At its core, Citizenship represents the relationship between individuals and their homeland, which includes values, responsibilities, and rights. It is a manifestation of identity, commitment, and involvement in societal progress (Yasein Salman and Mohammad Harafsheh, 2020). The idea of citizenship is conceptualized as one of the intrinsic ties between members of a society. In a world of globalization and socio-political tensions, national cohesion and resilience depend heavily on the maintenance of a deep sense of citizenship and any lack of that structure necessarily carries extreme risk (Abreu and Velázquez, 2019).

One of the key dimensions of citizenship is participation in civil society, community, and political life. The term active citizenship has become very commonly used when describing forms of participation that are supposed to be fostered so as to ensure a strengthening of democratic values, social cohesion, and a sense of responsibility toward the common good (Hoskins and Mascherini, 2009). It is the political participation that involves individuals in the exercise of their rights and duties. Therefore, the essence of citizenship and its social foundation is involvement in democratic life to defend rights, accountability, secure freedoms, and resist injustice.

These participatory activities, including political participation, form the base of every democratic society and constitute one of the principal means whereby citizens become involved in decision-making. Active participation in politics is important, not only for democracy to function, but also in order for policies to be responsive to the will and interests of the population (Hamilton and Fauri, 2001; Verba and Brady, 1996).

In this regard, it has been found that national loyalty plays a significant role in fostering active citizenship. National loyalty has been defined as an attitude that pre-disposes individuals to respond to their country with actions perceived as supportive of, and/or with feelings that value the continued existence and welfare of the nation. This sense of loyalty manifests in both tangible actions and emotional investments that reinforce a commitment to the nation’s values, stability, and long-term prosperity (Terhune, 1965).

In this perspective, it is important to distinguish national loyalty from loyalty to a particular government or regime. True national loyalty transcends allegiance to any transient administration. In fact, loyalty to the nation can be expressed through critical engagement with the government, holding it accountable and advocating for reform when necessary, an essential element of a healthy democracy. Criticism, therefore, should be seen not as disloyalty but as a form of active citizenship that seeks to uphold and improve the nation’s democratic principles and future stability (Poulsen, 2020).

Precisely, loyal citizens take part in political and social life more effectively, thereby contributing to the growth and stabilization of their country. National loyalty is said to increase the sense of responsibility and participation urge in citizens in national affairs. For university students, whose formative years are often marked by exposure to diverse ideas and political discourse, national loyalty can be an important determinant of how deeply they engage in political processes. Loyal citizens are more likely to participate in voting, advocacy, and other forms of political action, contributing to the stability and advancement of their nation. Loyalty transforms into active participation because people feel a personal responsibility or attachment to improving the wellbeing of their community or nation (Abu El-Haj and Bonet, 2011).

Loyalty, therefore, should not be seen as an innate or natural trait; it is shaped by social influences that build pride and a sense of belonging to our country (Alduwaila, 2017). These influences come through government-run places like schools and the military, where nationalistic ideas are taught. These places are crucial in teaching us about nationalism by integrating patriotic stories into school lessons and employing national symbols and rituals. These elements have a strong impact on how we perceive ourselves as members of a nation. These processes may be explicit (e.g., in education) or more implicit (e.g., through everyday symbols or practices), making nationalism a pervasive and integrated part of daily life (Al-Fadhli and Al-Saleh, 2012; Aldhafiri and Alsaeed, 2024; Leonard and Spyrou, 2011; Scourfield et al., 2006).

Identity is a broad and foundational concept that refers to an individual’s understanding of who they are, often shaped by social, cultural, and group affiliations. Loyalty, in contrast, can be viewed as one potential expression or outcome of identity. When individuals strongly identify with a group or institution, they are more likely to exhibit loyal behaviors, such as sustained commitment, advocacy, or resilience in the face of challenges. As Fletcher (2011) argue, “the basis of loyalty is the historical self,” suggesting that loyalty emerges from a continuity of identity over time, grounded in one’s past experiences and enduring affiliations. Thus, while identity encompasses the internal, cognitive structure of the self, loyalty reflects a behavioral manifestation of that identity in relational and institutional contexts (Connor, 2007; Fletcher, 2011; Marantz, 1993).

In today’s world, every country seeks loyalty from its citizens, viewing the stability, strength, and sustainability of its systems as dependent on their national loyalty. To achieve this, countries implement extensive programs designed to cultivate loyalty to their systems and values. Beyond the family, the education system serves as the second most influential institution in shaping the future of a nation. It plays a pivotal role in fostering a sense of national loyalty among students and strengthening their connection to their country (Fateminia and Rezanezhad, 2023).

Education is important for creating loyalty and citizenship, both in and out of the classroom (Astin and Antonio, 2004; El-Kassar et al., 2019; Leroux, 2019). As Bénéï (2005) emphasizes, loyalty can be nurtured through all sorts of processes in all kinds of contexts, including formal institutions such as schools or universities (Bénéï, 2005). Research supports the link between this type of loyalty or belonging and increased civic engagement and societal contribution (Putnam, 2000). Such connections demonstrate the need for fostering loyalty in educational and societal contexts; people are less likely to see the value in contributing meaningfully to collective goals and democratic processes if they are not tied to an organization or a cause (Morrow and Scorgie-Porter, 2017).

Indeed, Formal education is one of the most consistent and strong predictors of political participation (Nie et al., 1996). The association between education and political participation is among the best documented and most cited in all of political science. If researchers could select one variable to predict behaviors like voting, contacting elected officials, signing petitions, or discussing public issues, the variable would be educational attainment (Willeck and Mendelberg, 2022).

The findings of this study highlight the important role that universities have in shaping students’ understandings of citizenship and their engagement in political actions. The findings reveal that the students have a positive perception of their university contribution in reinforcing the values of citizenship, that is, they scored high in the mean (30.99). These results underscore that schools are good places for fostering citizenship values. A similar outcome was reported in a previous study conducted at Kuwait University, which also emphasized the positive role of higher education in nurturing active and responsible citizenship (Alzaboun and Al-Rayes, 2023).

Similarly, students had a positive perception of their national loyalty (M = 22.72). It shows that students are connected to and invested in their country, and this is a prerequisite for civic responsibility. However, the results also show that students’ average political participation is surprisingly low, with a mean score of (M = 10.49). While political participation is a vital component of active citizenship, the findings suggest that students may be reletively less engaged in formal political activities compared to other social groups, aligning with trends observed in the literature within the Kuwaiti context (Alduwaila, 2017). Thus, while on the one hand universities might be successful in promoting values of citizenship, on the other, there still some way to go before students are fully prepared to be engaged politically. It is in line with broader patterns observed in the literature. Research has shown that many young people possess limited skills and attitudes necessary for critical engagement in political processes (Pérez-Rodríguez et al., 2022; Sadeli, 2025; Suhariyanto and Rozak, 2025; Weiss, 2020).

In a Nigerian study, the results revealed a notable discrepancy: Although university students generally expressed positive attitudes toward democratic values, they also reported an unwillingness to protest against human rights violations and showed little willingness to actively participate in social and political initiatives (Obiagu et al., 2023).

However, A study conducted in the Chinese context revealed a positive association between political education and political participation. Education was found to enhance individuals’ knowledge, understanding of political processes, and critical thinking skills. This, in turn, can positively influence individuals’ sense of political efficacy by increasing their confidence in their ability to comprehend political issues and engage effectively in political activities (Chen and Madni, 2024).

Importantly, the findings suggest that national loyalty is a critical factor that motivates students’ engagement in political activities. This is consistent with previous research that highlights the positive relationship between national identity and civic engagement (Putnam, 2000). National loyalty appears to foster a sense of responsibility toward one’s country, which, in turn, enhances community involvement. A study conducted in South Korea revealed that national loyalty, as reflected through high levels of national pride, positively influences political participation. Utilizing data from the Korean General Social Survey (2003–2016), the research demonstrated that individuals with greater national attachment were more likely to engage in political activities compared to those with lower levels (Kim and Lee, 2021).

Equally Important, the university’s role in promoting citizenship was found to significantly predict students participation in political activities (β = 0.1522. p < 0.0001). The indirect effect analysis revealed that national loyalty enhances political participation indirectly through the university’s role (effect = 0.0270. BootSE = 0.0077. BootLLCI = 0.0137. BootULCI = 0.0435).

The role of universities in enhancing political participation has been supported by previous studies (Chen and Madni, 2024; Janmaat and Mons, 2023; Yu and Wang, 2025). For instance, a study conducted across nine European countries found that respondents who experienced democratic practices in school or university were more likely to vote and to engage in various forms of political participation (Kiess, 2022).

The findings indicate that national loyalty may influence students’ perceptions of the university’s role in reinforcing citizenship values, which, in turn, motivates them to engage in community activities. Universities have the capacity to translate national loyalty into tangible forms of civic engagement. This mediating mechanism has been explored in other contexts, where educational institutions have been found to play a vital role in transforming personal beliefs into collective actions (Browne and Cudeck, 1992).

From this perspective, the primary goal of citizenship education is to foster greater involvement in democratic society and encourage active participation. This involvement extends beyond the political dimensions of citizenship to encompass social aspects as well. It includes cultivating traits such as a “willingness to volunteer” and a “belief in the ability to make a positive impact on the social environment” (Aoun, 2010; Geboers et al., 2013).

The total effect of national loyalty on students political participation (β = 0.0755) further supports the notion that both direct and indirect pathways contribute to this relationship. The partial mediation observed in this study suggests that while national loyalty directly influences community participation, its impact is amplified when universities contribute to promoting citizenship values. These findings emphasize the dual importance of fostering national loyalty and strengthening universities’ roles in civic education to enhance overall community engagement.

The findings of this research contribute significantly to the ongoing discussion about the evolving role of universities in contemporary societies. A notable shift has been identified: Universities have transitioned from being cultural and civic institutions grounded in a democratic, public-oriented mission to adopting a neoliberal market-driven orientation. Since the economic crisis of the 1970, universities have increasingly prioritized the maximization of economic resources and aligned themselves with business and economic imperatives. This shift has diminished their focus on addressing social needs and fostering a cultural and civic orientation (Andreotti, 2021; Pérez-Rodríguez et al., 2022).

A university’s role extends beyond providing education and technical skills for professional success; it also aims to shape well-rounded individuals who contribute meaningfully to society (El-Kassar et al., 2019). This mission now includes fostering socially responsible generations that embrace sustainable practices and consider the broader community’s interests. As a result, university social responsibility has emerged as a new paradigm in higher education (Altbach, 2008; Giuffré and Ratto, 2014), influencing both internal and external stakeholders. However, students remain the central focus of this shift, as they are directly impacted by the university’s socially responsible actions, which shape their experiences and attitudes (El-Kassar et al., 2019).

Therefore, it is imperative to adopt a university model that extends beyond merely training competent professionals. Such a model should transform internal dynamics to create a democratic space where pressing social and political issues are critically examined. Furthermore, it should prioritize the generation of knowledge, values, and attitudes aimed at fostering meaningful societal improvements and encouraging active political participation as a cornerstone of democratic engagement (Pérez-Rodríguez et al., 2022).

The findings of this study have significant implications for both higher education institutions and policymakers. The positive relationship between national loyalty, the university’s role in promoting citizenship values, and community participation highlights the critical role universities play in fostering social responsibility among students. These findings indicate that universities must look beyond pure academic attainment and development of intellectual ability to an equally important commitment to fostering national loyalty and citizenship values among their students as part of their educational mission. Universities can promote national belonging and echo it through active citizenship in campuses and communities.

For policymakers, the study offers further reasons why civic education and social responsibility should be part of a university’s curricula — creating well-informed citizens who are engaged in their communities. Such elements should be taken into account for the design of the future higher educational strategies and policies focused on maximizing individual and societal contributions of university graduates.

Although this research contributes significantly to understanding the role of universities in promoting citizenship values and the impact of national loyalty on political participation, several limitations should be noted. First, the study relies on self-reported data, which is vulnerable to social desirability or other response biases. Even with attempts to keep respondents anonymous, biases can still pose a threat to the accuracy of responses among such sensitive issues as national loyalty and political activism. Furthermore, although the study examines the direct and indirect impacts of national loyalty and university citizenship roles, it omits potentially significant other variables, such as students’ socio-economic backgrounds, personal values, or previous experiences with civic engagement. Importantly, the sample was pre-dominantly composed of female students from the Education department, which may have influenced the overall trends observed. Further studies can also explore these variables to give a clearer picture of the various factors contributing to community participation. Last, the study has a cross-sectional design that limits the possibility of making causal inferences. Longitudinal and interventional studies would help to evaluate how experiences of national loyalty and university citizenship roles change over time and how they contribute to students’ engagement in community activities.

In conclusion, this study sheds light on the relationship between national loyalty, citizenship value promoted by universities, and political participation of students. The findings highlight the important role of universities in developing active citizens and narrowing the gap between individual loyalty to nation-building and civic engagement. These findings have important implications for policymakers and educators aiming to design programs that promote national loyalty, civic responsibility and active participation among young people.

To strengthen the promotion of citizenship within higher education, university leaders and educators should consider integrating civic education more explicitly into curricula across all disciplines, not only within education departments. Co-curricular initiatives such as service-learning, community engagement projects, and student-led civic forums can provide practical opportunities for students to connect theory with action. Policies that support inclusive participation—particularly among underrepresented groups—and promote critical discussions around national identity, democratic values, and public service are essential. Additionally, collaboration with civil society organizations and government agencies can help create pathways for sustained civic involvement beyond the university. Prioritizing faculty development in citizenship education and allocating institutional resources to support civic engagement initiatives will also be key to fostering a campus culture that values active, responsible citizenship.

Future research could explore how specific curricular or extracurricular interventions influence students’ civic behaviors over time, and whether these effects differ across cultural or institutional contexts. Longitudinal studies may also provide deeper insights into how university experiences shape political engagement and national identity in the long term.