogan “Empowering Minds for the Future” foregrounds a material process

(“empowering”) that positions the university as an active agent. Similarly, “In Wisdom We Build” encodes both

a relational process (“are wise”) and a material process (“build”), projecting wisdom as the foundation of

institutional activity.

SFL has been widely applied in discourse studies to uncover the relationship between linguistic form and social

function (Eggins 2004; Martin & White 2005). In slogan analysis, it enables the mapping of ideational meaning

onto ideological purpose. When combined with CDA, SFL facilitates a comprehensive understanding of how

linguistic features—lexical choices, grammatical structures, and thematic organization—contribute to the

construction of institutional identities.

African Educational Discourse and Identity Construction

In African higher education, identity construction is shaped by the interplay of colonial histories, local

epistemologies, and global pressures. Scholars such as Bamgbose (2000) and Prah (2009) have highlighted the

tension between indigenization and Westernization in African educational discourse. University slogans, as

linguistic artefacts, reflect these tensions by integrating local values (e.g., community, morality, service) with

universal ideals (e.g., excellence, innovation, leadership). This hybridity mirrors what Blommaert (2010) calls

“the layered nature of discourse” in postcolonial societies.

Recent Ghanaian discourse studies (Agyekum 2019; Adika 2012) have underscored the importance of examining

language in institutional and educational settings as a means of understanding national identity formation. Yet,

there remains a paucity of research on the micro-linguistic level of institutional self-representation—particularly

the analysis of slogans as sites of meaning-making. By situating slogan discourse within both CDA and SFL

frameworks, the present study bridges this gap and contributes to a nuanced understanding of how Ghanaian

universities linguistically negotiate their identities in a rapidly transforming educational landscape.

Theoretical Framework

The present study adopts an integrated theoretical framework combining Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to explore how institutional identities are constructed through university

slogans. These two frameworks, though distinct in orientation, complement each other in examining both the

ideological and linguistic dimensions of discourse. CDA provides the interpretive lens for understanding power,

ideology, and social meaning, while SFL supplies the grammatical and semantic tools for analysing how these

meanings are realized in language.

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)

Critical Discourse Analysis, as articulated by Fairclough (1992, 1995), van Dijk (1998, 2008), and Wodak

(2001), is grounded in the view that discourse is both socially shaped and socially shaping. It assumes that

language is a medium through which power relations and ideologies are constructed, maintained, and contested.

CDA thus moves beyond textual description to explain how linguistic practices relate to broader structures of

dominance and control.

Page 5988

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Fairclough’s (1992) three-dimensional model of discourse—comprising text, discursive practice, and social

practice—is particularly relevant here. The first dimension involves the close analysis of linguistic features

(lexical, grammatical, and rhetorical). The second considers the production, distribution, and consumption of

texts within specific institutional settings. The third examines the wider social structures and ideological

formations that inform those discursive practices.

In the context of university slogans, CDA facilitates the interpretation of how short linguistic forms encapsulate

complex ideological positions. Slogans are not neutral descriptions; they are ideological acts that legitimize

institutional missions and values. For example, a slogan such as “Knowledge, Integrity, Service” reflects an

ideological commitment to moral education and national development. CDA enables us to unpack the implicit

power relations—between the institution and the public, between tradition and modernity—that underpin such

linguistic constructions.

This approach also recognizes that language use in institutional settings is inherently intertextual. University

slogans often echo broader social and political discourses—of development, excellence, or faith—that circulate

within Ghanaian society. As Fairclough (2001) notes, intertextuality is a key mechanism through which ideology

is reproduced and naturalized. By drawing on shared cultural narratives, slogans position institutions within

recognizable ideological fields, thereby reinforcing social cohesion and legitimacy.

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)

Systemic Functional Linguistics, developed by Halliday (1978, 1985) and later refined by Halliday and

Matthiessen (2014), views language as a social semiotic system—a resource for making meaning within social

contexts. SFL posits that all linguistic choices serve three metafunctions:

-

The ideational metafunction, through which language represents experience and reality;

The interpersonal metafunction, through which language enacts relationships and attitudes; and

The textual metafunction, through which language organizes messages coherently within context.

In slogan analysis, the ideational metafunction is particularly salient. It is realized through the transitivity system,

which represents how processes (verbs), participants, and circumstances construct experiences of action,

perception, and being. Halliday distinguishes several process types—material, mental, relational, verbal,

behavioural, and existential—each contributing different dimensions of meaning.

By analysing the transitivity structures in university slogans, one can uncover how institutions represent

themselves as actors, thinkers, or moral entities. For instance, a slogan like “Empowering Minds for the Future”

encodes a material process (“empowering”), positioning the university as an agent of transformation. A slogan

such as “In Wisdom We Build” combines mental (“wisdom”) and material (“build”) processes, projecting a self-

image grounded in intellect and productivity. SFL thus enables a precise description of the linguistic resources

through which institutions enact particular social roles.

Integrating CDA and SFL

While CDA provides a macro-analytical framework and SFL a micro-linguistic one, their integration offers a

holistic approach to discourse analysis. Fairclough (2003) himself advocates a synthesis of linguistic and social

theory, arguing that understanding the ideological effects of discourse requires detailed textual analysis. SFL, in

turn, supplies CDA with the grammatical precision needed to trace the linguistic realization of ideology.

In this study, CDA is used to interpret the social and ideological dimensions of university slogans—how they

reflect the moral, cultural, and political priorities of Ghanaian higher education. SFL is employed to examine

the linguistic realization of those ideologies—how particular grammatical and lexical choices construct agency,

values, and relationships. Together, the two frameworks enable both description and interpretation: SFL

describes how identity is constructed; CDA explains why it is constructed that way.

Page 5989

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

This combined approach also aligns with the notion of critical systemic linguistics (Young & Harrison 2004;

Bartlett 2012), which seeks to bridge linguistic form and social function. By using SFL as a descriptive toolkit

within a CDA perspective, the analysis reveals how even brief institutional texts such as slogans embody larger

social discourses—of nation-building, spirituality, or global competitiveness.

Application to the Present Study

The CDA–SFL framework informs every stage of this research. At the textual level, slogans are analysed in

terms of process types, participant roles, and key lexical choices. At the discursive-practice level, the study

examines how slogans circulate through institutional and media channels. At the social-practice level, the

analysis situates these linguistic forms within Ghana’s broader socio-cultural and educational landscape.

The framework thus allows the study to move fluidly between linguistic evidence and social interpretation,

offering a comprehensive account of how Ghanaian universities use language to construct institutional identities.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This study adopts a qualitative-descriptive research design grounded in the interpretive paradigm. The aim is to

explore how institutional identities are constructed through the linguistic and ideological features of Ghanaian

university slogans. Given that slogans are short, context-dependent, and symbolically dense texts, qualitative

analysis enables an in-depth interpretation of meaning beyond surface linguistic structures (Creswell & Poth

2018).

The analytical framework integrates Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Linguistics

(SFL). CDA provides a macro-analytic lens for examining how discourse reproduces ideology, power, and social

relations (Fairclough 1995; Wodak 2011), while SFL offers micro-level tools for analyzing how meaning is

encoded through grammar and lexical choices (Halliday & Matthiessen 2014). This combined approach allows

for a systematic and theoretically grounded interpretation of both linguistic form and ideological function.

The study focuses on twenty (20) universities in Ghana, equally divided between public and private institutions.

This balanced sampling enables a comparative analysis of how institutional ownership influences discursive

identity construction within Ghana’s dual higher education system.

Data Selection

The primary dataset consists of official university slogans obtained from institutional websites, prospectuses,

and promotional materials. These texts were selected because they represent authoritative and publicly

sanctioned expressions of institutional identity.

The sample includes:

Ten (10) public universities (e.g. University of Ghana, KNUST, UCC, UDS)

Ten (10) private universities (e.g. Ashesi University, Central University, Pentecost University)

To ensure data validity, slogans were cross-verified across multiple sources, including official websites,

admissions brochures, and institutional social media platforms. Data collection was conducted between June and

August 2025.

Data Collection Procedure

The data collection process followed a systematic multi-stage procedure:

Identification

-

A comprehensive list of accredited universities was obtained from the Ghana Tertiary Education

Commission (GTEC).

Page 5990

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Extraction

Official slogans were extracted from institutional websites and verified promotional materials.

Verification

-

Each slogan was cross-checked across at least two independent sources to ensure accuracy and currency.

Compilation

-

Slogans were compiled into a structured dataset including institutional type (public/private), year of

establishment, and thematic category.

Preliminary Thematic Grouping

- Slogans were initially categorized into broad thematic clusters (e.g. knowledge, service, faith, leadership,

innovation) to guide subsequent coding.

Analytical Procedures

The analysis followed a systematic, multi-stage coding process, supported by the qualitative data analysis

software NVivo (Version 14). NVivo was used to organize, code, and retrieve textual data, enhancing

transparency and analytical rigor (Paulus, Woods, Atkins & Macklin 2017; Jackson & Bazeley 2019).

Stage 1: Data Preparation

-

All slogans were imported into NVivo as individual text entries.

Each entry was assigned metadata attributes (ownership type, thematic category, source).

Stage 2: Open Coding (Initial Coding)

-

Using an inductive approach, slogans were first subjected to open coding (Saldaña 2021).

Codes were generated for recurring lexical and semantic features (e.g. knowledge, faith, service, excellence).

This stage produced an initial coding scheme reflecting dominant lexical fields.

Stage 3: Axial Coding (Categorization)

Codes were then grouped into broader analytical categories:

-

Civic-developmental discourse

Moral-spiritual discourse

Global-entrepreneurial discourse

Relationships between categories were examined to identify patterns across public and private institutions.

Stage 4: Systemic Functional Linguistic (SFL) Analysis

Each slogan was analyzed for its transitivity structure following Halliday and Matthiessen (2014):

-

Process types: material, mental, relational, verbal

Participants: actor, goal, carrier, senser

Page 5991

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

-

Circumstances: purpose, manner, location

For example:

“Empowering Minds for the Future” → Material process

“Faith, Integrity and Excellence” → Relational attribution

This stage enabled classification of slogans based on the types of meanings they encode.

Stage 5: Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)

Building on the SFL findings, CDA was applied to interpret ideological meanings:

-

Lexical field analysis (e.g. faith, service, leadership)

Rhetorical strategies (parallelism, metaphor, nominalization)

Discursive positioning (nationalist, moral-spiritual, neoliberal-global)

Following Fairclough’s (1995, 2003) framework, analysis moved across:

-

Text (linguistic features)

Discursive practice (production and consumption of slogans)

Social practice (broader ideological context)

Additionally, insights from the Discourse-Historical Approach (Wodak 2011) were used to situate slogans within

Ghana’s socio-cultural and religious context.

Stage 6: Pattern Interpretation and Synthesis

-

NVivo queries (word frequency and coding comparison) were used to identify dominant patterns.

Findings were synthesized into thematic and ideological categories presented in tables.

4.5 Coding Reliability and Validity

To ensure analytical rigor, the study employed multiple strategies for reliability and validity:

Intercoder Reliability

Two independent linguists trained in CDA and SFL coded the dataset. Coding consistency was assessed through

iterative comparison, and discrepancies were resolved through discussion. This aligns with best practices in

qualitative discourse analysis (O’Connor & Joffe 2020).

Audit Trail

All coding decisions, category definitions, and analytical steps were documented within NVivo, ensuring

transparency and replicability.

Theoretical Validity

Coding categories were grounded in established frameworks:

-

Transitivity → Halliday & Matthiessen (2014)

Page 5992

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

-

Ideology → Fairclough (1995, 2003)

Discourse-historical context → Wodak (2011)

Triangulation

The study integrates:

-

Linguistic analysis (SFL)

Ideological interpretation (CDA)

Thematic categorization

This triangulation enhances the robustness of findings (Flick 2020).

Data Presentation

Findings are presented both qualitatively and descriptively. Tables summarize the distribution of slogans by

ownership, process type, and thematic focus, while selected excerpts are subjected to detailed discourse analysis.

Beyond description, the analysis interrogates how linguistic choices function as strategic resources for

persuasion, differentiation, and ideological positioning within Ghana’s competitive higher education market. In

line with Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough 1995; Wodak 2011), particular attention is paid to how slogans

enact power by legitimizing institutional authority and shaping audience perception. Thus, the study moves from

surface linguistic patterns to an interpretation of slogans as instruments of symbolic power and market

positioning.

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

Overview

University slogans operate as condensed narratives of institutional philosophy, distilling complex educational

ideologies into memorable linguistic forms. In Ghana’s higher education context, such slogans function not only

as descriptors but as strategic persuasive tools designed to attract students, secure legitimacy, and differentiate

institutions within an increasingly competitive marketplace (Bhatia 2005; Mautner 2020).

From a CDA perspective, slogans are not neutral; they are ideologically loaded micro-discourses that construct

institutional authority and align universities with broader socio-cultural values (Fairclough 2003; Wodak 2011).

In particular, the deployment of religious language in private university slogans must be understood not merely

as identity expression but as a discursive strategy of persuasion and symbolic power in the educational

marketplace.

The Data

Table 1: Public Universities and Official Slogans (2025)

No.

University

Slogan

Thematic Focus

University of Ghana

Integrity/Moral Excellence

Integri

(Proceed

Integrity)

Prodedamus

with

Kwame

Nkrumah

University

of

Knowledge/Innovation

2.

Advancing Knowledge

in Science and

Technology

Science and Technology (KNUST)

Page 5993

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

University of Cape Coast

Truth/Enlightenment

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Veritas Nobis Lumen

(“Truth, Our Guide”)

University for Development Studies

(UDS)

Service/Development

Knowledge for Service

Education for Service

University of Education, Winneba

(UEW)

Pedagogy/Civic Duty

University of Mines and Technology

(UMaT)

Technical/Ethical Values

Health and Nation-Building

Environment/Sustainability

Faith/Professional Ethics

Ethics/Professional Identity

Knowledge, Truth and

Excellence

University of Health and Allied

Sciences (UHAS)

Health

for

Development

University of Energy and Natural

Resources (UENR)

Energy for Sustainable

Development

Ghana Institute of Journalism (GIJ)

Ad Dei Gloriam (“To

the Glory of God”)

University of Professional Studies,

Accra (UPSA)

Knowledge,

Integrity

and Professionalism

Table 2. Private Universities and Official Slogans (2025)

No

University

Slogan

Thematic Focus

Ashesi University

Leadership/Global Citizen

Scholarship,

Leadership, Citizenship

Central University

Faith/Excellence

2.

3.

Faith,

Excellence

Integrity

and

Pentecost University

Religion / Transformation

Transforming

Society

through

Faith and

Technology

Valley View University

Ethics / Christian Values

Discipline / Faith

4.

5.

Excellence,

Service

Integrity,

Methodist University Ghana

Excellence and Morality

Catholic University of Ghana

Integration of Faith and

Reason

6.

Scientia

(“Knowledge

Faith”)

et

Fide

and

Wisconsin

College

International

University

Academic

Empowerment

Growth

/

7.

8.

Knowledge, Excellence,

and Empowerment

Presbyterian University Ghana

Leadership / Discipline

Discipline in Leadership

Page 5994

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Lancaster University Ghana

Innovation

Perspective

/

Global

9.

A World of Possibilities

Ghana Baptist University College

Faith

Excellence

/

Academic

10.

Excellence

Godliness

with

Thematic Distribution

A thematic comparison reveals three dominant identity frames across the dataset:

1. Civic-Developmental Orientation (Public Universities): Slogans emphasize nation-building, service, and

knowledge production.

2. Moral-Spiritual Orientation (Private Universities): Slogans focus on faith, integrity, and transformation.

3. Global-Entrepreneurial Orientation (Emerging Cross-sectoral Trend): Found in both sectors but

stronger in private universities, with emphasis on empowerment and global citizenship.

Table 3. Dominant Ideological Orientations by Ownership

Orientation

Public (%)

Private (%) Key Lexical Items

Civic/National

Development

50

15

Service, Development, Knowledge

Moral-Spiritual

20

30

50

35

Faith, Integrity, Godliness

Global/Entrepreneurial

Excellence, Leadership, Empowerment

5.4 Linguistic Patterns and SFL Analysis

Transitivity Structures

Public university slogans frequently deploy material processes—verbs of doing and creating—such as

advancing, building, developing, and serving. These verbs foreground active contribution and align with national

development discourse. Example: “Education for Service” (UEW) encodes a goal-oriented material process,

positioning education as an instrument for collective good. Private university slogans, conversely, favor

relational and mental processes. Expressions like “Excellence and Morality” or “Faith, Integrity, and

Excellence” describe being rather than doing. They construct the university’s identity as a state of moral being

and divine affiliation.

Nominalization and Parallelism

Both public and private institutions use nominalized triads—e.g., Knowledge, Integrity, and Professionalism

(UPSA) or Faith, Integrity, and Excellence (Central University)—to condense multiple values into symmetrical

units. This rhetorical pattern creates rhythm, memorability, and ideological balance, reflecting the tripartite

cognitive pattern common in institutional discourse.

Metaphoricity and Personification

Metaphorical expressions such as “A World of Possibilities” (Lancaster University Ghana) and “Transforming

Society through Faith and Technology” (Pentecost University) personify the university as an agent of

transformation. Such metaphors situate higher education within the global neoliberal discourse of innovation

and self-realization.

Page 5995

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Ideological Interpretations (CDA Perspective)

Public Universities: Nationalism and Development

A. Public Universities: Nationalism and Development (unchanged core, slightly tightened) Public university

slogans mirror Ghana’s post-independence ideological tradition that links education to national progress. Phrases

such as Knowledge for Service and Health for Development align with state-driven discourses of modernization.

These institutions position themselves as instruments of public good, reinforcing civic legitimacy and state-

oriented authority.

Private Universities: Faith, Persuasion, and Symbolic Power

Private university slogans reveal not only the influence of religious foundations but also the strategic deployment

of religious discourse as a persuasive and competitive resource. The recurrent use of lexical items such as faith,

Godliness, Christian values, and morality functions at multiple discursive levels.

First, from a genre perspective, such language reflects what Bhatia (2005) describes as promotional hybridity,

where institutional discourse blends informational, ideological, and persuasive functions. Religious expressions

are not merely declarative; they are value-laden signals aimed at constructing trust, credibility, and moral

authority. In a context where higher education is increasingly marketized, these values become symbolic

commodities that differentiate institutions.

Second, from a CDA perspective, religious language operates as a form of symbolic power (Bourdieu 1991). By

invoking divine authority (“Excellence with Godliness”, “Knowledge and Faith”), institutions elevate their

legitimacy beyond the secular domain, positioning themselves as morally superior or spiritually grounded

alternatives to public universities. This aligns with Wodak’s (2011) Discourse-Historical Approach, which

emphasizes how discourses draw on culturally embedded belief systems to legitimize authority.

Third, religious discourse functions as a persuasive strategy targeting specific audiences, particularly within

Ghana’s highly religious society. By aligning institutional identity with widely shared spiritual values, private

universities construct affective and ideological alignment with prospective students and parents. This reflects

what recent studies identify as identity-based branding, where institutions appeal to the beliefs and aspirations

of their target market (Henderson & Bowden 2020; Saichaie & Morphew 2021).

Fourth, the use of religious language can also be interpreted as a market differentiation strategy. In a crowded

higher education sector, faith-based discourse allows private universities to carve out a distinct niche, positioning

themselves as providers of not only academic excellence but also moral and spiritual formation. This aligns with

neoliberal educational discourse, where institutions compete through branding and value-added identity claims

(Mautner 2020).

Thus, religious language in private university slogans is not simply reflective of institutional heritage; it is

performative, strategic, and ideological—a means of exercising symbolic power, shaping consumer perception,

and securing competitive advantage.

Emerging Hybridity: Global Citizenship

A third, hybrid orientation appears in slogans that combine moral, civic, and global aspirations. For example,

Scholarship, Leadership, Citizenship reflects a convergence of academic excellence, ethical responsibility, and

global engagement.

This hybridity illustrates what Fairclough (2001) describes as the mixing of discourses in late modernity, where

institutions simultaneously draw on civic, religious, and neoliberal frameworks. It also reflects contemporary

trends in higher education branding, where universities position themselves as globally relevant while

maintaining local legitimacy (Mwinlaaru & Nartey 2022).

Page 5996

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Lexical Field Analysis

Table 4. Lexical Frequency of Key Ideological Terms

Lexical Item

Knowledge

Excellence

Faith

Frequency (Out of 20)

Orientation

10

9

Academic/Civic

Global/Entrepreneurial

Moral/Spiritual

Civic/National

Moral/Professional

Global/Entrepreneurial

Civic

7

Service

6

Integrity

5

Leadership

Development

Godliness

Empowerment

4

2

Spiritual

2

Global

This lexical pattern demonstrates a dominant discourse of excellence and knowledge, intersecting with faith and

service. The overlap suggests that while the institutional orientations differ, all universities ultimately frame

education as both transformative and moral.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

1. Public universities articulate collectivist, state-aligned identities, grounded in national development and civic

responsibility.

2. Private universities articulate faith-infused identities that function strategically as persuasive and market-

differentiating resources, not merely as reflections of religious affiliation.

3. Religious language operates as a form of symbolic power, enhancing institutional legitimacy and appealing

to culturally embedded belief systems.

4. Both sectors increasingly adopt global neoliberal discourses of excellence, leadership, and innovation.

5. Linguistically, these ideologies are realized through transitivity patterns, nominalization, evaluative lexis, and

metaphor, which together construct institutional authority and identity.

6. Ghanaian university slogans thus represent a discursive intersection of ideology, persuasion, and market

competition, rather than purely descriptive identity statements.

Conclusion and Implications

This study has examined the slogans of selected public and private universities in Ghana as semiotic sites for

constructing institutional identity. Drawing upon the dual framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)

and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the analysis revealed how linguistic form interacts with ideological

orientation to project distinct yet intersecting images of the Ghanaian university.

The results demonstrate that public universities foreground collective service, national development, and

knowledge production, positioning themselves as agents of modernization and social progress. Private

Page 5997

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

universities, by contrast, articulate moral and spiritual values alongside aspirations toward excellence,

empowerment, and transformation. Together, these two sectors represent the ideological duality of Ghana’s

educational philosophy: the civic and the spiritual, the national and the global.

From a linguistic perspective, slogans employ nominalization, parallelism, metaphor, and material-relational

process types to condense institutional philosophy into succinct yet powerful statements. Such rhetorical

compactness ensures memorability while enacting institutional legitimacy. The blending of moral and

developmental lexicons across ownership categories also points to increasing hybridization in higher education

discourse, as universities strive to remain nationally relevant yet globally competitive.

Implications for Institutional Communication

A. Branding and Policy Communication:

Universities should recognize that slogans are more than marketing devices; they are instruments of institutional

storytelling. Clarity and ideological coherence between slogans and institutional mission statements can enhance

both credibility and stakeholder engagement.

B. Pedagogical Insight:

Understanding the linguistic ideologies behind slogans can inform courses in communication, linguistics, and

education management, particularly within Ghana’s tertiary sector.

C. Sociolinguistic Relevance:

The study underscores how educational discourse contributes to national identity formation and reflects socio-

religious orientations in postcolonial contexts.

D. Global Positioning:

Ghanaian universities increasingly align their linguistic identities with global education trends—emphasizing

leadership, innovation, and excellence—without discarding traditional values of morality and service.

6.2 Recommendations for Future Research

Future studies may:

1. Extend the dataset to include polytechnics and teacher education institutions.

2. Compare Ghanaian university slogans with those from other African nations to explore regional ideological

trends.

3. Investigate student and staff perceptions of university slogans as lived discourse rather than static text.

4. Employ multimodal discourse analysis to include visual symbols, logos, and colors alongside verbal data.

In sum, Ghanaian university slogans represent condensed ideological blueprints through which higher education

institutions negotiate their roles as moral, civic, and global actors. They are linguistic performances of

institutional selfhood, reflecting the aspirations and contradictions of a nation that values both faith and

development.

REFERENCES

1. Adika, Gordon S. K. 2012. English in Ghana: Growth, tensions, and trends. International Journal of

Language, Translation and Intercultural Communication 1(1), 151–166.

Page 5998

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

2. Agyekum, Kofi. 2019. Linguistic Landscapes and the Sociolinguistics of Place in Ghana. Ghana Journal

of Linguistics 8(2), 1–25.

3. Angouri, Jo & Ruth Wodak. 2021. Language, Gender and Leadership: Authenticity, Power and

Performance. London: Routledge.

4. Bamgbose, Ayo. 2000. Language and Exclusion: The Consequences of Language Policies in Africa.

Münster: LIT Verlag.

5. Bednarek, Monika & Helen Caple. 2020. The Discourse of News Values: How News Organizations

Create Newsworthiness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

6. Bhatia, Vijay K. 2005. Generic Patterns In Promotional Discourse. In Vijay K. Bhatia & Maurizio Gotti

(Eds.), Explorations in Specialized Genres, 213–228. Bern: Peter Lang.

7. Bhatia, Vijay K. 2008. Genre Analysis, ESP And Professional Practice. English for Specific Purposes

27(2), 161–174.

8. Blommaert, Jan. 2010. The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

9. Bondi, Marina & Rosa Lorés-Sanz. 2020. Language in Academic and Professional Settings: Variation

And Change. Bern: Peter Lang.

10. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.

11. Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall. 2005. Identity and Interaction: A Sociocultural Linguistic Approach.

Discourse Studies 7(4–5), 585–614.

12. Creswell, John W. & Cheryl N. Poth. 2018. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among

Five Approaches. 4th Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

13. Eggins, Suzanne. 2004. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. 2nd Edn. London:

Continuum.

14. Fairclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse And Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

15. Fairclough, Norman. 1993. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse: The

universities. Discourse & Society 4(2), 133–168.

16. Fairclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London:

Longman.

17. Fairclough, Norman. 2001. Language and Power. 2nd Edn. London: Longman.

18. Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London:

Routledge.

19. Flick, Uwe. 2020. An Introduction to Qualitative Research. 6th Edn. London: Sage.

20. Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

21. Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edn. London: Edward Arnold.

22. Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s Introduction To Functional

Grammar. 4th Edn. London: Routledge.

23. Henderson, Meagan & Jennifer Bowden. 2020. An Emerging Model for University Branding: A

Qualitative Exploration. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education 30(1), 1–22.

24. Higgins, Christina. 2011. Identity Formation in Globalizing Contexts: Language Learning in the New

Millennium. Berlin: De Gruyter.

25. Jackson, Kristi & Pat Bazeley. 2019. Qualitative Data Analysis with Nvivo. 3rd edn. London: Sage.

26. Jaworska, Sylvia & Crispin Thurlow. 2021. Introducing Semiotic Landscapes. In Crispin Thurlow &

Adam Jaworski (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook Of Language And Digital Communication, 129–144.

London: Routledge.

27. KhosraviNik, Majid. 2020. Social Media And Critical Discourse Studies. In John Flowerdew & John E.

Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook Of Critical Discourse Studies, 582–596. London:

Routledge.

28. KhosraviNik, Majid & Johann W. Unger. 2022. Critical Discourse Studies And Social Media: Power,

Resistance And Critique. Critical Discourse Studies 19(3), 247–261.

29. Martin, J. R. & Peter R. R. White. 2005. The Language Of Evaluation: Appraisal In English. London:

Palgrave Macmillan.

30. Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2021. Register Variation In Digital Discourse: A Systemic Functional

Perspective. Functions of Language 28(1), 1–35.

31. Mautner, Gerlinde. 2020. The Marketization Of Higher Education Discourse: A Critical Perspective.

Discourse, Context & Media 35, 100389.

Page 5999

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

32. Mwinlaaru, Isaac N. & Mark Nartey. 2022. Discourse And Identity In Ghanaian Public Communication.

Journal of African Cultural Studies 34(3), 345–360.

33. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, Sabelo J. 2021. Decolonization, Development And Knowledge In Africa: Turning

Over A New Leaf. London: Routledge.

34. O’Connor, Cliodhna & Helene Joffe. 2020. Intercoder Reliability In Qualitative Research: Debates And

Practical Guidelines. Qualitative Research in Psychology 17(3), 1–13.

35. Oduro, George K. T. 2019. Faith-Based Higher Education And National Development In Ghana.

International Journal of Educational Development 65, 1–9.

36. O’Halloran, Kay L., Sabine Tan & Marissa K. L. E. Wignell. 2021. Multimodal Discourse Analysis. In

Ken Hyland & Brian Paltridge (Eds.), The Bloomsbury Handbook Of Discourse Analysis, 2nd Edn.,

451–467. London: Bloomsbury.

37. Paulus, Trena M., Michelle Woods, David P. Atkins & Rachelle Macklin. 2017. The Discourse Of QDA

Software: Learning From Users. Qualitative Inquiry 23(9), 1–12.

38. Piller, Ingrid. 2001. Identity Constructions in Multilingual Advertising. Language in Society 30(2), 153–

186.

39. Prah, Kwesi Kwaa. 2009. The Language Of Instruction Conundrum In Africa. Cape Town: CASAS.

40. Rogers, Rebecca, Malinda Schieble, Rebecca Mosley & Daniel R. Hui. 2005. Critical Discourse Analysis

In Education: A Review Of The Literature. Review of Educational Research 75(3), 365–416.

41. Saichaie, Kem & Christopher C. Morphew. 2021. What College And University Websites Reveal About

The Purposes Of Higher Education. The Journal of Higher Education 92(1), 1–25.

42. Saldaña, Johnny. 2021. The Coding Manual For Qualitative Researchers. 4th Edn. London: Sage.

43. Thurlow, Crispin & Adam Jaworski. 2010. Tourism Discourse: Language And Global Mobility.

Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

44. van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage.

45. van Dijk, Teun A. 2008. Discourse and power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

46. van Leeuwen, Theo. 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.

47. van Leeuwen, Theo. 2008. Discourse And Practice: New Tools For Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

48. Wodak, Ruth. 2011. The Discourse Of Politics In Action: Politics As Usual. 2nd Edn. Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan.

49. Wodak, Ruth & Michael Meyer (eds.). 2016. Methods Of Critical Discourse Studies. 3rd edn. London:

Sage.

50. Wodak, Ruth & Martin Reisigl. 2020. The Discourse-Historical Approach. In John Flowerdew & John

E. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook Of Critical Discourse Studies, 44–59. London:

Routledge.

Page 6000

ww w .rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNO V A T ION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | V o lume X Issue III March 2026

Appendix A: Public and Private Universities with Slogans