PERCEPTIONS OF STUDENT GOVERNMENT LEADERS AND STUDENT GOVERNMENT ADVISERS TOWARD SELECTED ASPECTS OF STUDENT GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS IN THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS IN FLORIDA (ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES, TRAINING, EDUCATIONAL VALUE, ADVISING, F

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare the perceptions of student government leaders and their advisers concerning selected aspects of student government in Florida's nine state universities and 28 community colleges. This comparison will help to determine the educational value of selected student government activities and the roles and responsibilities of student government leaders. Method. The method of investigation used was a descriptive survey. Data were obtained through the use of two questionnaires. Community college student government leaders and their advisers were surveyed at the 1985 Spring FJCSGA Conference held in West Palm Beach, Florida. A total of 67 percent of the student government leaders present at the conference completed and returned their questionnaires. There was an 87 percent return on the faculty adviser's survey. Each of the nine state university student government advisers and student government leaders completed the questionnaires. One hundred percent of the advisers responded and a 58 percent return was received from the student government leaders. Responses were received from a total of 188 student government leaders and 38 faculty advisers. Results. There were statistically significant differences between student government leaders and advisers in universities in the perceptions about the educational value of student government. There were also statistically significant differences in the perceptions of the role of the student government adviser between community college and university students and between community college and university advisers. Recommendations for Further Research. (1) A similar study of private versus public colleges and universities examining roles and responsibilities of student government leaders, and student government funding. (2) This study should be replicated on a national level to ascertain if there are geographical differences in the perceptions of student government leaders and their faculty advisers.