Institutional websites have become key stages on which educational organisations perform identity, authority and relevance. This study investigates how the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (ABRSM) and Trinity College London (TCL) recalibrated their digital self-presentations across 2016, 2022 and 2025. Drawing on multimodal discourse analysis of five recurring webpage genres, it examines how visual, textual and structural choices negotiate evolving narratives of heritage, inclusivity, learner agency and digital fluency. Findings reveal expansions in presentations of visual diversity and collaborative music-making, yet achieved through distinctly different semiotic approaches: the ABRSM layers broader representation onto an enduring discourse of tradition and rigour, whereas TCL integrates more corporate-associated semiotics to foreground diversity, informality and technological fluency within the architecture of its brand narrative. Across both institutions, examinations transition from being positioned as authority-certified symbols of achievement, to functioning as branded cultural artefacts that suggest lifestyle (participation, belonging) and global relevance.
AmaralM. P. D.FossumP. R. (2021). Education gone global: Economization, commodification, privatization and standardization. In WilmersA.JornitzS. (Eds.), International perspectives on school settings, education. policy and digital strategies. A transatlantic discourse in education research (pp. 301–309). Barbara Budrich.
2.
AngeloE.KniggeJ.SætherM.WaagenW. (2021). Higher education as context for music pedagogy research. In AngeloE.KniggeJ.SætherM.WaagenW. (Eds.), Higher education as context for music pedagogy research (pp. 7–17). Cappelen Damm Akademisk. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.119.choo
3.
AskehaveI.NielsenA. E. (2005). What are the characteristics of digital genres?—Genre theory from a multi-modal perspective. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2005.687
4.
BélangerC. H.SyedS.MountJ. (2007). The makeup of institutional branding: Who, what, how?Tertiary Education and Management, 13(3), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880701502133
5.
Bernabé VillodreM.delM.Azorín-DelegidoJ. M.Martínez-BelloV. (2024). Representations of cultural diversity in music education textbooks: A critical and comparative analysis. Multicultural Education Review, 16(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615X.2023.2300067
6.
BisaniS.DayeM.MortimerK. (2022). Multi-stakeholder perspective on the role of universities in place branding. Journal of Place Management and Development, 15(2), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-05-2020-0039
BlancoG. L.MetcalfeA. S. (2020). Visualizing quality: University online identities as organizational performativity in higher education. The Review of Higher Education, 43(3), 781–809. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2020.0012
9.
BouvierG. (2015). What is a discourse approach to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social media: Connecting with other academic fields?Journal of Multicultural Discourses, 10(2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2015.1042381
10.
BulgrinE.WeberS. M. (2023). Websites as institutional imaginary positionings. Zeitschrift Für Weiterbildungsforschung, 46(3), 575–592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40955-023-00266-9
11.
BulotaiteN. (2003). University heritage—An institutional tool for branding and marketing. Higher Education in Europe, 28(4), 449–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/0379772032000170417
12.
Campoverde-MolinaM.Luján-MoraS.ValverdeL. (2023). Accessibility of university websites worldwide: A systematic literature review. Universal Access in the Information Society, 22(1), 133–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00868-y
13.
ChernyavskayaV. E.SafronenkovaE. L. (2019). Towards constructing identity of a National University: “Our past” at the websites of Russian universities. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities & Social Sciences, 12(10), 1819–1839. https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0498
14.
FaircloughN. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
FordK. S.PattersonA. N. (2019). “Cosmetic diversity”: University websites and the transformation of race categories. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000092
17.
HoangT. V. Y.Rojas-LizanaI. (2015). Promotional discourse in the websites of two Australian universities: A discourse analytic approach. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1098616
18.
HollandM. M.FordK. S. (2021). Legitimating prestige through diversity: How higher education institutions represent ethno-racial diversity across levels of selectivity. The Journal of Higher Education, 92(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2020.1776510
JurˇíkováM.KocourekJ.LižbetinováL. (2021). Building the prestige of a university as a tool to achieve competitiveness. Communication Today, 12(2), 128–144.
KielichG. (2025). Understanding the representation of women electric guitarists on Instagram. Popular Music, 44(1), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026114302400030X
24.
KressG. (2010). What is mode? In van LeeuwenT.JewittR. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 54–67). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203803881
25.
KressG.Van LeeuwenT. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Routledge. http://doi.org/10.4324/9780203619728
26.
LažetićP. (2019). Students and university websites—Consumers of corporate brands or novices in the academic community?Higher Education, 77(6), 995–1013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0329-8
27.
MelewarT. C.DennisC.ForoudiP. (2021). Introduction: Building corporate identity, image and reputation in the digital era. In Building Corporate Identity, Image and Reputation in the Digital Era (pp. 3–8). Routledge.
28.
MyersM.BhopalK. (2021). Cosmopolitan brands: Graduate students navigating the social space of elite global universities. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 42(5–6), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2021.1941763
29.
NobreH.SousaA. (2022). Cultural heritage and nation branding – Multi stakeholder perspectives from Portugal. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 20(5), 699–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2021.2025383
30.
OlsenP. (2019). Assessing improvisation in graded music examinations: Conflicting practices and perceptions [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. University of Cambridge, Cambridge.
31.
RavazzaniS.MaierC. D. (2017). Strategic organizational discourse and framing in hypermodal spaces. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 22(4), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-09-2016-0062
32.
SaichaieK. (2011). Representation on college and university websites: An approach using critical discourse analysis [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
33.
SaichaieK.MorphewC. C. (2014). What college and university websites reveal about the purposes of higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(4), 499–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.914317
34.
SmithA.SwiftD. (2014). Exploring the language of learning within further education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(2), 249–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2012.722195
35.
TimokhinaG.KoryaginaI. (2024). Management of ethical university brand promotion on the international markets. In WalshJ. (Ed.), Business ethics – the competitive advantage of trust and reputation (pp. 237–258). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.115066
36.
TomáškováR. (2015). A walk through the multimodal landscape of university websites. Brno Studies in English, 41(1), 77–100. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2015-1-5
37.
TownsendL.WallaceC. (2016). Social media research: A guide to ethics (pp. 1–16). University of Aberdeen.
38.
TurnbullJ. (2023). The discursive construction of diversity & inclusion in corporate websites. In Hofer-BonfimB.ZehetgruberM.PetersE.SchnitzerJ. (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion across languages (pp. 149–168). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23136-1_9
VillanuevaL. S.DolomM. A. C.BelenJ. S. (2018). Genre analysis of the “About Us” sections of Asian Association of Open Universities websites. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 13(1), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-09-2018-0019
41.
WangX.Cooper-ChenA. (2009). Asian images portrayed in the websites of US higher education institutions. Chinese Journal of Communication, 2(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750902897455
42.
WuY. Q.CheongC. Y. M. (2021). Corporate branding of academic institutions: Semiotic communication of logos and names. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 34(1), 321–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2021.1989544
43.
ZemskayaY. N.KuznetsovaE. A.OsmolovskaiaA. V. (2025). Constructing the image of the global university through its official website (based on “about” pages). In SergiB. S.PopkovaE. G.AdievaA. A.AtabekovaN. K. (Eds.), University 4.0 and educational technology for sustainable development: Best practices and perspectives in Russia and Central Asia (pp. 53–61). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48762-1_6
44.
ZhangY.O’HalloranK. L. (2013). ‘Toward a global knowledge enterprise’: University websites as portals to the ongoing marketization of higher education. Critical Discourse Studies, 10(4), 468–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2013.799517
45.
ZhangZ.TuW. (2019). Representation of international students on Australian university websites. Iberica, 37, 221–244. http://doi.org/10.17398/2340–2784.37.221
